Revelations 2 Who would you like the next spin-off game (Revelations 3?) to feature?

[N7Valentine]

@bSTAR_182 While I've been away from the forums I interacted with quite a lot of Jill fans (and some Chris fans, too) to get some infos, so I just wanted to provide an answer to the statement of "Capcom hating Jill" :wink:

Anyway, I wouldn't be okay with a measly cameo in 7, that's true but given the fact that she's been absent for almost 8 years within RE's timeline, I think her fans would even take a lousy cameo at this point. Hell, I just want something that puts her story forward. That E-Mail in Rev2 was nice and it gave her more personality, but still it's not enough. All I can say is, enough with Pre-RE5 Jill! Bring her back with a more fleshed out and human story. (and Julia Voth as her face model. I don't mind her being blonde, tbh) :wink:

Whether she appears with or without Chris, eitherway is fine by me. I'm not one of those folks saying "Chris is taking Jill's spotlight" BS. If you wanna blame someone, blame Capcom not Chris :biggrin:

Generally, us Jill fans are very hard to please bunch, but one has to understand that Capcom has done many questionable decisions with her character, such as an unnecessary face/voice/personality change, so that most of us have no hope for her anymore

PS: Nice avatar btw. Are you looking forward to Alien: Covenant ?

 

[Unknown]

Rebecca (not Billy) and Chris. Chris will most likley not be in the mainline Resident Evil games anymore so we need to see him somewhere.

But knowing Capcom it will most likley be a ****ty love story with Leon and Ada.. ugh

I don't know if the direction of RE7 means that Capcom won't ever opt to use the original characters in a main game ever again. Returning characters are confirmed so their presence will always be there. You may be right about them never being the main protagonist of a game again though, unfortunately.

I think Capcom will keep doing more CGI movies now, probably one for every new main installment as a way to keep the original protagonists involved in the series in a meaningful way.

 

[bSTAR_182]

@bSTAR_182 While I've been away from the forums I interacted with quite a lot of Jill fans (and some Chris fans, too) to get some infos, so I just wanted to provide an answer to the statement of "Capcom hating Jill" :wink:

Anyway, I wouldn't be okay with a measly cameo in 7, that's true but given the fact that she's been absent for almost 8 years within RE's timeline, I think her fans would even take a lousy cameo at this point. Hell, I just want something that puts her story forward. That E-Mail in Rev2 was nice and it gave her more personality, but still it's not enough. All I can say is, enough with Pre-RE5 Jill! Bring her back with a more fleshed out and human story. (and Julia Voth as her face model. I don't mind her being blonde, tbh) :wink:

Whether she appears with or without Chris, eitherway is fine by me. I'm not one of those folks saying "Chris is taking Jill's spotlight" BS. If you wanna blame someone, blame Capcom not Chris :biggrin:

Generally, us Jill fans are very hard to please bunch, but one has to understand that Capcom has done many questionable decisions with her character, such as an unnecessary face/voice/personality change, so that most of us have no hope for her anymore

PS: Nice avatar btw. Are you looking forward to Alien: Covenant ?

Jill's not my favorite (female) character of the series, but I do respect her as she is clearly an icon. I loved her in the original/REmake, she had sass and clearly held her own in a job that is typically male dominated. Capcom hasn't been consistent with her since then though and one of the main things that I can't stand about her is her lack of personality. She's too bland for me and I hope that is changed by them depicting her in a more personal way the next time we see her. They need to show us how everything has affected her over the years. I think it would be pretty fun if they used that drink date between her, Chris, and Barry for the opening of the next game. Have an outbreak/incident occur while they're all enjoying drinks and chatting at a bar.

You may be right about them never being the main protagonist of a game again though, unfortunately.

Ugh, I'm really hoping that is not the case... but it is very likely. I'm hoping for at least 1 or 2 more games with the fan favorites before they move onto other characters.

 

[black 93]

I think Capcom will keep doing more CGI movies now, probably one for every new main installment as a way to keep the original protagonists involved in the series in a meaningful way.

I think this too. It's a real mixed bag for me when it comes to past characters. I can understand Capcom wanting to scale back on them with the direction they're taking, eg Chris wouldnt fit in with the style RE7 is going for. Guy can fight like Rambo and move boulders but then he's running from Grandma Baker?. The old characters have been fighting bio weapons for 20 years now, so RE7 probably isnt the game for them. As time goes on im seriously starting to wonder if Capcom have focused TOO MUCH on the horror aspect with RE7 and when it comes to RE8 they might try mixing it up a little more. Id rather the classic characters be in the CGI movies or the Revelations series than totally vanish (plus i don't think Capcom would have the balls to totally get rid of them) and im one of the few people that's really interested in seeing how Ethan turns out in 7, but for old characters to never star in a main game again.., i dunno that's a little depressing.

 

[Unknown]

According to a translated list of info recently we never actually see Ethan's face. I dread the PC mods that make it third person and show that his character model is actually faceless...

 

[N7Valentine]

Jill's not my favorite (female) character of the series, but I do respect her as she is clearly an icon. I loved her in the original/REmake, she had sass and clearly held her own in a job that is typically male dominated. Capcom hasn't been consistent with her since then though and one of the main things that I can't stand about her is her lack of personality. She's too bland for me and I hope that is changed by them depicting her in a more personal way the next time we see her. They need to show us how everything has affected her over the years. I think it would be pretty fun if they used that drink date between her, Chris, and Barry for the opening of the next game. Have an outbreak/incident occur while they're all enjoying drinks and chatting at a bar.

Oh I know she's not your favorite (Chris is :razz and I agree with Capcom not being consistent with her, but you should blame Capcom for changing the director/writer with each game for that They write the characters after all, so it should rather be"Capcom writes Jill in a bland manner":wink:

I hope that is changed by them depicting her in a more personal way the next time we see her. They need to show us how everything has affected her over the years. I think it would be pretty fun if they used that drink date between her, Chris, and Barry for the opening of the next game. Have an outbreak/incident occur while they're all enjoying drinks and chatting at a bar.

Giving her a more human/personal story would benefit her character greatly. The whole one-sided Badass-Action-Girl trope has worn out and people demand for more fleshed out characters these days. I like your idea of the dink date between her, Barry and Chris being shown in a cutscene (The Mass Effect series, for instance does things like this:biggrin and hopefully we got a Jill like the one in that E-Mail to Barry. That's how I see things:wink:

According to a translated list of info recently we never actually see Ethan's face. I dread the PC mods that make it third person and show that his character model is actually faceless...

Kinda creepy when you think about it...

 

[bSTAR_182]

Oh I know she's not your favorite (Chris is :razz and I agree with Capcom not being consistent with her, but you should blame Capcom for changing the director/writer with each game for that They write the characters after all, so it should rather be"Capcom writes Jill in a bland manner":wink:

I think I made it very clear in my post(s) that it is Capcom's fault for their poor portrayal of her character. I'm not blaming Jill for her bland personality, I'm simply stating she is bland- and even you agree with that statement. Despite knowing that Capcom is to blame, that doesn't make me like her over such characters as Claire or Ada who, I find, have way more personality.

Obviously we agree that Capcom needs to focus on developing Jill better.

 

[N7Valentine]

I think I made it very clear in my post(s) that it is Capcom's fault for their poor portrayal of her character. I'm not blaming Jill for her bland personality, I'm simply stating she is bland- and even you agree with that statement. Despite knowing that Capcom is to blame, that doesn't make me like her over such characters as Claire or Ada who, I find, have way more personality

Sorry. I should have used better wording :redface: What I wanted to say is that Capcom doesn't really put much effort into her character lately nor do they care to keep her consistent.
Oh, if she ain't your favorite, that's fine. Different strokes for different folks:wink: I mean I personally find Leon quite boring and Chris' writing in 6 to be atrocious but others like them, so who am I to judge them, right?

Obviously we agree that Capcom needs to focus on developing Jill better.

Indeed. That's something we both agree on

 

[Spinky]

I kind of want Sheva back, mostly because she's just been completely forgotten by absolutely everybody (for no REALLY good reason, IMO). Didn't even make it onto RE5's PS4 box art even though she deserved it much more than Jill, honestly.

A hardened, relatively older Ashley would also be hilarious. Might not be the best decision ever, but I want that purely for the sh*ts 'n' giggles.

One thing I don't want is for Alex Wesker to ever return... but I somewhat doubt I'll get my wish on that.

 

[RedPanda]

I really doubt that Chris won't be the face of another main game installment. If they did finally get rid of him, which in itself seems dubious considering their history with killing off/abandoning major player characters, they'd definitely at least give him a proper sendoff. You know, like exactly what happened in 6, just with him actually dying, or actually retiring, instead of chickening out on both possibilities. And not just possibilities mind you, ones that they set up very well to happen. Like with the whole, Piers can take Chris's place and Chris is gonna retire thing felt genuine. And then the possibility of Chris sacrificing himself so Piers could live at the end felt like a very real and sensible send off. But alas, here we are.

In general I do like the idea of having varied characters in Rev so that we can see more of our beloved heroes and all that, but I don't fancy the idea of the main cast being relegated to side projects only. They are at the heart of RE and I think Capcom knows that. I firmly believe that they only ever intended to shy away from the main cast for 7 only, as a way of enforcing their notion of rebranding. If they announced Chris as the protagonist, people wouldn't buy their "return to horror" spiel for a second, but I think this is a drastic change to get the public's attention, and from there they'll work to find some kind of middle ground.

As for my ideal cast for Rev3, I'd say Sherry and Claire. Jake would inevitably be involved, so I guess I'd be fine with him as well. I know Claire was in Rev2 but frankly I don't think one side game appearance justifies throwing her on the shelf for another 10 years, plus I'm totally biased.

I kind of want Sheva back, mostly because she's just been completely forgotten by absolutely everybody (for no REALLY good reason, IMO). Didn't even make it onto RE5's PS4 box art even though she deserved it much more than Jill, honestly.

A hardened, relatively older Ashley would also be hilarious. Might not be the best decision ever, but I want that purely for the sh*ts 'n' giggles.

One thing I don't want is for Alex Wesker to ever return... but I somewhat doubt I'll get my wish on that.

Oh my goodness I just got a picture in my head of a minigun-wielding Ashley and now I really need this to happen. Also I'm picturing her voice being a lot less grating and she's more self-assured, but she still screams LEOOOOOOOON in the exact same voice.... and now I'm getting ahead of myself.

As for Alex Wesker, imo it'd be weird if she never returned, just because of all the effort that went into her reveal and the ending totally setting her up for future installments. It'd be a strange move to back out that would not sit well with many people out there. Personally I could take her or leave her, but she is the only villain who's succeeded so far so kudos to her for that.

I'm glad someone's giving Sheva some love. I'm a pretty hardcore Sheva apologist just because it seems like so many people hate on her for no reason. I don't know why people don't get this, but her faults as an npc are not a facet of her personality.

 

[Unknown]

Like with the whole, Piers can take Chris's place and Chris is gonna retire thing felt genuine. And then the possibility of Chris sacrificing himself so Piers could live at the end felt like a very real and sensible send off. But alas, here we are.

I don't understand people who say this. Like seriously, can you not see how cliched that would be? I loved how Capcom built up that idea of Piers replacing Chris, only for fate to snatch it away.

I saw it as a well-done subversion of everyone's expectations. I really think people who wanted that "Chris sacrifices himself for the world and is replaced by his protege" to pan out are massively overlooking the themes of the story there.

I also don't think Capcom "chickened out" of anything. They killed Wesker afterall, took a risk with Jake (though some would say it was a desperate attempt to keep Wesker involved, I see it as more of an idea they just thought would create an interesting dynamic with Chris), they've come right out and said RE7 won't have any returning characters, made it first person...but yeah, like you said here we are, and i've got no problem with that.

 

[Airaku]

I don't understand people who say this. Like seriously, can you not see how cliched that would be? I loved how Capcom built up that idea of Piers replacing Chris, only for fate to snatch it away.

I saw it as a well-done subversion of everyone's expectations. I really think people who wanted that "Chris sacrifices himself for the world and is replaced by his protege" to pan out are massively overlooking the themes of the story there.

I also don't think Capcom "chickened out" of anything. They killed Wesker afterall, took a risk with Jake (though some would say it was a desperate attempt to keep Wesker involved, I see it as more of an idea they just thought would create an interesting dynamic with Chris), they've come right out and said RE7 won't have any returning characters, made it first person...but yeah, like you said here we are, and i've got no problem with that.

This is always an interesting topic. While I do see it from both points of view playing the base game and I can see why some people feel like Capcom chickened out and why other people say that's BS. However when I read "The Marhawa desire" and then replayed the game.... honestly so many plot pieces, structures, and more was foreshadowed for a Piers taking over for Chris. There is a lot of mentorship and building up of Piers in the graphic novel. It explains why his personality is the way it is in the game. The book serves as a prequel to RE6 and I will say that Piers used to be more of the joker type who's constantly cracking jokes. Something massive happens in the finale that justifies the man we saw in 6. However I am willing to recognize that in away the way it played out still works in the sense that Piers got some closure. You could say his death is a homecoming to return to the person he loves. However the argument that many people perceive is that Piers was meant to be his successor and his character would be attached with the theme of "loss" as he's always losing those he cares the most about and those he tries to protect. It very much echo's Chris's character in terms of soul, but he defines his own and takes it to the next level. The narrative really goes both ways and there is no saying who is right unless Capcom comes out and admits it. Something I highly doubt will ever happen and even if they do, what's to say they aren't doing damage control?

 

[RedPanda]

I don't understand people who say this. Like seriously, can you not see how cliched that would be? I loved how Capcom built up that idea of Piers replacing Chris, only for fate to snatch it away.

I saw it as a well-done subversion of everyone's expectations. I really think people who wanted that "Chris sacrifices himself for the world and is replaced by his protege" to pan out are massively overlooking the themes of the story there.

I also don't think Capcom "chickened out" of anything. They killed Wesker afterall, took a risk with Jake (though some would say it was a desperate attempt to keep Wesker involved, I see it as more of an idea they just thought would create an interesting dynamic with Chris), they've come right out and said RE7 won't have any returning characters, made it first person...but yeah, like you said here we are, and i've got no problem with that.

With regards to Chris dying instead of Piers, I never said that I personally would've preferred it, only that, as you stated, it would've been the obvious route to go. Contrary to how I now realize my post sounded, I don't actually want Chris to die. I really like the guy. I was attempting to assure people that he would return to the main games, citing Capcom's inability to kill their characters as proof. I personally wouldn't have liked the idea of Chris dying in 6 just because a lot of people seemed to dislike that game (I am not among them), and killing a major character in a game that sits uneasily with the fans just wouldn't do the character justice imo. While I hadn't thought of it personally before, I also agree with you that it would've been incredibly cliche for Chris to die considering people were predicting it before the game even came out.

I do however think that Capcom are chicken when it comes to their characters. Wesker is really the only long-standing character who's died. Not only did it take several fake deaths for them to commit to it, but they ensured that he lived on in name through Alex Wesker and in spirit through Jake. We had no basis for Jake's existence, so as it stands I do think Jake was a desperate attempt to keep Wesker involved.

 

[KevinStriker]

My heart says Billy Coen but my brain says that's dumb.

 

[Agent Spike]

I would like Billy to return. He's such a badass.

 

[Hel]

I don't understand people who say this. Like seriously, can you not see how cliched that would be? I loved how Capcom built up that idea of Piers replacing Chris, only for fate to snatch it away.

I saw it as a well-done subversion of everyone's expectations. I really think people who wanted that "Chris sacrifices himself for the world and is replaced by his protege" to pan out are massively overlooking the themes of the story there.

To each their own, but personally, I'd rather have a cliched story than one that doesn't make any sense.

I also don't think Capcom "chickened out" of anything. They killed Wesker afterall, took a risk with Jake (though some would say it was a desperate attempt to keep Wesker involved, I see it as more of an idea they just thought would create an interesting dynamic with Chris), they've come right out and said RE7 won't have any returning characters, made it first person...but yeah, like you said here we are, and i've got no problem with that.

If Capcom had never chickened out of anything, then the whole cast would be dead by now (which kind of makes me glad that they did chicken out a few times). Every major character except Claire - or maybe even her? - was supposed to die at some point in the long history of RE games, but didn't. And when they saw what actually killing off one of the franchise's most important characters did to the fans, they decided not to repeat the same mistake with Chris (who was indeed supposed to die until they changed their minds and killed Piers instead, which was even confirmed in an interview). I'm not saying that I think it would have been a mistake, or that killing Wesker was one. But with all that being said, I can hardly imagine that Capcom's decisions are not dictated by their fear of negative fan reactions. It's the same with RE7: It may be a risk they're taking there, but first of all it's just a reaction to the criticism RE6 got, and an attempt to make fans love them again by going into the complete opposite direction.

By the way, Chris wasn't even supposed to be in RE6 until someone pitched the idea of pitting him and Leon against each other, and it shows in the way the story is written. So that's probably not what they thought of when they created Jake.

 

[Unknown]

To each their own, but personally, I'd rather have a cliched story than one that doesn't make any sense.

Right, it made total sense when you thought Chris was going to sacrifice himself, but when Capcom totally subverts your expectations and fools you, all of a sudden it makes no sense!

If Capcom had never chickened out of anything, then the whole cast would be dead by now (which kind of makes me glad that they did chicken out a few times). Every major character except Claire - or maybe even her? - was supposed to die at some point in the long history of RE games, but didn't. And when they saw what actually killing off one of the franchise's most important characters did to the fans, they decided not to repeat the same mistake with Chris (who was indeed supposed to die until they changed their minds and killed Piers instead, which was even confirmed in an interview). I'm not saying that I think it would have been a mistake, or that killing Wesker was one. But with all that being said, I can hardly imagine that Capcom's decisions are not dictated by their fear of negative fan reactions. It's the same with RE7: It may be a risk they're taking there, but first of all it's just a reaction to the criticism RE6 got, and an attempt to make fans love them again by going into the complete opposite direction.

.

I'm well aware that Capcom have considered killing off protagonists at some point (Leon in 4, Jill in 5, Chris in 6). It's just that they want to keep them alive instead of killing them just for shock value, which is why they ultimately decide not to.

Of course RE7 is a return to horror as a result of RE6's reaction, but isn't that just a natural response? They know another RE6 won't go down well, so they go the other way; seems more like a decision footed in logic rather than a fear of backlash.

By the way, Chris wasn't even supposed to be in RE6 until someone pitched the idea of pitting him and Leon against each other, and it shows in the way the story is written. So that's probably not what they thought of when they created Jake.

So? There was no story at all until both Leon and Chris were settled on. It's not like Chris was added to a Leon game, since RE6 only took shape around that concept art of the two of them. There's no beta versions featuring Leon in a different story or anything like that. It was during the concept stages, the producer suggested Leon, the director suggested Chris, before any plot had been written.

 

[Hel]

Right, it made total sense when you thought Chris was going to sacrifice himself, but when Capcom totally subverts your expectations and fools you, all of a sudden it makes no sense!

Alright, I guess I should have just quoted or repeated myself to avoid such funny misconceptions instead of posting a link to a lengthy essay about everything that doesn't make sense in Chris's story with a separate section all about the ending. But to cut a long story short: It's not that they killed off the newbie instead of the old fox, or that it came as a surprise. I'm quite fond of plot twists, especially the ones you don't see coming - just not that one. Chris was rightfully depressed, blinded by hatred and questioning his ability as a captain after losing his entire team, then the exact same thing happens to him again, immediately after he said he's going to leave the BSAA for good, but suddenly he makes a U-turn because what? It was Piers's dying wish? (... Since you don't seem to like clichés, how come you liked that?) With Piers as the survivor, it could have gone either way without looking silly.

I'm well aware that Capcom have considered killing off protagonists at some point (Leon in 4, Jill in 5, Chris in 6). It's just that they want to keep them alive instead of killing them just for shock value, which is why they ultimately decide not to.

If they had dealt with Chris according to their original plan, it wouldn't have been for shock value (and we don't know if that was behind the idea of the other characters' deaths either). It would have been an honourable ending to the story of a beloved long-term protagonist, going out with a bang while doing exactly what he has dedicated his life to: stopping viruses (in this case the one in his own body), saving the world (from Haos), protecting people (his last remaining soldier). It would have been ironic as well, turning into a BOW himself after so many years of fighting them. Cliched? Maybe, but I'll gladly take that over seeing him die of old age after being the unstoppable hero for 60+ years, or slipping on a banana peel and hitting his head on a stone. That would be for shock value.

Of course RE7 is a return to horror as a result of RE6's reaction, but isn't that just a natural response? They know another RE6 won't go down well, so they go the other way; seems more like a decision footed in logic rather than a fear of backlash.

Of course it's a natural response, that's just what I said. But you pointed out RE7's deviation from the previous concept to prove that Capcom are willing to take risks, and while that's technically true, the way they're going about it just screams "chicken" to me. Imagine you've established something over the course of a long time, you're proud of it, you've even dropped a hint that this is the future (assuming my interpretation of RE6's secret ending is correct), but as soon as someone criticises it, you immediately forget everything you once thought was good and do the exact opposite just to pander to that person's wishes - where's the backbone in that? Yes, I get it, that's how the market works, you can't keep producing stuff that no one likes and expect to pay your bills with it, but wouldn't a less extreme solution have worked too?

So? There was no story at all until both Leon and Chris were settled on. It's not like Chris was added to a Leon game, since RE6 only took shape around that concept art of the two of them. There's no beta versions featuring Leon in a different story or anything like that. It was during the concept stages, the producer suggested Leon, the director suggested Chris, before any plot had been written.

I remember otherwise, but that doesn't matter now. The point is that the very existence of Jake, as much as I like him, comes across as a giant asspull that probably would never have happened if Wesker had still been around. I'm not contradicting that there's an interesting dynamic between him and Chris, in fact I'd love to see a game featuring the two of them as unwilling partners, but if that really was the reason for his creation rather than to keep Wesker involved, I see it more as an excuse to keep Chris around after his arch-enemy died (which sadly, in the eyes of some fans, also means that Chris himself has no more reason to stay).

 

[JujuLodestar]

Hunk as the main antagonist.

Really just a stupid idea that popped into my head given that Hunk was an Umbrella agent and given Umbrella went Kaboom he's just out there screwing everyone over for ****s and giggles.

Meh. Or even as a Merc I dunno. I just wanna see Hunk again.

 

[Unknown]

Alright, I guess I should have just quoted or repeated myself to avoid such funny misconceptions instead of posting a link to a lengthy essay about everything that doesn't make sense in Chris's story with a separate section all about the ending. But to cut a long story short: It's not that they killed off the newbie instead of the old fox, or that it came as a surprise. I'm quite fond of plot twists, especially the ones you don't see coming - just not that one. Chris was rightfully depressed, blinded by hatred and questioning his ability as a captain after losing his entire team, then the exact same thing happens to him again, immediately after he said he's going to leave the BSAA for good, but suddenly he makes a U-turn because what? It was Piers's dying wish? (... Since you don't seem to like clichés, how come you liked that?) With Piers as the survivor, it could have gone either way without looking silly.

Well, there's plenty about RE6 that makes no sense so I won't single out Chris's campaign alone. Chris turning back into the guy he was before was the point of his campaign, it was what all that anger and being an a**hole to his team, only for them to die off, was all about. I don't agree it looked silly (that was Leon's campaign), so we'll just leave that there.

If they had dealt with Chris according to their original plan, it wouldn't have been for shock value (and we don't know if that was behind the idea of the other characters' deaths either). It would have been an honourable ending to the story of a beloved long-term protagonist, going out with a bang while doing exactly what he has dedicated his life to: stopping viruses (in this case the one in his own body), saving the world (from Haos), protecting people (his last remaining soldier). It would have been ironic as well, turning into a BOW himself after so many years of fighting them. Cliched? Maybe, but I'll gladly take that over seeing him die of old age after being the unstoppable hero for 60+ years, or slipping on a banana peel and hitting his head on a stone. That would be for shock value.

Actually, it would've been precisely shock value. Capcom confirmed the reason they decided to kill Piers was because they felt it weren't right to bring Chris back for the express purpose of killing him, because it would be "cheap". I don't see Chris' death, despite the cliches that go with it, as an honourable ending. I find the current one to be far more fitting, as though fate is not done with Chris just yet, I much prefer that.

Of course it's a natural response, that's just what I said. But you pointed out RE7's deviation from the previous concept to prove that Capcom are willing to take risks, and while that's technically true, the way they're going about it just screams "chicken" to me. Imagine you've established something over the course of a long time, you're proud of it, you've even dropped a hint that this is the future (assuming my interpretation of RE6's secret ending is correct), but as soon as someone criticises it, you immediately forget everything you once thought was good and do the exact opposite just to pander to that person's wishes - where's the backbone in that? Yes, I get it, that's how the market works, you can't keep producing stuff that no one likes and expect to pay your bills with it, but wouldn't a less extreme solution have worked too?

Well, I don't get the "chickening out" thing. I just think Capcom quite naturally realised they'd get a negative reception if they kept pushing this Hollywood action direction. And so, they agreed to go back to horror and slow paced gameplay. I also never got the impression that Capcom were mighty proud of the direction the series had gone in, either.

I remember otherwise, but that doesn't matter now. The point is that the very existence of Jake, as much as I like him, comes across as a giant asspull that probably would never have happened if Wesker had still been around. I'm not contradicting that there's an interesting dynamic between him and Chris, in fact I'd love to see a game featuring the two of them as unwilling partners, but if that really was the reason for his creation rather than to keep Wesker involved, I see it more as an excuse to keep Chris around after his arch-enemy died (which sadly, in the eyes of some fans, also means that Chris himself has no more reason to stay).

I'm not under any delusions that Jake isn't a huge asspull, he is. He exists purely to keep Wesker involved (which begs the question of why they didn't just go with Alex Wesker who had already been referenced in Lost In Nightmares, but, Capcom). I don't think there needs to be any "excuses" to keep a character around. Leon is in RE6 for no reason whatsover, afterall. I really like how Chris is a part of the story despite his long-running rivalry finally being over. Also, I think Capcom just wanted to play with the idea of Chris now rescuing the son of the man he killed, and the irony of a Wesker being humanity's last hope, having previously been its worst nightmare.