Jimquisition: The Survival of Horror

loc978

New member
Sep 18, 2010
4,900
0
0
Jim, this video contains my favorite thing you've ever said:
...the moronic game industry is stuck in the mindset that if every product isn't the giant cash-vacuum Hobbit-style experience, it's not worth producing.
This is an industry that would rather make no money than some money... that would have nothing if it couldn't have it all.
The potential profit in a horror game is merely good. It's not extreme, it's not exorbitant... and if it's not extremely exorbitant, companies aren't interested.
If you replace "game industry" and "horror games" with any other publicly traded, multinational (headquartered in the US, generally), luxury goods-producing industry and its less than incredibly popular products... this quote still applies.

This is the result of the attitude that any lack of financial expansion is tantamount to failure... an attitude that needs to die if we're ever going to see social progress.

Thank god for you.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Oh my .-.

that was something else... what am I to do about my arousal now?


Anyhow, on the actual topic of the episode. I fully concur that Survival horror / pure horror / scary scare games, are not dead, and should have never been considered dead by the "AAA" side of the industry. I personally love the good old classics, and I'm enjoying the resurgence of them today.

But I also do wonder one thing... Patrick Klepek from Giant bomb, wrote a very interesting piece questioning what could this let's play - horror game - "revolution" cause. While it is certainly clear that watching those videos seems to be quite entertaining for a lot of people, he wondered if it translated into actual sales for the creators, and further success for them.

Technologically, games are getting to a point where it can be truly terrifying to play a survival horror game. And not just fear, but absolute dread. He cited the case of Outlast, which despite positive reviews, has had only OK sales, and he notes that although many people are very interested about watching the gameplay, even more people express that they couldn't bring themselves to play it.
I'm neither here nor there, but I feel that maybe there is a sense that horror games are more popular than what they really are. I mean, with my indie studio we are pre-producing a survival horror game, and we are noticing that the niche might be overflowing.

It's really hard to say, maybe the appeal of current horror games is that they are very enclosed and rather short experiences, in that sense it could make sense that the smaller companies are interested in pursuing them, but they lack the incentive of bigger companies.
All said, I think that The Last of Us was a rather surprising move. Sure, it is not pure Survival Horror, but it is far closer to it than the few last Resident evils. And it went a lot darker than I expected it to be, so it does show that there is a possible interest for that kind of action.

I suppose the next few years will tell.
 

JenSeven

Crazy person! Avoid!
Oct 19, 2010
695
0
0
I was actually half expecting it to wear a David Cage or a John Riccitiello mask, but A:CM works too.

To be honest I'm not a fan of horror games, or horror films, I've never seen the appeal of them, but I do think they need to exist and I would be happy if fans of that genre get something that they really want.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
I need a hug after watching that ending. I never knew Jim was a master of tongue-action. Not sure I ever wanted to know that >.<
 

portal_cat

New member
Jun 25, 2009
62
0
0
I can't wait for the game Evil within. And maybe one day (on a Blue Moon) the big named companies will realize that it's okay to make a horror game with very little fighting that scares people. Horror games may be a bit Esoteric but they do sell.

And as for the ending
http://memestorage.com/_nw/23/87899101.jpg
 

VanQ

Casual Plebeian
Oct 23, 2009
2,729
0
0
I've seen users banned from these forums for posting less graphic content than that ending. Jesus lord. Making out with Colonial Marines like that is worthy of having its own shock site so I can just link people straight to it.

OT: I'm kinda glad that the AAA industry has taken its claws out of the horror genre for the most part. We've seen what they do to the titles they've kept their claws in, I'd hate to imagine if there were MORE RE6s and Colonial Marines out on the market.
 

proghead

New member
Apr 17, 2010
118
0
0
The sack over the head looks really good on you, Jim. The hat on the sack is a nice touch, too. You should wear that more often.

But no more scary soft porn please.
 

Proverbial Jon

Not evil, just mildly malevolent
Nov 10, 2009
2,093
0
0
I'm a huge fan of Jim Sterling's body... of work. However, that was one "vertical slice" I don't need in my life. If you know what I mean ;)

OT: I'm a huge fan of Silent Hill of old. No game franchise has so expertly crafted an atmosphere which invokes so many emotions at once. Repulsion, curiosity, suspension, tension, disgust, apprehension, abject fear... and despite all that you feel a compulsion to move forward.

Silent Hill 3 was the pinnacle of fear for me. That hospital.. it, it did things to me... to my mind o.o You need only look at Heather's collection of love letters from Stanley. They get increasingly creepy and not in an ultra exaggerated horror way but in a real-life stalker fashion. You honestly feel like some creeper is going to come after you, like they are following you... right now. Behind you!

But when all is said and done, they are nothing more than text entries. No cheap jump scare, no startling noises or monsters. Just text. Deeply disturbing and wholly unsettling text made all the more potent by the game world. THAT is what I want to experience again.
 

BloodRed Pixel

New member
Jul 16, 2009
630
0
0
besides that Jim Sterling has now official proven that he is a pervert,

I REALLY think "Within" will suck big time and be nothing more than a big lame QTE full of stupid"emotions".
I have no hopes for that game.
 

JemJar

New member
Feb 17, 2009
731
0
0
Jim, you're an interesting game critic/pundit. But you're an awful actor. Please stick to what you know (when you're not blindly insulting your audience for no good reason) because when you do you make interesting videos.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
You've got me there.

However: drone strikes on innocent civilians. International wiretapping on people who pose no threat. Imminent starvation. I don't think being scared of a stupid video game or movie is much of a step up from what most of the world has to deal with.

Oh wait, one more final thing to horrify people: LIBERALS! HEALTH CARE!
Actually, I sort of wonder if games could be used to convey some of these points. I don't know how you'd make people empathise with starvation through a game, but drone strikes seem well within our grasp. I guess the biggest issue would be mainstream consumption.

It's hard to get Americans to care, though. Most of us only cared about drone strikes when we found out they could potentially be used on American soil. Same with wiretapping. And we're such a sociopathic nation that we blame people--even children--for being hungry.
 

nevarran

New member
Apr 6, 2010
347
0
0
Small wonder I'm feeling uncomfortable while watching your vids and there is someone else in the room with me.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
So what was Jim afraid of? I keep trying to watch but somehow I seem to wind up with blank spaces in my mind between the start and video stop.... I gave up. I suspect it might be some kind of defense in my brain shutting out traumatic experiences....

That said I'll say like I usually do that I think removing combat from horror games is, and always will be, a mistake, largely because combative reactions are natural, and trying to design around the idea of not having combat ultimately becomes just as limiting and experience busting as turning a game into a purely action based experience... a shooter with monsters, which is ultimately what roughly half the shooters out there are anyway.

The trick is of course to design combat so it's something you want to avoid, and generally makes you feel like an underdog. The original, great, survival horror games, achieved this by having what were then necessarily clunky controls, combat wound up becoming a chore because it couldn't be any other way, and oddly the "man tank" worked. The transition however as tech improved was to simply try and make combat like everyone else and again, that didn't work
out too well.

I tend to look towards games like "Condemned" as having basically the right idea, as long as they don't wind up turning every scene into a melee brawl. Your looking at fairly decent combat controls, combined with an environment and relative difficulty that generally doesn't leave you feeling like "He Man".

I also tend to look towards the original "Alone In The Dark" (with the now horrible polygon graphics), a game which presented a decent blend of puzzles and combat, with many cases being situations where you might be able to fight past something, but there was almost invariably another way, and there simply were not enough bullets to shoot everything (nor could everything in your way be shot down).

The thing with the combat free "horror" games is that in a lot of cases I feel like I'm playing the old "7th Guest"/"11th Hour" games combined with forced stealth sequences, and less elaborate mini games. :)

I don't know, maybe the guys that did "Condemned", the guys that did "Dark Souls", and a dream team of atmospheric indie horror games should get together and turn something out.

Also some people will probably be surprised to here me say this (again) but other horror games I kind of wish people would look towards for inspiration are the old "Elvira" games, "Legacy: Realm Of Terror", and "Realms Of The Haunting" a whole era of horror gaming that people tend to forget about, which had some really interesting stuff for it's time. "Elvira 2: Jaws Of Cerberus" had a spell casting system where you had to gather stuff from offices and stuff and guess which items fit the requirements to mix which spell, of course there was some bad design where some items could be used for more than one thing, and if you mixed a spell with an item you needed for another spell (which had a very rare or unique component in the environment) you could literally screw yourself. The monsters were also fairly nasty, and I remember going around scrounging spell components to get enough stuff to fight some of the monsters. Not to mention some odd puzzles like using a tuning fork to break a skylight to let sunlight in on a vampire (if I remember correctly). I admit one thing I do not miss though is "adventure game logic". :)
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
A game with only one Xenomorph.

Hey, that sounds like a really neat idea.

Where you shoot clones and mercenaries...

AND....that doesn't.
 

Stabby Joe

New member
Jul 30, 2008
1,545
0
0
One thing I see happening a lot is when TV and film producers try and cash in on what I'm calling "internet success". If it's popular online we can use it, such as interconnected platforms, TV/films based on original online properties, online exclusive shows etc.

As correctly said in this video, horror games are very popular on sites like Youtube so I'm surprised the big companies don't try and ape that success since it seems the automatic response for them in other departments.

Also while not mentioned in this video, the prime Bethesda example of single player only success: Skyrim! But that had its own episode.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
The difference I find is that horror movies are usually pretty cheap. That is the reason Saw or Paranormal Activity make a lot of money: not because they can sell more tickets than Man of Steel, but because they make a absurd return with a dedicated audience, since they cost pennies. Horror games only work as indie games. I don't want to sound dismissive, but I don't think high profile and horror mix very well. For all the Riccitiello fun we have, at least EA tried it with Dead Space, four times, so he knows how much it really costs.

AAA horror games need to have some production value, as much as any AAA game. Either they do, or they rely in darkness to create a moody ambiance (and there is just so much you can do with it). Anything shorter than that, and we get models and animations like the ones in Colonial Marines. Because of that, they can't really count with a small but dedicated audience (small being the key word there)
 

geier

New member
Oct 15, 2010
250
0
0
Well, like allways, you are right jim.
But i don't understand the point of the video. As you said, survival horror is not dead and new small studios make good games and therefor profit. I think this is the best possible situation. These studios can, without the competition from AAA studios, serve to the needs of the dedicated fans and make good money from it.

So everyone wins:
Gamers get games from little studios that want to produce an experience, not only a product.
Small studios can make money in a "safe" enviroment without big competition.
 

UNHchabo

New member
Dec 24, 2008
535
0
0
mdqp said:
Anyway, I certainly wouldn't mind more survival horror games, although I feel lately we are missing a "middle of the road" experience, right now either indie developers make no combat horror games, or AAA studios make action packed horror games, but nobody seems to make games where fighting is difficult and discouraged, but possible, with at least a little bullet management.
I think Receiver [http://www.wolfire.com/receiver] fits this definition -- if you're not careful you run out of ammo very quickly, the music and audio tapes give a creepy atmosphere, and it's possible to do a "pacifist run", but very difficult.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Zachary Amaranth said:
Aardvaarkman said:
You've got me there.

However: drone strikes on innocent civilians. International wiretapping on people who pose no threat. Imminent starvation. I don't think being scared of a stupid video game or movie is much of a step up from what most of the world has to deal with.

Oh wait, one more final thing to horrify people: LIBERALS! HEALTH CARE!
Actually, I sort of wonder if games could be used to convey some of these points. I don't know how you'd make people empathise with starvation through a game, but drone strikes seem well within our grasp. I guess the biggest issue would be mainstream consumption.

It's hard to get Americans to care, though. Most of us only cared about drone strikes when we found out they could potentially be used on American soil. Same with wiretapping. And we're such a sociopathic nation that we blame people--even children--for being hungry.
I think people like you and me aren't alone in thinking that. Plenty of us think that. It's just that the people who cause that kind of crap tend to be the loudest and most stubborn. I think we should keep that in mind and remind ourselves that vocal minorities don't define groups.