Resident Evil 2 and 3 Review
Evil prices, evil gameplay. Just pure evil, basically.
Version tested: GameCube
"For the first time on the Nintendo GameCube comes Resident Evil 2/3 in all [their] original glory," so the back of the box blurb goes. But whereas Capcom and Shinji Mikami lavished a huge amount of care and attention to remaking the 1996 original a year or so back, what the company has delivered this time around is two functionally identical ports of the ancient PSone originals, yours for a mere £25-30 each depending on where you look.
And rather like the rotting zombies that shamble haplessly through the game, time has not been kind to these ageing survival horror stalwarts. In their day, both these titles were benchmark titles that pushed the PSone with lavish pre-rendered backdrops and slick cut scenes, but now the true horror is to witness just how badly they have aged. The previously stunning environments now look so low resolution and blocky (especially on RE2) it's a wonder why we ever thought they looked the part in the first place, while the character models are even more resoundingly awful; badly animated with low resolution textures and joints clipping all over the place. Even the text is as blocky as hell, and the overall production values are a world away from what we expect and demand from our games these days.
Play it on as small a screen as you can find

It doesn't help their cause that we're using a much bigger, much sharper (and widescreen) TV these days, as clearly these games were not designed to be exposed to such harsh scrutiny, but even so, things have moved on massively in the preceding five years. Thank the lord.
If you can somehow divorce yourself from the terrifyingly bad visuals, the games themselves, however, still stack up reasonably well if you're well into this whole survival horror lark (which we realise is an acquired taste), and missed them the first time around. They also give the real hardcore fetishist the chance to own the whole series on one format, with Code Veronica also coming down the pipe later in the year (no doubt also at the same price), but you'd have to be some sort of mentalist to consider buying them all over again for the sake of it.
Anyway, yes, the games. Resident Evil 2 is set just after the end of the original, with the sequel, once again, playable as two different characters; rookie S.T.A.R.S cop Leon S. Kennedy (on his first assignment, the poor chap), and Claire Redfield, who's looking for her brother, S.T.A.R.S member Chris Redfield. Each quest is broadly similar trawl around Racoon City (albeit with a few minor story differences), and anyone familiar with other games in the series will know what to expect.
In Resident Evil 3 you take charge of the scantily clad Jill Valentine (a S.T.A.R.S member from the original game) in another traipse around the flaming Racoon City. Set a month and a half after the incident of the first game, the infamous T-virus has spread around the city and it's up to you to guide Jill around the hazardous environment, find survivors, avoid the flesh eating zombies and the relentless, stalking Nemesis. More of the same, really, albeit with fractionally improved environments and character models.
Locked doors, scattered objects, shambling zombies...

As is traditional, each game world consists of a series of locations, a few locked doors, and scattered notes and objects lying around that inevitably result in said doors becoming unlocked. Standing in your way, at regular intervals, are the usual menacing zombies and their friends, which you have to dispatch with the minimum of fuss with whatever weapons you can lay your hands on.
The main problem any player of Resident Evil games will come across is working out ways of killing the numerous baddies without either dying or running out of ammo. The problem is, these games are notoriously tight in the ammo and health provision, making the game far more of a challenge than most action-adventure title. It's a long held complaint, and ruefully just as relevant here, but the cumbersome control system and inability to see what you're aiming at also makes for an oft-frustrating experience.
The heinous typewriter save system also makes things harder than they could be, and all in all, what could be an entertaining adventure is often marred by some old school mechanics that most developers binned long ago. If you're adept or willing to work around these foibles then you're in for a treat, but the less patient gamer will curse it within the first 20 minutes and probably never return. But this divide in opinion has always been apparent, so no-one should be surprised about this.
Problems, irritations, frustrations

RE3 does, in fairness, change things a smidgen, giving the player the ability to create their own specific type of ammo, with the use of different types of gunpowder. In addition, Jill now has a dodge manoeuvre, which in theory enables you stand a better chance of surviving when it counts. In practice, however, this move causes its own problems, especially if you encounter the many crowded areas, as does the ammo creation system, unless you know what you need and when.
However, with both games, you'll find yourself cursing the lack of inventory spaces, and the inability to drop objects (which was only introduced in Resident Evil Zero), and all told the trip down memory lane merely serves to illustrate how far games have come generally, and how forgiving we must have been back then to put up with such wholly irritating fundamentals. They're not even scary, for God's sake.
How Capcom can seriously think that anyone in their right minds will willingly part with £25-30 for each of these is a query we just can't get our heads around. Even at half the price you'd be hard pressed to justify shelling out for them, and given that the excellent (and GameCube exclusive) Resident Evil Zero has shifted all of 35,000 copies in the UK to date, despite being discounted for weeks, it's abundantly clear that even new versions of the game aren't of major interest to you, never mind outdated ports. In all seriousness, games should come clearly stickered with a 'Best Before' date to ward off unsuspecting punters. These are two zombie shooters that should never have been exhumed, and if you see them shuffling towards you muttering 'thiirrrrrrty quiiiiiiiiiid', run. Run for your lives!
4 / 10
You may also like...
-
Mass Effect 3 Demo: The First 20 Minutes
-
Face-Off: Final Fantasy 13-2
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Retrospective: Star Wars Episode I Racer
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Happy Action Theater Review
-
Game of the Week: Catherine
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
App of the Day: Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Review
-
Face-Off: The Darkness 2
-
The Darkness 2 Review
-
Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 Vita Review
-
EA evaluating FIFA Street features for FIFA 13
-
Epic's Sweeney on graphics tech: "the limit really is in sight"
-
Grand Slam Tennis 2 Review
-
App of the Day: Sir Benfro's Brilliant Balloon
-
One Piece: Unlimited Cruise SP Review
-
Metal Gear Solid 5 expected between April 2013 and May 2014
-
Sony admits "dropping the ball" with Demon's Souls
-
Catherine Review
-
King Arthur 2 Review
-
Mass Effect 3 FemShep trailer debuts
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 now live for Xbox 360









Comments (22) Latest comment 9 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Nem, you're famous!!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Fair point. Can I be Gonzo?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I want to be animal.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Oi!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
You mean Mouse is busy reading up on how to do them then?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
If that was £20 I probably would (never played the Playstation version, see).
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
And why the hell not criticise the visuals....when you spend £30 on game you expect a whole lot more than this. It's not necessarily a badge of quality, we *realise* this, but the entire series has traded on the fact that the visuals are highly detailed. The fact is they are awful by today's standards. This isn't a criticism of the gameplay, it's just a screamingly obvious fact.
And anyway, I love the Res Evil games - try arguing with the many people who hang around here that absolutely, irrationally hate the series.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I guess it is a matter of taste tho. The cheese of it all and B style i can understand: but the whole style of gameplay with camera angles, ammo, saving etc.: the reason being "its just the standard of the series" isn't good enough for me: it may be what makes it RE, but its also what makes it rathar a rathar cult kinda game.
A bit like marmite then. You either love it or hate it.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
This is actually a port of the Dreamcast version (or a 'port of a port'!) and thus runs at a higher resolution than the PSX original. The 3d models are rendered in a higher resolution and the backgrounds have been anti-aliased so as to mask the pixellation. Of course this isn't enough to hide the fact that these are PSX visuals, but it does enough to make the game a hell of a lot more tolerable on a big TV than the original ever was.
As for the controls, I never had a problem with them first time round and I had a quick go on these ports and found them to work quite nicely with the cube's analogue stick, plus a new control option to allow the use of the shoulder buttons for turning makes it easier for newbies to play the game. I also really don't have a problem with the graphics - I still like the artwork and these games can still be very atmospheric.
Obviously I agree comletely with all of you on the pricing though.. what were Capcom thinking?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
RE2 has aged so badly it's not even funny. RE3 is still actually an enjoyable game, but not now at £30. Capcom should have remade these games too, it has to be said. Although RE2 and RE3 are good games, rereleasing ports on a GC was not a smart move.
Roll on Resident Evil 4.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I am bothered by the fact that this seemingly bold move has so quickly turned into an excuse to release a bunch of lazy ports. It's not that I'm bothered by them having dated graphically it's just that from the point of view of those of us who are anal enough to care about narrative consistency the Resident Evil series is something of a mess with various plot elements having been arbitrarily changed between games and several different versions of each game on various consoles with different plot elements having been changed slightly. I figured the decision to bring the entire series to the Game Cube to be something of a reset button for the series allowing them to go back and create THE definitive version of each title in the series and tie up all of the inconsistencies that existed throughout the original releases.
But then again I want any series of games that even attempts to have a plot to have some grand narrative that is far more important to the games' creators then sales
Comment below viewing threshold Show