Code Veronica... takes place in 1998, came out in 2000... Resident Evil 5 came out and takes place in 2009. Your argument is moot.
Resident Evil 7 Rumour: Resident Evil 7 to be announced at E3
- Thread starter Loki
- Start date
- Status
Code Veronica... takes place in 1998, came out in 2000... Resident Evil 5 came out and takes place in 2009. Your argument is moot.
...How...How is my argument moot. That is 10 years in real time...And the creators of RE even SAID in an interview about RE6 how the game ages in Real Time. I'll even post the link to prove it. So again, how is my point moot?
Where's the link?
How does this help your case? What does that have to do with characters being retired? Anyone can come back, plain and simple. Chris not being used for a long time certainly didn't make him a retired character... These games aren't made every year and Capcom has a lot of characters to explore and some of them end up not being used. That doesn't mean they can't have importance to the story, that doesn't mean Capcom is done using them.
What are we even arguing about here? For now, the characters are unofficially retired. When they haven't made a cannon game appearance in over ten years, or when the character Canonically states they're retired (When Leon says She chose the role of protector instead of Fighter), then it's safe to say they are UNOFFICIALLY retired, until further notice.
As far as the link. This was a good two years ago, so I'm still trying to find it. You'll just have to bear with me.
Why 10 years and why a game? Because Chris went 9 and Claire was in a film and you want to be right? You have no say in this, period. You can't make up the rules for characters that aren't yours. Claire not being a fighter doesn't equal retirement because she was never a fighter. It's not the same as if Chris was done fighting.
Also, if you want to stick by your over 10 years rule... Claire, Rebecca, Billy, and Barry have been in Umbrella and Darkside Chronicles. So you really have no point here.
...I wasn't saying there is a "Ten year rule" genius...I was just saying ten years is a long time for a series that hasn't even been going for Twenty years...(Granted it's getting close). And While they were in Umbrella Chronicles, they were nothing but Retellings of stories that we were already familiar with just to lead up to the NEW story that starred Chris and Jill...Chris didn't go 9 years...He actually HAD new involvement in Umbrella Chronicles...Hell, the largest gap we have ever seen from Chris is 7 years, but it was obvious that his story had not had closure. Claire and Billy HAD closure to their stories. And Closure + Long spans of time having NO involvement in the series or furthering the story equal retirement. Even if just unofficial. You just don't want to admit it that they may never use these beloved characters again, because somewhere int he back of your mind you believe if these characters come back, maybe OTHER old elements of the game will as well, saving the series you so love...
And yes, Claire was a fighter...Just not in the same respect. Claire wasn't fighting Umbrella...But she was fighting anything and everything that would stand in the way of her getting to her brother, and by the time CODE: Veronica happened she KNEW what that could entail. So yes, she was a fighter, she just had a different fight...A different goal..
Claire was in Degeneration in 2008. Also, these games don't just come out every year. Releases have been getting significantly longer.
Yeah, but you still said...
Also, that line says nothing about retirement from someone who was never in the game... In a manner of speaking.
Says who? You? That's like saying Chris and Jill had closure at the end of part one. Why should they come back and fight some more, it was a good end.
Where the hell are you even getting this crap from? Stop trying to make connections about me, because you're always wrong about them.
LMAO! Are you serious? So when Leon says she chose to be a protector and not a fighter, that meant she wouldn't fight for Chris? If Chris was getting butt-raped by Wesker in front of her, she wouldn't fight for him? She would walk away and say "KennedyKiller says I'm retired from fighting?" Leon is talking about THE fight. Just like when he told Helena "he's been in this as long as I have." THIS and FIGHT would be the same thing. It's what they do. Also, I highly doubt Claire knew she'd end up on an island full of zombies...
...I really think it's to the point that even you don't know what your argument is pal...
Sure, says the guy who uses the wrong evidence to back a claim and changes his argument or the subject to ignore being wrong.
You never ONCE showed how my evidence was wrong...You backed it up...Hence my comment about you not knowing what you're arguing about...
LMAO! You have no evidence. You couldn't even provide a link for information you most likely misunderstood. Your whole argument is about characters being retired because you want to say so.
...How can one misunderstand the sentence "In Resident Evil, the characters age in real time" when the developer was talking about Leon's aged look...And it's about Characters being retired because COMMON SENSE says they are for the time being...
The same way you misunderstood Sherry's and Claire's relationship and the use of Superman in Deathbattle... Honestly, it's not that hard to follow. It's not like you haven't blatantly lied before based on your misinterpretations of things.
Like Claire, who according to your made up rules... doesn't qualify as a retired character yet is retired to you. How is that common sense?
...What "Made up rules"...Based on the DEFINITION of retired...Or one of them at least...She can technically be considered retired...As can several characters...There never was a "Ten Year Rule" I was just saying Ten years is a Long time to go without being in a game series that isn't even 20 years old.
Don't get me started on Deathbattle, because that's STILL Bullsh*t.
And no, I didn't misunderstand the relationship of Claire and Sherry. I flat out didn't know about those files. But after being provided with the information, I realize and admit to being wrong. That wasn't a misunderstand at all.
And like I said, what does that matter? Do you understand that these games don't release as frequent as they used to? There are more main installments in the series pre-Resident Evil 4 in a shorter time frame than there are post Resident Evil 4. This leaves us with unexplored options, that doesn't make anyone or anything retired. Your definition doesn't apply here because Capcom has always said they are open to using them.
Only because you can't accept the facts... Facts that have supported your arguments and still wasn't enough for The Man of Steel.
You said more than just disregarding the files... You went as far as to say that the games themselves hint at them never seeing each other. Which was flat out wrong.
The games DID hint at it based off not reading the files, what with how Leon talked about it in Darkside Chronicles...
And while they aren't released as frequently, that doesn't alter the fact that Claire has NOT been seen in action in 7 years as far as the Resident Evil universe is concerned...And how does a Definition not apply? It's not a definition I made up. It's the legitimate definition for the word...So I'd say It's right over you dude...And yes, there are unexplored options. But don't waste the TIME exploring the options that have already been stated by previous canon installments that they don't NEED to happen and are very UNLIKELY as is. And explore options that are a bit more possible given what we already have to go off of.
And Resident Evil 6 didn't happen?
It's your definition as in I don't care for it... I have to clarify since that went right over your head.
Anyway, let's use your definition.
Retired - withdraw to or from a particular place.
Withdraw - remove or take away (something) from a particular place or position.
Not being used doesn't equal being removed. If Capcom flat out said, we're done with these characters, had them retire in-game, or killed them off... then you can assume they're removed until further notice. Yet, they've expressed the possibility of Billy's return and even Rebecca's. Just because I use my red toothbrush more often than my blue toothbrush, doesn't mean I've retired the blue one. I might use it tomorrow, it's just not in use right now. I haven't thrown it away or sealed it up.
What we have to go off of is a mess. Games like Resident Evil 3, 4, Revelations, and 6 didn't need to happen. Even Degeneration and Damnation. The story didn't need to go there but it did. Anything can happen, plain and simple. If Jake became an option in RE6 then anyone can be an option because right now, there is no definitive direction for the series to go in. That's why Claire can be in RE7 mixed up in another outbreak that has Chris trying to rescue her. It adds nothing to an overall story, just like Chris getting drunk in a bar didn't, yet, was an option.
But they HAVE taken her away from the series. If Leon saying it isn't enough, she HAS been taken away from the games for the last seven years...And, what with RE5 closing what the developers have called "Chapter One" of the Resident Evil series, and RE6 opening Chapter 2, or Part 2, then it's even MORE likely she's retired, because unlike with Chris, Jake, and Leon, there was no lead in for her character from Chapter 1 to Chapter 2...Also, whether or not you care for a definition doesn't make it ANY less valid. I don't care for your opinion right now, but As much as I hate to admit it right now, it's a valid opinion. That said, She HAS been removed from the games. Wanna know how I know. Cause she NOT IN THE GAMES. Capcom doesn't need to say "Oh, we've removed her." People play the games and notice SHE'S NOT THERE.
And several of those stories DID have relevence later. Resident Evil 3 has Jill get infected, which explains why she can't get infected with Wesker's new Virus in RE5, RE4 introduced the virus that would later be used and upgraded in RE5. Revelations gave us some insight into the BSAA that was no previously offered, so it was good for building knowledge to the player, and giving us a better understanding of the universe. But Still you're techinically right. It's story wasn't exactly a necessity. RE: Degeneration, DID need to happen, because that's what pretty much solidified Claire's retirement. RE6 is the beginning of What the Developers are calling Chapter 2, so while it didn't need to happen, it is starting a new Chapter in RE history, and that is kind of needed it they want to continue from THERE.
You can't be serious right now... Do you not read anything that has been said? Do I honestly have to repeat myself and explain everything all over again, because you keep disregarding everything and constantly reword your argument. Also, Leon never said anything that dismisses her an active character who can be used later in the franchise. I've already explained this numerous times, but you want to keep being delusional and see things your own way. Just like being sad and walking away meant Shadow killed himself to you...
Also, tidbits of information from an entire game doesn't justify its overall existence. It's not like the series would be stumped if Jill couldn't not get infected anymore... And yeah, a chapter 2 that already ****ed up hard that has Capcom rethinking everything. Even then, Chris, Leon, Ada, and Sherry are still present. Chris didn't need to be there, Wesker is dead, he had his "perfect" send off. Leon, he's never been a relevant source to the main story, we didn't need to see him. Sherry, she was retired... She hadn't been THERE for years and years. Why is she back? She was done. Yes, I'm being sarcastic, and in doing so, proving exactly how your logic is moot.
Actually, you're right. Sherry was retired. And Capcom brought her out of Retirement as a way to ease fans into the idea of Jake. What is more poetic then the children of the two most evil people in RE history (Wesker and Birkin) fighting alongside each other for the heroes...So yes, she was retired, and the brought her out of it. And I'm the delusional one? He says he should have never been created, then walks away. How is that NOT a child friendly way (Because it IS a Sonic game) for older plays to realize he's going to kill himself. And how did he NOT Dismiss her. He most DEFINITELY did. You're JUST as delusional as I am, you're just on the total OPPOSITE end of the spectrum. And how has Leon never been a relevant character? He fights JUST as hard as Chris does against bio-terrorism, and has ever since the first game. Well...Second game. First game he was in. Yeah, it starts off as a mistake. But at the end of it, he WANTS to continue fighting. Did you learn NOTHING from Darkside Chronicles, Degeneration, and Damnation? Those were ALL focused on his fight against Bio-Terrorism. Hell, the only game where he ISN'T fighting Bio-Terrorism intentionally is RE4. I guess RE6 is debatable in that respect. And yes, I've read everything you've said...it's all total bullsh*t. You're doing nothing but rewording the same argument as well.
- Status