Talk:Resident Evil: Revelations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleResident Evil: Revelations has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
November 26, 2014Good article nomineeListed


Renteria: Okay Hunk appears to be the main antagonist of this game, with a teaser trailer showing him being interrogated by Jill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Where is this trailer? I haven't seen it. (talk) 01:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

main series or portable?[edit]

i think this game should be in category portable, since is being launched for the 3DS and as the article says "it takes place between RE4 and RE5" so it probably won't be part of the main serie. (talk) 15:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I think we should re-define the difference between canon and non-canon. These "portable" titles were mostly low-cost and non-canon games based on Resident Evil and Resident Evil 3: Nemesis - they were just different variations of the two games adapted and shortened for mobile usage. This is also why the Resident Evil 4 mobile versions lacked certain portions. Resident Evil: Revelations on the other hand, is a big-budget production for a console-system, and appears to be designed as a canonical addition to the series - hell, they even designed a plot for it ("The Missions", in comparison, just had Jill running around the police department completing linear objectives)!-- OsirisV (talk) 17:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Who wrote Q4 for Australia?[edit]

How can anyone honestly believe that when the other release dates are around January-February? Remove it at once, because I know it's ridiculous, and at least write Q1 or a similar time to Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

That's it, I know this is wrong. It isn't even cited, so I'm assuming its change to Q1 2012 like the rest of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, the Nintendo 3DS eshop officially confirmed Australian release of 27th January, 2012. This question is closed now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, looks like Nintendo Australia just loves releasing games a week after Europe. 2nd February 2012 it is now. Thanks for changing that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

In-game locations[edit]

I've been looking through trailers and discussions. I believe that the port town and snowy mountain settings in the game would be the ruins of the city Terragrigia and Il Veltro's mountain hideout in Valkoinen Mökki, Finland respectively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcldragon (talkcontribs) 17:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

No, Terragrigia is not actually a level in the game, the only levels to occur in that place are flashback levels relating to Parker and Jessica's escape from the Terrigrigia headquaters of BSAA during the original incident. The port town and mountain levels are all related to the mountain hideout. Colliric (talk) 23:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

You can also go into the sister ship of Queen Zenobia and Queen Semiramis, the Queen Dido. She sank right next to Terragrigia as the city was destroyed (Episode 12: The Queen Is Dead).-- OsirisV (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Resident Evil; Revelaitons[edit]

Can someone please make "Resident Evil: Revelaitons" redirect here?

Why? Who's going to use that spelling?-- OsirisV (talk) 21:20, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Capcom :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:01, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Japanese Voice Cast[edit]

Does anybody have any idea on which characters the Japanese voice actors portrayed? The closing credits listed them, but it didn't specify their parts.

According to the IMDb, Atsuko Yuya is Jill, Hiroki Tōchi is Chris, Mitsuru Miyamoto is Parker, Nana Mizuki is Jessica, and Unshō Ishizuka is Clive. The rest of the actors don't have their characters listed. Bluerules (talk) 22:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I already told you on the Resident Evil Wiki - IMDb isn't a reliable source. For one thing it kept changing the plot for the Simpsons movie between "the simpsons save Springfield" and "Marge gets pregnant".-- OsirisV (talk) 00:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Nintendo Gazette stated that Hiroki Tochi would play Chris and Atsuko Yuya would play Jill, which is probably where the IMDb got their info from. But like I said before, I'm not here to argue how valid the IMDb's information is, I'm trying to figure out who the Japanese actors played. Bluerules (talk) 16:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
The game's credits lists the voice actors' names (including Yuya), but does not state who plays who.-- OsirisV (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Right. But I do believe IMDb's information considering how Yuya, Tōchi, Miyamoto, and Mizuki recieved the highest billing. It would make sense for them to be playing the game's most important characters. Do you agree with what the IMDb says on Revelation's cast? Bluerules (talk) 02:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Not a survival horror[edit]

The series began as a survival horror series, but it's now, with this game included, a shooter series with a horror atmosphere. Survival horror is not just any game that has monsters in it. A major focus of this game is the shooting and killing of every enemy you see, and that's not what you do in survival horrors. Shooter and Survival Horror do not mix; either a game is primarily about shooting enemies or it's primarily about puzzle-solving and collecting items and keys. In this case, it's primarily about shooting enemies. A game like Painkiller wouldn't be considered Survival Horror, so why would this be?

People always confuse Horror with the sub-genre Survival Horror and include everything that has any hint of a horror theme as a Survival Horror regardless of what the gameplay is like. This happens with the FPS genre too, like how people think Portal and Gears of War are FPS games

  • Two points. First, it does not matter what genre you or I think the games falls under: whatever genre the games are listed under in reliable third-party sources is the genre the games will be listed under here. That's just the way wikipedia works, "verifiability, not truth." Since genre is a subjective classification, there is no one "right" way to classify some games. Second, I don't think anyone would argue that the recent Resident Evil games play the same as the early Resident Evil or Silent Hill games. Genres can evolve though. If reliable sources still consider the Resident Evil games survival horror games, it just means the genre has broadened or changed over time. Indrian (talk) 18:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Indrian totally beat me to the punch. Much like he said: Go by what third party, reliable sources are saying. If they call it survivor horror, then so should we. Sergecross73 msg me 18:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Unless the sources are blatently wrong, we go with what sources call it. The distinctions you're trying to make between survivor horror and horror and shooter are more along the lines of original research. If sources are calling the game survivor horror, then it is survivor horror. --MASEM (t) 19:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Led Zeppelin can call itself a Jazz-Funk Techno band, but they're still a rock band as that's what their music falls under. Same thing applies here. It's not a survival horror game — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Again, you have only shown your own view; we need sources to support a change. If Led Zeppelin calls themselves 'Jazz-Funk Techno', when we'll accept them as being, at least to an extent, a Jazz-Funk Techno band. Survival Horror doesn't have any particular restrictions to it - it just has to be a horror-themed Action/Adventure game.-- OsirisV (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
"Survival Horror doesn't have any particular restrictions to it - it just has to be a horror-themed Action/Adventure game" <- There's even a damn article on Wikipedia for it that gives a list of parameters a survival horror game has to meet. One of the most important is a lack of emphasis on combat. This game is all about combat. It's a shooter.
Not to mention unlike the Led Zeppelin example other reliable sources (unconnected to Capcom) have used the term. If Campcom used the term and no one else used it there may have potentially been a case not to use it but since other sources have used the term there is no case. To be blunt several reiable sources calling this or any game game a certain genre easily trumps a personal opinion of a single Wikipedia user who thinks it is not.--
Unfortunatly Wikipedia itself it not a reliable source so you can't use a Wikipedia article to go against what a reliable source says especially since that article does not even even mention the game in question. To make any change you will need at the very least to find a reliable source that directly states that this game in not survivor horror.-- (talk) 01:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Capcom calls it Survival Horror because they want to pretend the game is going back to its original Resident Evil roots, which it really didn't. Other sources have to then call it Survival Horror because Capcom did, though technically this game isn't a survival horror game if you look at the gameplay. Calling this Survival Horror is like calling Mario Kart a platformer or Halo Wars a first-person shooter. Just because the main series was one thing, doesn't mean every game after is automatically that same genre. (talk) 02:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

The big problem with that analogy is that reliable sources did not call Mario kart as a platformer or Halo wars a FPS but have called this game a survivor horror game. Also why there are some differences between this game and the earlier games (increased combat etc) I don`t see them being anywhere near as large as the other two games mentioned. To be clear We are not using Survivor horror as a genre simply because the other games in the series were part of that genre (a quick look at much more different Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles and Resident Evil Survivor etc prove that we are not in the habit of doing that) but because reliable sources (which article content needs to be based on) have said this game is part of that same genre.-- (talk) 01:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Its important!![edit]

Sorry for my english but I thought its important, please write about this here in the main article!

Внешность Джилл Валентайн

Если сравнивать внешность Джилл с пятой частью, то заметны сильные изменения черт лица: так, если ранее использовалась модель головы из римейка первой игры, то на этот раз её изменили на принципиально новую. Однако, некоторые поклонники игры были недовольны этим фактом и много писали об этом на официальном форуме Capcom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jana (talkcontribs) 13:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Resident Evil: Revelations/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 21:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll take this one. Expect input in a day or two. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


Generally, a very good article. There are a few minor points that I noticed.

  • "In addition to the single-player campaign, Resident Evil: Revelations offers an action-oriented mode, called Raid Mode, where one or two players may fight their way through a selection of altered scenarios from the single-player campaign.[4]" - What kind of action-oriented mode? I think it should be made clear from the outset whether it's specifically single-player and multi-player.
Clarified with "...a more action-oriented mode, called Raid Mode, where...". I think it is not appropriate to call it multiplayer mode or co-operative mode because it can also be played by one player. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Ref 7, maybe you could fill it out as fully as possible without going into specific in-game quotes, with the full release date and publisher.
Added publisher and full release date. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
  • "The game also supports a StreetPass functionality that allows different players to exchange items for use in the game.[14]" - If possible, maybe this sentence could be incorporated into the gameplay section, but I leave that up to your discretion.
Moved it to the gameplay section. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Is there a way of incorporating the sales data into the reception section, as with other video game articles? If not, then I don't have any real objections for it being left there. As to the HD sales, that can remain in the HD version's section.
In my opinion, sales fit better into a release section (if the article has one) because 99% of the reception section is dedicated to the critical response. Also, incorporating the sales data into the reception section would reduce the marketing and release section to almost one ugly paragraph. If it is really an issue, I can rename the reception section to "Critical reception". --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Refs 1-4, maybe you could give a full release date for the book. I'm sure it can be found on an Amazon site or something.
Added full release date. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Refs in general; this is optional, but maybe you could change the author names to a last/first configuration.
Done. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

That's everything. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:27, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in reviewing this article, really appreciated. I think I have addressed all the issues you brought up. Please let me know if there is anything else that needs to be fixed. Cheers. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I can't see anything else wrong with this article that stops it from being a GA. And as to the sales data, it wasn't that big an issue, and can stay as it is. This... is... a... Pass. Well done with getting this article into its current shape. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:04, 26 November 2014 (UTC)