Resident Evil 3 Remake Resident evil 3 review are in

[Deleted member 21244]

That's the thing, @Albertwesker959 , there is a lot of different reviews talking about the length of the game. From 4 to even 7 hours. We'll only know once we played. I'm stepping back from this discussion and wait for the game. There's not much to be said for now that I didn't said earlier. I'm still fairly optimistic, and Jim Sterling's video reviewing the game was pretty optimistic. That being said, amidst the reviews, I really hope everyone who plays it have a good time. I'm pretty sure I'll have.

I m still optimistic too, the demo was good and I love resistance so I'm glad on the money i spend on thr game

This few hour of campaign and cut content still bugs and disappoint me, but it's true that everyone play game differently, maybe it will take 10 hour for me to beat on hardcore

Only 2 days left my heart is going on fire for every day it passed because I'm really hyped about it

@Jamesy we probably never know why they decide to cut them, but my suspicious is that Capcom wanted to exploit re 2 remake success and wanted to deliver re 3 remake as soon as possible and this mean cut things on the way, i already explained some motivation in some of my previous post

 

[Jonipoon]

I think the reviewer who clocked 4 hours must had rushed through the game. I think some of this might be blowing out of proportions, really.

That's the dangerous thing about reviewers. They will never admit it, but they are influenced by each others' opinions. So if one early reviewer calls something trash, its very likely that later reviewers will be influenced by that and trash something a little bit more than originally intended.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

That's the dangerous thing about reviewers. They will never admit it, but they are influenced by each others' opinions. So if one early reviewer calls something trash, its very likely that later reviewers will be influenced by that and trash something a little bit more than originally intended.

Not evey review do this sort of reasoning almost none of them to be fair , at least professional certified reviewer and good people too who want to make review

If you are referring to random youtube people making game and movie review than maybe you wre right, they get influenced by what people say but how can the re 3 review have been influenced by each other if they came out simultaneously ? Did reviewer have a WhatsApp group to talk about ? Lol

 

[bSTAR_182]

Is the game going to be long? Nope, but most first playthroughs won't be 4 hours long (unless you rush through it as well, which why would you?).

Regarding the cut stuff, I can understand the disappointment, but at the same time... I can understand Capcom's motivations as well. As much as I love RE3 (it's my fav old school RE alongside REmake), you didn't really have a motivation to visit most of its buildings unlike RE1 and RE2 (where the characters were trapped in their environments so had to explore them in depth to find a way out). The police station, was there simply to make the og game longer, and was also a nice Easter egg/nostalgic trip in the past, while the clock tower, as beautiful as it was, was basically a reminder of the RE1's mansion (even though the layout was a bit different, same as RE7 and Rev2).

So yeah, I think that it makes sense to shift things a bit with this one. The story, premise and structure required it to work fluidly.

Great points in this post.

While RE3 was never a favorite of mine, the main thing that stood out to me was the beginning half as you're running through a more in-depth and colorful version of the city streets than RE2's. Once Nemesis starts making his regular, scripted appearance, the game feels even more like a race through the city to escape. For the sake of making this game's concept and premise work, while giving it a modern edge, changes needed to be made. Even though they removed some content, they expanded on others and before anyone can say if it was truly right or wrong, they should experience the entire game for themselves.

 

[Roku]

Not evey review do this sort of reasoning almost none of them to be fair , at least professional certified reviewer and good people too who want to make review

If you are referring to random youtube people making game and movie review than maybe you are right, they get influenced by what people say but how can the re 3 review have been influenced by each other if they came out simultaneously ? Did reviewer have a WhatsApp group to talk about ? Lol

I both agree and disagree with this.
It's true the reviews themself aren't going to be influenced by other's reviews (at least not the one that have received an early copy by Capcom and are strictly tied by a contract), since they're mostly been written around the same time (although, there might be some internal discussion between people of the same site about the game in some cases, and that might influence the reviews just a tiny bit), but it's also true that:

- all these "special articles" coming out now (like the one titled "What went wrong with Resident Evil 3" by Multiplayer.it) are being influenced by reader's reactions and by the reviews score given by other critics.

The game might have its issues, but right now, it doesn't even matter how small or big they are, because the general opinions (by critics) has decided that the game is a disappointment and, even more important, have noticed that people love to read about it, so it serve them to blow it out of proportion.

So basically, you're about to see a lot of articles and videos talking about how bad the game is (even though it's not bad, just not perfect) and making it sound a lot worse than it is, by said certified journalists.

- Some, will take into consideration the reactions of public with their scores (an important game taking a very bad score, will grant you views). Although, luckily there aren't many example of this (but I did, see a few).

 

[Deleted member 21244]

I both agree and disagree with this.
It's true the reviews themself aren't going to be influenced by other's reviews (at least not the one that have received an early copy by Capcom and are strictly tied by a contract), since they're mostly been written around the same time (although, there might be some internal discussion between people of the same site about the game in some cases, and that might influence the reviews just a tiny bit), but it's also true that:

- all these "special articles" coming out now (like the one titled "What went wrong with Resident Evil 3" by Multiplayer.it) are being influenced by reader's reactions and by the reviews score given by other critics.

The game might have its issues, but right now, it doesn't even matter how small or big they are, because the general opinions (by critics) has decided that the game is a disappointment and, even more important, have noticed that people love to read about it, so it serve them to blow it out of proportion.

So basically, you're about to see a lot of articles and videos talking about how bad the game is (even though it's not bad, just not perfect) and making it sound a lot worse than it is, by said certified journalists.

- Some, will take into consideration the reactions of public with their scores (an important game taking a very bad score, will grant you views). Although, luckily there aren't many example of this (but I did, see a few).

This is true, in the end the game got an 80 on metacritic which is the som of every review, it's not as good as re 2 remake and maybe the web is exaggerating or maybe not this must be seen

Waiting for the release to see my reaction on it

 

[Jonipoon]

Thank you, @Roku for explaining it much better than I could do. If @Albertwesker959 is wondering what I was thinking, this is more like it. The internet has decided that the game is a massive disappointment, and one bad review triggers another at this point. In a world where everything is about how many clicks, likes and watchtime you can get, its understandable that channels will jump on the current bandwagon and that's a shame - especially since the game isn't even out yet!

I find it so ridiculous that websites and channels are already putting out videos titled "What went wrong with RE3 remake"....

EDIT: What I find most ironic is that so many reviewers and channels were praising the RE3 remake demo for being even better than RE2 remake....

 

[Deleted member 21244]

Thank you, @Roku for explaining it much better than I could do. If @Albertwesker959 is wondering what I was thinking, this is more like it. The internet has decided that the game is a massive disappointment, and one bad review triggers another at this point. In a world where everything is about how many clicks, likes and watchtime you can get, its understandable that channels will jump on the current bandwagon and that's a shame - especially since the game isn't even out yet!

I find it so ridiculous that websites and channels are already putting out videos titled "What went wrong with RE3 remake"....

EDIT: What I find most ironic is that so many reviewers and channels were praising the RE3 remake demo for being even better than RE2 remake....

Yeah know i understand what you Mean, the world had decided that the game is disappointing and bad just because of what s been around saying on the internet

But a review dosent trigger the other they were simply made in different location by different person, and released at the same time
It's more likely that one reaction trigger another, a twitt trigger another twitt and so on and the general consensuse think the game is bad

People should definitely try the game first , that s what i will do, but i cant still ignore some of the review point, unless thr game make me change my mind

Yeah doing YouTube video saying what went wrong whit re 3 is ridiculous since the game is not out yet and if something went wrong nobody knows the true, thy just make the videos for sharing

The demo was revived well because playing 10 minutes or 2 hours of a game is different than playing the whole game, is like watching 10 minutes of a movie o could call it good and beautiful compared to its predecessor but only after playing the whole game I can say if it's true or not
When reviewer first tryed the first level of dmc 2 they called a better game than dmc 1 but when review came out the game wss completely destroyed, because you cannot really make a full review on just a piece of game that you are not even playing as long as you want since it's essentially a one shot play and your cloack is ticking

 

[Jamesy]

What I don’t understand is why capcom did not take more time and care with Re3 remake? Is it because it’s not a classic like the original RE2 or do you think it’s because they wanted to get it released quickly before RE8?

 

[Deleted member 21244]

What I don’t understand is why capcom did not take more time and care with Re3 remake? Is it because it’s not a classic like the original RE2 or do you think it’s because they wanted to get it released quickly before RE8?

Probably because of a lesser budget, and because they have to respect the release date
Essentially this is how it works in game industry, I'll make it very simple, Capcom decide to make a game in this case re 3 remake, they decide the budget to spend on it and hire some of they're development team to the job, in this case was an outside team the, m2 team ... The team started they're job, but they realize that the budget capcom gives to them wasn't enough to fully remake re 3 whit the vision they have in mind, something that already happened whit devil may cry 4, where dante part of the story was completely cut and reworked making it a completely backtracking of the Nero campaign
Whit the budget they have team decided how to proceed whit the game what to put in it and what to cut, making a larger game cost more money, probably making the clock tower the park ecc would have cost more since they are completely new area to explore and to make from the ground, and since we are talking about a modern day game making new are cost a lot more money and time compared to a ps1 game where they just put some poligon and makes some draw and the new area is done in an instant... Another explanation is that Re 3 was also a very requested game by fan and after the success of re 2 remake capcom decide to exploit this success and and after hearing fan request of re 3 remake decided to exploit all this and reveal the game whit an aprile release date, the game was probably going to be released later this year, but capcom decide for early release something they already did whit re 6 by anticipating the release date of two month because they simply wanted money , this release date will inevitably altered the time to finish the game so some area had to be cut.. I

This are all my assumption but by knowing capcom history's whit some game like dmc 4 and re 6 and by having taken a closer look at re 3 development it's very likely that this things are true

 

[Jamesy]

Yeah true about the budget. some gamers don’t realise that money does not grow on trees.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

Yeah true about the budget. some gamers don’t realise that money does not grow on trees.

Yeah
Also another reason is the fact that Capcom is missing some really "strong" person that lead the resident evil series, they make re 2 remake and re 3 remake but who the hell was the director of this game? Probably some capable people that pretty can do the job right and can make good game but this People are not really as strong, visionary and unique as shinji mikami was
Trust me that if shinji mikami was directing re 3 remake he would have fought until the end for making the perfect game and putting those cut area into the game, even going against capcom itself, something that he did actually
Capcom simply air people and even if they are good at what they do they simply make the job and if Capcom tell them to release the game on april thy must do so, if Capcom give them that budget they simply say ok, nobody of them would fight against capcom telling them I need more budget because I want to make the perfect remake, nobody would fight to say: we must release the game later because we need more time to make the game... what I'm saying here is that Capcom is missing strong game director, they are missing the tarantino, the Spielberg, the Kubrick of game industry, they simply have good director that make the job done but they didn't have some really visionary director like other company have

 

[Jamesy]

weird though IGN gave RE3 a 9 out of 10. They also gave RE2 remake a 9/10......

 

[Deleted member 21244]

weird though IGN gave RE3 a 9 out of 10. They also gave RE2 remake a 9/10......

Everyone have its opinion on game, mostly i dislike ign for the reason i made in some post above

Personally i would now like to try the game for myself to find out how it stand, even if the game will turn out good the cut they made will still be a disappointment

I tryed the resistance beta for many hours know and i find it pretty good, reviewer weren't that exited about it, so we should just wait for the game

 

[Jamesy]

Sha

Everyone have its opinion on game, mostly i dislike ign for the reason i made in some post above

Personally i would now like to try the game for myself to find out how it stand, even if the game will turn out good the cut they made will still be a disappointment

I tryed the resistance beta for many hours know and i find it pretty good, reviewer weren't that exited about it, so we should just wait for the game

shame there are no plans to remake code veronica. a year ago capcom did talk about remaking the re1 remake. It might be an interesting new experience with over the shoulder gameplay.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

Sha



shame there are no plans to remake code veronica. a year ago capcom did talk about remaking the re1 remake. It might be an interesting new experience with over the shoulder gameplay.

Maybe they will remake code veronica later, i would personally love a code veronica remake but I'm afraid about the things that could be cut

I love the re 1 remake the way it is, it doesn't need a new remake that inevitably cut other things

 

[Jamesy]

Maybe they will remake code veronica later, i would personally love a code veronica remake but I'm afraid about the things that could be cut

I love the re 1 remake the way it is, it doesn't need a new remake that inevitably cut other things

can I just say I am heartbroken the re3 has turned out not to be so good. I thought it would be a 10 out of 10 masterpiece and something to keep me entertained during quarantine.

 

[Mr.R]

Hey guys, I was watching Sphere Hunter (Suzy)'s review of RE3 (there's no spoilers on the review, but it shows more areas than the demo)

and she commented something interesting. She said her playtime clocked around 5 and something hours (the time close to her grade) but on the top of the screen, there was a "total play time" of 8 and something hours (it appears on the screen at around 14 minutes). She said time stops during cutscenes, probably to better calculate the rankings. When we think of a campaign, in a normal playthrough, we count the cutscenes in our time, because the game does.

This MIGHT (we only know when we play it) explain some of those 4 hours reviewers. The reviewer probably rushed anyway, but he didn't counted his total play time when writing the review. Anyway, her video was also very high note and she gave it an 8. There's also some sort of randomization of itens in high difficulties (there's 2 above hardcore).

Well, now all the speedrunners can watch the cutscenes!.......okay, I'm kidding, I suppose watching the scenes while you're trying to speedrun might break your flow. I don't know. I suck at speed runs.

 

[Turo602]

I don't understand why people are suddenly downplaying Nemesis after everyone complained about the Ustanak being too scripted in RE6.

Yes, Nemesis' appearances are scripted, but the actual encounters weren't. You used to have the choice of fight or flight, and were rewarded for fighting at the expense of health and ammo, or had to deal with and avoid him while conserving your ammo. This is what made Nemesis stand out from the previously scripted Mr. X in the original RE2.

Based on the reviews I've seen, Nemesis sounds more like the Ustanak with predetermined set-pieces and boss battles. Everyone has their own personal horror stories with Nemesis and REmake 2's Mr. X because they had more freedom to chase you around the map than something like the Ustanak who was just a series of chase, stealth, and boss fight segments.

Choice is completely removed from the player and that's what I think reviewers mean by Nemesis being too scripted, which for one, sounds like a huge misstep.

Regardless, a lot of the reviews I've seen with the exception of Gamespot have been rather positive despite showing disappointment. But it's also important to note that a lot of these reviews don't seem finalized as they're just reviewing the campaign and not factoring in Resistance which reviewers haven't been able to fully experience.

Though I will say, I do find it odd how certain reviewers seem to be holding this game to much higher standards than they did REmake 2. Reviewers overall seemed to be more tight lipped about what REmake 2 lacked from its original and were just more impressed by what was there. This feels like the total opposite is happening.

Personally, I think they really dropped the ball with these 2 remakes because they're both so close to perfect (well, that is assuming RE3 is as good as I hope it will be), but what they lack really makes a huge difference in the overall perception and quality of the games. For example, giving Leon and Claire more distinctive campaigns or at least letting the player choose which character gets which gun. I think all the other changes and differences would have been easier pills to swallow had they done that.

But as far as REmake 3 goes. While I'm sure Resistance adds some necessary heft to the overall product, I would have preferred Capcom stick to their guns and let that be its own thing that they could continually support, meanwhile, they should have made up for the lack of a 2nd campaign with a Mercenaries mode that includes characters, enemies, and locations from RE2. Could have even gone the extra mile and added co-op play to it. I think that would have made a world of difference.

It obviously wouldn't stop people from complaining about things, but they would definitely satisfy me enough to rank them higher than their originals.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

Hey guys, I was watching Sphere Hunter (Suzy)'s review of RE3 (there's no spoilers on the review, but it shows more areas than the demo)

and she commented something interesting. She said her playtime clocked around 5 and something hours (the time close to her grade) but on the top of the screen, there was a "total play time" of 8 and something hours (it appears on the screen at around 14 minutes). She said time stops during cutscenes, probably to better calculate the rankings. When we think of a campaign, in a normal playthrough, we count the cutscenes in our time, because the game does.

This MIGHT (we only know when we play it) explain some of those 4 hours reviewers. The reviewer probably rushed anyway, but he didn't counted his total play time when writing the review. Anyway, her video was also very high note and she gave it an 8. There's also some sort of randomization of itens in high difficulties (there's 2 above hardcore).

Well, now all the speedrunners can watch the cutscenes!.......okay, I'm kidding, I suppose watching the scenes while you're trying to speedrun might break your flow. I don't know. I suck at speed runs.

Well that's positive than, but the timer did stop in resident evil 2 remake during cutscene too and in re 7 too i think, and my first play trought was about 10 hours whitout cutscene in those two game, so this game is half longest than a single campaign from re 2 and half of re 7
But i will only know after i will play it, maybe it will take me longer than 5 hours

The 4 hours review weren't necessarily rushed since they say that themself, the timer didn't stop during retry too so maybe the reviewer that say that last longer did die frequently or probably did they play it on hardcore

There are also walkthrought of 5 hours long whit all cutscene in it on YouTube, obviously i didn't see them because of spoiler, so i can't say if it is rushed, but they are there, whit a long time of 5 hours whit cutscene included

@Turo602 i think people and reviewer are disappointed by nemesis because Peter fabiano the producer of re 3 say in more than 3 interview that nemesis would have beem more intelligente than mr x, that he would have used a more formidable IA than the one capcom created for mr x in re 2 remake, but this isn't the case, because nemesis is s normal boss as any other game, he had simply different pattern move than mr x, but patter move didn't make an upgrade on the IA and they also say that it wasn't scripted in many part of the game, that he would have randomly happeared, but also admitting it would have also been scripted, this was obviously a lie and many review writed this disappointment
If Capcom would have simply closed they re mouth, than probably nobody would have complained about it right now... But it's also true that reviewer and people are complaining about the nemesis in the second half of the game, i didn't know the detail but mostly all review and people who already played the game were disliked by how nemesis was handle in the second part, calling it a banal design choice
Personally i didn't play the game so i can't talk for this, i would only know after i play it