Capcom Is Considering a Resident Evil Crossover Where the Remakes and New Games Intersect

Capcom might be doing something much bigger with Resident Evil than remaking the games we already love. The people running the franchise are talking about what happens when those remakes catch up with the newer games, and the word floating around is crossover.

I think we should start by giving Capcom a hand, because what they are doing with the Resident Evil franchise is kind of a masterclass. They have already been laying connections between the remakes and the newer games, and that raises a question I am far more interested in than which number gets announced next. Are we replaying the past because Capcom wants to sell it again, or because something in the past is going to matter in the future? I never would have thought they could put a Marvel MCU style big crossover feel on this series, but that is exactly what they are talking about and teasing. There are two very different reasons to go back to Raccoon City, and if Capcom handles this properly, a familiar game could leave us wondering what comes next all over again.

A Resident Evil executive producer says the remakes and new games could intersect

Here is where this is coming from. Resident Evil executive producers discussed the series in a Japanese publication celebrating its 30th anniversary. According to the translated comments reported by IP First and other outlets, the producer describes two approaches: new entries continue the story, while remakes let players experience its earlier events. That makes sense, and it is what Capcom has been doing. I do want to stress that these comments were translated, so there could be errors in them. I simply do not know.

The producer says Capcom is considering what happens when those two approaches catch up with each other and intersect, or, dare I say it again, cross over. He points to connections involving Umbrella, Spencer and Raccoon City as preparation for a crossover. My mind is blown, because I do not even know what that would mean or look like.

Nothing has been announced, and no remake Leon is meeting older Leon

Crossover is the word everybody is getting fired up about right now, but I want to be careful about what we put underneath it. Capcom has not announced a game where remake Leon meets older Leon and they compare hair products. We do not have evidence of time travel, separate universes colliding, or every surviving character assembling in front of a burning Umbrella logo. What we have are comments about connecting the franchise's past with the ongoing story, and the exact form of that connection remains unclear.

Honestly, I think the simpler possibility could be far more interesting. Imagine playing a remake and discovering that something you previously treated as background information now has consequences in a future game. It could be a research project, a missing person, or something the characters thought they destroyed. Those old adventures have their own beginning and ending, but now you would understand why one part of that world has not stopped causing problems for another. That could give these remakes a purpose beyond better lighting and missing the same shot in higher resolution.

Resident Evil Veronica could give Claire, Chris and Wesker more weight

There is already a useful example in what Capcom has said about Resident Evil Veronica. That game is officially scheduled for 2027. Capcom describes it as a reimagining of Code Veronica using the RE Engine, with more release details still to come. The producer has explained that revisiting these older games lets the team adjust connections to the broader lore established since their original releases, and that applies to Veronica too.

That is important because Code Veronica has people and relationships worth returning to: Claire, Chris and Wesker. There is so much there beyond giving an old location nicer textures. My interest is in what a new version could do with those characters now that Capcom knows how much of the story came after them. You could give an interaction more weight. You could make a motivation much clearer. You could plant something that feels ordinary during this adventure and becomes uncomfortable later.

But there is also a line I do not want them to cross. "Please do not turn every old mystery into setup for a game that won't release for 6 years." Veronica needs to be a satisfying game on its own. If I finish it and feel like I just paid for an extremely elaborate trailer, that is going to be a problem.

The crossover idea has to reward attention without exhausting players

I think that is the real challenge with this whole crossover idea. Connections are exciting when they reward attention. They get exhausting when understanding the current story requires remembering a document you picked up during a remake three consoles ago. "I love Resident Evil lore. I also occasionally forget why I walked into my own kitchen." So Capcom has to give me a fighting chance to stay on point and keep up with everything going on.

Resident Evil 7 shows why new games still need room to shock us

The newer games have already shown that the series can introduce a different kind of experience while keeping ties to its history. Resident Evil 7 put the fear much closer to your face. It made the situation feel smaller, more personal and very claustrophobic. You were not initially approaching that house as somebody who had spent years professionally dealing with biological disasters, and that matters. Capcom's own explanation of the game's direction emphasised responding to fans who missed the fear of the earlier entries, and they knocked it out of the park.

So when I hear about stronger connections between old and new, I am hoping Capcom preserves that ability to shock and surprise us. A new protagonist should not need to be somebody's secret relative to justify being there. A new outbreak should have its own victims, its own mistakes and its own atmosphere. History can explain why the danger reached them without taking over the entire story.

That is where the remakes could become especially useful. Let the remake show us how a terrible idea started, then let a future game show what happened after somebody assumed the problem was buried. You would be giving players two perspectives on the same disaster, separated by years. It sounds like a natural fit for a franchise built around experiments escaping the people who thought they had control.

It also creates an opportunity with the returning characters. In a remake, we can experience them before all the history piles up. In a newer game, we can see what surviving did to them. The payoff does not have to be another familiar entrance. It could be a decision they now make differently because we understood what happened last time.

Dusk Golem says Resident Evil 5 and 6 remakes are not currently in development

This is where Resident Evil 5 and 6 enter the conversation. People hear that the remakes will eventually catch up, and everybody decides those two games must already be in development. I get it, they are obvious subjects for discussion. But a broad plan for the franchise does not confirm that every individual project fits inside it.

Insider Dusk Golem has pushed back on those claims, saying that to his knowledge the RE5 and RE6 remakes are not currently in development and will not release within the next five years. That is an insider claim, not Capcom's announced schedule, though he is a good insider. So I am not treating it as a guaranteed countdown, but I am definitely paying attention. I also do not want the interesting part of the producer's comments buried underneath an argument about whether we are punching a boulder again in 2029.

If Resident Evil 5 eventually gets remade, there are worthwhile discussions to have. Personally, I would want the partnership to remain central. Cooperative play gives the game its own appeal, but I would also like more situations where having somebody beside you does not automatically make you comfortable. RE6 is a whole different conversation. In my opinion, Capcom would need to decide what it wants that remake to achieve before worrying about how faithfully it reproduces every enormous sequence. There are characters and ideas I would not mind going back to, but improving the presentation alone is not going to address why parts of that game felt overwhelming.

A Resident Evil crossover is risky, but I am in if it is built carefully

Neither of those projects needs to carry this entire crossover idea by itself. Capcom can build connections through different games without forcing one remake to be the explainer for everything. If the crossover idea is true, it is very risky. The bigger story should make the moments meaningful.

So let the remakes stand on their own. Let the newer games keep introducing unfamiliar situations. Keep winning, Capcom, and use connections carefully enough that returning players recognise something worrying before the characters do. This is fun, and it is cool. If that is the kind of crossover Capcom is building, I am in, because revisiting the past could actually make the future less predictable.

Do you want the remakes feeding into future Resident Evil stories, or would you prefer they stay focused on recreating their own adventures, and which unfinished thread would you want Capcom to finally resolve?