Resident Evil 5 Demo Breaks Xbox Download Record

The Xbox 360 demo for Resident Evil 5 was downloaded 1.8 million times in the week following its January 26 release in Europe and North America, setting a new record. In fact, Microsoft says the demo surpassed 1.3 million downloads in its first three days.

And while Microsoft merely referred to Resident Evil 5 as being "among the top demo launches on the service," the previous known record holder, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, took eight days for its demo to reach a million Xbox Live downloads.

During those initial three days, the free zombie-shooting demo was restricted to Xbox Live Gold members. After January 29, it was made available to all Xbox Live members, with the PlayStation 3 demo available today via the PlayStation Store.

The strong North American and European performance follows that of the earlier Japanese demo, which was downloaded by 53% of Xbox Live Gold members in Japan.

Developed by Capcom, Resident Evil 5 hits PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 on March 13.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    February 2, 2009 2:03 PM

    Too bad the controls are such a polarizing factor. Plenty of those 1.3 million downloaders have probably been completely put off from buying it.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:07 PM

      We'll see. This will be a good indication of whether trailers sell more games than demos as was the claim a while back.

      • reply
        February 2, 2009 2:15 PM

        The trailer had me interested but the demo controls turned me away. I just feel the game should allow you to move AND shoot, even if your accuracy is affected.

        • reply
          February 2, 2009 2:24 PM

          A video game character should not be more physically limited than I am in real life.

          • reply
            February 2, 2009 2:55 PM

            so all games should let you be able to bend your legs behind your head?

            • reply
              February 2, 2009 3:46 PM

              Ok maybe I should say I don't like it when video games don't let me perform 'basic' movements that I can accomplish in real life.

              And, as another comment said, as a trained professional (as depicted in the game), I ought to be able to move and shoot at the same time, which is something I can do as a non-trained professional in real life. I know firing a gun isn't anything like as it is depicted in movies.

              • reply
                February 2, 2009 4:06 PM

                Training has nothing to do with it. Yeah, cops *can* move and shoot at the same time and so can you, but they don't very often because it's next to impossible to hit a moving target that way. The restriction is in place so that you don't waste all of your ammo running around shooting your gun off trying to hit something that you're not going to. I don't care how good your coordination is, it's just not going to happen.

          • reply
            February 2, 2009 3:27 PM

            I'd like to see you try and hit a moving target with a handgun while you're also moving in real life. I'd be impressed if you didn't manage to kill yourself in the process. Unlike the action movies, it isn't possible to run around like a maniac shooting at things from the hit and expect to hit something.

            • reply
              February 2, 2009 3:35 PM

              I'm sure cops can walk and shoot without a problem. It's the running and shooting which is another thing.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:13 PM

      Really? I feel like the overall response is overwhelmingly positive

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:13 PM

      I don't mind the controls at all. I like not being able to move and shoot. Makes me think and choose my targets wisely.

      • reply
        February 2, 2009 4:33 PM

        Makes me feel limited. I understand design considerations in games, but making a game harder like this is just bad IMO. Maybe it flies in other markets.

        • reply
          February 2, 2009 4:47 PM

          What's harder about it? I think it's easier to target specific enemies and even body parts when not moving. It's like you are always using a sniper rifle, and since ammo preservation sometimes is a factor in these games, almost every shot counts. They could have done it gears style where aiming really slows you down isntead of stopping you completely, but both systems are effectively doing the same exact thing.

          It's still not an arcade shooter.

          • reply
            February 2, 2009 5:23 PM

            No, in Gears I could change my aim without going out of that stance.

            • reply
              February 2, 2009 5:37 PM

              Gears is a bad comparison because it's an arcade cover shooter, but it also is a good comparison in some ways.

              When you are behind cover in Gears and aiming with the left trigger, you aren't moving, you are stationary like when aiming in RE4+5. And most of the combat is like this, because it's a cover shooter. No one seems to complain that you can't move that concrete pillar with you in a battle with the enemy.

              When you are out in the open and holding left trigger to aim, you are slowed a lot and are basically an open target to everything, on harder difficulties or in MP you can be taken down almost instantly. In RE4+5 you are always out in the open and aiming stops you and makes you a target.

              It the way the games are designed. RE4+5 has a bit more ammo preservation and scarce supply, whereas in Gears ammo is plentiful and abundant.

              • reply
                February 2, 2009 5:44 PM

                As someone familiar with most of the games in the Resident Evil series, I will gladly admit the controls suck. They always sucked until RE4. Then they worked.

                The game of RE4 itself still had problems, such as having to pause the game to go into the inventory to use a grenade, unpause, throw it, pause again, pick weapon, unpause. This was the most idiotic design choice I've ever seen in a video game. Why can't you cycle weapons or grenades? Why does the action pause at all when using the inventory in a survival horror title?

                Blah! Not everything is fixed or perfect, but this isn't a run & gun shooter, never has been. And from my experience, while stopping to shoot leaves you more vulnerable, it also helps when you are using a freaking gamepad to aim. On the PC you can be running at HL2 sprint speeds and stlll pull of a headshot now and then. Analog sticks just aren't that accurate.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:14 PM

      it's difficult to tell on the internet. people who write in comments are not representative

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:18 PM

      I don't know, it's just like Resident Evil 4, and that sold just fine. In fact, it's improved over Resident Evil 4 in that you can actually strafe.

      • reply
        February 2, 2009 2:31 PM

        Not by much. I think just because it's close to RE4's control scheme makes it feel dated. You cannot even walk while shooting. That is a big problem, Dead Space had better controls.

        • reply
          February 2, 2009 2:39 PM

          People were complaining that it felt dates in Resident Evil 4, to begin with.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:25 PM

      I hadn't played any of them and I will definitely not be buying it. I'm not going to buy a game that I have to fight with the controls to play. Sure, it might not be "that bad", but I have plenty of other ways to spend 60 bucks that will give me more enjoyment.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 2:53 PM

      The controls felt better than a hell of a lot of other third person games I've played. The only problem I had, was the quick turn around, which I only ever seemed to be able to press when I didn't want to..

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 3:50 PM

      It wasn't just the controls that annoyed me but the rather limited peripheral view that you have - when surrounded by lunatics on all sides, it makes surviving considerably more difficult than it arguably should be.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 4:26 PM

      I hated the controls as well. It felt like I was looking at a game from 2009 but playing a game from 1999. Just way too cumbersome.

      • reply
        February 2, 2009 5:00 PM

        I love the controls, mind you. I was just pointing out that so many people seem to dislike them.

        The problem here really isn't the controls but that people EXPECT to be able to strafe while shooting in games with guns. Racing games that don't allow you to shoot missiles at the leader aren't necessarily worse because you're missing that dynamic.

    • reply
      February 2, 2009 5:42 PM

      I really tried to like the controls. I knew about all the drama from all the RE4 threads and such. So I went at the demo prepared to give it a fair shot. Well, it just doesn't work out well for me. Maybe coming from a COD4 marathon into this demo might have been bad but still. Controls should be this difficult for a reason, and RE5 doesn't give me a reason like DMC4 did. I havent finished either of the two parts that are included, so i will keep trying to I at least beat those, then see where I stand.

      But realistically speaking, it's unfortunate that they are releasing this so close to Streetfighter 4, because thats where my $80 are going.

    • reply
      February 3, 2009 12:50 AM

      After seeing how the controls haven't been improved, I'm now going to "wait and see" on this one -- even though I'm a HUGE horror fan.

Hello, Meet Lola