Resident Evil 2 HD Remaster (Official Topic)

[KManX89]

More good news, guys: remember when past leaks said the mutant alligator, Tofu and 4th survivor would all be cut from the REmake? Well, it turns out they're all returning! It's just been confirmed today:

YES!

I shutter to think how scary the gator will look in photorealistic visuals and dark, cluttered environments.

 

[Zacmac90]

There are two iconic features in the game I hope are in this remake; the RPD music and the door opening scenes.

 

[Turo602]

There are two iconic features in the game I hope are in this remake; the RPD music and the door opening scenes.

They confirmed in the Q&A I posted that the door loading screens are no more and that there's no loading screens throughout the game. At the very least, they should have done a nod to it by having the door scene occur when entering the police station. But that's unfortunately not the case as there's footage of some players leaving the police station and it's seamless like everything else.

 

[Zacmac90]

They confirmed in the Q&A I posted that the door loading screens are no more and that there's no loading screens throughout the game. At the very least, they should have done a nod to it by having the door scene occur when entering the police station. But that's unfortunately not the case as there's footage of some players leaving the police station and it's seamless like everything else.

awww thats such a bummer, i think that was one of Resident evil's best features..did they say if they'd keep the same R.P.D music than?

 

[tonygo7]

Ps4 players i created a resident evil 2 community feel free to join and add me psn:Undisputed_User

 

[Roku]

awww thats such a bummer, i think that was one of Resident evil's best features..did they say if they'd keep the same R.P.D music than?

Not really, but the people that pre-order the game will be able to change the new soundtrack with the old one.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

In 2015, they promised us a Resident Evil 2 REMAKE. Now in 2018, they instead reveal a Resident Evil 2 REBOOT. Not only that, they're pretending like they haven't broken their promise. If they had announced it as a reboot in 2015, I might have been more accepting. But instead I'm just angry at them for deceiving us and not acknowledging that they've broken their promise. And I'm heartbroken that this probably means a proper remake is never going to happen.

Boycotting the upcoming reboot in order to get a proper remake is not going to be enough, because if you wait that long, they'll only interpret it as a lack of interest in Resident Evil 2. Make lots of angry noise for them to see. For them to change their minds, they need an uproar. The problem is, there are too many people applauding them, oblivious that they've been deceived.

It's clear to me that doing a proper remake is up to us now. If we the fans want an authentic remake of Resident Evil 2, we'll just have to do it ourselves. WE DO IT. We the fans. That is the only way it's going to happen. Fans of Resident Evil 2, start honing your skills. Hackers keep hacking, coders keep coding, and artists keep crafting. Build that remake we all want because Capcom will never do it. THEY NEVER DO IT.

 

[Gar Bageman]

In 2015, they promised us a Resident Evil 2 REMAKE. Now in 2018, they instead reveal a Resident Evil 2 REBOOT. Not only that, they're pretending like they haven't broken their promise. If they had announced it as a reboot in 2015, I might have been more accepting. But instead I'm just angry at them for deceiving us and not acknowledging that they've broken their promise. And I'm heartbroken that this probably means a proper remake is never going to happen.

Boycotting the upcoming reboot in order to get a proper remake is not going to be enough, because if you wait that long, they'll only interpret it as a lack of interest in Resident Evil 2. Make lots of angry noise for them to see. For them to change their minds, they need an uproar. The problem is, there are too many people applauding them, oblivious that they've been deceived.

It's clear to me that doing a proper remake is up to us now. If we the fans want an authentic remake of Resident Evil 2, we'll just have to do it ourselves. WE DO IT. We the fans. That is the only way it's going to happen. Fans of Resident Evil 2, start honing your skills. Hackers keep hacking, coders keep coding, and artists keep crafting. Build that remake we all want because Capcom will never do it. THEY NEVER DO IT.

I get where you're coming from, but I wholeheartedly disagree. This IS a remake, it just isn't done in the classic style.

As I'm sure is the case with you (and just about any old school fan here), I've played the original RE2 so many times and dominated it so thoroughly that I could probably match any world record speed runs for it with very little effort. I think I may've played it more than any other game I've ever owned. From the time the demo came out to the time the original REmake came out, RE2 was my favorite game on the planet. I remember when they first announced REmake, there was talk that the other classic RE games would follow it on the GameCube, and the consensus among fans at the time was an understanding that they'd be getting the same, top to bottom, modern re-imagining RE1 had. So, when it turned out they merely ported them, it kind of left this gaping hole of longing in a lot of us where we've developed this severely-myopic tunnel vision and headcanon about 'proper' REmakes for all the classic-era games and what exactly that should mean.

My point here is, however, that we're really talking semantics right now. Remake, reboot - there isn't really a difference in this case. What we're getting is still very much a new, modern, re-imagined version of an ancient game. It just isn't 100% the one a lot of people were hoping for. But there was no way it was ever going to be. We're simply too far removed from the original, and there are now too many varying types of RE fans to make happy. Personally speaking, the current REmake2 is more exciting than any RE game has been since REmake. And while, yes, I'd love to see the classic, fixed-camera return, I never once expected them to do it for this. For better or for worse, that style of RE game is dead at Capcom. So, while I absolutely understand the disappointment, I can't say I share in it. What we've seen of this looks amazing to me, and while it isn't the remake I initially wanted way back in '01, what it is is more than acceptable.

Obviously, your mileage may (and does) vary. This is just my two cents.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

I actually don't have a problem with the gameplay changes. While I can't imagine why they wouldn't want to include fixed camera angles as an option, I can live without them. What makes me angry is the rearranged layout of the police station, redesigned characters (Claire in particular), rearranged events like jump scares (which will probably only impact the first playthrough anyway), and dialog that is so unrecognizable that it almost feels like a different story. So all gameplay aside, it's much more different than it needs to be to feel relevant and be successful, even with the range of RE fans out there. There's just no reason to make the game take place in an alternate universe. I don't think any fan is asking for that.

This IS a remake, it just isn't done in the classic style.

So I disagree with the first part of this sentence because not only is it not done in the classic style, it doesn't take place in the same universe.

My point here is, however, that we're really talking semantics right now. Remake, reboot - there isn't really a difference in this case.

I see why you'd say this, but the important difference in the words is in the degree of change. They're changing more than is necessary. It's entirely possible to remake this game without establishing different continuity, as the word reboot implies. And it's entirely possible to remake it in a way that is more visually recognizable (by not changing character designs or the layout of the police station).

What we've seen of this looks amazing to me, and while it isn't the remake I initially wanted way back in '01, what it is is more than acceptable.

While I can't argue this from a graphical standpoint (the graphics of the game are gorgeous), what do you think about the changes to the layout of the police station? Or Claire's new design? Because that's probably what bothers me most. If nothing else, I want a better looking version of the game I know and love, not a half-recognizable version.

 

[Gar Bageman]

I actually don't have a problem with the gameplay changes. While I can't imagine why they wouldn't want to include fixed camera angles as an option, I can live without them. What makes me angry is the rearranged layout of the police station, redesigned characters (Claire in particular), rearranged events like jump scares (which will probably only impact the first playthrough anyway), and dialog that is so unrecognizable that it almost feels like a different story. So all gameplay aside, it's much more different than it needs to be to feel relevant and be successful, even with the range of RE fans out there. There's just no reason to make the game take place in an alternate universe. I don't think any fan is asking for that.

So I disagree with the first part of this sentence because not only is it not done in the classic style, it doesn't take place in the same universe.

I see why you'd say this, but the important difference in the words is in the degree of change. They're changing more than is necessary. It's entirely possible to remake this game without establishing different continuity, as the word reboot implies. And it's entirely possible to remake it in a way that is more visually recognizable (by not changing character designs or the layout of the police station).

While I can't argue this from a graphical standpoint (the graphics of the game are gorgeous), what do you think about the changes to the layout of the police station? Or Claire's new design? Because that's probably what bothers me most. If nothing else, I want a better looking version of the game I know and love, not a half-recognizable version.

I guess I'm having trouble really understanding your complaints. It seems like maybe our individual perception is too out of tune. I mean, the remake of RE1 did absolutely all of that stuff. Characters were redesigned, the mansion layout was different-though-similar (much like the R.P.D. precinct appears to be here), the dialog was radically different (though still had a few callbacks to the original version which, again, is happening here), the music was different, some of the events and scares were moved around (like the window dog coming later), and there were new environments and scares added throughout. It wasn't a 1:1 remake at all, but rather a re-imagining. And if all of those things put the REmake2 into an alternate universe, did they not do the same for the original REmake? Or do you object to it there as well?

 

[Mr.R]

It's been a while since I got really excited about Resident Evil. I found RE7 to be a very misleading game, where the premises of what everyone thought it was good only lasted for half a game. The RE2 remake got me excited again, and in my opinion they got pretty much everything right, at least from what we got right now (Claire look a little weird, true, and I hope the RE7 inventory is just a place holder. Maybe it'll change on the final version.)

One thing I don't understand though is why some people are really sad they won't have fixed cameras. It's 2018! Why people want to shoot on things they can't see, with auto aim? I always found this to be something necessary back then, but nowadays it would be a large step back. Freedom of aim can give us a new whole gameplay experience based on where you shoot and why, also with enemies's weakpoints. I'm very happy we're having OTS cameras for the Remake. I never played the original Remake or Zero back in the 00's because I didn't had a GameCube or a Wii. When I first played on my PS3 I was happy with Remake's atmosphere and character design, but it was clear for me that the gameplay was outdated. Good thing Capcom took RE2R to a more modern approach. Again, RE2Remake would never please everyone, sadly. I'm happy it pleases me, at least from what they showed us so far.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

Think of it this way. I would say the different degrees of change fall under these three tiers:

1. Remaster
2. Remake
3. Reboot

Which of those three would you say the RE1 remake falls under, and which of those three would you say the RE2 remake falls under?

I mean, the remake of RE1 did absolutely all of that stuff. Characters were redesigned, the mansion layout was different-though-similar (much like the R.P.D. precinct appears to be here), the dialog was radically different (though still had a few callbacks to the original version which, again, is happening here), the music was different, some of the events and scares were moved around (like the window dog coming later), and there were new environments and scares added throughout.

So while you are correct, the difference is in the degree of change. The RE1 remake does all of these things, but the RE2 remake does them to a much higher degree. And I would argue the level of change in the RE2 remake has crossed the line. It's too extreme. Especially when you consider this:

I think it's fair to say that RE1 has more room for improvement than RE2. Do you agree? If so, wouldn't you expect a greater amount of change for a RE1 remake? There just isn't as much reason to change as much with RE2. So in that sense, the RE2 remake should be closer to RE2 than the RE1 remake is to RE1. But it isn't. Instead we're getting the opposite. It's almost like they don't think RE2 is good enough to warrant a faithful remake.

And if all of those things put the REmake2 into an alternate universe, did they not do the same for the original REmake? Or do you object to it there as well?

Technically you're right about both remakes being in alternate universes. So to be more specific, the problem I have is how clear it is that it's an alternate universe. With the RE1 remake, it's like, okay, I guess technically that's an alternate universe. There are signs here and there. With the RE2 remake, it's clear that it's definitely an alternate universe, no question. The signs are everywhere. So think of it this way: how clear do you want it to be that the remake is in an alternate universe? Very clear? Not clear at all? I think for most fans, the answer is definitely not "very clear," and I would say that for the RE2 remake, it's very clear.

To answer the other part of your question, while there are some things I wish they hadn't changed in the RE1 remake, it's easy for me to say that overall, the RE1 remake is superior, because for the most part, they stuck to the proverb, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Visual upgrades were prioritized over design choices or changes in the narrative. But with the RE2 remake, they're trying to "fix" things that aren't broken. Much more so than with the RE1 remake.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

One thing I don't understand though is why some people are really sad they won't have fixed cameras. It's 2018! Why people want to shoot on things they can't see, with auto aim? I always found this to be something necessary back then, but nowadays it would be a large step back. Freedom of aim can give us a new whole gameplay experience based on where you shoot and why, also with enemies's weakpoints. I'm very happy we're having OTS cameras for the Remake.

I think you're right about the OTS camera being superior from a gameplay perspective, but what the fixed camera angles bring is a more cinematic presentation that can also add layers to the psychological experience by doing things like placing a camera outside of a window looking in (which gives us the unsettling feeling that someone is watching us). And there's the whole nostalgia thing.

The thing is, it's comically easy to employ both camera methods, so there's no reason both shouldn't exist in the RE2 remake. Take the Lost in Nightmares DLC for RE5, for example. Both sides of the fan base can easily be satisfied.

 

[MisterScott]

The Remake of Resident Evil 1 wasn’t that faithful ether, for instance they shaved off Barry’s iconic beard and made him skinnier and nobody complained then so why are everyone complaining about Claire’s new jacket? I feel like the the remake of Resident Evil 2 is being held to higher standards than the remake of the first game when this remake is being done exactly like the first remake except for the new camera system.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

The Remake of Resident Evil 1 wasn’t that faithful ether, for instance they shaved off Barry’s iconic beard and made him skinnier and nobody complained then so why are everyone complaining about Claire’s new jacket?

I think the key question to ask regarding characters design is, if you were to mod the remake character model into a game from some other franchise, would you recognize which game the model is based on if the first time you saw the remake model was in the mod? In the case of RE1 remake Barry, I think the answer is yes, you would know that's Barry from RE1. In the case of RE2 remake Claire, I think the answer is no, you would not recognize that as Claire from RE2. In fact, you probably wouldn't even recognize it as Claire at all.

My point isn't that the RE1 remake is 100% faithful, my point is that it's much more faithful than the RE2 remake.

I feel like the the remake of Resident Evil 2 is being held to higher standards than the remake of the first game when this remake is being done exactly like the first remake except for the new camera system.

So not true. The layout of the environment is more different. The character design is more different. The lighting is more different. The dialog is more different. Hell, the item screen is more different. And yes, the camera is more different. Everything about the RE2 remake is more different than the RE1 remake.

 

[Gar Bageman]

Think of it this way. I would say the different degrees of change fall under these three tiers:

1. Remaster
2. Remake
3. Reboot

Which of those three would you say the RE1 remake falls under, and which of those three would you say the RE2 remake falls under?

My perception is that they're either both a remake or they're both a reboot. in my eyes, the only different change between the two is that one retains the original, fixed camera, and the other does not. That one thing isn't enough for me to categorize them differently.

So while you are correct, the difference is in the degree of change. The RE1 remake does all of these things, but the RE2 remake does them to a much higher degree. And I would argue the level of change in the RE2 remake has crossed the line. It's too extreme. Especially when you consider this:

I think it's fair to say that RE1 has more room for improvement than RE2. Do you agree? If so, wouldn't you expect a greater amount of change for a RE1 remake? There just isn't as much reason to change as much with RE2. So in that sense, the RE2 remake should be closer to RE2 than the RE1 remake is to RE1. But it isn't. Instead we're getting the opposite. It's almost like they don't think RE2 is good enough to warrant a faithful remake.

Again, that seems to be more down to personal preference rather than objectivity. I see the degree of change each has undergone as a being about on par. Meaning that neither one (from what we've seen) is changed more drastically than the other. And as much as I love the original RE2, I think it has just as much room for improvement as RE1. I mean, that's why I wanted them to remake it in the first place - because with better technology and better performance capabilities, they could feasibly make a better game. But, once again, that's more of a subjective thing than objective. From what I've seen, I believe they actually delivered.

Technically you're right about both remakes being in alternate universes. So to be more specific, the problem I have is how clear it is that it's an alternate universe. With the RE1 remake, it's like, okay, I guess technically that's an alternate universe. There are signs here and there. With the RE2 remake, it's clear that it's definitely an alternate universe, no question. The signs are everywhere. So think of it this way: how clear do you want it to be that the remake is in an alternate universe? Very clear? Not clear at all? I think for most fans, the answer is definitely not "very clear," and I would say that for the RE2 remake, it's very clear.

If I am to believe that one is clearly an alternate universe, I absolutely have to believe the other is just as clearly in an alternate universe. From all we've seen, I don't view one as being any more or less AU than the other. But I'll offer this; Seeing as all the games that came out after REmake are playing off its lore to some extent, maybe REmake2 is following suit. The likelihood of that being the case is quite high. Clearly they've had REmake on the mind for a number of years, and it was really the remaster's success that finally got us REmake2, so it wouldn't be remotely surprising to me if REmake2 is set squarely in that canon.

To answer the other part of your question, while there are some things I wish they hadn't changed in the RE1 remake, it's easy for me to say that overall, the RE1 remake is superior, because for the most part, they stuck to the proverb, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Visual upgrades were prioritized over design choices or changes in the narrative. But with the RE2 remake, they're trying to "fix" things that aren't broken. Much more so than with the RE1 remake.

I have to ask; How long has it been since you've played RE1 and its remake? Because I played them both (all campaigns) over a couple of days when the PS4 version came out, and they're pretty drastically different in a lot of places and in a lot of ways. Honestly, if anything, I'd say that what we've seen of the REmake2 setup might actually more faithful to the original than REmake was.

 

[MisterScott]

I think the key question to ask regarding characters design is, if you were to mod the remake character model into a game from some other franchise, would you recognize which game the model is based on if the first time you saw the remake model was in the mod? In the case of RE1 remake Barry, I think the answer is yes, you would know that's Barry from RE1. In the case of RE2 remake Claire, I think the answer is no, you would not recognize that as Claire from RE2. In fact, you probably wouldn't even recognize it as Claire at all.

My point isn't that the RE1 remake is 100% faithful, my point is that it's much more faithful than the RE2 remake.


So not true. The layout of the environment is more different. The character design is more different. The lighting is more different. The dialog is more different. Hell, the item screen is more different. And yes, the camera is more different. Everything about the RE2 remake is more different than the RE1 remake.

Barry in Remake looks nothing like Barry who was originally a big bearded guy while the Barry in Remake was a average sized clean shaven man with a slight ginger stubble, if it were not for his signature red flak jacket at face value he could easily pass as a random STARS cop.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

My perception is that they're either both a remake or they're both a reboot. in my eyes, the only different change between the two is that one retains the original, fixed camera, and the other does not. That one thing isn't enough for me to categorize them differently.

Okay, I see many other differences besides the camera. But don't you think it's significant that the developers themselves no longer call it a remake? In the announcement video in 2015, it clearly says "Remake," and now they're marketing it on their website as "reimagined."

FWIW, if the camera were the only difference in approach, I would agree that it isn't enough for me to categorize them differently.

I see the degree of change each has undergone as a being about on par. Meaning that neither one (from what we've seen) is changed more drastically than the other. And as much as I love the original RE2, I think it has just as much room for improvement as RE1.

I have to say, of all your answers, this one shocks me the most. I just see so much improvement from RE1 to RE2. RE1 is so brightly lit and colorful, and the voice acting is comically bad. And the music isn't nearly as good as RE2, which is outstanding and still holds up.

I mean, that's why I wanted them to remake it in the first place - because with better technology and better performance capabilities, they could feasibly make a better game.

And see I agree with that completely. The problem is that they didn't stop with technology and performance—they progressed into design and narrative.

I have to ask; How long has it been since you've played RE1 and its remake? Because I played them both (all campaigns) over a couple of days when the PS4 version came out, and they're pretty drastically different in a lot of places and in a lot of ways.

The last time I played RE1 was years ago, sometime between 2012 and 2014 is my best guess, and I also played some of the RE1 remake around that time and several times since. The most recent time I played the RE1 remake was January of this year (which I followed up with RE2, FWIW).

Honestly, if anything, I'd say that what we've seen of the REmake2 setup might actually more faithful to the original than REmake was.

Do you believe this in terms of environment layout, character design, and dialog wording? I think all of these things are much more faithful in the RE1 remake.

 

[Mjolnir Mark IV]

Barry in Remake looks nothing like Barry who was originally a big bearded guy while the Barry in Remake was a average sized clean shaven man with a slight ginger stubble, if it were not for his signature red flak jacket at face value he could easily pass as a random STARS cop.

Maybe so. But he's still more recognizable than RE2 remake Claire. At least Barry's got that signature red flak jacket. What does she have to tell you that she's Claire?

 

[MisterScott]

Maybe so. But he's still more recognizable than RE2 remake Claire. At least Barry's got that signature red flak jacket. What does she have to tell you that she's Claire?

She looks older and her The clothes she’s wearing seem to be taking more inspiration from her Revalations 2 and Code Veronica outfit more than her Resident Evil 2 outfit but you can still tell she is Claire by her face, I don’t entirely agree with how Capcom designed her new look but I’m sure we can all agree that as far as her facial structure is concerned she is a more faithful reimagining of Claire than Remake Barry was of Barry and Resident Evil 7 Chris was of Chris as the latter two looked like movie characters that experienced a “actor swap”.