Raccoon City’s Studio Is Satisfied With One Happy Customer: Capcom

Raccoon City’s Studio Is Satisfied With One Happy Customer: Capcom

Reviews of Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City were not kind. It opened to terrible reviews, especially for a title releasing under that name and publisher. “Not worth playing” and “a mediocre slog with annoying difficulty spikes” is the appraisal of Kotaku’s Evan Narcisse, in his review.

Eurogamer contacted developer Slant Six for a reaction to the criticism and got a passive-aggressive buck-passing to Capcom:

“We read every review and we try to pull out all the constructive feedback that we can so we can learn a little about what people liked and what they didn’t,” Slant Six’s Mike Kerr told Eurogamer. “Then we look to what our internal goals were and what Capcom asked us to do and I think we accomplished what they wanted to do — we took the Resident Evil franchise in a different direction.”

“A different direction.” I’m sure Capcom and Resident Evil detractors both can agree that’s where Racoon City ended up.

Operation Raccoon City dev: “I think we accomplished what Capcom wanted us to do” [Eurogamer]


  • Hopefully the two month wait for the PC versions fixes all these issues. Although you know a game is bad when they can’t even get the console release right (super bad PC port incoming!)

  • “hi im from Eurogamer & as you’re no doubt aware, your new RE title has been getting terrible reviews (including from us), thoughts?” -Eurogamer
    “F**k you!” – Slant Six

  • When these games are developed by third party groups, they can’t as many corners as possible to make as much $$ from the budget they were given. I sincerely doubt they really care about the game as much as Capcom. Capcom really should have made this themselves.

  • “We read every review and we try to pull out all the constructive feedback that we can so we can learn a little about what people liked and what they didn’t”

    Apparently they only wanted to learn a little about what people like and dislike…

    “Then we look to what our internal goals were…”

    Unfortunately implying that their internal goals were not really related to caring about what people liked…

  • such a pity, wa shoping this would be decent but the hugh armount of reviews panning it has basicly prevented me from buying it

    • It’s a decent game but it requires you to play online with actual people. The AI is horrible and to be honest, the only thing holding this back as a good game

  • IMO, while it definitely isn’t AAA, there’s a lot of great design ideas going on in Operation Racoon City, but if the execution isn’t great then the game leaves a bad taste. Case in Point is Assassin’s Creed. Most reviews were disappointed that it didn’t live up to its full potential and said ACII was really what AC should have been. In the case of ORC, playtesting is their weak point, and I think given a second chance to go in there and polish up the clunky, unresponsive controls, and the admittedly god awful AI, they’ll have themselves a winner.

    And then MAYBE, this brand can carry the action element of the RE franchise while the numbered RE games can feel safer returning to its horror roots.

  • Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this game 3 hours long with an extra 3 hours worth of on disk DLC?

  • ORC is only bad because of two things, the first is the AI (sample scenario would be “Oh look environmental hazard! Lets walk into it!”) the second is difficulty spikes, (seriously it takes at least 2 ammo clips of the most powerful SMG in the game, all shot to the head to take down a hunter, and in almost all the encounters with a hunter, you gotta fight at least three of em at the same time, and mind you, this was on casual difficulty).

    Other than that, if you play with other people, the games a blast to play, its not deserving of all this negativity (unless its towards AI and difficulty spikes) and iv’e enjoyed my time with it. I would give it a 7.5/10, which in my view, makes it a good game.

  • Has no-one picked up that this is just the RESIDENT EVIL version of Left 4 Dead? Capcom was too busy making RE5 to notice that a competitor came up and changed the game (excuse the pun). Survival horror amplified in expectations, and this is why RE5 could not follow the same formula of RE4 and be successful. Capcom want to win? Make your zombies run like L4D and more mobs on screen at one time — Yes it may detract from the story — but if you want to get today’s gamers on the edge of their seat, that’s what you gotta do.

    RE1 – RE3 were great for their time because noone expected zombies to run at 28 Days Later speed. I guess the dead also evolve?

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!