Evil looks you in the eye

By Corey Brotherson Published 2 August, 2005

RE5 producer explains visuals.

Resident Evil 5 producer, Jun Takeuchi, has divulged some fresh details about the recently-revealed game, in an interview with Famitsu Xbox.

Speaking in the September issue, Takeuchi talks in depth about the visual aspects of the game. The main character, who's identity has yet to be officially confirmed (although it's clearly looking like one of the series mainstays, Chris Redfield) is said to be modelled in extreme detail, even down to the individual blade of hair for his stubble. Capcom plans to create a visual engine that can set values for various muscles in the character's faces, although Takeuchi laments he's unsure if this will make it in the final game.

What is certain, however, is that Resident Evil 5 will follow a closer gameplay model to RE4 rather than its previous iterations, which means more action based gaming and, according to Takeuchi, something resembling reactive physics that allow the realistic breaking and toppling of items within the game world. The producer hopes all this will run at 60 frames per second, twice the speed of RE4, even with additional effects to help create a greater visual sense of heat and cold.

Famitsu Xbox also questions Takeuchi on the chances of RE5 using middleware, such as the Unreal 3 engine, his response being the development team is looking into it, given the time and expense of creating their own engine.

Resident Evil 5 has still yet to get a release date, but expect more information on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 title at the Tokyo Game Show this September.

Comments (30) Latest comment 7 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RumpyStumpy #1 7 years ago

    "Capcom plans to create a visual engine that can set values for various muscles in the character's faces, although Takeuchi laments he's unsure if this will make it in the final game. "

    I doubt it will be in the game. Just more developer bs, fable anyone?

  • DaveT #2 7 years ago

    " even down to the individual blade of hair for his stubble"

    Why the hell do they bother with this? I mean seriously, is it going to make any difference at all to the game? who's actually going to notice if it isn't pointed out?

  • Zero Beat #3 7 years ago

    Why the hell do they bother with this? I mean seriously, is it going to make any difference at all to the game? who's actually going to notice if it isn't pointed out?

    The player, when the camera zooms in on his face in a cutscene and you either see flat textured hair or individual hairs with shape and depth.

  • Zero Beat #4 7 years ago

    In a cinematic game like Resident Evil you want to be immersed. Seeing something flat which shouldn't be flat in a cutscene will take you out of the experience more than a properly modeled detail.

    Gameplay is such an old fashioned term. Visuals are an important part of the experience, moreso in some games than others. Ico wouldn't be half the game it is if the developers had been limited to PlayStation hardware, it doesn't do anything gameplay-wise that couldn't be done on the PlayStation hardware though.

  • Chtulie #5 7 years ago

    Didn't HL2 and Vampire Bloodlines (of course, same engine) already use fascial muscles to make the characters emote?

    opefully, this time there will be more open areas to actually make use of the control system.
    All the tight areas in re4 made me wish it controlled more fluently like killer 7 in those places, only during areas like the village did all the controls and all the options available to the player through the controls make any sense (it's arguable that mercenaries was better then the main game, gameplay wise).
    ...
    any word on a new mercenaries mini-game?

  • dadrester #6 7 years ago

    Why the hell do they bother with this?

    because they can!

    if Capcom just state the obvious... no one will give a shit about what the game is about or what engine they would be using.
    why does Sony/Capcom annoy me so-ooo much?

    it was an interview. the guy was answering questions that were posed to him by a journalist. it's not marketing copy written by capcom. i think after the gaming gem that was resident evil 4 there won't be many people who take note as soon as any info on this is released.

    and capcom annoying you?! you must be pretty hard to please or some rampant fanboy.

  • smelly #7 7 years ago

    "The player, when the camera zooms in on his face in a cutscene "


    Erm.. if its during a cutscene, why not just pre-render it?

    Will you be able to notice this stuff WHEN PLAYING?!?!?


    " Seeing something flat which shouldn't be flat in a cutscene will take you out of the experience more than a properly modeled detail. "


    Again.. in a cutscene. Why are we more interested in cutscenes all of a sudden than "in game scenes"?

    Edited by smelly at 02/08/05 @ 18:26

  • Chtulie #8 7 years ago

    But cutscenes take you ouit of the immersion of the game, things happen which aren't possible (any of the previous resident evil games, the twin snakes) or don't correspond with the gameworld (gta: san andreas) in cutscenes, all of a suddn you're no longer active, you're forced to be passive in cutscenes (the passivity is something even the makers of half-life 2 couldn't get totally rid of).

    The sheer fact that when you're watching a cutscene, you're not actually playing the game means that immersion goes out the window, you take a breath, you sit back, you're just not into it as much as you were when playing it.

  • Zero Beat #9 7 years ago

    I expect to see the interactive QTE-cutscenes back in full force.

  • Roamer #10 7 years ago

    But cutscenes take you ouit of the immersion of the game, things happen which aren't possible (any of the previous resident evil games, the twin snakes) or don't correspond with the gameworld (gta: san andreas) in cutscenes, all of a suddn you're no longer active, you're forced to be passive in cutscenes (the passivity is something even the makers of half-life 2 couldn't get totally rid of).

    You obviously haven't played Resident Evil 4 :)

  • Kon #11 7 years ago

    ^^
    Obviously.

    Gameplay Enhancing Hair.... now there's a new concept for you.. XD

    Perhaps soon we will all be able to tell if the girls in DOA have shaven their harmpits in the last two days or not. Hoooo, now that will surely have me buying yet another substandard beach volley/weaksouce fighting game come the new gen consoles.

    So gameplay is overrated huh?.. I'm beginning to wonder if people actually know why it is they chose videogames as a hobby.

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #12 7 years ago

    Visuals are an important part of the experience, moreso in some games than others

    I think there's an important difference between a visual style and visuals for the sake of visuals. Rendering individual hair, to me, sounds like it's the later.

  • Freek #13 7 years ago

    It's not so much gameplay enhancing hair but mroe part of the overal graphical fedility (sp???). It makes the main character more human and therfor the overal experience more immersive.
    They used the hair to illustrate that.

  • Genji #14 7 years ago

    Futuristic graphics are nice, but they're just cosmetic, and thus of secondary importance, at least to me. They're not going to save a crap game. And they're taking increasing amounts of time and money to create.

    Total "immersion" is not something that I prioritise when I play games. No game is ever going to look and feel exactly like real life, nor would I particularly need it to be. Is it fun? Is it interesting? Does seeing individual hairs on a stubble make it more fun or interesting? How much money is being spent on that stubble that could be spent on improving the AI or optimising the framerate?

  • UncleLou #15 7 years ago

    " even down to the individual blade of hair for his stubble"

    Why the hell do they bother with this? I mean seriously, is it going to make any difference at all to the game? who's actually going to notice if it isn't pointed out?

    Completely disagree. If everyone thought like this, we'd still be stuck in the 8-bit era, if at all. Where do you draw the line? I mean, who needs lip-synching? Individual fingers? High-res textures? Real-time shadows?

    Apart from that though, isn't that what Valve did in Half-Life2? I remember reading they simulate 40 face muscles.

  • Scimarad #16 7 years ago

    The characters is HL2 definitely gave the impression of being human way better than in anything else. Whatever they did in that is way to go...
    Edited by Scimarad at 03/08/05 @ 07:34

  • roofles #17 7 years ago

    Having good gameplay and good graphics is completely out of the question.

  • Kon #18 7 years ago

    "Completely disagree. If everyone thought like this, we'd still be stuck in the 8-bit era, if at all. Where do you draw the line? I mean, who needs lip-synching? Individual fingers? High-res textures? Real-time shadows?"

    It's your opinion, and i won't try to steal it from you, but i think you shouldn't be seeing things in such an absolute term.

    Let me make a comparisson to food. You have Bread, Wine, Meat, Cakes, and Caviar. And in games you have Controls, GUI, Sound, Poligons, High-Res Textures, Real-Time Shadows (who can very much affect gamplay) and individual blades of hair.

    My point? Well, if it wasn't obvious enough, it's quite simply that there are things that beyond a point, just aren't very usefull at all. Let's face it, i doubt you will see as much new gameplay experiences in this new generation (when compared to the last), as you did in the current gen machines.
    Edited by Kon at 03/08/05 @ 08:40

  • Blerk #19 7 years ago

    You lot do remember this is Resi 5, right? Resi 5. It'll be fantastic. Stop whining and let them get on with it. They know what's best.

  • Genji #20 7 years ago

    "Would it make you guys happy if Capcom announced that RE5 would come out with no graphical update at all , and will look the same as RE1 except you can use an eyetoy with it to box with the zombies/or wash windows to see zombies through?"

    Yes, Blerk is right. When I wrote my response, I wasn't saying that RE5 would be a bad game. On the contrary, I think it'll be fantastic. I wasn't really talking about RE5 at all - it's a bigger issue than that. I think RE5 will be fun, but I don't think that the fun will have anything to do with the stubble or anything related to "immersion".

    Petey, don't reduce my argument to the assumption that I don't want better graphics. I just see them as icing on the cake. I wouldn't want to eat a cake that was all icing. I'd get sick. It might not even be a cake anymore - just something that looks pretty in a window.

    Wow. I LOVE that cake analogy.

  • UncleLou #21 7 years ago

    "Completely disagree. If everyone thought like this, we'd still be stuck in the 8-bit era, if at all. Where do you draw the line? I mean, who needs lip-synching? Individual fingers? High-res textures? Real-time shadows?"

    It's your opinion, and i won't try to steal it from you, but i think you shouldn't be seeing things in such an absolute term.

    Let me make a comparisson to food. You have Bread, Wine, Meat, Cakes, and Caviar. And in games you have Controls, GUI, Sound, Poligons, High-Res Textures, Real-Time Shadows (who can very much affect gamplay) and individual blades of hair.

    My point? Well, if it wasn't obvious enough, it's quite simply that there are things that beyond a point, just aren't very usefull at all. Let's face it, i doubt you will see as much new gameplay experiences in this new generation (when compared to the last), as you did in the current gen machines.

    I still have to disagree vehemently. ;)

    You say "beyond a point". But where is that point? That's what I meant. You can't just define that point. Some people would argue that, graphically, what the Commodore 64 was capable of is enough. Ultimja IV was a great RPG, so why would we need anything but 2d-sprites?

    There's either progress, or there is no progress. But you can't just say "we've had enough progress now, let's stop here". The world just doesn't work that way. And trust me, I've been playing games long enough, and the first time I heard your argument is when the Amiga and ST were about to surpass the C64 in popularity. If "they", whoever that is, would have listened to you (or like-minded people) in that age, we wouldn't have had any progress.

    Likewise now. Think ahead 10 or even only 5 years. Will you still say the graphical improvements are usless, and we should have stopped right where we were in 2005?

    Besides, the facial animations do improve a game. Have you played Half-Life 2? Of course it doesn't improve the gameplay, but it does improve the atmosphere. Which, the more games I play, becomes more and more important for me. Gameplay is good, but it's (mostly) nothibg without graphics, atmosphere, etc. Just as graphics per se without gameplay aren't anythign, either.

    :)

    edit:
    Added another smiley, don't want this to sound too serious. ;)
    Edited by UncleLou at 03/08/05 @ 10:10

  • President_Weasel #22 7 years ago

    yeah, maybe, but nowhere does it say that the graphics are the only thing that will be improved about RE5. It's not as if RE4 wasn't already a quantum leap forwards in terms of gameplay, now is it?
    This article just happens to be about an interview from Famitsu where the producer was asked about the graphics. All of a sudden everyone (except Blerk, credit where it is due) is frothing at the mouth about how graphics are being promoted at the expense of gameplay. Guys, take a deep breath and calm down a bit eh?

  • Genji #23 7 years ago

    I'm doing my best not to "froth at the mouth", but it's quite hard when people keep telling me that that's what I'm doing.

    It's the whole "style vs. substance" thing, really, and is mostly a matter of opinion. I didn't find the atmosphere in HL2 to be enough to hide the fact that I wasn't having any fun with it, facial animations or no facial animations.

    Graphics are a part of atmosphere, and atmosphere is very important in some games. Let's go back to horror games for a second, because atmosphere is critical if you want to freak people out. I think that things like facial expressions enhace the atmosphere of a horror game, but only up to a certain point.

    The scariest game I have ever played is still System Shock 2. That game created an atmosphere scarier than most games I see today, and all without any facial expressions, real-life physics, etc. Killer 7 ranks right up there, too, and it's not because of the graphics, which look primitive by today's standards.
    Edited by Genji at 03/08/05 @ 10:36

  • Milbe #24 7 years ago

    Do NOT compare this game to anything else, especially not to Fable and HL2.

    Go with Blerk:
    "You lot do remember this is Resi 5, right? Resi 5. It'll be fantastic. Stop whining and let them get on with it. They know what's best."
    Edited by Milbe at 03/08/05 @ 13:03

  • kangarootoo #25 7 years ago

    "style vs. substance"

    These things aren't mutually exclusive you know. I'm with you on System Shock 2, but I wonder if it might have been MORE scary with greater graphical realism.

    Pushing the bar a little bit in any part of your game has to be a good thing right? But if you focus on one area too heavily and sacrifice another to the detriment of the overall gameplay experience then we can probably agree that is a bad thing. This news article gives us way less info than we need to decide whether that is likely to be the case, so all we can do is speculate (and there's nothing wrong with that of course).

    I think part of the reason for the rendering of individual hairs is so you can put info like that in press releases, which in turn causes heated debate such as we are seeing here, which in turn increases word of mouth publicity, which in turn sells more copies, which is of course the foundation of their business plan. In that context, it seems like a fine idea to me.

  • kangarootoo #26 7 years ago

    p.s. The facial muscle thing in the Source engine is potentially a time saving mechanic for any licensee who is interested in facial animation, not just a gimic. You give it a bunch of emotion values (lets say 5/10 for grumpy and 8/10 for worried, I don't know really) and it deals with the animation for you.

    I recomend the "Half Life 2: Raising the Bar" book to anyone. Loads of interesting stuff for fans or otherwise, and more artwork than you can poke with a stick.

    p.p.s.
    Ah, just re-read the first post by Rumpy Stumpy. Well there you go, HL2 has exactly what Takeuchi is on about.
    Edited by kangarootoo at 03/08/05 @ 14:02

  • Kon #27 7 years ago

    "Added another smiley, don't want this to sound too serious. ;) "

    Yeah, no need for anyone to get too worked up about videogames. There's quite enough of that going around the other articles.

    Anyway, just wanted to point out lastly that i also love to see new games that graphically surpass what i've seen so far. A graphics whore is the term most generally implied.

    It's just that i fear that great gamplay will start to take a backseat (or should i say even moreso?).

    Well, i'm confident that RE5 will offer both if RE4 is anything to go by.

    Cheers mate ! ;)

  • Genji #28 7 years ago

    "These things aren't mutually exclusive you know"

    I never said they were. Having a good helping of both is very nice, but some games prioritise one over the other, as you well know. Good response, though.

  • sumanai #29 7 years ago

    Ah, somehow after reading these comments, a game springs to mind. It is called 'Alone in the Dark'. Looked ugly the day it was born, mind you, but many regarded it as a marvellous horror game with a splendid atmosphere. I played it a tidbit later than others. If I right recall it might have been fall of 2004. Yes, 2004, so no "retro"-feelings going on and about. The damn thing scared me shitless in a few seconds.Once I got down one stairs and had to quit. In System Shock 2 I went as far as killed one enemy, and my heart was about to stop. The original System Shock I had hard time playing with difficulty at minimum, even though the enemies are just standing there, until you attack them.

    And better graphics would have possibly ruined them. I've seen the new and "better" graphics for System Shock 2. Thanks to rather crap design, they effectively ruin the immersion. If the eyeballs are made with quite a good precision, they also need to work like ones. If their just dots in the face, it doesn't matter if their static.

    My point here is, that it's the graphic's design that matters, not graphics themselves. Compare Everquest II and World of Warcraft. In my mind E2 has better graphics, but they're utter crap in design. While WoW's graphics have low polygon count, but good design.

    Sound also has a good deal on the atmosphere, it depends on the designers if that 7.1 Surround is actually important. A good designer doesn't need to make that sound come from behind, because if (s)he really managed to immerse you into the world, all that matters to you is that someTHING made that sound.

    Secondary point: it should be said, that rather many times directors and designers have hid their inability to truly create an atmosphere behind new techonoly. Usually this comes out as either games or, more often, movies that are merely disgusting. On the other occasions, it has come out as a game or movie that's praised and the maker is praised to heaven for his(/her) skills, while (s)he owns all of it to special effects.

    And yes, this has nothing to do with RE5, but this area seems to have been "degenerated" into a conversation of graphics as important part of immersion / atmosphere. Actually I prefer it this way. It's not like there's anything intelligent to say about RE5 at this point anyhow.

  • Genji #30 7 years ago

    "Genji if you're not actually talking about RE5 then maybe you're in the wrong forum :p"

    No, I think I'm in the right place. The comments here brought up a very interesting topic, which I felt compelled to discuss. Comments would be very bland if they just stuck to things like "wow, that looks awesome/crap"
    Edited by Genji at 04/08/05 @ 03:59