It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Or is it a no-go with The Gamers because it was a Taiwan-exclusive port?
It's really a bad game to begin with. It was never re release not even on the PSN store.
I mean i did sort of enjoy it back in 00. But it's one of the few games i would not put a dime if it was re released.
I think that Capcom agrees with me, the game is just bad and it would sell even worst than in 00
avatar
Wild.Dog: It's really a bad game to begin with. It was never re release not even on the PSN store.
I mean i did sort of enjoy it back in 00. But it's one of the few games i would not put a dime if it was re released.
I think that Capcom agrees with me, the game is just bad and it would sell even worst than in 00
I do remember Resident Evil Zero did give a shoutout to Resident Evil: Survivor by name dropping Sheena Island during the intro.
So, unless Capcom has stated otherwise since 2002 it at least seems to be canon?

Never played Survivor myself and only every watched a Longplay ages ago. So, please humour me: Why is the game so bad?
avatar
Wild.Dog: It's really a bad game to begin with. It was never re release not even on the PSN store.
I mean i did sort of enjoy it back in 00. But it's one of the few games i would not put a dime if it was re released.
I think that Capcom agrees with me, the game is just bad and it would sell even worst than in 00
avatar
Externica: I do remember Resident Evil Zero did give a shoutout to Resident Evil: Survivor by name dropping Sheena Island during the intro.
So, unless Capcom has stated otherwise since 2002 it at least seems to be canon?

Never played Survivor myself and only every watched a Longplay ages ago. So, please humour me: Why is the game so bad?
Back in 00, arcades were still a thing, there were many games that use handguns, rifles or other type of gun. Time Crisis 1 and 2. Silent Scope series, etc.
So when Capcom announced Survivor, everyone was expecting it to be like that. On rail shooter. The PSX already had games like time crisis, there was the guncon and even other light guns even some had pedals.

What we got? A first person shooter, that reused assets from Resident Evil 1 and 2, it was not on rail but you had to walk and it was clumsy because it was the same tank controls you had in RE1-3 but now in first person...
Worst the US version did not support lightgun..
Truly a cash grab for a console that was at the end of it's life cycle.


Survivors series are mostly bad games, Chronicles series on the other hand are what the survivor should have been from the start.
Post edited June 30, 2024 by Wild.Dog
I've seen the port of Survivor. It requires so much work.... It's such a broken mess. It's literally unplayable.

It would have to be redone from the ground pretty much.
avatar
Externica: I do remember Resident Evil Zero did give a shoutout to Resident Evil: Survivor by name dropping Sheena Island during the intro.
So, unless Capcom has stated otherwise since 2002 it at least seems to be canon?

Never played Survivor myself and only every watched a Longplay ages ago. So, please humour me: Why is the game so bad?
avatar
Wild.Dog: Back in 00, arcades were still a thing, there were many games that use handguns, rifles or other type of gun. Time Crisis 1 and 2. Silent Scope series, etc.
So when Capcom announced Survivor, everyone was expecting it to be like that. On rail shooter. The PSX already had games like time crisis, there was the guncon and even other light guns even some had pedals.

What we got? A first person shooter, that reused assets from Resident Evil 1 and 2, it was not on rail but you had to walk and it was clumsy because it was the same tank controls you had in RE1-3 but now in first person...
Worst the US version did not support lightgun..
Truly a cash grab for a console that was at the end of it's life cycle.

Survivors series are mostly bad games, Chronicles series on the other hand are what the survivor should have been from the start.
Thanks. So what I get is the controls were bad. That really is something that can kill the fun out of any game. Kinda reminds me of the Wii port for Obscure 2. Not sure if comparable, though.
I used to hate Survivor when it was first released and only beat it once. It wasn't until Aydan Watkins' mod of this game making it with the classic tank controls and fixed camera that got me to appreciate this game more and have beat it a few more times within the last year. I mean it has a pretty good dark story, good music and is just fun to play IMO. It's definitely no where the near the quality of RE1-CV but still like I said, just a little fun RE to play and beat in like an hour or less. That said, I'd actually be interested in seeing GOG take this on.
I don't care what all the haters are saying! I want Survivor to be fixed and re-released. If i was a modder i would fix it myself.

And to reply the question above! Yes! Survivor is canon and so is dead aim and umbrella corps.
Post edited July 06, 2024 by MasterDarkseid
avatar
Wild.Dog: It's really a bad game to begin with. It was never re release not even on the PSN store.
I mean i did sort of enjoy it back in 00. But it's one of the few games i would not put a dime if it was re released.
I think that Capcom agrees with me, the game is just bad and it would sell even worst than in 00
To be fair I don't think it was a bad game, they messed up selling it in the US. As a light gun game similar to Time Crisis it was a blast. When I think of all the people trying to play it with a Dual Shock because Capcom USA didn't want to advertise another companies peripheral I get upset. I loved it as I somehow knew it was a Guncon game.

That said I don't see it working on PC unless there's a PC / CRT gun out there that I'm not aware of.
avatar
Externica: I do remember Resident Evil Zero did give a shoutout to Resident Evil: Survivor by name dropping Sheena Island during the intro.
So, unless Capcom has stated otherwise since 2002 it at least seems to be canon?

Never played Survivor myself and only every watched a Longplay ages ago. So, please humour me: Why is the game so bad?
avatar
Wild.Dog: Back in 00, arcades were still a thing, there were many games that use handguns, rifles or other type of gun. Time Crisis 1 and 2. Silent Scope series, etc.
So when Capcom announced Survivor, everyone was expecting it to be like that. On rail shooter. The PSX already had games like time crisis, there was the guncon and even other light guns even some had pedals.

What we got? A first person shooter, that reused assets from Resident Evil 1 and 2, it was not on rail but you had to walk and it was clumsy because it was the same tank controls you had in RE1-3 but now in first person...
Worst the US version did not support lightgun..
Truly a cash grab for a console that was at the end of it's life cycle.

Survivors series are mostly bad games, Chronicles series on the other hand are what the survivor should have been from the start.
It did use the Guncon, I played it heavily in the US. They just didn't write it on the box. I recall the US team had an issue with advertising a Namco device but I could be wrong.
Post edited July 08, 2024 by GuyDaigochi
avatar
Wild.Dog: It's really a bad game to begin with. It was never re release not even on the PSN store.
I mean i did sort of enjoy it back in 00. But it's one of the few games i would not put a dime if it was re released.
I think that Capcom agrees with me, the game is just bad and it would sell even worst than in 00
avatar
GuyDaigochi: To be fair I don't think it was a bad game, they messed up selling it in the US. As a light gun game similar to Time Crisis it was a blast. When I think of all the people trying to play it with a Dual Shock because Capcom USA didn't want to advertise another companies peripheral I get upset. I loved it as I somehow knew it was a Guncon game.

That said I don't see it working on PC unless there's a PC / CRT gun out there that I'm not aware of.
avatar
Wild.Dog: Back in 00, arcades were still a thing, there were many games that use handguns, rifles or other type of gun. Time Crisis 1 and 2. Silent Scope series, etc.
So when Capcom announced Survivor, everyone was expecting it to be like that. On rail shooter. The PSX already had games like time crisis, there was the guncon and even other light guns even some had pedals.

What we got? A first person shooter, that reused assets from Resident Evil 1 and 2, it was not on rail but you had to walk and it was clumsy because it was the same tank controls you had in RE1-3 but now in first person...
Worst the US version did not support lightgun..
Truly a cash grab for a console that was at the end of it's life cycle.

Survivors series are mostly bad games, Chronicles series on the other hand are what the survivor should have been from the start.
avatar
GuyDaigochi: It did use the Guncon, I played it heavily in the US. They just didn't write it on the box. I recall the US team had an issue with advertising a Namco device but I could be wrong.
The US version of Survivor for the PSX, doesn't support guncon. It was a disappointment. I'm not aware of any patch of the US version of survivor that enables guncon.
In the end it was a bad game that could be enjoy if you are fan of reisdent evil.

Hell i did enjoy MK Special forces and it was a bigger shiaat than survivor.
I hope not. It would be the biggest waste of time. They should instead bring back Dino Crisis 1 and 2.
avatar
Jimona: Or is it a no-go with The Gamers because it was a Taiwan-exclusive port?
I don't think so.

I think Capcom with GOG should have made a port for RE1: Director's Cut instead of this version.
GOG doesn't do any ports.
Strange, I played it with the guncon in the USA and as a kid I doubt I imported the game. Perhaps I did though.

I do know with the guncon it was very fun but very short also. Too long to play in segments but too short the need save files.