Resident Evil 3 Remake Resident evil new timeline confirmed

[KennedyKiller]

What?
Re 1 and remake completely contradict the whole re story
If you play as jill only Chris and barry get out of the mansion while if you play as Chris only Rebecca and Jill get out alive

But later game confirmed that Chris Jill Barry and rebecca all get out of thr mansion on the same chopper and returned alive in raccon city, but this ending is impossible to do in tje original re game and neither in the remake, so this game contradict everything, they contradict code veronica, re vendetta, revelations 2 ecc but they are canon

How did re 2 remake contradict the rest of the series?
If you play re 2 remake you can safely play the rest of the series nothing is contradicted
Only leon and Claire scenario contradict each other but this contradiction didn't bother because code veronica re 4 ecc will always happen in the same way, Claire always go fo Chris, leon always joyn the us and Sherry get into us custody and the foment g virus inside her will always give the power she have in re 6

No, you Replace RE1 with the REmake, and RE2 and 3 flow as normal. RE1 is non canon. It's replaced by the now canon REmake.

In REmake2, Ada's cover story is totally different, making the File detailing her relationship with the Umbrella employee make zero sense. So RE2 screws up REmake's story in that regard.

In REmake2, Leon doesn't meet Sherry until the very end. Has zero bond with her. So their relationship and trust/companionship with one another in RE6 makes much less sense than in the original, where they were together much more by comparison.

In RE2, Claire finds the file Chris leaves detailing that he's going to Europe. In REmake2, she finds the letter that she says "Doesn't sound like him." However, she has ZERO clues that would lead her to Europe. So her ending up in the events that lead to CODE: Veronica make no sense.

You can say all this stuff happened off screen, but without confirmation from an official source, it's just fan speculation. Which isn't exactly a factor for what fits the definition of "canon." I could also say that Leon learned to be a professional dancer off screen, and that's why he's so graceful in the Laser Room in RE4. And since there's nothing to prove otherwise, you'd have to accept that, if you're willing to accept the contradictions I'm making above.

You can have both. You can't call Umbrella Chronicles a true blue Resident Evil game and then complain about the canon when you accept all the other contradictions that have existed since the very first game. It's poor storytelling for sure, but it's foolish to act like it's hard to comprehend. Everyone else gets it, why don't you?

I do "Get it." But I'm saying it's bad writing, and I don't LIKE it. There's a big difference. I play RE specifically for the long form story telling. Which is the same reason I watch things like anime. And with the massive changes and retcons, I'm growing annoyed with Capcom. They're pulling a Marvel/DC, which is why I don't read western comics anymore, and I'm voicing my displeasure with that sort of shoddy storytelling.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

No, you Replace RE1 with the REmake, and RE2 and 3 flow as normal. RE1 is non canon. It's replaced by the now canon REmake.

In REmake2, there Ada's cover story is totally different, making the File detailing her relationship with the Umbrella employee make zero sense. So RE2 screw up REmake in that regard.

In REmake2, Leon doesn't meet Sherry until the very end. Has zero bond with her. So their relationship and trust/companionship with one another in RE6 makes much less sense than in the original, where they were together much more by comparison.

In RE2, Claire finds the file Chris leaves detailing that he's going to Europe. In REmake2, she finds the letter that she says "Doesn't sound like him." However, she has ZERO clues that would lead her to Europe. So her ending up in the events that lead to CODE: Veronica make no sense.

You can say all this stuff happened off screen, but without confirmation, I could also say that Leon learned to be a professional dancer of screen, and that's why he's so graceful in the Laser Room in RE4. And since there's nothing to prove otherwise, you'd have to accept that, if you're willing to accept the contradictions I'm making above.

Probably you didn't replay this game since
Re remake still contradict the story like re 1 did since there is no ending in which jill Chris Barry and Rebecca get all out on the some chopper and fly to raccon city... And re 1 is still canon as well as fhe remake , Capcom didn't take it out of canon, i already made this point in another thread i don't want to repeat myself

Ada backstory in re 2 remake didn't change future game, her relationship whit john could still have happened even if she didn't mentioned it in re 2 remake, also she didn't mentioned it again in re 4 or else

Probably you forgot that Claire give Sherry to leon after re 2 ending while she went for searching Chris and leon and Sherry were taken into US custody, probably the same things happened after the re 2 remake
also you can see in the re 2 remake ending, that leon Sherry and Claire are togheter so Sherry and leon did pass time togheter after the event, leon didn't simply walk away on the other side of the road after re 2 remake ending XD probably many things happened off screen after the ending
And leon and Sherry did pass the same time togheter in the original and in the remake if you think about it, only that in the original leon take Sherry to the train but she was unconscious so they didn't have time to interact but the rest it's the same in both original and remake

Marvin tell to claire that Chris went to Europe and the letter that Claire find in thr stars office say that he went to Europe

Just replay the game like i did recently and you find out tha the things I say are true, and that most of the things you are complaining about didn't exist

 

[KennedyKiller]

Probably you didn't replay this game since
Re remake still contradict the story like re 1 did since there is no ending in which jill Chris Barry and Rebecca get all out on the some chopper and fly to raccon city... And re 1 is still canon as well as fhe remake , Capcom didn't take it out of canon, i already made this point in another thread i don't want to repeat myself

Ada backstory in re 2 remake didn't change future game, her relationship whit john could still have happened even if she didn't mentioned it in re 2 remake, also she didn't mentioned it again in re 4 or else

Probably you forgot that Claire give Sherry to leon after re 2 ending while she went for searching Chris and leon and Sherry were taken into us custody, probably the same things happened after the re 2 remake, also you can see in the re 2 remake ending that leon Sherry and Claire are togheter so Sherry and leon did pass time togheter after the event, leon didn't simply walk away on the other side of the road after re 2 remake ending XD

Marvin tell to claire that Chris went to Europe and the letter that Claire find in thr stars office say that he went to Europe

Just replay the game like i did recently and you find out thaf most of the things I say are true

You clearly didn't read my post, or at the very least understand it. Capcom has officially stated that in canon, Everyone makes it out. Even if the game doesn't show it. We have confirmation FROM the creators. And Yeah, Marvin mentions it, but he clearly doesn't know anything about Chris plan. Hell, he says "Europe I think." He doesn't even know if he's correct. As for the Letter to S.T.A.R.S., you're right, he does mention Europe. (Also, I have played it recently. Twice in the last 3 months actually)

As for her relationship with John...That is completely dumb. It's an unnecessary change that makes the games seem further removed from one another. In REmake, you find a note left for Ada from John. In RE2 Ada says she's looking for her boyfriend John. Boom. You have that connection. Something that ties the two games together more than just Chris and Claire's relationship. You know things go deeper. You've established in-universe backstories over the course of two games that conincide to add a layer to the realism. Removing this in the REmake, not only takes away from that, but also creates a plothole. Like I said above you can SAY all this stuff happened off screen. But I can say it didn't. And neither of us are more right than the other because neither the game, NOR the developers, have given us any idea which is correct. THAT is the bad story telling element.

And not, I didn't forget Claire gives Sherry to Leon. I didn't forget that at all. In fact, I'm assuming that STILL happens. But, the government immediately takes Sherry. Sherry and Leon are separated. And without REmake2 giving Sherry and Leon the same bond they have in REmake, there's NO reason for to be happy to see him and immediately trust him in RE6. Because if we go by REmake2 timeline, then Sherry meets him once. At the very end. Has no relationship with him. Then government takes her. As opposed to originally. they go through several of the trails and tribulations of the outbreak together, and Leon even helps save her life, only for her THEN to be taken. Their reunion in RE6 makes so much more sense when THAT is the story we see. You aren't thinking about this from a story telling perspective. You're filling in the blanks YOURSELF because you have knowledge from the older games.

 

[Turo602]

I do "Get it." But I'm saying it's bad writing, and I don't LIKE it. There's a big difference. I play RE specifically for the long form story telling. Which is the same reason I watch things like anime. And with the massive changes and retcons, I'm growing annoyed with Capcom. They're pulling a Marvel/DC, which is why I don't read western comics anymore, and I'm voicing my displeasure with that sort of shoddy storytelling.

Nobody is saying that it's good writing and that you have to like it. You keep saying they're retconning the canon and that's untrue. Nothing is affected by REmake 2 or REmake 3 existing. It's not replacing anything just like Umbrella Chronicles or Darkside Chronicles didn't replace anything. Neither Jill's or Chris' scenario in RE1 or REmake replace one another. These are simply different ways to get what is essentially the same story.

 

[KennedyKiller]

Nobody is saying that it's good writing and that you have to like it. You keep saying they're retconning the canon and that's untrue. Nothing is affected by REmake 2 or REmake 3 existing. It's not replacing anything just like Umbrella Chronicles or Darkside Chronicles didn't replace anything. Neither Jill's or Chris' scenario in RE1 or REmake replace one another. These are simply different ways to get what is essentially the same story.

Which means two different canons...Like Dragon Ball Super and Dragon Ball GT. They exist in completely different canons. However, one is a MAIN timeline. You keep saying "essentially the same story" but that is not what canon means. You get "essentially the same story" out of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man, The Amazing Spider-Man, and the Spider-Man comics when it comes to Spidey's origins. But they're all still DIFFERENT canons from one another. They do not exist in the SAME canon. Which is what Capcom is trying to say is the case here. But again, that defeats the purpose of what canon is. In the original RE2, Leon A Claire B is non canon. Claire A Leon B is canon. That's fact. Those two scenarios cannot occupy the same space. One has to take priority and be the main timeline. This is the exact same. Only making the REmakes the canon timeline retcons, however small they may seem, significant story and narrative events and character interactions. And if a retcon is done well, then I'm all for it. But the problem is REmake2 DIDN'T do it well, and I have an issue with the main timeline being the worse written of the bunch.

Also, UC and DC aren't exactly the same. You can't compare those. Those aren't "Remakes" per se, as they serve a narrative function. UC is Wesker narrating the events of 0, 1, and 3, and DC is Leon doing the same thing. Just like if I tell a story about me and my friend at a party, and my friend tells the same story, we might both tell slightly varied versions of it, with the "True" version being something someone caught on camera. Our versions of the story may add stuff, leave stuff out, whatever, but at the end of the day we have the TRUE version on recording. REmake2 doesn't do that with RE2. It's not story being told as a first person account. So narratively its structured different, and doesn't really apply to this argument.

Also, not contradicting the main story, or events before/prior is not the ONLY thing that determines canon. If that were the case, Rebecca's adventure in Resident Evil: Caliban Cove, the novel by S.D. Perry, would be considered canon. nothing in that novel contradicts later events in RE. But it's non-canon. So the idea that "I doesn't impact later titles, therefore it's still canon" doesn't hold up.

 

[Turo602]

Which means two different canons...Like Dragon Ball Super and Dragon Ball GT. They exist in completely different canons. However, one is a MAIN timeline. You keep saying "essentially the same story" but that is not what canon means. You get "essentially the same story" out of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man, The Amazing Spider-Man, and the Spider-Man comics when it comes to Spidey's origins. But they're all still DIFFERENT canons from one another. They do not exist in the SAME canon. Which is what Capcom is trying to say is the case here. But again, that defeats the purpose of what canon is. In the original RE2, Leon A Claire B is non canon. Claire A Leon B is canon. That's fact. Those two scenarios cannot occupy the same space. One has to take priority and be the main timeline. This is the exact same. Only making the REmakes the canon timeline retcons, however small they may seem, significant story and narrative events and character interactions. And if a retcon is done well, then I'm all for it. But the problem is REmake2 DIDN'T do it well, and I have an issue with the main timeline being the worse written of the bunch.

Again, you don't get it. These are new ways to experience the same story. They're interchangeable. Whether you play the original, the Chronicles version, or the REmake, you are getting the necessary information to continue playing the series. Everyone knows Lisa Trevor's story is canon and George Trevor is even referenced in Revelations. Yet, Revelations 2's Claire Sandwich line makes the original canon too. Jill also references playing the Moonlight Sonata before in Lost in Nightmares, but again, we know Rebecca survived too. It's all interchangeable information that has no major impact on the main plot.

Your Spider-Man comparison doesn't make sense either since you're talking about 2 completely different movie adaptations with their own sequels that both loosely adapt the same comic books. The Resident Evil remakes are still video games and aren't being made to branch into a new series. It's still the same series.

Also, UC and DC aren't exactly the same. You can't compare those. Those aren't "Remakes" per se, as they serve a narrative function. UC is Wesker narrating the events of 0, 1, and 3, and DC is Leon doing the same thing. Just like if I tell a story about me and my friend at a party, and my friend tells the same story, we might both tell slightly varied versions of it, with the "True" version being something someone caught on camera. Our versions of the story may add stuff, leave stuff out, whatever, but at the end of the day we have the TRUE version on recording. REmake2 doesn't do that with RE2. It's not story being told as a first person account. So narratively its structured different, and doesn't really apply to this argument.

LMAO! Don't start this again. You said this years ago and it didn't hold up. That's not what is happening in the Chronicles games as there is absolutely no way Wesker or Leon would know how anything went down that they weren't involved in. The purpose of those games was to retcon the series and add information to fill in the gaps, which is considered canon. The other games aren't suddenly non-canon or in a separate timeline. They all occupy the same timeline, hence Resident Evil 5's acknowledgement of its events in its files.

 

[KennedyKiller]

Again, you don't get it. These are new ways to experience the same story. They're interchangeable. Whether you play the original, the Chronicles version, or the REmake, you are getting the necessary information to continue playing the series. Everyone knows Lisa Trevor's story is canon and George Trevor is even referenced in Revelations. Yet, Revelations 2's Claire Sandwich line makes the original canon too. Jill also references playing the Moonlight Sonata before in Lost in Nightmares, but again, we know Rebecca survived too. It's all interchangeable information that has no major impact on the main plot.

Your Spider-Man comparison doesn't make sense either since you're talking about 2 completely different movie adaptations with their own sequels that both loosely adapt the same comic books. The Resident Evil remakes are still video games and aren't being made to branch into a new series. It's still the same series.

I'm not the one that doesn't get it...I don't think you understand what canon is. Canon is VERY specific. You get the same story from RE1 as you do in The Umbrella Conspiracy book, but the book, again is NON CANON. Canon isn't just "The overall story." That is not what defines canon. And that's what you don't seem to be getting through your head. The MAIN Canon is going to be a specific version of the story. The one the author, creator, writer, etc, deems the canon. Anything additional/supplemental is exactly that, and non canon until the creator acknowledges it as part of canon. And then, in the event of two pieces of writing being contradictory, one is going to have to be retconed out of the mainline canon. If you read the Dragon Ball Z manga and watch the anime, you get the same story. But one of them will have events that are Non canon. Meaning, the MAIN canon is the one that has either none, or the least amount of these events. Thats how canon works. The manga NEVER shows how Vegeta turns Super Saiyan. He's just able to do it after a brief absence in the story. A filler episode DOES show how me was able to attain it, however, due to the nature of it being filler, and not part of the original source material, it is technically non canon. Vegeta doesn't canonically turn Super Saiyan after a burst of frustration and wanting it badly while almost about to die on a meteor. Canonically...we don't know how he turned Super Saiyan. That is a perfect example of canon. No matter what way you got through DBZ, you got the overall story. But one of them has events that aren't original, authentic, or derived from the source material. Therefore...non canon.

As for my Spider-Man comparison, it's the perfect comparison, because Amazing Spider-Man is a remake/reboot of a franchise, to take the series in a different direction, making changes to the series, while keeping the overall important information from the source material the same. Exactly like REmake2 did. Again, being interchangable is NOT what defines canon.

LMAO! Don't start this again. You said this years ago and it didn't hold up. That's not what is happening in the Chronicles games as there is absolutely no way Wesker or Leon would know how anything went down that they weren't involved in. The purpose of those games was to retcon the series and add information to fill in the gaps, which is considered canon. The other games aren't suddenly non-canon or in a separate timeline. They all occupy the same timeline, hence Resident Evil 5's acknowledgement of its events in its files.

...Have you even played the Chronicles games...that is LITERALLY the point of games. The DRIVING FORCE behind the stories and retellings is Wesker and Leon recapping the events...That is just factually how the story progresses

 

[ToCool74]

I kinda see KennedyKiller's point more, I would be ok with RE2 remake and RE2 original's narrative being interchangeable and both canon had RE2 remake not created inconsistencies in it story such as the whole Ada FBI and complete absence of here working for "The organization" or the fact that John subplot is completely gone despite this flying directly in the face of RE1 and its remake's lore, but we already had a topic that dealt with this discussion here,

Resident Evil 2 (2019) - Does this change the story from the original version?

Does it change any of the lore or create continuity errors with the rest of the series? Or does it keep everything intact?

residentevil.org

Curiously enough a certain member had a different outlook in that thread but all it took was a word and video from Capcom to completely change that consensus but your definitely free to have a change of heart I just found the complete 180 interesting.

But as I said in that topic I just wish they would have left the core story completely intact, why change Ada's narrative in such as a way other than to just be different for the heck of it? Or maybe they forgot about the John subplot in both RE1 and RE2? I alway maintained that a new and improved remake should EXPAND on the narrative and not remove key plots from it, just look at RE1 remake which kept the core story completely intact while adding new story elements since the the Trevor storyline, now THAT is how you make a remake and its original interchangeable in the canon with RE1 original and its Remake since neither story takes anything away from its canon and thus it all remains intact since you can simply view Remake as a expansion on its lore in comparison to Remake 2 which decided to remove things from it.

In any case I just can't see it in the same main canon due to those changes since it sucks me out of the story knowing that those elements are missing in the new remakes which is why I simply choose to recognize them as "reimagining" stories rather than group them with the established canon, its currently one of my main fear with RE3 remake right now which is that they will change a core story element that will contradict something that happened before or after it but whatever, I personally just think that that video posted it simply Capcom doing what is right for business and rightfully inlcuding them in the lore recap rather than outright confirmation that they are officially part of the established canon.

You guys are free to believe what you want.

 

[Turo602]

I'm not the one that doesn't get it...I don't think you understand what canon is. Canon is VERY specific. You get the same story from RE1 as you do in The Umbrella Conspiracy book, but the book, again is NON CANON. Canon isn't just "The overall story." That is not what defines canon. And that's what you don't seem to be getting through your head. The MAIN Canon is going to be a specific version of the story. The one the author, creator, writer, etc, deems the canon. Anything additional/supplemental is exactly that, and non canon until the creator acknowledges it as part of canon. And then, in the event of two pieces of writing being contradictory, one is going to have to be retconed out of the mainline canon. If you read the Dragon Ball Z manga and watch the anime, you get the same story. But one of them will have events that are Non canon. Meaning, the MAIN canon is the one that has either none, or the least amount of these events. Thats how canon works. The manga NEVER shows how Vegeta turns Super Saiyan. He's just able to do it after a brief absence in the story. A filler episode DOES show how me was able to attain it, however, due to the nature of it being filler, and not part of the original source material, it is technically non canon. Vegeta doesn't canonically turn Super Saiyan after a burst of frustration and wanting it badly while almost about to die on a meteor. Canonically...we don't know how he turned Super Saiyan. That is a perfect example of canon. No matter what way you got through DBZ, you got the overall story. But one of them has events that aren't original, authentic, or derived from the source material. Therefore...non canon.

As for my Spider-Man comparison, it's the perfect comparison, because Amazing Spider-Man is a remake/reboot of a franchise, to take the series in a different direction, making changes to the series, while keeping the overall important information from the source material the same. Exactly like REmake2 did. Again, being interchangable is NOT what defines canon.

The Resident Evil games are interchangeable because it was literally stated by the creators and is evidenced by the video games themselves. We're talking about Resident Evil's canon here. A canon that starts off with 2 contradicting stories. According to you, only one can be canon, yet there is no verifiable split in the timeline that acknowledges one over the other because it's all the same canon. I've given you plenty of examples of why their is no definitive version to these events, yet you think you're gonna refute it by spitting a bunch of jargon about canon like if you're talking to f*cking third graders who are new as hell to the concept. Either accept there is no definitive way to consume the series or keep being angry over losing something that's not even lost. There's literally no other way to explain this to you. Each game and iteration simply keeps adding to the overall lore. This is literally the rule of the original Resident Evil game's story. If they wanted to, which they've already done, they could acknowledge both versions of any game.

And once again, your comparison makes no sense, since you're comparing 3 very distinct separate canons, whereas Resident Evil has only one canon that can be consumed in various ways, some more detailed than others. It's all part of the same series. The Amazing Spider-Man film is not part of the Raimi Spider-Man films nor are they part of the comics. They are very clearly 3 different series.

...Have you even played the Chronicles games...that is LITERALLY the point of games. The DRIVING FORCE behind the stories and retellings is Wesker and Leon recapping the events...That is just factually how the story progresses

Capcom presenting official information via narration isn't the same as your interpretation of someone telling a story and f*cking up details because stories get changed from person to person. It was a clever storytelling device that made it easy to transition from game to game. The story they told was meant to be definitive, not disregarded as Wesker's questionable personal account of the series' events.

Again, I'm not saying it's not sh*tty storytelling. I would love some cohesion from this series and they really dropped the ball with these remakes as they had the opportunity to tell definitive stories that sync up perfectly with the modern games, but this is simply the way Capcom does it. Go argue with them.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

I don't understand why you compare resident evil whit spider man and dragon ball, this comparison have no sense Since the three spider man movie series are three completely different things, it's not like amazing spider man 1 and 2 are remake of sam ramy spider man 1 and 2, they are two completely different things, they have two different stories and they are not part of the same universe, just like the Tom Holland one
The same goes for dragon ball gt and super they are two different stories

Not everything in history hsd to be put under canon and non canon or tagged, take the James bond franchise for example, whenna new actor came out and the story was changed was the previous actor eradicated from canon? No, they are all part of the James bond universe, daniel Craig didn't take out Sean Connery bond movie and neither did pierse Brosnan ecc.... So as you can see evey franchise have it's way of see canon

Also, again, this is resident evil and canon here dosent work as other franchise, in the re universe there is just one canon that have all the game and re 2 and 3 original, re 2 and 3 remake, darkside and umbrella chronicles are all part of this Canon and capcom pretty confirmed, and they only confirmed that operation raccon city, resident evil resistance and Gaiden are not part of this canon but all the other game are in the same universe and are part of the storyline, so it's useless for you to continue to say how canon works in this franchise since Capcom already established how it work, you can create you own canon If you want but it isn't capcom real intention

Even i personally like cohesion in story , and i personally don't like some of the things re 2 changes but they didn't matter in the end, we still can play the original re 2 for that and we have the remake too, so everyone can enjoy the game they want and still get the same story even if the two have minor detail change and they can continue playing the other game whitout any problem, and i personally find this things a good things

 

[Jonipoon]

Imagine if you had Sam Raimi's Spider-Man. Canonically it goes Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Spider-Man 3. But now, Sony decides Same Rami's Spider-Man is canon. Spider-Man 2 isn't. Instead, Amazing Spider-Man 2 is the new canon. That narratively DOESN'T work. These are two completely separate timelines, and by creating new canon, while keeping older games are part of canon in the same timeline, is just bad storytelling, and creates a slew of issues. Sue me for enjoying RE specifically for its long form story telling.

That's a terrible example. It's not like TASM2 follows the same storyline as Rami's Spider-Man 2, and that's because it's not a remake - it's a completely new story with a completely different villain.

Granted, I think Resident Evil is in a quite unique situation here, I'm pretty sure there's no other entertainment franchise that has two separate timelines as part of a unified canon. It's messy, I agree, but I think the minor differences between the originals and remakes are acceptable since they keep the basic storylines the same. It's not like they did anything controversial in the RE2 remake like killing off Leon and therefore changing the entire future of the series.

 

[UniqTeas]

I agree with KennedyKiller to a degree. I just can't find any good examples of how the change in canon/timeline effects later entries. Does it effect Sherry in RE6? Does it effect Leon in RE4?

But for sure, if we compare the continuity of the original RE2 game to the RE2 REmake - we will see a lot of inconsistencies between the scenarios. Who fought William Birkin in the police station underground? Or in the sewers? I know it doesn't change anything major, but it is frustrating to not have a final answer on what is the truth. I'd like there to be a TRUE story and we can't have that anymore.

I also still think Capcom would be wise to change the canon in the REmake story line since they have acknowledged it is indeed different. I still like the idea of having an original storyline set in the RE Universe that shows the end of Umbrella. A TRUE RE4 if you will.