View Full Version : Capcom Joke (slightly risqué)
(@mods - if it's too much, just delete the topic)
I'm not sure if this is real or not, but from responses it seems to be legit.
The story goes a Resi 5 player who casually just so happened to be zooming onto the behind of Jill Valentine's Battle Suit figure found a surprise. It turns out the battlesuit is apparently very very revealing.
The info then found it's way onto the net.
I've only just heard about this now when I was browsing another games forum. I am of course far to mature to be zooming in on action figures, also I don't have the Jill Valentine figure so I don't know if it's true.
Does Capcom even know about this?
Ahhhh, so that's why the game is rated 18 :p Damn Capcom, I hope it's not true. Jill sandwi- Okay, okay.
charmed699
26-03-09, 21:43
Ah!Ah! Some people must have lots of time to spend hours looking for things like this!
Story Spoilers! Alert ! Alert!
It would be pretty weird but I swear it's one of those full suits that mechanics wear so nothing to see. Her suit reminds me a lot of the one Samus wears when she is not wearing the combat suit. :p
I hope the poor girl heals quickly anyway from that horrible "fashion accessory" she was given.
thezombiemessia
26-03-09, 21:51
All I'm finding on the net is people asking if it's true, or people asking if anybody else can see it.
I haven't unlocked that particular figure yet, and nobody is posting pictures...so I can't be certain if it's true or not.
"casually just so happened to be zooming onto the behind of Jill Valentine's Battle Suit figure"
lol @ casually
some sexually frustrated twerp is clearly just seeing things!
Dante Must Die
26-03-09, 22:21
Hmm...I need to unlock this figure for myself.:whip:
mmmm...Jill sandwiches. :D :D :D
Carbonox_Ratchet
26-03-09, 22:33
There's a thread over on the IGN forum dedicated to this very issue. They can safely say that it's there alright.
Reminds me of the Gloria debacle when she was revealed in Devil May Cry 4.
Dante Must Die
26-03-09, 22:37
There's a thread over on the IGN forum dedicated to this very issue. They can safely say that it's there alright.
Reminds me of the Gloria debacle when she was revealed in Devil May Cry 4.
You gotta love Capcom for thier fan-service. :D :D
All I'm finding on the net is people asking if it's true, or people asking if anybody else can see it.
I haven't unlocked that particular figure yet, and nobody is posting pictures...so I can't be certain if it's true or not.
Yeah there's a lot of people asking about it, I first heard about it on Gfaqs and there was a picture.
It's not a HQ pic but it does look like her V.
I think the BBFC missed it. Time to drop them a line folks!:p
Triple Seven
27-03-09, 16:11
Shouldn't be a big deal.
some sexually frustrated twerp is clearly just seeing things!
I think I am talking for the sexually frustrated twerps (someday, brothers, we will be in charge :)) when I say: let's hope the next RE game will have an unlockable HENTAI-mode then! :D
video games is for playing, girls in a club is for looking
i prefer to keep the two seperate
Mokkori Man
27-03-09, 21:20
Psst don't talk too loud! Otherwise they are going to remove it from the game before I could buy and play it :D (especially in Germany where gaming is a crime :()!
Now all we need is Barry as a playable character ;)! Poor Barry... FINALLY he could get a Jill Sandwich :D!
It's nothing to worry about, it's only a big deal for the gaming population that casually zooms in on static models that happen to be women.
Ghidorah221
27-03-09, 22:27
video games is for playing, girls in a club is for looking
i prefer to keep the two seperate
Speak for yourself James! Jill Valentine made Resident Evil for me!
i swear you guys are mad, i've looked at the figure and its just the fabric of her cat suit.
Dante Must Die
28-03-09, 01:44
The power of Jill sandwiches is strong in this thread. :D
Capcom know what they're doing. :o
There are no sandwiches, you're all just perverts, it's all your imagination. It's her suit.
There are no sandwiches, you're all just perverts, it's all your imagination. It's her suit.
There's nothing left to the imagination.
I need to unlock this figure soon to cast my critical evaluation on it.
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 15:42
i swear you guys are mad, i've looked at the figure and its just the fabric of her cat suit.
Sorry to disappoint you folks, but this really is the truth of the matter. It is just some lazy textures and shading that are badly disjointed and broken up and the 'two lines' that people think are so suggestive are little more than seams on the suit. The whole reason pictures have not been posted is probably due to the fact people are trying to make something of nothing.
If you look it as aught more, you either need to find yourself a girl or have your head examined.;)
Sorry to disappoint you folks, but this really is the truth of the matter. It is just some lazy textures and shading that are badly disjointed and broken up and the 'two lines' that people think are so suggestive are little more than seams on the suit.
Nope, as verified by myself, it is in fact what it's rumoured to be. It's not "suggestive seams", its a fully detailed graphic texture, quite clearly viewable on a HDTV.
If you look it as aught more, you either need to find yourself a girl or have your head examined.;)Or perhaps have your eyes tested. Or buy a HDTV.
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 16:39
Nope, as verified by myself, it is in fact what it's rumoured to be. It's not "suggestive seams", its a fully detailed graphic, quite clearly viewable on a HDTV.
Then post a fully detailed image or video to prove this so-called claim. Honestly, you verifying that it is is about as useful as myself verifying that it is not. :thumb:
Then post a fully detailed image or video to prove this so-called claim. Honestly, you verifying that it is is about as useful as myself verifying that it is not. :thumb:
Image or video, why? We can all just look on the figure, no? Either way proves nothing, and we aren't allowed to even write the words let alone post images (due to the forum rules).
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 17:03
As proof and evidence for others to judge whether there is anything even remotely suggestible about it. Some here do not have the game, so a detailed image would do you no harm if it is true as you claim. ;) It seems odd that people claim its validity yet do not provide a picture as evidence, would you not agree?
Heh, I examined the figure after the thread arose on IGN and was of the same opinion as many there: it is naught but disjointed texturing and the design of her suit. :rolleyes:
Some here do not have the game
Aww boo hoo for them. :p
so a detailed image would do you no harm if it is true as you claim.I never claimed it was true!:eek:
It seems odd that people claim its validity yet do not provide a picture as evidence, would you not agree?Not really, since you can check it out yourself in the game. Besides, the images are all over the net in other forum topics. A simple google search procures them.
Heh, I examined the figureYes, I bet you did.:whistle:
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 17:48
I never claimed it was true!:eek:
What does this relate to then?:confused:
Nope, as verified by myself, it is in fact what it's rumoured to be. It's not "suggestive seams", its a fully detailed graphic texture, quite clearly viewable on a HDTV.
Or perhaps have your eyes tested. Or buy a HDTV.
Not really, since you can check it out yourself in the game. Besides, the images are all over the net in other forum topics. A simple google search procures them.
As I said, many already have done and think such claims are entirely preposterous. Which is why I find the lack of any evidential image rather bemusing. Perhaps you could highlight what you see that others clearly do not? I have looked for an image, yet have not found one. Perhaps you could link us to one of the "numerous" links in existence?
Yes, I bet you did.:whistle:
True. I do not know what is more pathetic, that someone actually bothered to look and create a topic about something that is not there - or myself for making effort to evaluate such a foolish claim. :p
As I said, many already have done and think such claims are entirely preposterous.
Never said they claimed otherwise; and that's rather stating the obvious considering the replies by other members in this very thread.;)
Which is why I find the lack of any evidential image rather bemusing.
I find that finding it bemusing is missing the point, especially when the source is the game :rolleyes: It's not like the claiming of a personal feat with no way to prove it save for unforthcoming photography. Not to mention worthless as you yourself have already claimed to have viewed it ingame already.
Perhaps you could highlight what you see that others clearly do not?
I can't with any degree of context, as I'm unaware of what "others" claim not to see.
I have looked for an image, yet have not found one.
Weird! Especially since the originating IGN thread has three of them.
Perhaps you could link us to one of the "numerous" links in existence?
Can't, due to the already mentioned forum rules. You appear not to be familiar with them, all new users should take a detailed gander.
I do not know what is more pathetic, that someone actually bothered to look and create a topic about something that is not there - or myself for making effort to evaluate such a foolish claim. :p
The latter, of course. 'The fool and the fool that follows', and all that jazz.
Perhaps you could link us to one of the "numerous" links in existence?
Can't, due to the already mentioned forum rules. You appear not to be familiar with them, all new users should take a detailed gander.
.Been keeping an eye on this and Parjay is correct
Please check out the Rules and Regs
http://capcom-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=6681
If you want to see these things then use http://www.google.co.uk
TBH i can't see what the fuss is about.
TBH i can't see what the fuss is about.
Quite; it just seems there's a lot of people out there that condemn users asking the question yet have plenty of their own time to waste discussing and "invalidating" rumours :D
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 18:40
I find that finding it bemusing is missing the point, especially when the source is the game :rolleyes: It's not like the claiming of a personal feat with no way to prove it save for unforthcoming photography. Not to mention worthless as you yourself have already claimed to have viewed it ingame already.
I have viewed the model and am quite content that nothing is amiss and it is little more than her suit, after all - it was not I claiming that her vagina was visible for all to see. Nor did I say "There's nothing left to the imagination." :thumb:
I can't with any degree of context, as I'm unaware of what "others" claim not to see.
Heh, playing the fool? As you will.
Weird! Especially since the originating IGN thread has three of them. To dead links as well! The horror!:eek:
Can't, due to the already mentioned forum rules. You appear not to be familiar with them, all new users should take a detailed gander.
I would be surprised were they punish you for something that is entirely debatable and, for many, does not exist in the slightest.
The latter, of course. 'The fool and the fool that follows', and all that jazz.Thus this remains a feast of fools for all involved. ;)
I have viewed the model and am quite content that nothing is amiss
Excellent.
it was not I claiming that her ****** was visible for all to see. Who claimed it was? Eek read those rules, new guy.
Heh, playing the fool? As you will.Now, now no need for trolling/flaming. My statement still stands, and this flame just proves that you can't seem to grasp any context nor comprehension; and this lack has instilled in you the assumption that I'm claiming we can see Jill's private parts.:rolleyes:
To dead links as well! The horror!:eek:Hmm, works fine for me.
I would be surprised were they punish you for something that is entirely debatable and, for many, does not exist in the slightest.Again, as myself and the moderator has requested, read the rules so you understand and won't make any more mistakes like outlined above.
Thus this remains a feast of fools for all involved. ;)You spin me right round baby right round like a record baby right round. (ie there's that lack of comprehension, again; in this thread we quote a post and restate it in different words..get!).
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 19:40
Who claimed it was? Eek read those rules, new guy.
Erm, that was what the entire event/discussion was alluding to, as it began on IGN and was subsequently brought here. I am familiar with the forum rules, you need not worry. If the moderators feel the use of such an "explicit" word to be completely out of line, then they may amend it accordingly.
Now, now no need for trolling/flaming. My statement still stands, and this flame just proves that you can't seem to grasp any context nor comprehension; and this lack has instilled in you the assumption that I'm claiming we can see Jill's private parts.:rolleyes:There is no trolling nor flaming. What reason would I have for such things? Perhaps you were otherwise unaware of what was being discussed, yet from your earlier posts I had made the assumption that you were well aware of the subject matter.
Now, if you were ignorant of the topic then you ought to understand that this comment led me to believe otherwise:
Nope, as verified by myself, it is in fact what it's rumoured to be. What it was rumoured to be was a rather detailed rendition of Jill's privates; which is explained in more detail at IGN, which you appear to be familiar with.
Again, as myself and the moderator has requested, read the rules so you understand and won't make any more mistakes like outlined above.As I mentioned above, if the moderators considered my comments utterly licentious - they may amend the situation as they see fit.
Erm, that was what the entire event/discussion was alluding to, as it began on IGN and was subsequently brought here.
Indeed; it was questioned because you seemed to be directing it toward me.
There is no trolling nor flaming.Excellent.
What it was rumoured to be was a rather detailed rendition of Jill's privates; which is explained in more detail at IGN, which you appear to be familiar with.Indeed; and it's also rumoured to be the seams of her suit, and it's also rumoured to be an erroneous texture, and it's also rumoured to be a glitch in only some versions of the game. You see now about the missing of context? You've seemed to have assumed all along that I'm aruging we can see Jill's privates, when I'm not.
But at least we're on the same page, now.
deadmensboots
01-04-09, 20:20
Indeed; and it's also rumoured to be the seams of her suit, and it's also rumoured to be an erroneous texture, and it's also rumoured to be a glitch in only some versions of the game. You see now about the missing of context? You've seemed to have assumed all along that I'm aruging we can see Jill's privates, when I'm not.
Heh, then it would seem your difficulty and subsequent issues were of your own fabrication. The topic was generally discussing whether or not Jill's privates were as visible as some claimed and whether they were intentionally created for that purpose, which is what my posts was clearly in response to.
Someone on another board also suggested it was a glitch in the Matrix, so perhaps you may wish to run with that "context" should the issue arise again elsewhere. ;)
at the end of the day people will see what they want to see.
I remember doing a experiment with freinds from school.
About 10 of us were in the town center and kept pointing to the sky say stuff like wow can you see that it's amazing for about 10 minutes and a croud gaverd round and after a while we made a disgreet exit.
For about 2 hours which is how long we stayed, people were stood looking at the sky coming out with all sorts of comments and what they could see. It was funny as their was never anything their to start with but most of them claimed they could see something.
So people will always see something even if their is nothing their to see.
Heh, then it would seem your difficulty and subsequent issues were of your own fabrication.
Not sure how you come to that conclusion then, as:
which is what my posts was clearly in response to.Yet you replied by quoting my own posts, like I was "wrong". I know what your opinion is (that it's not Jill's privates) yet you continually pestered me for images and proof that it was her privates, even when I wasn't making that conclusion; hence context and comprehension.
at the end of the day people will see what they want to see.
I remember doing a experiment with freinds from school.
About 10 of us were in the town center and kept pointing to the sky say stuff like wow can you see that it's amazing for about 10 minutes and a croud gaverd round and after a while we made a disgreet exit.
For about 2 hours which is how long we stayed, people were stood looking at the sky coming out with all sorts of comments and what they could see. It was funny as their was never anything their to start with but most of them claimed they could see something.
So people will always see something even if their is nothing their to see.
Yup totally agree, same old same old for humanity.
To be perfectly honest i think this topic has served more than it's original purpose.