Like it or not, re-releasing old titles has become an institution in the video game industry. As games become increasingly complex, they’re also increasingly expensive to make. Sales numbers for re-releases of games are surprisingly solid, even when compared to their original release sales numbers. Re-releases just make financial sense for developers and publishers — they can cash in on past popular titles for minimal redevelopment time and cost.
Resident Evil (2015)
A
Capcom
PS4 (reviewed), PS3, Xbox One, Xbox 360, PC
In 2014 alone, we saw upgraded re-releases of “Pokémon,” “Grand Theft Auto,” “Halo” and “Tomb Raider” games hit the market. Now, for the first video game re-release of 2015, it’s the seminal survival horror game “Resident Evil.”
Wait … doesn’t this sound familiar?
It should, because “Resident Evil” already had its turn. Six times. “Resident Evil (2015)” marks the seventh time the 1996 classic has been re-released in some form. So how is this week’s “Resident Evil” ’s release at all relevant?
To put it simply, it’s because the game is still fantastic; “Resident Evil” is a game that each generation of gamers should play. It’s still scary. It’s more beautiful than ever. It’s meatier and much more memorable than the vast majority of video games released today.
For the uninitiated, “Resident Evil” is an extremely influential survival horror game, pioneering gameplay mechanics that would be genre staples for years to come.
“Resident Evil” ’s genius is its revolutionary use of restriction to instill fear in players. It was among the first games to limit the player’s ammo and the number of times they could save, and was certainly the first to use these restrictions fairly and effectively. This combination of limiting factors forced frantic resource management and a pervading feeling that at any given moment, you might not have enough stuff to survive.
Another restriction in “Resident Evil” is its camera, which aims in fixed angles depending on the location of the player in the room. This allows the game to hide scares extremely effectively and makes for some interesting visual puzzles. The game is full of puzzles — actual interesting, complex puzzles — which mainstream video games seem to avoid at all costs lately.
Perhaps the only thing wrong with the original “Resident Evil” was the time and place it came out. The 1996 Playstation version looks, well, terrible compared to today’s popular hits. Its simple polygonal characters move statically and the game relies too heavily on FMV (real video of real actors — yeah, it was real bad). It’s aged worse than almost any other classic game with similar levels of acclaim.
In 2002, “Resident Evil” received a remake (note that remakes are more effortful ventures than re-releases that alter the way an old game looks or plays) on Gamecube. This remake was so good that it made the original look completely unplayable by comparison. It completely overhauled the graphics, sound and cutscenes of the original, giving the cutscenes in particular a slick CGI treatment instead of FMV.
“Resident Evil (2015)” is an HD upgrade of that game. Now, it’s playable in widescreen HD, with a new, optional control scheme that upgrades the archaic tank-like controls that plagued the 2002 treatment.
The only knock on this game is that the CG cutscenes weren’t upgraded to HD like everything else, so they feel very out of place. Otherwise, this is the very best version of a seminal video game. If “Resident Evil” doesn’t already occupy a spot in your collection, there has never been a better time to change that.
“Resident Evil” was reviewed using an advance digital copy provided by the publisher.