-
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.
Resident Evil 2 remake missed the mark in several ways
- Thread starter Deleted member 17402
- Start date
Nah. Remake 2 has zero replay value unlike the original. Same bosses and routes get old very quickly.
Yep. Hated the sewer section of the old game so that becoming Mansion 2.0 in the remake really sucked.
Definitely agree with some of your misgivings on REmake 2 itself. I think it boils down to how development is managed - a lot of resources are allocated to ensure the central location (mansion, RPD, Baker house, etc.) feel tight and by comparison future levels seem less polished. Not necessarily bad, but I do think the lab could've benefited from being a tad bit longer.
there is no Leon A in RE2 Remake.
only 1st and 2nd run.
and it is all the same. you only unlock a different ending cutscene.
I think that's better tbh. I can't say I'd ever go back to RE1 or Directors Cut for any purpose other than laughing at the game. But for RE2 I can enjoy both games on their own merits and have a reason to go and play either outside of nostalgia.
Mr. X was a better gameplay element than Lisa ever was. Outside of the boss fight against Lisa, she appears in exactly two rooms.
As for some additional lore, sure, they could have added something. I'm not too bothered by the lack of anything new though, considering what was present in the final game was so good.
As for some additional lore, sure, they could have added something. I'm not too bothered by the lack of anything new though, considering what was present in the final game was so good.
A and B are different in that you mostly get different bosses and you go from different routes. Not to mention that Claire and Leon have different objectives depending on who you start with. There is also the thing where the loot like guns and ammo or grass are shared between the two so if you pick something up in A it wont be in B.
And yes, A character gets to go in rooms that B won't go into and vice versa.
In remake you do the exact same puzzles and bosses so compared to the original, it feels less consistent as you don't know what B character did during A playthrough cause you end up doing the same thing as A. The original was designed in a way where what you did in A (puzzles or bosses) will not be repeated in B because A already took care of them.
Then there is also Mr X who never shows up in A but only in B.
I don't know what you are talking about.
As remakes go, REmake completely spanks REmake 2.
One expanded on the original without cutting anything and the other did.
I was hoping pre-release after all their talk of "not having B scenarios to diversify the campaigns more" would mean at the very least you'd have different bosses as leon and claire and maybe they'd interact more and you'd feel that psuedo b scenario feel by playing the other campaign and seeing what they were up to.
Imagine my surprise when in B/2nd scenario, you still fight Birkin the same as where you did in A/1st. And after the orphanage/ada section, you still end up in the sewers eventually taking the exact same route to the second boss all the way up to the end. Labs section also felt really short. Leon and Claire met like what, twice? At least the final boss is different, I guess.
I loved the twisting scenarios in the original, really made replaying it four times interesting.
Anyway, I really do love RE2MAKE but as other have echoed, there are so many missed opportunities that, if you're a big fan of the original and it's a/b scenario setup, you're likely to feel (even if it's just a little) disappointed in what could have been.
They absolutely NAILED Mr. X though.
Imagine my surprise when in B/2nd scenario, you still fight Birkin the same as where you did in A/1st. And after the orphanage/ada section, you still end up in the sewers eventually taking the exact same route to the second boss all the way up to the end. Labs section also felt really short. Leon and Claire met like what, twice? At least the final boss is different, I guess.
I loved the twisting scenarios in the original, really made replaying it four times interesting.
Anyway, I really do love RE2MAKE but as other have echoed, there are so many missed opportunities that, if you're a big fan of the original and it's a/b scenario setup, you're likely to feel (even if it's just a little) disappointed in what could have been.
They absolutely NAILED Mr. X though.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Okay cool I have no idea how that prevents you or anyone else from criticizing it. Nothing's perfect. We can love something even if it has faults.
I think one can go back and play RE1 without much effort. Granted, it is the RE title that aged the most, and the voice dialogue is something else. Yet most, if not all, the qualities that make classic RE great were already there and you don't have to make any excuse for them. They are great on their own right.
The funny thing is that Lisa Trevor is closer to the original Mr. X than REmake 2's Mr. X itself. But I think you're being a bit too harsh of that poor creature. Lisa Trevor and 2019's Mr. X are two very different type of enemies. You're right in the sense that Mr. X is a much more impactful gameplay element, but Lisa Trevor managed to be memorable for other reasons. Particularly her backstory, her design and the atmosphere surrounding her encounters.
OP
OP
That's precisely what I mean by REmake 2 missing its Lisa Trevor - I'm talking about a plot device that adds more to the lore. Lisa is hella interesting when you read about who she was and what the hell happened to her.
First off, I LOVED this game. I beat it 5 times within the 1st week it was released.
That being said, I would of liked more enemy variety, and after the allure of it finally being released, I just can't find myself beating it all the way through. I get bored with it tbh.
One of my major knocks on it was the lack of memorable DLC. The possibilities were truly endless for a battle mode, side story for Ada etc. Think Capcom dropped the ball on that. Truly felt bare bones.
Again, I loved this game, but it's one I might have to let breathe for a year before revisiting
That being said, I would of liked more enemy variety, and after the allure of it finally being released, I just can't find myself beating it all the way through. I get bored with it tbh.
One of my major knocks on it was the lack of memorable DLC. The possibilities were truly endless for a battle mode, side story for Ada etc. Think Capcom dropped the ball on that. Truly felt bare bones.
Again, I loved this game, but it's one I might have to let breathe for a year before revisiting
This discussion is very complicated to me because it generally feels completely unfair and twisted for the sake of defending the original. It goes from the very core design philosophy and messaging behind the project.
I don't know if people are aware of it, i assume not, but while it was in development the game suffered from severe drawbacks and delays due to different ideas splitting the team, which was only solved when the executive producer behind it, Jun Takeuchi, called the team and basically spilled out to them: "Well, the original Resident Evil 2 is already out there, you see, it's a complete package already so it's not worth to be stagnated or to simply recreate it, you people should make your own version of it, with your own ideas and vision."
That did not only come from him, but also Hideki Kamiya, the original director of 1998's RE2. He gave his blessing to the new project leader, Kadoi, to make his changes without hesitation and to simply create the best game possible.
There's things like the A/B scenario, which i will talk more about below, that even Kamiya himself said that he wasn't expecting to be possible in today's standards, thinking the that player wouldn't even be able to choose between Leon and Claire's campaigns, because of how much work it would require in a modern development scenario.
When asked, he wouldn't even make a remake of the original Resi 2 if he still worked at Capcom and was asked about it.
So that's what Capcom did, they made a modern interpretation of Resident Evil 2.
They don't call it a remaster, a remake or anything close to that. After it was revealed again, there was no remake subtitle below the name, plus, in interviews and every possible marketing material (including the back of the box and the title's main site), the company called it a "reimagination" of RE2.
The way people still call it a "remake" nowadays and compare it to the one made in 2002 is simply baffling to me, not to say dishonest. Since it was properly revealed they were sure to make it clear that it wasn't the case; the original Resi 2 exists to this day and this version will never replace it. That wasn't their intention, and they didn't promised something like that, at all.
Also, by playing the original RE2 and the 2019 version back to back recently, i think some people are purposely disingenuous when discussing the A/B scenarios, with some examples in this very thread.
What's really different in the 1998 version: Unique boss fights, Mr. X being exclusive to one scenario and some objectives being different.
What's also different in the 2019 version: The beginning and the end of both scenarios, there's also brand new/exclusive areas that only one character can access, new cutscenes, unique side characters for each protagonist, different weapons, puzzles are randomized alongside item locations/enemy placements, and, just like the original you enter in a different side of the station.
You still have to make a lot of the same puzzles in the 1998 version, despite what people pretend. You also have to backtrack and explore the same areas as well, despite some individuals saying otherwise. The story's inconsistencies are very present there as well, despite what some folks might have told you.
There's no perfect version of Resident Evil 2, that's the truth. Both have their unique set of strengths and flaws, with none being able to execute the A/B concept flawlessly.
And finally, the RE2 that was released this year is not a remake. It's not in the name, the developers already called it something else and it's not really comparable in the same way as REmake 1 and RE1 was.
I don't know if people are aware of it, i assume not, but while it was in development the game suffered from severe drawbacks and delays due to different ideas splitting the team, which was only solved when the executive producer behind it, Jun Takeuchi, called the team and basically spilled out to them: "Well, the original Resident Evil 2 is already out there, you see, it's a complete package already so it's not worth to be stagnated or to simply recreate it, you people should make your own version of it, with your own ideas and vision."
That did not only come from him, but also Hideki Kamiya, the original director of 1998's RE2. He gave his blessing to the new project leader, Kadoi, to make his changes without hesitation and to simply create the best game possible.
There's things like the A/B scenario, which i will talk more about below, that even Kamiya himself said that he wasn't expecting to be possible in today's standards, thinking the that player wouldn't even be able to choose between Leon and Claire's campaigns, because of how much work it would require in a modern development scenario.
When asked, he wouldn't even make a remake of the original Resi 2 if he still worked at Capcom and was asked about it.
So that's what Capcom did, they made a modern interpretation of Resident Evil 2.
They don't call it a remaster, a remake or anything close to that. After it was revealed again, there was no remake subtitle below the name, plus, in interviews and every possible marketing material (including the back of the box and the title's main site), the company called it a "reimagination" of RE2.
The way people still call it a "remake" nowadays and compare it to the one made in 2002 is simply baffling to me, not to say dishonest. Since it was properly revealed they were sure to make it clear that it wasn't the case; the original Resi 2 exists to this day and this version will never replace it. That wasn't their intention, and they didn't promised something like that, at all.
Also, by playing the original RE2 and the 2019 version back to back recently, i think some people are purposely disingenuous when discussing the A/B scenarios, with some examples in this very thread.
What's really different in the 1998 version: Unique boss fights, Mr. X being exclusive to one scenario and some objectives being different.
What's also different in the 2019 version: The beginning and the end of both scenarios, there's also brand new/exclusive areas that only one character can access, new cutscenes, unique side characters for each protagonist, different weapons, puzzles are randomized alongside item locations/enemy placements, and, just like the original you enter in a different side of the station.
You still have to make a lot of the same puzzles in the 1998 version, despite what people pretend. You also have to backtrack and explore the same areas as well, despite some individuals saying otherwise. The story's inconsistencies are very present there as well, despite what some folks might have told you.
There's no perfect version of Resident Evil 2, that's the truth. Both have their unique set of strengths and flaws, with none being able to execute the A/B concept flawlessly.
And finally, the RE2 that was released this year is not a remake. It's not in the name, the developers already called it something else and it's not really comparable in the same way as REmake 1 and RE1 was.
I don't even care about A/B scenarios taken out, but I'm not a big fan of how the campaigns come together later on. Despite the high marks of the title, you can tell where thing got rushed as they couldn't afford more time to the title.
It's still a good game, but far from what I expected when it came to remaking what is considered many's favorite of all-time. I'm hoping 3 doesn't run into the same sort of developer trouble, where they spend a year just deciding on a camera.
It's still a good game, but far from what I expected when it came to remaking what is considered many's favorite of all-time. I'm hoping 3 doesn't run into the same sort of developer trouble, where they spend a year just deciding on a camera.
Having Leon and Claire barely interact and completely botching the B side is what hurts RE2Remake. Still a great game though.
This.
Really enjoyed REmake2, but the b scenario was just dragged in to have claire playable. Wouldnt it be far better to have 1 scenario and just from time to time switch to claire. Like they did with the microsized ada part. They could have gone the extra mile and inregrate the b scenafio that would make sence. Fighting the same bosses twice is just not logical to me.
Love the game. It is my game of the year and I don't see anything shifting that.
However, the A / B stuff is a bit of a bummer.
It's fine but it isn't as diverse as the original so it was always going to be a tough comparison.
I don't want to suggest what they should have done - because if there was only one scenario per character (and one of them was the harder puzzles mode) then we'd be complaining that they didn't do the A / B stuff at all.
It's a small blemish on an amazing game.
However, the A / B stuff is a bit of a bummer.
It's fine but it isn't as diverse as the original so it was always going to be a tough comparison.
I don't want to suggest what they should have done - because if there was only one scenario per character (and one of them was the harder puzzles mode) then we'd be complaining that they didn't do the A / B stuff at all.
It's a small blemish on an amazing game.
As a whole, the story department seems to be where Capcom and RE need the most help. There's usually a lot of good ideas on the table but a botched execution. It was apparent in RE7 they think of these big stories they ultimately don't have the dev time for and it popped back up in RE2make. I really hope story stuff can be better handled in future titles, so there isn't a lot of "I wish they could've done X or Y" after you beat the game and think about a lot of the plot issues.
I loved the game but felt that the beginning in Raccoon City was way too short and that the Ada section wasn't nearly as good as Sherry's. Otherwise it's still my GOTY.
REmake 2 is great, but if they ever remake 4, I shudder to think how much they'll have to cut. I don't think we'll ever see an RE remake as near-perfect as the first.
This. Remake 2 was everything I wanted it to be and then some, fucking perfect. If you had told me I would experience a re2 remake at 4k/60fps on a console in this generation with that IQ, graphics and gameplay, no fucking way I would believe you.
RE7 has the best story in the RE series.
It has the best story setup/potential. But how the story is presented across RE7 i wouldn't say is "the best" of anything. Rather it shows how much work the series has to do on that front as a whole.
The only way to play this game is on hardcore with ink ribbon. Otherwise you are playing a watered down version of this amazing game.
Yeah the A/B scenarios in the original were way better, but the majority of players didn't even finish the remake once, and the vast, vast majority didn't do a second playthrough, so I completely understand them not spending a ton of time and money on content the vast majority of players will never see.
I agree that hardcore is the best way to play the game, but I do think there was a missed opportunity there. The only mode that has limited saves also being a virtual two-hit death mode probably put people off the game, and that's a shame, because RE2 really loses a lot with modern-style checkpoints. I might go so far as to say that this structure of game doesn't work very well with them at all. It would have been nice if there were at least an alternate version of the standard difficulty, even if it had the same enemy tunings, that had ink ribbons and was presented as the standard / default way to play.
I feel like whatever sacrifices were made , happened because they had to release a finished product AND had to deal with how people play modern videogames. Mister X was originally a bonus to make the B scenario feel fresh compared to the A scenario but the way people digest entertainment now , there was no guarantee anyone would actually play scenario B so they re-worked the game to throw mister X (the most unique thing about scenario B) into the main scenario. So , plus side - anyone that only plays the game through once will see 80% of it .... but minus side ? the people who loved the original and want to play as the other character will instead be treated to a weird challenge run "epilogue" that doesn't quite match up with the original intent. RE2make actually exceeded my expectations to be honest. The B scenario stuff was a let down but literally everything else the game had in it felt more organic and looked stunning. THAT is what I wanted out of it. It didn't really feel like a sequel to REmake 1 and it didn't need to , it was a full blown re-imagining of RE2 as a stand alone product of it's current time. Hell, just the fact that the sewer gator still makes it into the game at all is testament to just how badly the team wanted to keep all the major stuff intact but shinier. Earlier this year I felt the need to try and play RE2 on my vita (obviously the original PS1 version) just to remind myself of it and I was kind of amazed at how quiet and empty the whole thing is , it truly is a 20 year old game. Still had some fun powering through about half of it though.
Totally agree. The quick save mechanic robs the survival experience of this game. The strategy that goes into play with ink ribbons is on another level because not only you have to worry about finding these things but you have to worry about what to carry, what to discard when you find ink ribbon when full on the inventory, etc
Depends on what exactly you're looking for.
In terms of writing, character development, casting/VA's performance and events that are beautifully set in motion to pay off massively by the end...well, yes, it's the best the series has ever been.
If you're expecting it to be held back on everything the series has stablished over the years, then i can see how it may frustrate you since it's a soft reboot.
I've had a lot of trouble seeing what's going on. If I lower the gamma in the game to get to true black I end up crushing so many blacks I can't see anything. So I raise the gamma and then blacks are all grey on my trusty Kuro plasma. It's a lose lose and pisses me off too much to focus on actually playing the game.
Having to pay extra to enable the music doesn't endear me any either
Having to pay extra to enable the music doesn't endear me any either
I think it's more even RE7 on its own with no baggage wouldn't be considered anything special. That goes for any RE, which is the aspect I want to see improved across the board.
There's no RE title you can really recommend on story alone. The fact people joke about "you play RE for the story?" Is testament to that.
OP nailed it. I love RE2: Remake but there was so much more they could've done with it. My biggest gripe was the length because each scenario is quite short overall and they weren't really that different from each other so was expecting a bit more variety here to pad out the content. I also think there should've been a bit more enemy variety and overall new content/areas/backstory to differentiate it from the PS1 game.
The first remake was perfect and the additions (especially Lisa Trevor) make it the best remake ever made whereas Remake 2 is just a very god example of how a remake should be done.
The first remake was perfect and the additions (especially Lisa Trevor) make it the best remake ever made whereas Remake 2 is just a very god example of how a remake should be done.
I'm of a very different mind on this. While I think most would agree that the police department is the best part of both the remake and the original, I feel like the remake's map design for the sewers and labs maintains a fairly high quality while the map designs for those areas in the original drop significantly in quality compared to the RPD.
To me, the sewers and the labs in the original are propped up significantly by the boss fights and cut scenes. The sewers in particular I think are terrible in the original. Remove any of the cutscenes and boss fights from that section and what you have is maybe one of the most dull sections of any classic era RE game. Just between the art design, the puzzles and the way you progress through that map just lacks in good flow I just don't think that section is good. The remake just has much better map design and visually I think the remake injects the sewers with a lot of character. The best things I can say about the original sewers are the music was great, the boss fights were mostly fun, the cutscenes are some of my favorite in the game and it doesn't take very long to get through.
I feel similarly about the labs in the original except obviously the labs always had a very striking look unlike the sewers. Again though I think the players progression through the map pales in comparison to the remake and it just feels like there's a lot of fat in that section of the original game. Again, the original labs has cool art, great music, good cut scenes and fun boss fights but I'm just not a fan of the puzzles and moment to moment progression through that original version of the map.
Long and short I appreciate the time the team took completely redesigning those sections of the game as I think the game greatly benefited from it. I think the most disappointing aspects of the remake are (despite being conceptually cool) Sherri's section sucks to play and I wish the A & B scenario stuff was better. Outside of those gripes I think the remake is fantastic and I largely prefer it to the original.