Other than that great articleSilent Hill's rotting dogs and oversized inspects are generic stock monsters in comparison, ones which quickly fade from memory.
Some oversized monster inspecting you almost sounds scarier.albino boo said:Spotted a typo at the end of the first paragraph page2
Other than that great articleSilent Hill's rotting dogs and oversized inspects are generic stock monsters in comparison, ones which quickly fade from memory.
Sorry no - Good Old Console Review this week. That said, you can still purchase it digitally for PS3/PSP, which is where I got it.Naldan said:Well and I thought for some reason that Silent Hill got a PC release on Gog.com.
![]()
I pretty much dislike the PS1 emulator that the PS3 uses for those games. Mainly because of the way it handles jagging on HD TVs.Fanghawk said:Sorry no - Good Old Console Review this week. That said, you can still purchase it digitally for PS3/PSP, which is where I got it.Naldan said:Well and I thought for some reason that Silent Hill got a PC release on Gog.com.
![]()
What you say is true.The Rogue Wolf said:I think one of the reasons Silent Hill succeeded was that it went for "unsettling" as much as "scary". True horror in gaming is about anticipation, about trying to figure out the rules of the world you're in and what lives in it- and let me tell you, when I came down from that attic and found myself surrounded by rusted fences and rotting skin for the first time, I realized that the game had just significantly changed those rules and I'd gone from "seriously disadvantaged" to "up a creek".
I couldn't tell you how it happened. But (a) it's apparently not necessary until the carnival boss and (b) there's no way to backtrack to it beforehand, especially once you hit the save point.Johnny Novgorod said:The aglaophotis I get, but how do you miss the rifle? It's quite obviously displayed during your fight with pre-moth Floatstinger.
My criticism has nothing to do with finding/not finding the red vial specifically. I didn't need to get the best ending, or have all player choices be made obvious. It was that SIlent Hill can be made impossible to finish just by missing a few details. That's a poor design choice no matter what console generation it was played in. (Adventure games had the exact same problem, which is a big reason the genre was "dead" for so long.)ThinRedLine said:I'm not really sure what's with the gripe of "I didn't want to play this game again because I missed some items". Find me even a few people who played the game for the first time when it came out, without a guide, and knew both to take the red goo into a vial from the hospital AND that you should throw it at Cybil.
This game, much like SH2, has MULTIPLE ENDINGS. It's MEANT FOR REPLAYS. How can a game reviewer moan about sometihng like this? It's beyond me, in fact as of late, these GOR articles have started to become more and more frustrating to read, since they compare too much anecdotal opinion and what modern games do or don't do.
If you don't like revieweing old games the way they're supposed to be played, why are you doing this? I know this is kind of a harsh critique, but please take it into consideration in future reviews and games you plan to tackle.
Thanks for replying.Fanghawk said:*snip*
My biggest woe with the Silent Hill franchise is that 2 is glorified to Hell and back and people seem to forget that Shattered Memories and Downpour are nothing like that derivative, desperate Homecoming riff-raff.There's a reason Pyramid Head and Silent Hill 2's feminine mannequins were overused in sequels - they're highly memorable figures.
No worries at all! Believe me, I've heard worse.ThinRedLine said:Thanks for replying.Fanghawk said:*snip*
I just wanted to point out that looking at the comments, other people as well have also questioned you missing the rifle the first time round, as it seems like it's not something easy to do for most. If your point is that the game has faults just because there is a possibility to miss it, that opinion would unfortunately lend to so many different games and genres that it would basically invalidate the vast majority of games ever made into "bad design".
Critique the critics, is what I say, there's always room for growth on all sides of the fence, so again thanks for replying, very nice of you.
PS. Are all the GOR reviews you're playing mostly games you haven't played in the past or when they came out, or do you talk with your editors on what games to review? Would be interesting to hear.
Anyway, keep it up. If I came off a bit strong with the caps there it was just me being a bit baffled.
You're supposed to save yourself into an unwinnable situation because of missing optional items?ThinRedLine said:If you don't like revieweing old games the way they're supposed to be played, why are you doing this?
This is just bad bait, I've seen enough what can go on on these forums to tell you it's useless.Norithics said:You're supposed to save yourself into an unwinnable situation because of missing optional items?ThinRedLine said:If you don't like revieweing old games the way they're supposed to be played, why are you doing this?
Sorry, no. No amount of weird egotistical "Pffssh that was EEEASY for ME" is ever going to put the Bad Design genie back in the bottle. It's an old game with bad flaws, deal with it.![]()