Operation Raccoon City Played ORC and InsertedEvil? Please answer this q!

[wolfgirl]

Hi guys,

First of all a BIG HUG and THANK YOU to everyone who's taken my survey (the one linked in my forum sig) - it's really helped my research, especially the answers in the questions about rifts in the fan community between lovers of films vs lovers of games, as well as lovers of classic games and lovers of newer games (post-RE4). These quotes in particular were very useful for discussion on this topic as I presented a PowerPoint about my work to the first years of my course (I'm a third year).

I did a slide on InsertedEvil (the marketing campaign for ORC) and asked the question 'Why do you think InsertedEvil brings Resident Evil fans together?' to the first years to create a discussion. I got some answers I expected - it embraces the mass collective intelligence found online; enables fans to become characters themselves in an official, Capcom created narrative instead of playing through a character's story; lets the players feel like the heroes of the Resident Evil series – giving them the sense of Umbrella watching and chasing them; uses complex clues that generally only Resident Evil fans will be able to solve.

Though one interesting response from one of the students has made me want to add a section to my chapter on how Capcom has used fandom to promote its products (of which I've used InsertedEvil as a case study) - he was wondering if perhaps creating something like InsertedEvil, a story where fans partially direct the narrative (although it's the Insider who gives the clues and updates, it's the mass fan participation that carries the story) is almost a cop-out that means that the official companies don't have to work so hard in creating a narrative in their official products, because fans are pretty much doing it for them. This seems especially suspicious when a) SlantSixGames are newcomers to creating Resident Evil titles and b) Raccoon City is such a used and famous event in the franchise that it's pretty much now an easy template to stick a new story into, without much thought having to be put into it. This trouble is with this plan is that fans tend to create richer worlds than the narratives official companies put forward, there are way more fans than developers and they all work hard to create a richer Resident Evil experience through fan-media and communities, so anything the companies put forward can tend to disappoint.

So this is where I need your guys' help, to prove or disprove this theory. If you've played through ORC and Inserted Evil, please answer me these questions (BUT PLEASE ONLY REPLY IF YOU DON'T MIND BEING QUOTED IN MY ESSAY!!!):

1) What did you think of Inserted Evil?

2) What did you think of the story of ORC and has it lived up to your expectations?

3) Do you believe it's a cop-out for the companies to use a marketing campaign that employs a lot of fan-participation to carry its narrative along (so that the companies don't have to do so much work themselves in writing a narrative)? If so, is this morally right to do?

4) Do you believe that fans create a richer Resident Evil experience than the official companies do?

THANK YOU AGAIN xxx

 

[Springhosen]

1. I didn't really get into the whole Inserted Evil thing so I honestly can't say. (Sorry for the lack of answer. )

POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOR ORC:
2. I really loved the storyline to ORC. Unlike a lot of times in games when companies hit a plateau and try to go back and capitalize on something that was popular way back when and end up failing miserably simply because they lost sight of what made the idea great, ORC delivered. The entire concept, story and the characters fit into what we, as Resident Evil fans, have come to associate Umbrella with: betrayal, deceit, sending people into a dangerous situation with not enough details and general badassery. (Even the members of the Wolfpack who just don't seem as into it as the others and end up betraying you in the end fit in with this idea.)

Despite it being a "side-game" with no canon standing in the main universe, it didn't retcon a lot - {I hate it when games do, it's like disowning everything past games have done and saying it's not good enough} - and it doesn't change any of the core events of past games, aside from the alternate ending, and could very easily fit into the space before/after and between Resident Evil 2 and Nemesis, which I believe is part of it's mass appeal. This game brought both sets of fans together because it was what we all wanted it to be. New fans want shooting games that are nice-looking and older fans simply want those core Resident Evil horror elements back again and ORC delivered on both; it's a nice-looking shooter and we got Umbrella, zombies and horror back - even if only for one title. (Who says horror and action can't coexist? This title proves it.)

It has most definitely lived up to my expectations.

3. Not really. While co-op is a huge part of the game and the game is probably more enjoyable with more people it plays just smashingly with just one player - less people to move the narrative - I didn't feel like this was a cop out at all.

4. Absolutely! The games are only what you make them; without a fan-base, there would be no Resident Evil experience.

 

[wolfgirl]

Thanks for your response.

PLEASE keep responding guys!! All this is really useful and makes my essay so much better!