Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicals (Wii)

Warbie

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
10,615
Reaction score
0
For those who haven't been following Umbrella Chronicals - it's basically an on rails fps that concentrates on the fall of Umbrella. Various key characters from the series (Chris, Jill, Rebecca etc etc) are controllable and, while the game is on rails, we do get to choose which paths to follow. Essentially it's a sightseeing trip for RE fans with zombies and bosses to shoot at. tbh I don't expect goty, but I am looking forward to filling in a few blanks from the story and do like shooting zombies a great deal (gameplay looks similar to Duck Hunt from Wiiplay, but while moving and with the obvious Resident Evil differences). 2 quick vids (the 2nd is better) :

http://www.capcom.co.jp/bio_uc/

Apparently this also comes bundled with a revamped version of RE4. I can't find many details on this other than it'll include all the extras from the PS2 version and possibly a few new ones. I'm assuming we'll be aiming with the Wiimote this time (would be crazy not too) and that this'll be the first version that actually supports widescreen properly. Other minor visual updates sound quite likely too (some AA would be nice).

//edit - awesome vid of RE4 being played with the Wiimote :) http://www.capcom.co.jp/wii_bio4/index.html

All in all this appears to be good package. UC looks solid enough to justify the purchase and any excuse to visit RE4 again is fine with me. For those that never got to play RE4 this is christmas come early :)
 
That's shit. I thought they were actually going to make a proper RE game.

The 2nd video does look a little bit interesting though.
 
We'd all like a new game in the series, but for that we'll have to wait for RE5 (which is going to be the nuts!). UC looks like a very nice filler to me - and you never know, it could turn out to be great fun. At the moment Capcom can do no wrong.

Just the thought of an updated RE4 with the Wiimote must do something for you - I know I already have a tent set up in my trousers over the idea, and i've completed the game umpteen times.
 
It's funny because it's got the word "Chronicals" in it.
 
I'd rather if it were a full fledged new RE game. It sounds more like the mobile RE than anything
 
I can't stand playing any RE game beyond the first, so does someone want to explain the story to me, and what gaps this game could possibly hold?
 
I very much doubt we'll be getting RE5 on the Wii (tbh I wouldn't want it)

RE5 is being made to use every inch of power the 360/PS3 has. To port it to the Wii would result in some serious omissions, compromises and almost certainly a sloppy game. A Resident Evil made for the Wii and the Wiimote from the ground up, now that could be awesome.
 
Ok my lame ass excuse for not quite understanding is that I've a splitting headache. k so basically, on a rails as in...you don't stop moving? Sorry if I'm not understanding this. I'm not too bothered about an on the rails fps game because so long as the contents fun, I'm down.

The trailer looked fun....now if only I had a Wii. What Capcom really need to do is create a Resident Evil game for the Wii that goes back to the survival horror roots and revamp the forumla, instead of just calling it quits like they did with 4.
 
On rails means you are on a set path you can't stray from, has nothing to do with not stopping. It's like those arcade gun games like Virtua Cop.

Initially I thought this game was a terrible idea but it could turn out to be fun. I wouldn't expect much in terms of story, I'm not so sure a good story could be properly executed in this type of game.

I remember reading there was also going to be a typical RE type game included in the package along with this on-rails one, or did that wind up being the RE4 port? To be honest I have zero interest in the RE4 port, I own the game already and have beaten it multiple times, new controls really wouldn't be reason enough to play through it again.

I wonder if the series will ever return to its survival horror roots? :(
 
Ah, I figured. Cheers mate...I'm not too fussed either way. Sounds good!
 
I wonder if the series will ever return to its survival horror roots? :(

Ahem, RE5 ;)

My only citicism of RE4 was that it dropped the scares. Otherwise it's superb and improved the series in nearly every possible way. RE5 is meant to add to this while bringing the scares back - it doesn't get much more exciting than that :)
 
Resident Evil 4 was a fantastic game, but it didn't improve the actual series. The series is about survival horror and good scares. Resident Evil 4 had none of that, made the writing and dialogue worse in every possible way and didn't further the storyline of the series. Now don't get me wrong, I love Resident Evil 4; it's attention to polished and precise gameplay was utterly superb...definitely up there alongside the Metal Gear solid series and Half-life 2+episodes in this regard.

I just hope Resident Evil 5 ditches Mikami and re-introduces some survival horror and scary factor.
 
I guess I was referring to RE 1,2,3 and Code Veronica. I prefer a slower paced, more atmospheric, moody, story-driven type of game. Believe me I loved RE4 but in a totally different way from the previous games. Mainly it was just so damn fun to shoot things, and the game was gorgeous. The story was pretty awful though and I never got that isolated type of feeling that the other games provided. I want my limited inventory and ammo while bein chased by a rabid dog down a narrow hallway. :D
 
Was the writing and dialogue that much worse? I put it to you guys that it was worse in the orignal RE than in RE4. Hamfisted cheesiness is something Resident Evil is famous for :)

I agree with what you're saying though, Samon. While the gameplay was very much improved upon, the atmosphere and tension were lost, and with it some of what makes Resident Evil 'Resident Evil'. I also agree with you Mr Toad - the isolation wasn't there, ammo/health was too easy to come by and the pace was a little too fast.

Keep the gameplay the same, substitute the some of the action for atmosphere, and RE5 could quite easily be goty :)
 
Yeah I agree with you Warbie, except "keep the gameplay the same", they should change it atleast a little bit more back to the original way of the old RE games.>_<
 
You mean the clunky, old, aim high or low, can't see what you're shooting, gameplay of the original? :) It was great back in the day, but times have changed and the series had to move on. Some people blame the new gameplay for the loss of tension, but I disagree. RE could be every bit as scary this way, just with good combat too.
 
Was the writing and dialogue that much worse? I put it to you guys that it was worse in the orignal RE than in RE4. Hamfisted cheesiness is something Resident Evil is famous for :)

I agree with what you're saying though, Samon. While the gameplay was very much improved upon, the atmosphere and tension were lost, and with it some of what makes Resident Evil 'Resident Evil'. I also agree with you Mr Toad - the isolation wasn't there, ammo/health was too easy to come by and the pace was a little too fast.

Keep the gameplay the same, substitute the some of the action for atmosphere, and RE5 could quite easily be goty :)

Oh, I still think the atmosphere was good...at least, in an environment sense. Less in a 'scary' sense. The cheese in RE4 was worse than the other titles if you ask me...but then, they have all been written by the same numpty.

You mean the clunky, old, aim high or low, can't see what you're shooting, gameplay of the original? :) It was great back in the day, but times have changed and the series had to move on. Some people blame the new gameplay for the loss of tension, but I disagree. RE could be every bit as scary this way, just with good combat too.

I disagree with what you are saying. The series hasn't moved on at all; it's just went into an entirely new line of gameplay. That isn't the Resident Evil series moving on. Obviously the old gameplay needs spicing up, but the solution isn't to just abandon it. What it needs is tweaks and new features. There's still alot of fans out there who expected them to simply 'make it 'better'.
 
Apparently this also comes bundled with a revamped version of RE4.

When was this said? I knew there was a new RE4 but I didn't know they were being released together.
 
When was this said? I knew there was a new RE4 but I didn't know they were being released together.

It's something i've read in a few places - not confirmed, but I wouldn't be suprised. I've also heard its being released seperately at a budget price.


I think the series did need to move on Samon, it was getting very stale. Infact, with each new title the experience was becoming more generic and washed out - which is why RE4 seemed like such a breath of fresh air. I also think it retained much of the original's feel (in terms of basic game mechanics - walking about and exploring/shooting etc) and that the main depature was in atmosphere. I'm confident Capcom could make a game using RE4 gameplay that is every bit as 'Resident Evil' as any other in the series. The best of all worlds if you like.
 
Cant wait for this. Playing RE4 on the PS3 right now and its amazing.
 
That actually looked really good. Shame the dialogue and voice acting is ear-bleedingly bad yet again. ^__^
 
Yeah, just like MGS.\o(^-_____-^)o/

Slightsarcasmmighthavebeenencryptedintothismesagewithoutthepostersknowledge
 
Adding 'proper' player movement would make it something completely different.

I've never played an on rails shooter that lets you look around while aiming (perhaps Killer 7 - although that's quite different in other areas) and think it'll make for quite a unique experience. It's certainly more exciting a prospect than another (likely generic) fps.
 
Seriously, get rid of the on rails stuff. The game looks amazingly awesome from a graphics/cinematography perspective as it is right now, and adding proper player movement would only make it better.

qft. How long is in going to take to get a REAL fps on the Wii? Where the controls don't suck? I don't like 'on rails' shooters, it's like riding in a car shooting trees with a paintball gun instead of actually playing paintball.
 
:upstare:

*loads up HOTD2*

How very wrong you are.
 
Silent Hill games always did that type of gameplay better, and they actually had quality story/writing behind them. To be honest Resident Evil was pretty much obsolete before RE4 came out.

The problem with the old RE games is that that type of horror gameplay relied on you actually giving a shit. The terrible plot that plagues most Japanese games and the most abysmal writing/voice acting imaginable pretty much destroyed that for me. I couldn't be bothered to play them. RE4 was just as shitty in those regards, but it had a quality game there to back it up.
 
Silent Hill certainly has better atmosphere and a more engaging story, but RE still holds the crown for gameplay. There's something so right about limping through the mansion, half dead, low on ammo, and then you hear the groans. A less chilling experience perhaps, but a better 'game' (imo)

I agree about RE being on its way out before RE4, though, and was very happy with the change.
 
Other than the obvious similarities, UC looks different in play to the Gun Survivor games, which, let's face it, were all complete shite. If UC were coming out on any other console i'd dismiss it offhand, but having enjoyed many Duck Hunt sessions since christmas I know just how much fun aiming and shooting at stuff with the Wiimote is. If all UC does is improve and expand on this mini game (which is pretty much what the vids/previews suggest) then it'll be soooo much better than Gun Survivor and still crap on 9/10 of the fps released over the last few years.
 
I suppose the merit of an on-rails experience is that you can deliver a finely-controlled scenario to the player in order to allow for maximum cinematic effect. My biggest gripe with this format is that it nearly ignores any sort of narrative-building by the player (choosing which door you go down doesn't mean much), and since games of this nature tend to lack complicated artificial intelligence, they play out nearly the same way every time.

Whilst that is most certainly true I find myself more interested in the polished and stream-lined cinematic experience every time; often choosing it over games where I've more free reign. Whilst I'm not condoning the idea that an on the rails experience is the best one, I'm simply saying that even when you aren't on the rails, and are often restricted to one or two paths, that this type of experience is far more thrilling for me. It really allows the developer to create a finely-tuned and polished cinematic experience.

Those new impressions sound fairly positive. Still need a fricken Wii though.
 
In a game like Resident Evil, where fine detail can be seen in every environment, it's only natural to want to explore those nooks and crannies. Don't show me a balcony that I can't reach or a drawer I can't open. This isn't 1997 anymore; interactivity with the environment should be an element in every game.

Fair points. However, this isn't your usual Resident Evil came, it isn't trying to be. Your post suggests that on rails shooters are a thing of the past that should become obsolete now we've moved on to 'better' things - which I disagree with.

Operation Wolf at the arcade had me hooked as a kid, Time Crisis, Virtua Cop, HOTD .... these games kick ass. Allow the player to move around and they would be completely and utterly different - and not in a good way. I see what you mean about Killer 7, but again, apples and oranges.

'Narrative building'?? We're shooting zombies in the face here. The enemy may come at you in the same way each time, but that doesn't mean each visit will be the same, far from it. There's something clinically satisfying about mastering games of this type. You have to hone your skills, learn the levels/enemies, find ammo/health, and then try and string it altogether and become a gun kata ninja. There's no time to explore - we're trapped in a 10 hour long action movie sequence - there's zombies everywhere! Lock and load :sniper:
 
I very much doubt we'll be getting RE5 on the Wii (tbh I wouldn't want it)

RE5 is being made to use every inch of power the 360/PS3 has. To port it to the Wii would result in some serious omissions, compromises and almost certainly a sloppy game. A Resident Evil made for the Wii and the Wiimote from the ground up, now that could be awesome.

I'm not sure. I was really impressed with the graphic power of the Wii, after all of the doubts and speculation before it came out. Excite truck has some pretty graphics.

It surely can't do such advanced shading and shadows (I guess), but it runs in low resolution (wii is SD-TV, 640x480-ish), so it might be able to do a low rez resident evil 5, don't you think?

Operation Wolf at the arcade had me hooked as a kid, Time Crisis, Virtua Cop, HOTD .... these games kick ass. Allow the player to move around and they would be completely and utterly different - and not in a good way. I see what you mean about Killer 7, but again, apples and oranges.
Those kinds of games are only fun if they are good. Oh, and body parts, guts, and blood has to fly all over the place as I shoot. House of the Dead 2 (dreamcast) was pretty good, but I always wished it wasn't on rails. I wanted to walk around the cemeteries and houses and dungeons so bad, but you can't. MEH!
 
Those kinds of games are only fun if they are good.

Same for all games.

I know what you guys mean. I've wanted to see what is down the alley HOTD always takes you passed and see what's behind some of the doors that never open. However, making a shooter of this type with such freedom, while maintaing the balls to the wall action, would be insanely hard. Creatures would be jumping at you from behind, above, to the sides. The pace, and probably number of bad guys, would have to be reduced. Before you know it you're playing a standard fps (and we don't need any more of those!)

UC allows us to look around with the analogue stick (which i'm quite excited about), a slight departure and added freedom that eurogamer feel could already make things a little tricky. tbh I think it sounds quite neat - you can look around, but lose focus and start sightseeing and a zombie dog will be munching on your face.
 
There's nothing wrong with fps - apart from decent ones being few and far between and that we're plagued by too many of them. They aren't light gun games done better, though, they're different game types with a different appeal. The same goes for Star Fox, Panzer Orta, Rez etc. they certainly have alot in common with lightgun games - learning routes, enemy patterns - but are far less in your face and action packed. You're given time and space to breath, to move about.

You make it sound like recreating a movie like experience is a bad thing - surely that's the draw of lightgun games? I also fail to see how the game plays out the same way each time as there's one huge variable directly affects the level of tension - you. You'll miss at times, find yourself low on health, run out of ammo, use the wrong weapon, miss the health boost. The satisfaction is in getting it done right - and that takes practise.

And what's the shooting gallery in RE4 got to do with anything? :)

UC may turn out to be average, not because it lacks freedom, but simply because it wasn't done well. I'm still having fun playing duck Hunt on the Wii (in short bursts) and have every hope it'll be a breath of fresh air.
 
Oblivion allows you to do just about whatever you want, whenever you want, and the game is significantly better because of that simple fact.

That's crock. It really is. Oblivion is not significantly better just because it allows to go wherever you want, not at all. Open-ended games are rather overrated. There's a significant decline in quality when this happens, and the developer is unable to create a fluent and cinematic experience. As I said above, I'm more for the stream-lined and polished cinematic experience. Yes, games are all about interactivity, but I personally find your previous example more interesting. The player should definitely be able to tackle combat situations differently, but I don't think how vast the world the player has to wander around in should be such an important factor in how good a game is. People often have this overblown and ludicrous idea that freedom is better (quality>quantity every time). If you ask me, it isn't. I'm not saying I don't like open-ended games, I'm simply saying I prefer linear games with a very strict quality control.

Whilst UC is certainly on the rails, this doesn't mean the game is worse than Oblivion simply because you 'can't go wherever you want'. This, more so than a game with fairly linear level-design, gives them more of an opportunity to create an even greater cinematic experience. The example you cited is still going to be evident in UC, when I sharpen my skill with the game and gain the ability to pass through various sections with ease. It's these type of games where time with the game matters. My friend could have an entirely different experience because he's finding it difficult.
 
It's these type of games where time with the game matters.

Exactly - your first encounters will be very different to the 4th or 5th time around. You'll probably continue to improve and do things differently after then.
 
Back
Top