Character Analysis: How Albert Became “Wesker”?
Introduction: Well, actually, I never really planned on writing something this serious. But ever since I got hooked, I’ve been obsessing over Wesker and diving into all kinds of fan works. The more I consume, the more I feel like something’s missing, like none of it quite captures the essence of the original. So, I figured I’d take matters into my own hands and dig into the source material. This isn’t my first draft; it's more of a polished version with improved phrasing, added references, and some character comparisons. If it seems like I’m just narrating based on the existing material, that’s not a coincidence. My focus while writing this has been all about rebuilding and staying true to the characters, not so much getting into the nitty-gritty of their psychology. And trust me, I’ve been doing my best to keep personal bias out of it.
Since my native language is Chinese and my English skills are pretty much nonexistent, the labels and identities I use here are mainly based on the Chinese community of Resident Evil. But, I also read my fair share of fan works in English. Just a quick side note: the version of Wesker’s Report I first read was the Japanese-to-Chinese translation, which feels much closer to the original Japanese text than the official English version. But for the sake of smoother reading and staying true to the original meaning, I’ll include both Japanese and English versions. As for the English part, I’ll be using Capcom’s official translations or BradyGames' translations, depending on the context. And I’ll also throw in some explanations for translation issues when necessary.
Total word count: around 10,000+.
Bold text highlights the main points, colored text + italics are my personal thoughts or roasts. Italics + underlining are direct quotes from the original text, providing a fresh perspective rather than drawing firm conclusions.
What I’ll do: I’ll infer the “cause” based on existing materials, strip away all the labels attached to the character, and analyze the motivations behind their actions. Everything will be grounded in whether it aligns with the character's environment and survival logic, and I’ll use compound words and long sentences when necessary.
What I won’t do: I won’t indulge in moral judgment, make jokes about secret crushes or death, analyze the Muller mother-son dynamic, or get caught up in character pairings and criticism.
Highlight: I’m not against more emotional or personal readings, but that’s not really my thing. Everything needs to fit with the high-pressure world of Umbrella. What I’m aiming for here is to move beyond simple, binary readings. This document is packed with information, and I’ll dive into a lot of specialized terms to explain my thoughts in the middle and later sections. I’ll be breaking down personality from multiple angles and bringing in some psychological concepts. I suggest reading it slowly or checking out my interpretations first before going back to the original quotes. A heads-up: the structure of this document is pretty scattered, with lots of interconnected points. If you’re into linear storytelling, this might not be for you (honestly, even I get a bit of a headache reading through it sometimes).
When it comes to Wesker, I’ve gone through a lot of the original material and seen plenty of other players or viewers who immediately label him as a “Tyrant” or “Biohazard King” (Chinese fan community slang for an overpowered and showy villain.the latter is so funny that I laugh every time I see it,). But after diving into the original lines, documents, and Wesker’s Report, my interpretation of his actions has become increasingly subtle. I’m also approaching this as a creator, looking at RE5’s story and DLC from a narrative standpoint. Personally, I’m more of a fan of the Wesker created by Shinji Mikami, so my analysis is rooted in his vision. I truly believe that gradually rebuilding and restoring Wesker from his initial design will reveal his true character.
Main References: Wesker’s Report + RE1 Remake → RE4 + RE:UC → RE5 + RE5 DLC
Supplementary References: RE:CV, RE1, RE0, RE2 Remake, RE4 Remake
The game timeline should ideally follow the release dates to gradually piece together Wesker’s character, but given several factors: like how character development often took a backseat to the narrative and the influence of the era's style, I’ve opted for a more flexible approach. Instead of strictly adhering to a linear timeline, I’ve focused on the details and overall flow of the article. In the original RE1 (1996), Wesker was more of the classic villain, serving primarily as a narrative tool. But in the 2002 RE1 Remake, his character underwent a complete overhaul. Despite dying in RE1 back in 1996, Wesker made his return in RE:CV (2000) and the RE1 Remake (2002), with a gap of over two years. Even in RE:CV, his character still give way to game’s main narrative, which was more focused on the Redfield siblings. There wasn’t much room for character exploration, so RE:CV will only be used as supplementary material, with the main focus being on RE1 Remake. As for RE0, which was released alongside RE1 Remake in 2002, it serves as a prequel. But considering Wesker’s limited screen time and the fact that a lot of the content is already covered in the 2001 Wesker’s Report, I’m going to rely more on the Report to capture Wesker’s true thoughts and feelings. The Wesker’s Report also fills in some of the blanks from the RE1 Remake, so Wesker’s early development will mainly be based on that, with RE0 providing additional context.
It’s only in the later stages that we’ll see “Albert” gradually evolve into “Wesker,” at which point I’ll bring in RE4 and RE:UC from 2007, wrapping it all up with RE5 at the end.
My focus is a bit unconventional. I won’t be starting with the most common labels for Wesker, like “the careerist,” “the betrayer,” or “the test subject of the Wesker Project.”
Firstly, I’ll start with a detail that’s often overlooked: the phone call between Wesker and Barry in the RE1 Remake Jill's line.
From there, I’ll dive into Wesker’s actions during the mansion incident, like the times he pulls the trigger, or when he fixes a broken door on his way out. Then I will work my way into Wesker’s Report, followed by RE:UC, RE4 and RE5 created by Takeuchi Jun. The goal here is to break down all of Wesker’s actions and motivations, and piece together a more complete picture of his character.
I picked the phone call as my starting point because, when I stumbled across that dialogue script, it really made me pause and rethink the character. It had me questioning how many of the labels attached to him actually align with his true nature, and how many are just shallow, surface-level definitions. The conversation with Barry is particularly controversial,it’s so easy to fall into a binary view of his motivations (he still has some humanity and conscience / he’s just manipulating everyone, so he has no kindness). But here’s the thing: this is exactly my comfort zone.
First, in the phone call with Barry, before you get into the full context, it’s easy to jump to the simple conclusion that “Wesker used Barry’s family as leverage to get him to do his bidding.”
Once you hear the full conversation, it’s easy to fall into the idea that “this was just to reassure Barry, so he’d be more willing to do Wesker’s bidding,” which highlights the manipulation angle. This kind of interpretation tends to brush aside any possibility that Wesker might have a more human side. On the flip side, some might see it as an attempt to “redeem” Wesker, giving him a more sympathetic or relatable side. Or they might take his line, “This is an order from above,” as a sign that he’s just doing what he’s told, almost like he’s trapped in the situation. And then there's the line “I’ll ensure their safety,” which some might read as proof that Wesker has a conscience. It’s a very empathetic take, but it’s also pretty black-or-white, ignoring any real complexity.
So, if we break this down by looking at the first and second parts separately:
Wesker, as the team captain rather than the head researcher with most of the authority over the lab, simply didn’t have the power to disobey orders. That’s an objective fact. Wesker’s Report also clearly lays this out:
[In time, I shifted my position to S.T.A.R.S., a special forces unit of the Raccoon City Police Department. Umbrella, for crisis management reasons of their illegal Bio Organic Weapons development, had many of its people working in the police department.]
[I became the leader of S.T.A.R.S. and conducted all sorts of intelligence activities for Umbrella. As I continued to serve, I devised my own plans and waited for the right moment to execute them.]
[Then at last, opportunity knocked.]
[The freak murder incidents that had occurred in the forest near the mansion started it all. The mansion was Umbrella's secret B.O.W. laboratory and it was clear that the in-development t-Virus was the cause of the murder.]
[Initially, Umbrella instructed me secretively to keep S.T.A.R.S. out of the case, but with the heightened emotions of the citizens, S.T.A.R.S. had no choice but to move in.]
[That was when my next order was given. Dispatch S.T.A.R.S. to the mansion, dispose of them, then report the situation to headquarters so that their combat with the B.O.W. could be used for data analysis, allowing Umbrella a comprehensive portrait of the B.O.W.s' combat abilities.]
やがて、私はラクーンシティ警察の特殊部隊S.T.A.R.S.へ移る事になった。
アンブレラ製薬は違法な生物兵器開発の危機管理上、警察内部にも多数の人間を送り込んでいたのだ。
私はS.T.A.R.S.で隊長の肩書きを利用し、アンブレラのためにあらゆる諜報活動を行った。
私は、ある計画を考えそれを実行するための機会を待っていた。
そして、遂にその機会が訪れた。
そこで、次の指令がきた。
『S.T.A.R.S.を洋館に誘き寄せ抹殺しろ。そしてその状況をつぶさに報告し、戦闘時におけるB.O.W.の実験データーとして役立てろ。』
との指令を私に下してきたのだ。
So, the whole idea of Wesker being “forced into a corner” just doesn’t hold water. Throughout Wesker’s Report, he stays pretty much businesslike and detached, everything’s just a record. In fact, he even uses the situation to further his own agenda.
Then we get to the part about Barry’s family, which, along with the call records about “protection,” creates a bit of a paradoxical contrast:
[Barry was the strong truth and justice kind, and cherished his family more than anything. His type is easy to manipulate. I simply took that most important thing away from him.]
奴は正義感が強く、人一倍情に厚く家族を大事にしていた。このタイプを操るのはたやすい。
そいつが大事にしているものを奪ってしまえばいいのだから。
Personally, I’m more inclined to believe that Wesker’s protection of Barry’s family is genuine. After all, we see later in the story that they’re still alive. From a practical standpoint, keeping them alive is way more beneficial than eliminating them, Wesker is definitely the type to make that calculation. At the same time, using them as leverage to manipulate Barry? That’s totally real too. It just depends on how you interpret it. For me, Wesker is somewhere in between these two things: protection and manipulation don’t have to cancel each other out. He can be both human and cold-blooded. (It’s like Schrödinger’s cat, whether he’s one or the other really depends on the situation. For example, the moment Wesker fixes that broken door on Chris’s path. You could see it as a tactical move to secure better combat data, or as a way of showing concern for his teammate. Either way, he’s still a responsible leader at the core.)
The real focus here is that, when it comes to his own goals, Wesker will carefully weigh the pros and cons, then choose to either use or discard certain actions depending on what serves him best. If being sentimental or emotional gets in the way of his objectives or slows him down, he won’t think twice about switching to a more efficient, no-nonsense approach. And that’s the Wesker we all recognize, the cold, calculating one. This angle really emphasizes his self-serving nature and his cold-blooded traits. In the cutthroat world of Umbrella, this is just his way of surviving. I’ll get into the reasons behind this mindset in more detail later on.
Next, we have two instances where Wesker pulls the trigger, once against Enrico, and once against Rebecca.
Throughout the game, Wesker actually fires his gun more than just twice. He shoots at the air, and even takes a shot at Lisa. But when it comes to actually aiming at Enrico and sparing Rebecca, those two moments really stand out. These are the instances where we start to see Wesker break away from that early, stereotypical villain mold. It's definitely an interesting shift and one worth exploring in more detail.
In Chris’s storyline, the moment where Wesker points his gun at Rebecca is pretty subtle. While the office bonus scene featuring Rebecca’s photo, along with the fact that he doesn’t kill her, could easily be interpreted as a joke about Wesker secretly having a crush on her, there's actually a deeper layer to it. If we take it seriously, this moment shows Wesker as a pragmatic, highly efficient utilitarian. In his pursuit of the ultimate goal of “escaping Umbrella,” he selectively sets aside certain moral and emotional concerns. When the situation calls for it, he’ll cross the line, like when he kills Enrico for nearly exposing his betrayal to Jill and Chris. But killing Rebecca in front of Chris at that moment? Totally unnecessary. Plus, as a former researcher, Wesker probably has a certain respect for Rebecca's intellect and potential. It’s a perfect example of Wesker balancing his cold, calculated goals with a touch of personal sentiment.
Wesker’s admiration for people with exceptional intellect or physical abilities is pretty evident. Whether it’s in Wesker’s Report when he praises Birkin, during his later battles with Chris, or even in his attitude toward Ada in RE4, RE2 (original), and RE4 Remake, it’s clear that Wesker places a high value on “ability.” Meanwhile, when you compare “S.T.A.R.S. Wesker” from RE1 Remake to the “Tyrant” in RE5, someone who knows he’s just a test subject in a grand experiment. This stark contrast between the two versions of Wesker is jarring. (When you look at it through the lens of RE1 Remake, it gives RE5 a tragic undertone.)
Wesker is arrogant and egotistical. While it might seem like a typical stereotype, the sheer amount of material out there shows that it’s not an exaggeration, it’s actually pretty spot on. (Personally, I’ve always had a soft spot for the Wesker in Wesker’s Report. He’s so controlled, so deliciously cold, and that smug expression actually gives him a surprising amount of human depth. There’s also a certain dramatic flair to his personality, which might be influenced by the voice acting choices. The Wesker in Wesker’s Report and during Shinji Mikami’s involvement feels much more understated, leaving room for a lot of interpretation. This version of Wesker feels like a more complete, multidimensional character.)
The most obvious example is his choice of words and tone when interacting with Alexia, especially in the 1981 (21 years old) report segment. If we look further back, to when he was just 18 and first entering the research facility in 1978, and then to a few years later in 1988:
[But one day, our useless workers started to say these things.”If only Alexia was here.”]
[It angered me to think that our own workers and researchers are filled with these mindless fools who only judge people by their family name and bloodline.]
[Because they think like that, they always had to be told what to do, and never got promoted even though they were old enough to have one leg inside the coffin!]
[…But, I still had good judgement.]
[If I had let all of that go to my head, the development of the t-virus at the Arklay research facility would have been delayed.]
[As the head researcher, I always had to keep myself under control or success would not be possible.]
[Then, a thought came to my mind.]
[I could use those old staff members to further the progress of the research and to gain my success. Those old fools could die at any time, and would serve as perfect test subjects for the dangerous experiments.To be able to rise above everyone, why shouldn't I be able to use all resources to my full advantage?[
[But the problem was Birkin].
ところが、この日を境に、私達の部下である死に損ないのクズ共がこう言い始めた。『「アレクシア」様が、ここに居られれば。』名家だの血筋だのでしか人間を判断できない、愚民共が部下では先が思いやられた。
奴等は、そういう考えだから、棺桶に片足を突っ込んだ年齢になっても誰かの指示がないと動けない下っ端なのだ！…しかし、私にはまだ分別があった。
主任である私が、その時、熱くなっていたなら、アークレイ研究所での「t-ウィルス」開発はもっと遅れていた事だろう。いかなる状況でも、冷静に判断できねば成功は有り得ない。
その時、私は次のように考えた。古い時代の御歴々を上手く扱ってこそ研究成果も上げられる。いつ死んでもおかしくない御老体ならば危険な実験にも相応しい、と。全ての人材を合理的に利用できねば人の上には立てまい？
だが、問題はバーキンだ。
In the first half of the segment 1, you can really sense Wesker’s arrogance. Whether it’s in his own words from Wesker’s Report, or when he sharply critiques his subordinates whom clearly uses his position to judge others. And what’s even more interesting is that he’s really angry about it. (What’s he so angry about?)
I strongly believe that Wesker's arrogant personality wasn’t something that developed only after he injected himself with the virus. I bring this up because there’s a common theory that Wesker became the way he is only after experiencing the benefits of the virus he injected. This idea is strictly speaking, logical and has a strong foundation. However, it’s incomplete and leaves out some key aspects. My personal theory is that Wesker’s arrogance was already present during his time at Umbrella, specifically, as early as 1978 when he worked alongside Birkin:
[As soon as we got off the helicopter the head of the facility was standing in front of the elevator ready to greet us.]
[I can't even remember the guy's name. Who really cares about formalities and figureheads like him; from that day on, the Arklay Research Center was ours. As Chief Researchers, we were put completely in charge of all aspects of the facility. Of course that is just how Spencer had planned it all out.]
[He chose us.]
[We ignored the facility head and got on the elevator. I had already memorized the building layout the day before, and Birkin, although he has no bad intentions, never really pays much attention to other people.Most people probably get pretty irked from the first 5 seconds that they meet us.]
[However, the facility head had no reaction at all.Back then I was a young-buck completely full of himself, so I didn't really pay the facility head any mind.But in the end, I was really only Spencer's puppet, and the facility head, whose boss was Spencer, at least actually knew what Spencer was up to, and what he was thinking.]
ヘリコプターから降りるとすぐに、その施設を管理する「所長」がエレベーターの前に立っていた。「そいつ」の事は名前すら憶えていない。形式上はどうあれ、アークレイ研究所は、その日から私とバーキンのものだった。私達は主任研究員として、そこでの研究の全権を任されたのだ。もちろん、それはスペンサーの意志だ。私達は選ばれたのだ。
私達は「所長」を無視してエレベーターに乗り込んだ。私はその施設の構造を、前日に全て暗記していたし、バーキンは悪気などなく、他人の事は目に入らない。2人を相手にした人間は、最初の5秒で憤慨するのが普通だ。
しかし、「所長」には何の反応もなかった。当時の私は慢心した若造だったので、その「所長」の様子を気にも留めずにいた。結局、そこにいた頃の私はスペンサーの手の上で踊っていたに過ぎず、「所長」はそんな私よりも自分達のボスであるスペンサーの考えを理解していた訳だ。
If you take a closer look at these two segments, especially in the context of RE5 (with Wesker Project and Spencer’s influence), and combine them with the Wesker we see in Wesker’s Report, his character really starts to shape up as someone with elitist arrogance, a sense of mental purity, and a strict self-discipline. Factor in the impact of his childhood upbringing, and it’s clear he sets himself apart by considering himself “special,” with a superiority complex that makes him believe everyone else is just average or beneath him. (It’s honestly infuriating! No wonder Wesker’s Report says he and Birkin can barely have a conversation with anyone for more than five seconds without getting irritated.)
If we strip away the influence of Wesker's character in RE5 and focus purely on the version created by Shinji Mikami, we might deduce that Wesker’s arrogance stems from the fact that, at just 18, he was already promoted to the position of Chief Researcher. This ties back to what I mentioned earlier, his focus on “ability” rather than external factors as the core of his self-worth. This aligns with the concept of “meritocracy.” (The core idea is that success comes from a combination of “ability + effort,” encouraging fair competition based on merit and rejecting the idea that background or birth determines your potential.) This mindset fits perfectly with Umbrella’s corporate culture, where success and recognition are earned through skill and results.
In Wesker's Report, the moments where Wesker shows anger reveal a rare glimpse of “Albert”, the young man’s pride in his own abilities. It’s not the usual cold, objective, businesslike language we see in official reports. During Shinji Mikami’s time writing Wesker’s character, we never got much backstory about Wesker’s family or social class. But if we assume that, at the beginning, he didn’t have any pre-existing status or privileges, it starts to make sense. By “status” or “position,” I’m not referring to his role as a senior researcher, or the fact that he and Birkin were granted full authority over the research facility. What I mean is something more like coming from a prestigious family (like the Ashford family, for example). Wesker’s position was entirely based on his own abilities and intellect. He caught Spencer’s attention and was chosen to be placed in the Arklay facility, where, at a young age, he became the Chief Researcher. He quickly became the superior of those “old guys” who judged others based on their social standing. This helps explain where his arrogance and superiority complex come from, and why he’s so frustrated by the people around him. (We can really see how Shinji Mikami structured Wesker’s Report with a solid logic chain, though some of the details, if you don’t think about them carefully, can easily be missed.)
When you combine RE5 with the earlier versions of Wesker, the core difference becomes clear. One is shaped by the influence of his childhood environment (i.e., the nature vs. nurture argument), while the other is shaped by the corporate environment. The former is a traditional character development approach. The latter is far more expansive, and there’s a lot more depth here to uncover.
However, this is just the initial, surface-level “cause.”
In the second half of segment 1, Wesker mentions using the old staff members as test subjects, essentially using them as stepping stones. This seems to contradict the earlier parts of RE1R and my own interpretation of some of his actions. After all, if Wesker truly had any morality or humanity, how could he like his mentor Marcus, treat other staff members as mere experimental fodder? Wouldn’t this make him just another tyrant or a cold-blooded monster? However, I still have to emphasize the environment of Umbrella. After all, it’s a massive meat grinder where you either sacrifice others or become the one sacrificed. We see this in RE0, where Dr. Marcus uses his staff as test subjects. Wesker’s logic behind this behavior becomes clearer when we consider his need for practicality and survival instincts. In that context, it makes sense. This is exactly what I mentioned earlier about survival tactics, his cruelty isn’t innate but is shaped by Umbrella’s environment. It’s a cold, hard reality, almost an inevitability. (Had Umbrella not existed, he might have been a great team leader instead.) The most obvious contrast to Wesker’s approach is Birkin. Personally, I see Birkin as a pure academic, driven by knowledge and research (some websites even classify his MBTI as INTP). In an environment like Umbrella, where status and money are earned through results, Birkin thrived. However, Umbrella’s corruption still got to him. His cruelty toward test subjects, as well as his email correspondence with Irons in RE2, shows a different kind of brutality. Unlike Wesker, whose cruelty is a product of his environment, Birkin’s actions are driven by an obsessive pursuit of knowledge, he acts without any regard for the consequences. (In both the original RE2 and RE2R, Birkin orders the elimination of anyone who stands in the way of his research. It’s a cold, detached cruelty that seems more about the pursuit of science than survival.)
Next, another question: Is Wesker antisocial/sociopath?
I’d still disagree with this label. While the term antisocial might be useful in psychological profiling or criminal reports as a rough categorization, in clinical settings, it's just a diagnostic label. However, when we apply this label as audiences or interpreters, it often feels like we're trying to fit him into a black-or-white moral framework. It’s almost as if we’re trying to diagnose him with a mental illness based on assumptions, rather than understanding the complexity of his character.
[The way he reacted to the Alexia rumors was terrible.He never really said it, but for Birkin, the fact that he was the youngest person to ever be a chief researcher was always something he was proud of.]
[That “pride” was severely injured by having a mere 10 year-old become a chief researcher. It was probably the first time someone so talented as he had ever tasted defeat.He just couldn't accept the “younger, girl of good lineage”.]
[To be made a fool of by someone who hadn't gotten any results. Someone who had worked so far away.]
[The fact that he couldn't get over it, showed his immaturity.]
[However, even though he was still immature, no matter what, I had to bring him back to his senses.]
「アレクシア」の噂に対する彼の反応は悲惨なものだった。口にこそ出さなかったが、バーキンにとって、それ以前では最年少の16歳で主任になった事は自慢だったはずだ。そのプライドが「10歳の少女」によって粉々に砕かれたのだ。天才として生まれて、初めて味わう敗北感だったのだろう。「年下」の、「名家」の、「女」を、彼は容認できなかったのだ。
まだ何の研究成果も上がっていない遠い地での人事に翻弄されるとは。つまるところ彼はまだ子供だったのだ。しかし精神的に未熟であるにせよ、バーキンには何としても立ち直ってもらう必要があった。
I’ve omitted some of the parts from Wesker’s Report about virus research and instead directly lifted the segment about Birkin:
[Birkin's pace was quickened by Alexia's existence. He began to act “out of the ordinary”.He would stay at the lab for 24 hours straight. Attempt experiments that he hadn't really thought out.]
[I tried to use other researchers to get as many samples from the subjects before they died, but I just couldn't keep up with his pace.]
[The head facilitator brought in a new subject, as if nothing had ever happened. But she, too, soon died.]
[It was hell.]
だが、その実験はしばらく中断せざるを得なかった。バーキンから実験体を守るためだ。「アレクシア」に対して無意味な焦りを持ったバーキンは、常軌を逸した行動をとるようになっていた。
彼は24時間、研究所に泊り込み、無計画な思い付きで実験を繰り返した。私は他の研究員も使って、実験体が死ぬ前にできるだけ多くの生体サンプルを抽出したが、彼のスピードには追いつかなかった。
「所長」は何事も無かったかのように、新しい実験体を補充し、それもあっという間に死んでいく。
そこは地獄だった。
だが、その地獄の中で唯1人、あの「女の実験体」だけは生き延びていた。「彼女」は既に28歳。もう14年をこの研究所で過ごした訳だ。
[The summer of our 11th year at Arklay was just starting.I was already 28.]
[Birkin had become a father and already had a 2 year-old daughter.His wife was one of the researchers that worked at Arklay.]
[You would normally think it hard to understand someone wanting to get married and raise a child, all the while doing their research.
[But, it is said that only “non-ordinary” people ever continued to do research at Arklay Only the crazy ones ever succeeded there.]
私達にとって、「アークレイ研究所」での11年目の夏が始まろうとしていた。
その頃は私も既に28歳。バーキンに至っては2歳になる娘の父親にもなっていた。相手も「アークレイ」の研究員だ。互いにそこでの研究を続けながら、結婚し子供まで育てる気になれた事は普通に考えれば理解し難い。
だが、まともな神経の人間ではないからこそ「アークレイ」での研究を続けられたとも言える。そこで成功する者は、狂った人間だけだ。
PS: In the English version of 4 by Capcom, they retained the Japanese version “結婚し子供まで育てる気になれた事は普通に考えれば理解し難い” as “You would normally think it hard to understand someone wanting to get married and raise a child, all the while doing their research.” However, the overall tone is more colloquial, especially with the phrase “You would normally think it,” . But the bigger issue isn’t just this. Capcom also significantly toned down the line “だが、まともな神経の人間ではないからこそ「アークレイ」での研究を続けられたとも言える” in their translation.” (But, it is said that only 'non-ordinary' people ever continued to do research at Arklay.) The phrase “まともな神経ではない (non-ordinary)” was notably softened. The original Japanese more directly implies “not normal nerves,” leaning towards a pathological or mentally disturbed connotation, which is much stronger and more explicit than “non-ordinary.”
In segments 2, 3, and 4, Birkin falls into a frenzy of research driven by jealousy. This could be considered the most “human” part of his character. Or rather, it’s a moment where he used to have humanity, which is triggered by a specific source of emotional stimulus. However, even in this emotional turmoil, as a researcher, he still maintains a level of restraint and calmness in his records.
What’s most thought-provoking is segment 3, where Wesker describes the atmosphere of the research facility as “hell.” That word is worth careful consideration. It made me think: here’s a man who’s worked at the facility for years, participated in numerous project developments, witnessed countless test subjects die, and even conducted several experiments on Lisa with Birkin. In the segments where he records his experiments on Lisa, his tone is objective and calm, almost detached. Yet, when describing the chaotic atmosphere during desperate experiments, he uses such a subjective, emotionally charged word. Why the shift? This small detail caught my attention because it stands out as almost abnormal compared to his usual cold, AI-like documentation style. And it made me think of a term, psychological threshold.
This term typically refers to the threshold at which a stimulus must reach a certain intensity or degree to be perceived or trigger a reaction in the mind.
In the game, aside from Wesker, there’s a very typical example of this in Leon. He’s also witnessed “hell”. A good reference for this is the dialogue between him and Ada on the boat in the RE4 remake: “After the Raccoon City incident, the world changed. Now, to save one person, you have to sacrifice hundreds. I think I’ve changed too.” This is a classic example of a character’s threshold lowering after facing intense stimuli. Leon’s response, however, is more gradual and short-term. Ultimately, he escapes the source of his trauma. Even after becoming a special agent, he still had a buffer period. To put it bluntly, in the RE4 remake, Leon seems more mature and composed, but the reality is that he's become emotionally numb to death. (In the RE2 remake, when people die, he even casually mutters “Damn it”.)
But Wesker is the opposite. He’s the type of person who experiences short bursts of intense stimuli, again and again, never even catching his breath before being pushed back down. So, even after years of emotional numbness, when he faces such overwhelming triggers, it’s only natural that some “normal human” reactions would surface. This is essentially a form of trauma response shared by both characters.
Connecting Wesker to the concept of a “normal person” may seem bizarre, but I need to bring up Wesker’s Report again. On July 31, 1978, 18-year-old Wesker made the following record about Lisa:
[For 11 years, she had gone through tests with many viruses.I heard Birkin whisper something.Whether those words were cursing or praising, I do not know.]
[But we had come to a place we couldn't get back out from.We knew we could either take the research to its completion, or end up like her. For us, we only had 1 choice.That woman lying on the pipebed had moved something within both of our minds.Was this also a part of Spencer's plan?]
「彼女」は「t-ウィルス」開発のための実験体だった。実験開始日は、1967年11月10日。「彼女」は11年もの間、ここでウィルスの投与実験を受けていたのだ。
バーキンが何かをつぶやいた。それは呪いの言葉だったのか、それとも賞賛の言葉だったのか。私達は既に、後戻りできない場所まで来てしまったのだ。研究を成功へと導くのか、それとも、「彼女」のように朽ち果てるのか。もちろん、選択肢は1つしかなかった。
パイプベッドに拘束された「彼女」の姿は、私達の意識の中の何かを動かしたのだ。
これもスペンサーの計画した事の一部なのだろうか？
PS: In Capcom's English translation, they retained the Japanese term “朽ち果てる (Rotting),” but they omitted the line “私達の意識の中の何かを動かしたのだ (moved something within both of our minds).” On the other hand, BradyGames’ translation does the opposite, it keeps the latter part, “moved something within both of our minds,” but loses the term “Rotting,” directly changing it to “or end up like her,” which is a much more explicit reference. The original Japanese version was more metaphorical, with a broader implication.
This is also the most important point I’ll touch on when distinguishing Wesker from other researchers. Initially, when I read this part, I didn’t quite understand what “moved something within both of our minds” actually meant. From a writing perspective, this is a metaphor. As for the characters, I won’t make any definitive conclusions. In Birkin's case, it could be referring to the shifting of his moral boundaries for the sake of pure research, or perhaps his realization of the infinite potential of science. But when it comes to the 18-year-old Wesker, it could represent both the crossing of his moral threshold and, as I’ve previously mentioned, his psychological threshold.
There's also the third possibility, especially when combine with “But we had come to a place we couldn't get back out from. We knew we could either take the research to its completion, or end up like her. For us, we only had 1 choice.” Anyone who has experienced hell, or is in the midst of it, would undoubtedly be shocked upon seeing Lisa. The immediate reaction would be a mix of disbelief, followed by a grim realization of their own situation. Their next thought would inevitably turn to their own environment, realizing that one day, they too could quietly rot here, or become just another part of the system. (Fading from prominence within the company, or being consumed as a mere specimen.)
This might have sparked the idea of wanting to escape, but in reality, after seeing Lisa, it was already too late for that. Then, there's the disdain that “Albert” feels towards Umbrella, alongside the survival instinct that drives him to avoid becoming a disposable resource, a mere tool for the company. (Umbrella is much like a trap, luring in geniuses with promises of fame, fortune, and scientific progress, only to lock them in gilded cages. They exploit their talents to generate profit for the company, and when they are no longer useful, they simply discard them.)
From this perspective, it seems that Wesker does possess the understanding of what a “normal person” is. He was never the type of researcher who could stay at Umbrella indefinitely, whether due to his mental state or his scientific abilities (unlike Birkin or Anette). He is caught somewhere between “human” and “non-human.” This positioning allows him to observe and evaluate the environment from a detached perspective, and his inability to understand Birkin's decision to marry and have children, which mean create emotional connections. To Wesker, these are behaviors that are difficult to comprehend. (After all, if someone is not a “normal” person or lacks normal cognitive awareness, they wouldn't recognize the abnormality or confusion in the actions of others.)
At this stage, we’ve already pieced together how Albert transformed into “Wesker,” and he’s steadily moving further away from the person he once was.
Psychologically speaking, his sense of rationality and emotional control was a self-defense mechanism shaped by Umbrella's environment. It’s an inward reaction (like trauma response), and this response can be linked to almost all of his actions.
His arrogance and hubris are no longer just products of his environment; they’ve also become a way for him to differentiate himself from others and, in turn, maintain his own sense of self.
Manipulation, turning everything into tools (including emotions and the human side of things), and climbing over the “corpses” of old employees, is his outward-facing survival strategy. It’s a way to avoid being consumed by his surroundings and a more pragmatic, reality-driven approach to life.
By the time we reach RE1 to RE2, from 1995 to 1998, Wesker uses the STARS team to carry out his plans. At this point, his desire to escape from Umbrella isn’t just about uncovering Spencer's true intentions behind developing biological weapons. Every action he takes, whether manipulative or seemingly benevolent, can be traced back to this underlying drive. (For the record, I won’t be delving into his actions toward Ada in the RE:UC storyline. We've already established his behavioral logic earlier, and that part is thoroughly explored in the RE:UC storyline, which covers the scene in greater detail.)
Finally, we enter the middle period, where Wesker fully adopts traits of “controlling, an ambitious mastermind, and someone with a god complex.”
The two most commonly used labels for Wesker are “ambitious” and “control freak.” While these labels can sometimes feel vague or overly general, I do acknowledge they somewhat fit his character.
But when I dig deeper into Wesker’s ambition, I’m left wondering: What exactly is he ambitious for? Is it the power-hungry ambition of climbing to the top like other Umbrella scientists? Or is it the drive to build his own empire? Perhaps, as seen in RE5, it's the ambition to become a god of a new world? And then there's his desire for control, was this part of the original character, or did it emerge from the stereotypical interpretations of fan creations? It's similar to how serious characters often get tagged with the “dom” label, even if it's not fully fitting.
The key question here is: which installment really cemented the “ambitious” label for Wesker? What part of the storyline reinforced this image? So, I went back to RE:UC and RE4, and it was in the latter where I found the answer. However, to fully understand it, you need to cross-reference both games' developments. These two narratives are intertwined, influencing each other, and cannot be discussed in isolation.
In RE4's Ada storyline, we see Wesker fully embrace the persona that most people have come to know: cold, efficient, and laser-focused. His commands are sharper and more direct. He's clearly learned from the mansion incident and applies those lessons ruthlessly. He handles Leon with near-merciless precision, eliminating any potential threat before it can even fully develop. (It's the first real glimpse of his obsessive need for control. But as the story progresses, his strategy shifts, using the situation to further his own ends.) When Ada retrieves the virus sample and boards the helicopter to speak with Wesker, he says, “Thanks to you, we're one step closer to rebuilding Umbrella.”
Before the events of RE4 in 2004, there's the original storyline in RE:UC (released in 2007), specifically the “Dark Legacy” chapter. In this chapter, set in February 2003, Wesker infiltrates the Russian Caucasus research facility, obtaining the full range of Umbrella’s research data that he couldn’t access during the mansion incident. At the end of the chapter, he anonymously leaks Umbrella’s dark secrets, ultimately causing the company to collapse and declare bankruptcy.
Even though RE:UC was released 3 years after RE4, the chapter serves as a prequel to RE4 and a setup for the upcoming RE5. This doesn't mean the storylines are unrelated. However, a new question arises: Why would a former Umbrella researcher, someone who destroyed the company and abandoned his research position to uncover Spencer’s true motives, want to rebuild Umbrella?
Perhaps it all comes down to a crucial line from RE5 that really sets the stage for Wesker's character:
The only thing that can defeat power is more power,That is the one constant in this universe.However,there is no point in power if it consumes itself.
The first part of the sentence reflects Wesker's absolutism regarding survival. This power is not just the physical strength that exceeds ordinary humans; it’s a broader concept. It can refer to the power derived from information, or the kind of authority that comes from being at the top of a hierarchy, essentially, a dual meaning.
The second part, on the other hand, highlights how he’s seen colleagues consumed by power. It serves as a warning or reminder to himself, as an observer, about the dangers of letting power take control.
Looking at Wesker's early life, he was always a pawn in Umbrella's grand scheme, surviving under the constant control of others. Whether it was developing biological weapons at the behest of his superiors, later being assigned to the intelligence division, or dealing with the aftermath of the mansion incident by eliminating the STARS team as instructed, he was constantly following orders. He even betrayed his own “soul” by working for Umbrella's rival company, HCF, all to acquire Umbrella's research data.
So, Wesker’s ambition is no longer simply about “rebuilding Umbrella”, at least not the Umbrella we know. His true goal is to create a version of Umbrella where he is the one in control. On the surface, this might seem like a desire for power, but at its core, it’s about fighting power with power, resisting being dominated by dominating others.
Psychologically, this shift is a form of compensation for the trauma he experienced in his earlier years. It’s no longer just about inwardly suppressing his emotions and over-rationalizing his actions; instead, it’s evolved into an extreme, outward-facing behavior. He takes the trauma of “being controlled” and transforms it into a craving for “controlling others.
(PS:Here, “controlling others” does not mean that he seeks to dominate or control individuals. When a person has a strong need to control others, it can stem from various causes—childhood trauma or interpersonal experiences. But neither of these applies to him. The only factor that fits is the influence of Umbrella’s corporate environment. What it created in him was a sense of loss of control and insecurity.Behaviors such as “memorizing the facility layout,” which almost resemble compulsive actions, or an excessively heightened sense of suspicion, as well as his frequent emotional reactions whenever his plans are disrupted, all stem from this.In contrast, if he truly had a deep, personal desire to control individuals, that would imply he cared intensely about them. But Wesker, in most cases, does not regard most people as significant at all. His control or manipulation of others is driven by the demands of his plans—not by emotional compensation.)
(Additional PS: What I’m describing—his tendency to memorize the facility layout or become overly suspicious—does not mean these behaviors are 100% caused by “lack of security” or “a sense of losing control.” Rather, it’s that most people who experience insecurity or have felt out of control before often respond with such behaviors.)
This is exactly where the tragedy of RE5 begins. The tragedy isn’t just about the flaws in character development and narrative in RE5, but rather about Wesker’s entire life and, ultimately, his demise. To me, it’s deeply ironic, yet profoundly... dramatic. It’s almost like the story of Prometheus or Icarus: one steals the “fire” in the early stages (destroying Umbrella, rebuilding order), while the other flies too close to the “sun” and ignores the warnings, eventually crashing down from the sky (consumed by his obsession with power and his fear of being controlled).
Using mythological stories to compare Wesker’s illogical and fragmented behavior in RE5 makes it all the more perplexing. In the original series, his sudden desire to become a “god” and evolve the world seems even more outrageous than his previous goal of rebuilding Umbrella in RE4. It feels like a jarring shift in character, and many would argue that it makes him seem like a madman, or that the writers intentionally crafted this for dramatic effect, possibly to distance the character from Shinji Mikami's earlier influence. (PS: It’s important to note that RE:UC and RE5 share the same screenwriter, Haruo Murata. While it's tempting to dive into conspiracy theories, the reality seems to be much simpler. Murata, along with Yoshiaki Hirabayashi, was responsible for the script and detailed world-building, while Kenichi Ueda focused on the broader storyline and the world concept.)
But I believe his actions are understandable, at least logically. It just requires peeling away Haruo Murata’s overly ornate dialogue, looking at it carefully, and re-translating it to fully understand why he behaves this way, and why he suddenly turns into a madman with a god complex.
In terms of narrative, whether or not the “Wesker Project” is considered a crucial piece in completing his character arc, the influence of Spencer and Umbrella on Wesker is undoubtedly immense. The night Wesker kills Spencer serves as the pivotal moment that triggers everything, including the often-criticized shift in his behavior, where he becomes more theatrical and, in some ways, more unhinged.
Imagine, if you will, a man who has always seen himself as “the chosen one,” an elite who takes pride in his abilities. From the age of 18 to 40, he spends decades betraying, gathering intelligence, and collecting samples around the world, pouring in all his energy and resources. Yet, when he stands before the very figurehead of the creator and the mastermind behind it all, he learns that everything he believed about himself, his excellence, his betrayals, and everything he took pride in, was nothing but a lie. All of it was merely a pawn in Spencer's grand game. His reaction to this revelation is bound to be nothing short of catastrophic.
It's like this: He believed he was defying the fate of being controlled, but in reality, he was simply living in the illusion of resistance. Spencer reveals to him that from the very beginning, everything was calculated, which means “Albert” never truly existed. The very core of his identity (his sense of self is denied). And that night, on a psychological level, “Albert” is completely erased.
At the same time, Wesker's act of killing Spencer isn't just an act of revenge born from anger. To me, killing Spencer, who symbolizes his father, is about taking away the so-called divine power of becoming a god, thus reclaiming control over his own life.
As for the idea of becoming a new kind of god, it’s no longer just about accelerating human evolution, as Murata Haruo wrote. In this context, it represents Wesker’s attempt to take back the power of defining his own existence, instead of being defined by others. Becoming a god of the new human race becomes a metaphor for reclaiming his identity and purpose, an attempt to assert that his existence belongs solely to him. (Even though we all know that RE5's narrative is flawed, and the sudden decision to accelerate human evolution feels extremely out of place.)
But conversely, once Wesker killed Spencer and took everything for himself, he was inevitably headed for a downfall. The more he pushed to transcend, the more he proved how successful he was as the product of the “Wesker Project.” In other words, he fulfilled Spencer’s original goal: the creation of a superior human race.
In the end, his death also brings full circle the opening line from RE:UC: “ There is no point in power if it consumes itself.”
Just like the ouroboros in RE5, self-consumption.
This thing is really driving me crazy. It’s been so long since I last picked up a pen, and now that I’m back at it, I ended up writing something like a mini-paper. So, I’ve experienced the pain of writing a paper. The whole process is both painful and enjoyable. Although it’s definitely more enjoyable than drawing, to be honest. Looking up references and comparing different versions of translations is a real headache, but at the same time, the more I dig, the more I discover. Finding new things is really exciting.
The first draft was just a little over 3k words. But after letting it sit for several days and going back to read it, I realized it was mostly just a collection of thoughts, basically like a reading log (I originally posted it alongside some ship talks). So, in the spirit of being thorough, I ended up adding a lot more content to make it a more complete and independent analysis. And, well... the more I wrote, the more it just kept growing...
Early on, when I started writing about the version of Wesker created by Mikami, my initial goal was simply to reconstruct the character as he originally was. I wanted to avoid delving too much into psychological analysis, mainly because I'm not a psychology expert myself, and I was worried I’d go off-topic. But as I continued, I found myself wanting to explain in detail how Wesker became who he is today. At that point, I couldn’t avoid touching on psychology, so I started researching like crazy. My browser history was full of searches like: “the difference between emotional detachment, emotional isolation, and emotional numbing”, “is xx considered a trauma response?”, “distinguishing between neurotic and psychological issues.”
I wouldn’t say I was forcing technical terms just to pack in more information. By the end, I was pretty much losing it myself. Normally, if I were to read a character analysis filled with all these jargon-heavy terms, it would feel like being bombarded with knowledge. But when I first started writing, my thought process was pretty much like this: “Oh, Wesker’s calmness and rationality seems like a way of isolating others? It might be a response to trauma, a very typical one... what’s that technical term for it again? Let me check if there’s any comparison group that could explain this better…”
For the sake of precision, I’d rather people not understand what I’m saying than lose accuracy, but as a result, it just kept piling up. (Well, it’s great, but maybe don’t do that again next time.) I’m fully aware of the downside of my thinking process, it’s way too scattered. I always end up needing readers to go back and review the theories I’ve laid out earlier. It's a bad habit I picked up from writing Hogwarts Legacy, where I tend to leave too many clues and foreshadowing.
I’m not very good at linear writing. I tend to use multiple foreshadowing points as anchors and quickly review things in my mind without strictly following a linear progression. The advantage of linear writing is that it reads smoothly, one idea flowing into the next, but the downside is that it’s hard to insert evidence and there’s a big risk of missing out on important details or depth.
Writing in a networked way raises the reading bar too high, to the point where even I start to struggle with supporting the content with my own knowledge. I end up learning things outside my expertise just to keep going. If I don't specifically adjust the overall structure and add brief summaries, the piece becomes too loose and can lead to information overload. But the upside is that every key theory and event I bring up is interconnected, reinforcing each other over time, which makes it feel more like describing a “real person” rather than a “symbolic character”.
As I got deeper into the writing, especially in the later stages, I found myself stuck, sitting in front of the computer, barely managing to squeeze out a few words. My thoughts were there, but turning those into something coherent and readable was a whole different story. On top of that, I had to balance adding narrative elements while diving deeper into psychology. The further I went into psychology, the more I felt I was uncovering the “human” side of Wesker that had been hidden, but the biggest risk was that I could lose solid evidence to back up my analysis. There was a real danger of emotional projection, which would take me away from the “objectivity” I emphasized at the beginning of the document. After all, my goal was always “to restore and rebuild the character,” with rigor as the top priority.
But that wasn’t the most frustrating part. The most head-scratching, almost emotionally overwhelming part came when I was writing the RE5 section. The whole time I kept thinking, “No, I have to stay objective. This isn’t a rant piece, it’s a proper, emotion-free analysis.” By the end, I was so fed up that I didn’t even want to look at the original RE5 files anymore. At first, it was like “Wesker's event records from 1960 to 2007,” but after the part where he kills Spencer, the records suddenly became, “Next, he strives to realize his Ouroboros plan and sees himself as the god of the new human race.” I was left absolutely speechless.
I mean:“Excuse me?? Sir?? How did you turn into ‘I shall become God’ in two seconds flat?? What exactly set you off?? What kind of cosmic slap did you receive??”
RE5's content and files... honestly, there’s not much left to dig into. The good parts are really good, but the bad parts are just so bad, to the point that the entire plot and cutscenes are etched into my brain. As for Wesker’s psyche, well, let’s just say he could really use a therapist.
Wesker in RE5, if you ask me, I dislike him—but honestly, yes, I do. In my opinion, he's commercially successful, and his character design is excellent. However, the character development in RE5 completely nails Wesker down to various labels: the tyrant, the cold-blooded demon, the sociopath, or even the bossy president, dom, “daddy” figure, and a mentally unstable person. I can understand how he ended up being portrayed this way, and I can see the emotional outbursts he has in interactions with other characters. These emotional explosions are exactly what a lot of fan creations are based on, because they’re something we can feel and empathize with. The space for creation here is wider, even more than the human aspects that could be freely added during the Mikami era. (There's more room for psychological interpretations, especially when you reinterpret RE1 content based on RE5. He becomes more unique and humanized this way. While Mikami's era aimed to understand Wesker's actions through rationality, Takeuchi Jun's era looks at him through an emotional lens.)
My dissatisfaction with RE5 isn't just limited to that. The character development of Excella is overly flat and superficial. She doesn't really come across as the beautiful and intelligent executive of Tricell that she was supposed to be, which is a bit of a missed opportunity. Also, the dialogue is too forced and over-the-top, which makes it feel very sophomoric—not like the simpler, more understated dialogue in the earlier installments.
But if you say that RE5 is a total disaster in terms of the story, I both agree and disagree. First, objectively speaking, without a second translation for interpretation, it's true that the original dialogue feels disjointed, so calling it a disaster is certainly justified. Also, when it comes to game design, the player experience is very polarized, some love it, some hate it.
But after carefully comparing the details of the dialogue, it's clear that the writers didn’t intentionally write badly. It’s more of a matter of skill level.
Now I need to bring up some groundbreaking lines that I didn't include in the main body of the text. Initially, I planned to mention them in the section on character relationships, but by the time I got to analyzing Wesker, there was simply no space to mention Chris. Plus, the document was already so dense with information that I just didn't have room to fit it in.
In the 2002 RE1 Remake, during Chris's storyline in the lab, Wesker says to Chris, “You'll never understand.” Then, in the volcano battle of RE5, Wesker says to Chris, “Why do you never understand?”
The first appearance in RE1 Remake, and the final farewell in RE5, is a brilliant bookend, a perfect callback and closure. You can clearly see that the writers took the time to think through Wesker's dialogue from the original Resident Evil era.
This kind of closure with implied meaning is similar to the opening lines in RE:UC and how Wesker's conclusion was handledt.
Alright, no more complaints about the writers; it's all been said before.
I know Wesker's lines to Chris are definitely worth diving into, but personally, I’m not really into the “old enemy” dynamic between them. The chemistry just isn’t there for me. Plus, it’s a real headache trying to figure out when the creators are deliberately leaning into the classic hero-villain trope versus when they’re actually trying to build a deeper, more meaningful interaction that shapes both characters. It’s a lot of work, and honestly, I’d rather focus on other things. That’s why in my analysis, I ended up giving more attention to Wesker's relationship with Birkin, mainly because Birkin plays a bigger role in the reports.
One thing I absolutely have to mention is that Chris and Birkin are two sides of the same coin for Wesker. This is a viewpoint I’ve held for months, and it still stands. If Birkin represents an intellectual counterpart to Wesker, then Chris is his physical counterpart. Even though Chris starts off weaker than Wesker, his potential is immense.
As for why Wesker keeps sparing Chris, I didn’t get to dive into this in the article, but there’s enough in the text to explain it: “No need, respect for his skills, and Chris’s faction can serve as a useful pawn to further Wesker's plans (as seen in RE:UC).” By the end of RE:CV, Chris’s goal is pretty clear, take down Umbrella, not necessarily hunt down Wesker. So, what would make Wesker actually kill or show hostility? Only when someone truly gets in the way of his objectives. We see this with characters like Enrico, or Sergei Vladimir in RE:UC. Outside of RE:CV and RE5, Wesker and Chris almost never have a direct confrontation.
And why does Wesker only start regretting not killing Chris back in RE5 (“I should've killed you years ago”)? All I can say is that his early arrogance didn't let him realize that Chris would grow into what he is today. In that situation, Wesker was basically enraged and cornered when he said those words. Setting aside any character pairings for a moment, in that situation, Wesker is pretty much at his breaking point, completely enraged and cornered. The question “Why don’t you ever understand?” is almost a cry of frustration. I’ve wondered if Wesker, at that point, is projecting his own experiences and his “absolute power” theory onto Chris. After all, Chris has seen it all: the betrayal, the loss of his teammates, investigating Umbrella, the Raccoon City incident (even though he wasn't physically there), and then the creation of BSAA to carry out anti-bioterrorism operations. After all these years, Chris should have been able to understand the deeper reasons behind everything that went down. Yet, taking down such a vast, powerful system and network with just one individual is an incredibly difficult task..
This leads to a fundamental difference in the way the two characters think. Chris likely believes that as long as he keeps pushing, he’ll see results, no matter big or small. On the other hand, Wesker, coming from the corporate world of Umbrella, has probably already seen the inevitable outcome. He knows that an individual can't achieve much, and even organizations begin to rot from within over time. His philosophy of “absolute power”, which means fighting power with power, resisting control by controlling, naturally doesn't resonate with Chris.
In Chris’s eyes, Wesker’s actions are like “a dragon slayer turning into a dragon himself”. What's more, Chris has never really stopped to consider why Wesker betrayed them in the first place or what drove him to that point. Even if he tried to think it through, the difference in their early environments would make it impossible for Chris to understand Wesker’s choices and behavior. He simply cannot walk a mile in Wesker’s shoes.
Okay, let's talk about Birkin now, the intellectual counterpart. For me personally, Birkin is similar to Wesker, but also not quite the same. They were in the same environment, part of the same project team for years, from their youth to their early adulthood. I can almost imagine that the reason Birkin and Wesker were able to work together is because in the Umbrella environment, they were able to keep pace with each other’s rhythm and thought processes. In the early days, they were in the same environment, synced in their research.
But Birkin isn't really Wesker's intellectual counterpart. The Report makes it clear that Wesker sees Birkin’s emotional attachment as something abnormal. There are also two other key points: first, Birkin is a pure scholar; he focuses on "how to do things." From constantly obsessing over the reports in his hands to guarding his research outcomes, it’s clear that his attention was entirely on his work. Even Wesker himself mentions in the report that Birkin, “he only focuses on research, has no understanding of the true horrors of Umbrella.”
Wesker, on the other hand, focuses on the "why" behind things. From hypothesizing the outcome of the virus's spread based on the geographical location of the Arklay Research Facility, to questioning the true purpose behind the development of BOW, and ultimately, exploring Spencer’s hidden target.
One is driven by the pursuit of creation, while the other seeks the underlying truth.
Finally, the most important point.
During my research, I came across a common misconception often used in fan communities: the idea that his coldness is linked to the belief that “emotion is a symbol of weakness” or that “emotion = weakness”, and that's why he supposedly discarded it.
But after digging through all the materials, there is absolutely·no·such·thing.
Whether it's conveyed subtly through dialogue or stated outright, I couldn't find any evidence to support that idea at all.
The only hint of this idea is in the Report, where Ada expresses a sense of liking for Leon. He says:
"スパイというのは、感情を持たずに、任務を忠実に遂行するマシンの筈だ" (A spy's obligation and priority is in the mission, to carry out the mission like a machine without any emotional interference.)
This can easily be misinterpreted or distorted. The intended meaning, whether in the original Japanese or the official English, emphasizes the role of "being a spy", much like “being a soldier, a police officer, or a researcher”. It's more about highlighting the identity and position, rather than fundamentally denying "human emotions."
RE1 Remake Script form：
Resident Evil - Game Script - GameCube - By Aquashark - GameFAQs
