Talk:Resident Evil Outbreak

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

What attacked Monica?

Alright, let's talk. I've asked around, and it seems the population is split on exactly who attacked Monica--it's obvious that an embreyo (AN embreyo, not THE embreyo) killed her, but exactly what attacked her is...open to debate, I suppose. Nearly half of the people I've talked to say Birkin, the other near-half say the dude in the suitcase (which apparently then has the ability to fly and can teleport out of cases. What, me opinionated?), and about a small percent yell about some secret Umbrella flapping thing. I'd like to hear opinions, please.

It simply has to be Birkin. The case is intact when she's attacked by something big and distinctly Birkin-like. The notes about the specimen note that its containment fluid must be changed from time to time, or else it will wake up; this suggests that the creature did, in fact, wake up. But notes have been misleading before. One in that very scenario mentions a password which is never used. There are similarly misleading examples in other games, which I could point out if anyone's interested. If the creature is Birkin, that leaves the loose end of what happened to the specimen... Teflon Don 06:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It crawled away into the wild, and by wild I mean "the bowels of Ol' Birkman's lab". Just because a creature comes from a fancy jar, it doesn't mean it has to play a particularly important part. For all we know, it might've been a McGuffin designed to bring about that whole "OMG YOKO UR LUKIN 4 DIS RNT U OMG" speech from Monica. Also, I kind of doubt that embryo could've taken out Monica, seeing as it's kind of small. And squishy. Yes, I'm aware that the one that took the whole chestburster routine was strong enough to break through the metal floor-deal, but the little dude had been feeding off Monica's insides and was about to mutate to boot, so he doesn't count. That said, could someone vote or something on if we should change what's on the page on how Monica got Mr. Alien-Ripoff in her?--SMWhat 03:40, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain it was supposed to be Birkin. It wasn't the embryo in the case, because you see Monica look up in a very startled manner before the creature gets her. If it wasn't Birkin, it was that giant moth, but the Birkin theory is much more credible. I always assumed from the very first time I completed 'Below Freezing Point' that it was supposed to tie in with a Birkin referance. The fact that the scenario is set in the same locaion that Birkin makes most of his appearances in RE2 simply sealed the deal, I think. This topic's a little old, but it doesn't really look like it's decided yet.Gamer Junkie 18:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it was Birkin. Aside from the fact that you can distinctly hear flapping{Birkin mad a hell of a lot more noise than that}, there's also the fact that Birkin would have left her a bloody mess, and Monica didn't have a scratch on her. If you ask me, the moth abducted her, and during the struggle, the G-Larva broke out of it's capsule and implanted itself. Monica got free and the larva began to mutate as she neared the turntable. It cuts off her air supply and she is rendered unconcious. Then the chest-bursting thing happens.

But since it's obvious that there will be no agreement, how about we just add that she somehow got implanted by a larva, making no mention of the how.Mealstrom 23:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know the article is a bit old, but I've been thinking. Is it for SURE that there's an embreyo in that metal briefcase? I've had assumed that it had a sample of the G-Virus, but then Birkin found Monica, took the G-Virus sample (As he did with the ones that were stolen) and then left Monica with an embryo implanted. (Just like Ben or Irons)

I'm really not sure about all this, but is it OFFICIAL that there was a G-Larva inside that briefcase? Or is it just assumed? (Alexlayer 01:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not sure it's ever mentioned. All that's known for sure was that she took something from inside the capsule and intended to sell it to the highest bidder. Damn, why were Capcom so vague on details in the Outbreak series? Gamer Junkie 14:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a file in outbreak that mentions the larvae can be carried in a case. And seeing as to how Monica never does change the fluid in side im presuming the thing escaped when she was attacked. What we should also remember is the fact that if you listen you hear a footstep. In his 1st 2nd and 3rd form Birkin still walks slightly humanlike it sounds logic he could have been the assailant. Second there is the place itself, there are doors through which the moth can never fit else it would have probably attacked the survivors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.92.136.195 (talk) 11:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heres mine: Birkin attacks her... but Tube breaks (could have just containes the virus)... But he has infected her with embry anyway.

Wait a minute... As that G-Creature grew far quickly AND was able to produce the chestburster things as soon as it became adult... could Monica have same Blood-type as Birkin? I mean you only become a G if you directly inject urself. if infected by embryo you just die when it comes out. But for you to only become G when injected, someone with same Blood type would have the same expel results. With the addition of the "baby" being able to grow into adult fairly quickly and be able to reproduce (A-Sexualy).

Please help... i need to know if anyone else believes this.OsirisV (talk) 17:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sherry Birkin was William's daughter, and she was infected for a lot longer than Monica. Besides, from RE2, we are led to believe that the embryo only explodes out of someone's chest when the host is genetically incompatible. In compatible hosts, the host itself becomes another G mutant. (Sherry's eyes were red just before she received the G-vaccine.) Now, as to Monica...I had always supposed that Birkin didn't merely attack her, it infected her. The capsule is broken, but unfortunately, we never find out what happens to its contents. Teflon Don (talk) 19:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the vial was far too small to contain a G-Embryo. others include: Developed in Birkins lab, VERRY Important (especialy to kill for it) and risk ones life to keep it safe, i am guessing it contained ANOTHER batch of G.OsirisV (talk) 15:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major copyedit

I spent an hour or two copyediting this article for language, style and sentence structure. However, I also made a major change to it, removing huge amounts of text for two reasons:

The article was massive, and needed editing for brevity.
Much of the information was in the characters' biographies, where is was not appropriate.

The text I removed was not poorly written, irrelevant or stupid - it was just in the wrong place, and impeded the flow of the article where it was. The changes I made can be found here, and I would be happy to see someone more familiar with the storyline expand the plot summary to include all the information I removed. I'd do itself, but having never played the game, I don't believe I could do the job justice.

Thanks in advance. Hope this didn't annoy anyone too much. :) RandyWang 07:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote up all the information regarding the supporting characters last week and, mate, there is NO WAY I'm re-writing all of that. I didn't find it pointless, since minor characters aren't allowed to have their own articles, I thought this would be the one and only place possible to expand as much on their background/history/role as possible. I'm a little annoyed, but whatever, let's just hope somebody else can be bothered taking a few hours to write it all up again. Gamer Junkie 13:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Gamer Junkie - I honestly didn't mean to annoy you. Please keep in mind, I didn't think the information was pointless: it simply needed a move to the plot synopsis, for the reasons I stated above. Basically, character biographies are best suited to be a brief introduction to the character, whereas further explanation of their experiences throughout the game are best kept in the plot synopsis - it allows for the user of the {spoiler} tag, and keeps everything organised. I didn't complete this reorganisation myself, because I simply don't feel qualified to do the storyline justice, given my limited experience with the game.

How about this solution: tomorrow, if I have time, I'd be happy to incorporate this information into the storyline myself. However, I would greatly appreciate your help in going through my work to ensure that I actually got the plot together correctly - you have more experience with the game than I do, so I'd appreciate knowing that someone was checking for errors I made. Does that suit you?

Again, I'm really sorry for the annoyance. RandyWang 14:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll do that if I can spare up some of my day. No need to apologise, everybody has the right to edit this information (so long as it's done properly). Besides, it's not nearly as annoying as when one user deleted my entire page regarding Tyrell Patrick from 'RE: Nemesis' because he decided the character wasn't important enough to deserve an individual page. He left about three paragraphs of info and combined it with one of his pages. That's fucking annoying, especially when you spend hours scrounging up the info. Gamer Junkie 14:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dvd and Hdd

I don't understand what that dvd and hard disk section was about, does that mean you can play outbreak on the computer?

Sony released an Hard Drive for it's PS2 which Outbreak supported. If played on DVD mode, load times were much longer. HDD mode reduced load times.Notedog 23:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Re outbreak a.jpg

Image:Re outbreak a.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why Shutdown

Does anyone know why the Online game got shut down? MJN SEIFER (talk) 23:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canon?

is this game actually canon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenday21 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC) I don't think it's canon, and it has to be deleted from the canon games list of resident evil games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.11.97.226 (talk) 19:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit

If anyone involved in creating this article is still watching and interested, please verify that the content is still accurate post edit. I assumed from reading the development section of the article that the game consists of five scenarios and used this to standardise the references in the gameplay section, which referred to five levels seperately. If this is incorrect and each seperate scenario is in fact five levels itself, please fix. Jaimaster (talk) 05:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. -- Hadal (talk) 07:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resident Evil: Outbreak → Resident Evil Outbreak – Per WP:COMMONNAME: game has no colon in primary ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) and reliable secondary sources ([6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] etc.). Prime Blue (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Source for idTECH3

No mention of the engine in the article and it does need one. -- TVippy 01:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Resident Evil Outbreak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]