Revelations 2 The villain of Revelations 2

[Spikeyroxas]

I know the story isn't related to the first revelations but it doesn't mean characters won't be.
The person speaking to Moira and Claire was quoting poetry.
The secret ending in revelaions shown us Jessica reading Dante.

 

[Hel]

This is interesting. Do you know what kind of poetry the person was quoting? Was it Dante again? I'm quite fond of Dante's Divina Commedia, especially the Hell part, so I would love that to be a returning element from the first Revelations.

Here's a short clip of the villain's voice with Claire's response to her:

I think it sounds too old and deep to be Jessica... yeah, I know, they told us not to mind the voice too much, but it can at least provide hints. For example, I don't hear any broken accent, so it might not be Svetlana after all, and unless Excella has improved her English in Helheim before coming back from the dead, it's probably not her either. I'd also say that anyone with a high, young or girlish voice can be ruled out by now, including Jessica. Then again, she might have mysteriously aged a few decades since 2005 or swallowed male hormones. That's possible too, of course.

 

[Spikeyroxas]

Hahahah
T-Virus to male hormones virus
Made me laugh

 

[KennedyKiller]

Revelations was only exclusive for a year or so and it didn't get a sequel until it was ported to all other current platforms. The Chronicles were only ported to PS3, not to XBox and PC.



It doesn't change the fact that the Chronicles are not telling those old stories correctly, and that's why I don't trust them. That's why I don't trust the new stories either. I'd feel more comfortable with a villain from a story that can be 100% trusted. (Or at least close to 100%... We all know how Capcom love to retcon things.)

Whether you trust them or not doesn't make them any less cannon...I can not trust that Leon and Claire never got bit during Raccoon City since I watched them get bit several times as a game mechanic, but canonically they were never bitten...That is the equivalent of what you're saying...It's rather absurd not to trust something is canonical when it is clearly stated to be canonical by the company that makes it...

Also, new theory...

Capcom said "Die Hard Fans." As an avid comic book reader, I'm always looking for new cool comics. Well Capcom has just released issue one of their new Resident Evil comic published by VizMedia. Now, I won't lie...IDK if it's canon or not, but Capcom themselves are the one behind the project, leading me to believe it is. That said, this comic introduced TWO new female characters. A nun that runs a school where the outbreak in the story is taking place, and a new BSAA agent who Chris knows very well, and is known as the best BSAA agent in her Branch...What if it was one of these ladies, considering only "Die Hard" fans would pick up the Resident Evil comic series. The time placement is also correct, because we see Chris and Pierce going on Missions together, proving this is before the events of RE6...

 

[Hel]

I can not trust that Leon and Claire never got bit during Raccoon City since I watched them get bit several times as a game mechanic, but canonically they were never bitten...That is the equivalent of what you're saying...It's rather absurd not to trust something is canonical when it is clearly stated to be canonical by the company that makes it...

Nope. Gameplay and story segregation is not the same as being told two different versions of the same tale and having to believe them both. What is rather absurd is that Capcom expect us to do just that, even though these versions contradict each other at times. If you can accept this based on the premise that everything we're told in the Chronicles is nothing but an accumulation of distorted memories, fine, but then what makes you so sure the original stories aren't just that as well? We don't even know for sure if Manuela lives or dies in the end, both outcomes have already been declared canon at some point in this very thread.

Anyway, I was only giving my opinion on the idea of Manuela as the villain, you don't have to agree with my reasons. Let's rather focus on your new theory, which is pretty interesting and far from implausible, considering that Piers, too, made his debut in Marhawa Desire before his first game came out. Having read most of the comic, I think it would be rather difficult to come up with a good reason for any of those female characters to be around for Claire's newest adventure, but you never know. (And there's actually three new females, not just two; a student of the Marhawa school also becomes important later on.)

 

[Spikeyroxas]

So another words
It could be any random person introduced at any random time

Let's just hope the plot point behind this isn't completely random too

 

[bruno]

Sorry Bruno...I speak Japanese...That translates 100% to "Guy" or "Man"...

To reiterate what KennedyKiller said above, it 100% not ambiguous at all, I'm a big fan of japanese culture and I have a friend who is fluent in japanese and once I found out about alex wesker I asked whether or not he was confirmed to be a guy.

He read the original translation to me and said it very clearly refers to him as a guy.

Oh ok then... There didn't seem to be a consensus from the sources i visited.

 

[Turo602]

Regardless of exclusivity, canon is canon. After all, REmake has been an exclusive for a long time and Zero still remains so and both those games are canon as are the Chronicles games. While it isn't consistent with the actual games it's retelling, let's not forget how inconsistent the original and even REmake are. Even though there isn't an ending featuring all the confirmed survivors of the Mansion incident, we have accepted both contradictory scenarios as canon. My guess is Capcom wants us to do the same with these games as well.

But I do get what @Hel means. It is hard to trust the canonicity of the Chronicles games. Just like it's hard to trust what really happened in the first Resident Evil. Obviously, the extended lore (Umbrella's End, Operation Javier, and various other additions to the story) is canon. They have been referenced and even set up in games coming before and after. But it's still easy to see how the Chronicles series further complicates things.

The point of the Chronicles series was to tie up loose ends. It was supposed to give us clarity of the stories that came before, not remove them from the canon. So KennedyKiller is right in that they are part of the official canon but that doesn't mean the original games never happened the way they did. Honestly, there is no telling anymore how anything happened. We just have to accept that both versions of the story can co-exist just like Chris' and Jill's scenario in the original game.

 

[Spikeyroxas]

To be honest
The only things I think the chronicle games cleared up were how ada escaped,
Weskers scenarios and the Russia place
Every section based on a game that's already told the story seems loose to me

 

[Fenris]

The "remake" parts of the chronicles are simply just imaginations of how people think the events happened. Like when your grandpa tells you stories and you create an image in your head of how the story would look like in reality. In UC everything was retold by Wesker, so the way how the RE1 and RE3 scenarios play, are just how he thinks the events took place. In Darkside Chronicles Leon reveals the events of RE2 to Krauser, so the scenario is probably his vision of Leons and Claires adventure, while the RECV scenario is just a vision of how Leon thinks the rockford island incident took place.

 

[Turo602]

The "remake" parts of the chronicles are simply just imaginations of how people think the events happened. Like when your grandpa tells you stories and you create an image in your head of how the story would look like in reality. In UC everything was retold by Wesker, so the way how the RE1 and RE3 scenarios play, are just how he thinks the events took place. In Darkside Chronicles Leon reveals the events of RE2 to Krauser, so the scenario is probably his vision of Leons and Claires adventure, while the RECV scenario is just a vision of how Leon thinks the rockford island incident took place.

No, it's not. It's just an on-rails shooter that used narration as a means of tying the stories together rather than it just being a game with random levels that have nothing to do with each other.

 

[KennedyKiller]

The "remake" parts of the chronicles are simply just imaginations of how people think the events happened. Like when your grandpa tells you stories and you create an image in your head of how the story would look like in reality. In UC everything was retold by Wesker, so the way how the RE1 and RE3 scenarios play, are just how he thinks the events took place. In Darkside Chronicles Leon reveals the events of RE2 to Krauser, so the scenario is probably his vision of Leons and Claires adventure, while the RECV scenario is just a vision of how Leon thinks the rockford island incident took place.

No, it's not. It's just an on-rails shooter that used narration as a means of tying the stories together rather than it just being a game with random levels that have nothing to do with each other.

No Turo, he's exactly right when you look at it. The games are narrated the entire time by characters who, at times, not directly involved in the incidents. It's much easier and more believable to that characters reiterating past events from years ago would get a few minor details wrong, but the whole story have the same overall outcome, than to just sum it up as "Oh, it's an on rails shooter game." After all, that's how real life works...

 

[Turo602]

No Turo, he's exactly right when you look at it. The games are narrated the entire time by characters who, at times, not directly involved in the incidents. It's much easier and more believable to that characters reiterating past events from years ago would get a few minor details wrong, but the whole story have the same overall outcome, than to just sum it up as "Oh, it's an on rails shooter game." After all, that's how real life works...

No. You're trying too hard to make sense of a video game. You can't tell me that's exactly how it is when it's just speculation. It's an interesting view, but nowhere is it ever said that Umbrella Chronicles is Wesker's memories or imagination of events he never saw happen. Especially since the events you play through are so detailed that he might as well have been there. The only reason for the distortion is the on-rails co-op. They had to change certain elements to accommodate the gameplay.

 

[ToCool74]

No. You're trying too hard to make sense of a video game. You can't tell me that's exactly how it is when it's just speculation. It's an interesting view, but nowhere is it ever said that Umbrella Chronicles is Wesker's memories or imagination of events he never saw happen. Especially since the events you play through are so detailed that he might as well have been there. The only reason for the distortion is the on-rails co-op. They had to change certain elements to accommodate the gameplay.

Actually it was revealed that the game was originally going to play like RE4 during the earlier stages of its development by the guys who made it, which means that most likely they where planning on using the same type of length and story cuts that was eventually in the final product since I highly doubt they would have made each scenario as long and as faithful as the original games their are chronicling with RE4 gameplay.

After all this was a chronicles game, they have to cut some stuff out and make some changes since they would end up with 5 whole Resident Evil games in one.

Which means that most likely the chronicling story and "distortion" in it was originally intended for a RE4 type of gaming field rather than a on the rails shooter and as they said they changed the core gameplay since they wanted to appeal to the more casual Wii owners and make it easier.

As such I'm leaning more towards the notion from a story standpoint (and how I believe Kawata would explain it) being the fact that the people telling them where never there which is why the story is more compact and not as faithful since they only have second hand knowledge of the events.

 

[Turo602]

Actually it was revealed that the game was originally going to play like RE4 during the earlier stages of its development by the guys who made it, which means that most likely they where planning on using the same type of length and story cuts that was eventually in the final product since I highly doubt they would have made each scenario as long and as faithful as the original games their are chronicling with RE4 gameplay.

After all this was a chronicles game, they have to cut some stuff out and make some changes since they would end up with 5 whole Resident Evil games in one.

Which means that most likely the chronicling story and "distortion" in it was originally intended for a RE4 type of gaming field rather than a on the rails shooter and as they said they changed the core gameplay since they wanted to appeal to the more casual Wii owners and make it easier.

As such I'm leaning more towards the notion from a story standpoint (and how I believe Kawata would explain it) being the fact that the people telling them where never there which is why the story is more compact and not as faithful since they only have second hand knowledge of the events.

The co-op gameplay still heavily impacts the story. It forces both characters together at all times. There is no other reason for the differences other than it's a game that's trying to go through stories as quick as possible so that they can squeeze new information in between. On-rails or third-person gameplay wouldn't change that.

 

[KennedyKiller]

The co-op gameplay still heavily impacts the story. It forces both characters together at all times. There is no other reason for the differences other than it's a game that's trying to go through stories as quick as possible so that they can squeeze new information in between. On-rails or third-person gameplay wouldn't change that.

Capcom had done Co-op games where the players use the same character before..Like in their game Darkwatch (Awesome game BTW). Besides, they could have technically made the game like the House of the Dead games, where you never see your character except in Cutscenes, so you wouldn't even know what character you're actually playing, so nothing would have to change storywise if they did it that way...

 

[Turo602]

Capcom had done Co-op games where the players use the same character before..Like in their game Darkwatch (Awesome game BTW). Besides, they could have technically made the game like the House of the Dead games, where you never see your character except in Cutscenes, so you wouldn't even know what character you're actually playing, so nothing would have to change storywise if they did it that way...

But they didn't. The game already has enough mindless shooting for them to want to further extend the levels by covering each character's scenario. We already know what happens so teaming everyone up was the best way to simplify the stories so that it can get to the point and give you new story details.

 

[Fenris]

No. You're trying too hard to make sense of a video game. You can't tell me that's exactly how it is when it's just speculation. It's an interesting view, but nowhere is it ever said that Umbrella Chronicles is Wesker's memories or imagination of events he never saw happen. Especially since the events you play through are so detailed that he might as well have been there. The only reason for the distortion is the on-rails co-op. They had to change certain elements to accommodate the gameplay.

But none of us knows if it was Capcoms intention to make a game of a bunch of random levels or if it was their intention to make a more "flashback" orientated game. A lot of movies and tv shows use this kind of storytelling, so maybe Capcom was thinking "let's put small remake parts in it and use it to connect it to the actual story" If you play the remake scenarios they even start with an intro speech where Wesker "retells" everything, which is very smiliar to movie and tv flashbacks. And about Wesker not knowing the events: I'm sure at some points Chris and Jill revealed all their informations to some people and sice Wesker has his spys everywhere he has enough informations have his own conclusion. (And to be fair: The events where he was absent are not really hard to conclude if you look up some of the details)

 

[Turo602]

But none of us knows if it was Capcoms intention to make a game of a bunch of random levels or if it was their intention to make a more "flashback" orientated game.

Um, they're clearly not a bunch of random levels...

A lot of movies and tv shows use this kind of storytelling, so maybe Capcom was thinking "let's put small remake parts in it and use it to connect it to the actual story" If you play the remake scenarios they even start with an intro speech where Wesker "retells" everything, which is very smiliar to movie and tv flashbacks.

That's my point entirely. Just because someone is narrating doesn't mean we're playing their version of the story. It's just like a TV show or movie where someone tells a story and it cuts to what happened. The narration is just a device to connect the stories so that it isn't just random levels.

And about Wesker not knowing the events: I'm sure at some points Chris and Jill revealed all their informations to some people and sice Wesker has his spys everywhere he has enough informations have his own conclusion. (And to be fair: The events where he was absent are not really hard to conclude if you look up some of the details)

Yes, Wesker had spies that found out every last detail, action, and word of someone else' experience while it was happening... It's not Wesker's version of the story, it's just a cutaway scene showing you the events of what he's talking about.

 

[The Darkening Sea]

I think it will be Alex Wesker.
Alex has been referred to by different pronouns in Japanese, making their gender ambiguous. We know they used Spencer's funds to do their own research on an isolated island. Revelations 2 will take place on an isolated island....
We can't possibly know what kind of research Alex was carrying. They reported to Spencer they were working on a immortality formula, but Spencer was a finished old man, and would be easily fooled.

Since people are keen to see the mysterious woman as being someone’s mother, then why must she be Moira Burton’s mother, or Sherry’s mother?

Annette Birkin is not a character that only the hardcode fans would be able to guess. Even minor fans could tell you who she is if they’ve played the hugely popular RE2.

Unless this Alex Wesker really is a female (Alexandra) and is the actual mother of the Ashford twins, Alexia and Alfred. Their father was called Alexander remember. All names correspond. This would be a ridiculous twist, but it’s not absurd for resident evil. The guys at Capcom are more than prepared to change something for the sake of a new plot. If you know them, you wouldn’t put it passed them. British aristocratic toffs are completely ridiculous anyway. What happened to their mother again? I forget. Lord Spencer and his Wesker children project, is not too far in the left field regarding the Ashford family. Let’s say their mother has superior IQ and were selected and became one of the Wesker children.

Now what would be the connection between her and Claire or Moira?

Claire (instrumentally her brother) eliminated Alexia in Code Veronica X. She was blown to smithereens with a rocket launcher! Perhaps in the twisted Ashford mind, the Redfield’s are countable for the destruction of the family, the palace, and the island.

The circumstance of Revelations 2 is definitely reminiscent to Code Veronica with the Island prison surroundings. It might be a hint at something. I take Moira as a young sidekick, relating to the fact that Claire has always taken the mother figure role. (You could argue that she even had to babysit Steve!) And as Moira is Barry’s daughter, it is like bringing a part of him back.

The idea of Barry’s wife or (other daughter) being evil is just silly, desperate even. I don’t believe Capcom have gone that far down hill yet.

There is more correlation with the Ashford family and the familiar surroundings that which Code Veronica and Revelations 2 share.

The Annette scenario would be a predictable and ****ty revenge plot. Come on! And If I remember correctly, she was fatally clawed by her mutated husband in the shaft in the underground laboratory. Shortly after, the entire place detonated. I know, I know, Ada survived remarkable odds. But I’m optimistic the game series has moved on - it is a bit more sensible these days.