-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Shinji Mikami: "[Code Veronica] deserved more to be a numbered [title]", "[RE3's] quality was a bit on the lower end"
- Thread starter Dreamboum
- Start date
Code Veronica was not even close to better than RE3. 3 moved the story forward more than CV, had better gameplay mechanics, more memorable characters, a remake whether you like it or not.
Hell the remake is still better than CV, at least I never get to certain points and say fuck it and not continue.
I hate that you can be pushed into a progression wall on the plane if you're not careful with your ammo.
Hell the remake is still better than CV, at least I never get to certain points and say fuck it and not continue.
I hate that you can be pushed into a progression wall on the plane if you're not careful with your ammo.
A lot of this is off. RE3 was originally supposed to be a PS2 title directed by Kamiya starring HUNK but that project fell apart and eventually morphed into Devil May Cry. Capcom then made the decision to elevate their Jill spinoff game to mainline status because it was a PS1 title and it made sense to keep the numbered entries on Playstation at the time. Code Veronica was never intended to be numbered.
Mikami went with Nintendo with RE4 because the PS2 was a nightmare to develop for and he didn't want to bother with it.
As much as of a massacre REmake 3 felt I agree with this.
The remake on its own is a really fun game. Just don't remember it is a remake.
See above, I'm a fan. ;)
In a larger sense I actually believe nobody has ever earned a Ferrari in the history of the world, though. Considering "earned" implies he deserves/is entitled to it in a karmic sense... nobody actually deserves any luxury item in such a sense if you consider the alternate applications of an equivalent value could yield in increased prosperity elsewhere on earth.
Of course, outside of a karmic sense that'd be a fallacy of relative privation, but if we're not talking in a karmic sense (in a vacuum, essentially) all that matters to determine if he earned it or not is whether or not he can afford it, really. He gets to determine how to spend the fruits of his labor, after all.
We already knew this but yeah.
This too. I laughed so hard at the part where he has to kill his father and stopped playing right there:
This too. I laughed so hard at the part where he has to kill his father and stopped playing right there:
Yes. I agree completely. I've replayed all the main games in the last couple of years and I think Code V is at the bottom of the traditional RE games (0-3+CV). I would still absolutely welcome a remake in the vein of the new remakes.
RE3 is the best of the original trilogy. CV was too reliant on backtracking, suffered from too much padding, had some annoying enemies, had an awful supporting character (and villains, to be honest), and was the beginning of the comic book villain conga line era in the series.
RE3 had the best environments of the pre-rendered titles (and much, much better than CV's), many gameplay improvements which CV lacks, randomized gameplay elements that heightened the feeling of horror and unpredictability, a deceptively simple story with a lot of darker undertones.
Whenever I replay the series, RE3 is the title I look forward to the most. Meanwhile, CV always feels like a chore.
RE3 had the best environments of the pre-rendered titles (and much, much better than CV's), many gameplay improvements which CV lacks, randomized gameplay elements that heightened the feeling of horror and unpredictability, a deceptively simple story with a lot of darker undertones.
Whenever I replay the series, RE3 is the title I look forward to the most. Meanwhile, CV always feels like a chore.
RE3 barely advanced the story because originally there wasn't one. It also wasn't written by the main series writer of the time (Noboru Sugimura) because it was so unimportant.
CV, on the other hand, has implications explored as recently as in RE7.
CV, on the other hand, has implications explored as recently as in RE7.
I have no actual knowledge of the situation but my idea of the matter based on what I've often seen repeated online is that CV was developed with the intention of being the successor to RE2 where as RE3 was initially developed as a spinoff that ended up being "promoted" to RE3 due to pressure by Sony and subsequently corporate Capcom.
Your post makes me think I'm likely wrong in my appreciation of the situation though, can you correct it?
BTW, I'm a huge Sega fan but have no real horse in this race as I like RE3 and CV about the same with neither being exactly a favorite of mine and despite my Sega allegiance I've owned every single console Sony has ever released so I'm also very much a fan of theirs.
Hot take. After REmake 1,2 and 3 capcom should declare all other games as non canon and make a real part 4 in a similar grounded storyline. Scrap all that matrix nonsense and goofy stuff. I know people love 4 but Leon just acts so out of character.
A carlos/leon/jill/chris game after 3 would be amazing
A carlos/leon/jill/chris game after 3 would be amazing
I would say RE3 was the finale of the RC incident rather than advanced the story. It is way more important to the original RE games.
CV was the next act.
I like both, but imho Code Veronica is very flawed and mostly saved because the main characters are the Redfield siblings.
It's not that your understanding of the overall narrative is flat out wrong – it's just the details aren't correct.
Correct.
Mostly correct. But RE2 was actually planned for Saturn as well as PlayStation even when the game existed in its 1.5 form.
This isn't the best way to describe its development. RE3 was originally RE1.9, and intended to be a short spinoff. That's why the gameplay in it is so unorthodox and we see almost none of it used in any following RE (CV, REmake, RE0).
In some ways, yes, but the "next level" talk was always intended to manifest in Kamiya's RE2 sequel (which became DMC), not with CV. CV was meant to be a graphical and narrative leap over RE2, but not necessarily a gameplay one.
Sony had no say in CV's development or RE3's numbering. Capcom wanted numbered REs on PlayStation systems out of their own volition. Capcom's upper management didn't want people to buy a Dreamcast for RE"3", an N64 for RE0 and then a PS2 for RE4. In this sense, CV and RE0 were a bit expendable if you only owned a Sony system, but that doesn't change the fact they were more important than RE3 itself.
This just isn't true.
And none of this is either...
Neither game is that great. The remake totally falling flat certainly showcases the problems of 3.
It was definitely more ambitious in terms of technical aspects, being a next-gen game, moving to a full 3d environment and all that. But the interesting thing is that in terms of gameplay RE3 is much more bold. There is nothing in CV as exciting and daring as Nemesis. Even something like the dodge, which didn't work as it should, offered something new compared to previous titles.
In fact, I would argue that in terms of design, Nemesis alone is better than everything in CV. It was a solid use of the RE formula, but it lacks anything beyond that.
Respect to the inside perspective on this -- I understand how the office politics of stuff like that must be frustrating -- but I'm with everyone else here saying RE3 is also a much better game than CV. And, despite RE3 feeling a bit like a side story, it also came off as more relevant to the immediate main storyline than CV. Up until that point, we associated RE games with Raccoon City (it wasn't the globe-hopping adventure that RE4 and subsequent titles made it) so it inherently felt more "mainline".
Last edited:
This. Love RE3, CV feels weird to play. They checked all the boxes but it's awkward.
Nah. I have never managed to get more than a few hours into CV, while I've beaten RE3 numerous times.
The whole ending sequence just felt so damn final.
The credits music and the news report were the cherry on top.
Didn't RE Nemisis became a numbered title because Capcom had a contract with Sony about having another numbered title RE, so they had to demote RE:CV and promote Nemisis?
Even if CV didn't have good gameplay, it did progress the story. I think it should have been the numbered title instead of Nemesis
Even if CV didn't have good gameplay, it did progress the story. I think it should have been the numbered title instead of Nemesis
He says CV wasnt numbered due to a console manufacturer.....my guess is this would be sony. I think they signed a deal to make an exclusive RE game for dreamcast. He wanted it to be a numbered title in the series but my guess is sony absolutely did not want a competitor to have an exclusive numbered re game and pressured capcom. This must have really pissed mikami off as we know he actively wanted to drop ps2 for the real re4 and met with nintendo and microsoft.
I've played them both when they came out and CV was a mindblowing experience especially since it was a taste of "next gen" while 3 felt like e natural continuation of 2, "more of the same" kind of vibe. Now looking back from 2020 CV does have some design problems and there are some bosses you can get stuck and have to restart the game but in 2000 when the hard glitchy shit was the norm it felt just like a harder RE. The story, levels, villains were great...the annoying kid as a companion kinda sucked if I recall but yeah what Mikame said makes total sense
RE3 any day. CV is bad. I played it a long time ago, but a little while ago watched a stream of it and was surprised how bad it is. Like it's worse than I remember and I already remember not liking it.
Mikami always felt like the spin-off becoming a numbered entry was a bad idea so this isn't surprising. In my opinion, Nemesis is deserving of a numbered entry despite what Mikami thinks. That being said, I will always maintain the belief that Code Veronica should have been RE4 and all the games after it should have moved down a number to make up for it.
YES! Six months since I made this thread...
www.resetera.com
Let's talk about Resident Evil - Code: Veronica and why it should've been called Resident Evil 3
So I’ve recently been down a fun Code Veronica hole and it got me remembering what it was like around release and trying to piece together memories. Firstly - it sure feels like a mainline Resident Evil entry, so why does it have a weird ‘code’ subtitle? It’s certainly closer to Resident Evil 2...
www.resetera.com
He's 100% right.
RE2 and C:V are the best of the classic RE games and C:V was not only better than RE3 but felt like the true sequel to RE2 in every possible way.
RE2 and C:V are the best of the classic RE games and C:V was not only better than RE3 but felt like the true sequel to RE2 in every possible way.
I always find it weird that people are so obsessed with whether Nemesis or CV was the most 'deserving' of being RE3 when the answer is that both were. It's become such a war between fans of those games that the the obvious point of discussion that CV should have been RE4 is totally ignored.
Gameplay mechanics and memorable characters all come down to a matter of opinion but I can't remotely understand thinking it moved the story forward more.
C:V reunited Claire and Chris, as well as brought Wesker back to the series with his super powers. How in the world did RE3 move the story forward more?
And listing "they remade it" as a reason why 3 is better than C:V is hilarious in how completely unrelated the two things are.
