One thing I will always be painfully passive agrresive about is the origin of survival horror; many say that Resident Evil perfected it, some say Sweet Home was merely a starting point, others say Alone in The Dark was a good game, but not a good horror...
Honestly, you'd be suprised how few people have played these two games, at least compared to RE. So today, I'll be looking at them, because I'm bored.
[HEADING=2]Sweet Home[/HEADING]
When looking at this game, you'll have to remember that this game is on the NES. And it's got blood, lots of that, gore, babies in incinerators, melting faces, and heads puking out rats, all under the guise of cutesy, super deformed 8 bit graphics.
It was also never officially translated; however, a small group of fans translated and tweeked with the game, sold it, and donated the earnings to charity; thus, hundreds of English copies are still being made, and are still in circulation today. Seriously, if you want this game, go get it on eBay, Amazon, whatever. They'll have it, trust me.
The game starts with the 5 characters - and you'll want to name them, because it's important later - who are also a film crew making a documentary. There's the director, the all-rounder in battle, the tank cameraman, the crappy one but she's also the medic so whatever she gets a pass, the director's daughter who is awesome, and the maid who doesn't really do much.
Yes, it's an RPG. A very complex one at that. When they get to the mansion, the supposed death place of a painter and his wife, the wife's angry ghost locks them inside, with the monsters and ghouls and stuff. The game's RPG mechanics are only there; you'll comfortabley reach the maximum level 2/4s into the game, which I hate in RPGs (when you max out too fast, I mean) and there are many, many different weapons, though they're also only really there.
Really, what is really the biggey about the game is the micromanagement: Every character has a key item, and two inventory slots; there are copies of the key items that you can put in the inventory slots, too.
The director has a lighter, to burn ropes and damage monsters.
The camera man has a camera and a stupid sweater, and he uses both to kill enemies with his sheer moxie.
The medic has a first aid kit, used to heal status ailments except from death because, y'know, they're dead.
The director's daughter has a key, making her an immediate de-facto member of the party.
The maid has a vacuum to vacuum things.
You can only have 3 members per group. However, the whole level business isn't the only form of progression; it also uses a Quest for Glory type system, in which a character gets stronger anyway, ultimately meaning that all levels do is increase HP and anti-cultural message-making.
I went through the game using the director's daughter character, and traversing back and forth between the two groups. By the end of the game, she could take out pretty much anything.
The game has it all: Traps, lava, blood, ice, spikes, permanent-death, non-regenerating health items (and there aren't many, by the way), random encounters, and for the time, amazing visuals and music, and micromanagement. Seriously, go play it now, you'll finish it in about 4 hours, if you're quick.
Sweet Home remains one of my favourite games today, and no, not because of nostalgia. I happened to hate this game when I first played it because I didn't have time to appreciate it.
[HEADING=2]Alone in The Dark[/HEADING]
Alone in The Dark follows the story of Edward Carnby/Emily Hartson (There's no word on whose the real protagonist/canon protagonist, so I'll just go with Emily, because she's closer to the other characters in term of blood relations) as they go to the house of a dead man. Emily's uncle had killed himself via hanging just days ago, and they want to know what's going on. Oh, and Edward wants a piano or something.
The game was noted for its odd use of camera angles, gorgeous sprite backdrops, and moving, polygonal characters. It uses a very intelligent system to move the 3d character around 2d areas, which ironically would later be used in The Sims, a game that also takes place in a horrible house where everyone keeps dying in mysterious ways (although with a lot more grills and babies).
The gameplay was specifically designed to hate you, but also teach you; combat is a mess, but a good mess. You held down the attack button, and then you move your character's individual body parts to attack. It's a lot funner and easier to learn than it sounds. The monsters were annoying dogs, Nyarlathotep's retarded children, zombies (lots of them), and rats that won't die. All in all, it was fondly remembered.
As you can see, Resident Evil takes heavy influence from both, but neither gets credited as the inventor of survival horror, which I fucking despise.
[HEADING=2]Alone in The Dark. The other... "one", and thank god there was only one.[/HEADING]
The recent Alone in The Dark, er... well, it had a lot of ideas. It's about Edward Carnby but NOT in New York's big park thingy, and there are zombies and crap and Satan.
The game's got a lot of good ideas; the idea that you need fire to actually kill stuff, for example, is a good idea.
The vast majority of enemies can only be killed with fire. Ethanol ridden bullets, molotovs, aerosol cans, anything you can get your hands on that might explode, thus become extremely valuabe, making the game actually feel like a survival horror game.... except that there are lots of bullets and lots of alcohol, making it just another generic shooter.
The ability to swap between 1st and 3rd person is also a good idea - personally, I'd preffer to play in 1st person, as it's more immersive and, well, horrifying if you look at the horrible monsters through the characters' eyes. However, it's obviously not finished; you don't turn in 1st person; rather than change the control scheme, or revamp both control schemes to work together, they just left it.
For example, you don't turn, you move anyway, making precision weird, and just... well, shitty. It also makes the platforming (yes, you read that right) horrible, whether you're in first or third person mode. So, nope, they couldn't even get a first person mode right.
Let's look at a game that does this well, Siren: Blood Curse. Also a mediocre game (but not a horrible game, like this one) with a few good ideas, it also features the ability to play in first person, except if you choose to, it actually contributes a suprising amount to the game's atmosphere, instead of just... existing. This is obviously what Alone in The Dark's devs tried to pull off, and they failed.
They wanted a, "The player's probably going to want to play the majority of the game in one mode, and only switch to the other when neccesary", just like Siren's devs thought, except here it's just fucked up and stupid and doesn't work and I hate this piece of crap.
The combat also mimicks the first game's. While the first game had a very precise, well-functioning combat system that was a lern-2-fly-noob kind of thing that you'd actually get better at the deeper you got into the game (along with exploration and micromanagement in general, showing the game's learn it, master it mentality) this game can't even do that right, because it's like Carnby doesn't have elbows. His weapons and weapon just go everywhere and don't hit anything.
[HEADING=2]So, what just is Survival Horror?[/HEADING]
Survival Horror finds its roots in Japan, duh.
Compare Silent Hill 2, 3 and 4 to Doom.
In Silent Hill, you are alone, in a foggy, scary, monstrous resort town/mall/your own home, whatever, with horrible, grotesque abominations that you have too much in common with you for your own comfort, that all hate you, and want to you dead, but maybe only to relieve their own pain.
Defining gameplay points include strategical thinking, management, limited items, and an emphasis on puzzles, but also gameplay, making a balance of the two, all while staying scary, but not in "oh look at me I'm a clown on fire" way, but in a more subtle way. So, "disturbing" and "psychological" might be better words than "terrifying", but it's all still there.
In Doom, you are on Mars, and you're a musclebound guy with a huge minigun shooting demons and zombies and zombie-demons and the minigun's bullets explode.
Defining gameplay points include explosions, standing on a pile of corpses, more explosions, finding cool guns, and making things die.
Survival Horror, unlike Western Horror, depend of emotions and psychology, much like Japanese horror, rather than Western Horror's... average fare. And they don't mix well.
Japan has attempted to make western horror movies. Sweet Home itself is based on a movie. The movie is cheesy, narmy, and it's definetely worth a watch simply because it's shaped like itself (it also served as footing for many Japanese actors today).
Whereas, America's attempts at Japanese Horror (Alone in The Dark 2008, for example) have all been about as successful as America's attempts at their's.
It's only in European countries and cultures do the two mix. The Bunyip, Lamb Tree of Caunterbury, Man-Eating Trees, and west Asian and Russian horror stories and fiction, do these two elements really mix.
Next time, a closer look at Silent Hill (specifically the two best known game, 2 and 3) and me rambling on about how awesome the Japanese are at making people shit themselves.
Honestly, you'd be suprised how few people have played these two games, at least compared to RE. So today, I'll be looking at them, because I'm bored.
[HEADING=2]Sweet Home[/HEADING]
When looking at this game, you'll have to remember that this game is on the NES. And it's got blood, lots of that, gore, babies in incinerators, melting faces, and heads puking out rats, all under the guise of cutesy, super deformed 8 bit graphics.
It was also never officially translated; however, a small group of fans translated and tweeked with the game, sold it, and donated the earnings to charity; thus, hundreds of English copies are still being made, and are still in circulation today. Seriously, if you want this game, go get it on eBay, Amazon, whatever. They'll have it, trust me.
The game starts with the 5 characters - and you'll want to name them, because it's important later - who are also a film crew making a documentary. There's the director, the all-rounder in battle, the tank cameraman, the crappy one but she's also the medic so whatever she gets a pass, the director's daughter who is awesome, and the maid who doesn't really do much.
Yes, it's an RPG. A very complex one at that. When they get to the mansion, the supposed death place of a painter and his wife, the wife's angry ghost locks them inside, with the monsters and ghouls and stuff. The game's RPG mechanics are only there; you'll comfortabley reach the maximum level 2/4s into the game, which I hate in RPGs (when you max out too fast, I mean) and there are many, many different weapons, though they're also only really there.
Really, what is really the biggey about the game is the micromanagement: Every character has a key item, and two inventory slots; there are copies of the key items that you can put in the inventory slots, too.
The director has a lighter, to burn ropes and damage monsters.
The camera man has a camera and a stupid sweater, and he uses both to kill enemies with his sheer moxie.
The medic has a first aid kit, used to heal status ailments except from death because, y'know, they're dead.
The director's daughter has a key, making her an immediate de-facto member of the party.
The maid has a vacuum to vacuum things.
You can only have 3 members per group. However, the whole level business isn't the only form of progression; it also uses a Quest for Glory type system, in which a character gets stronger anyway, ultimately meaning that all levels do is increase HP and anti-cultural message-making.
I went through the game using the director's daughter character, and traversing back and forth between the two groups. By the end of the game, she could take out pretty much anything.
The game has it all: Traps, lava, blood, ice, spikes, permanent-death, non-regenerating health items (and there aren't many, by the way), random encounters, and for the time, amazing visuals and music, and micromanagement. Seriously, go play it now, you'll finish it in about 4 hours, if you're quick.
Sweet Home remains one of my favourite games today, and no, not because of nostalgia. I happened to hate this game when I first played it because I didn't have time to appreciate it.
[HEADING=2]Alone in The Dark[/HEADING]
Alone in The Dark follows the story of Edward Carnby/Emily Hartson (There's no word on whose the real protagonist/canon protagonist, so I'll just go with Emily, because she's closer to the other characters in term of blood relations) as they go to the house of a dead man. Emily's uncle had killed himself via hanging just days ago, and they want to know what's going on. Oh, and Edward wants a piano or something.
The game was noted for its odd use of camera angles, gorgeous sprite backdrops, and moving, polygonal characters. It uses a very intelligent system to move the 3d character around 2d areas, which ironically would later be used in The Sims, a game that also takes place in a horrible house where everyone keeps dying in mysterious ways (although with a lot more grills and babies).
The gameplay was specifically designed to hate you, but also teach you; combat is a mess, but a good mess. You held down the attack button, and then you move your character's individual body parts to attack. It's a lot funner and easier to learn than it sounds. The monsters were annoying dogs, Nyarlathotep's retarded children, zombies (lots of them), and rats that won't die. All in all, it was fondly remembered.
As you can see, Resident Evil takes heavy influence from both, but neither gets credited as the inventor of survival horror, which I fucking despise.
[HEADING=2]Alone in The Dark. The other... "one", and thank god there was only one.[/HEADING]
The recent Alone in The Dark, er... well, it had a lot of ideas. It's about Edward Carnby but NOT in New York's big park thingy, and there are zombies and crap and Satan.
The game's got a lot of good ideas; the idea that you need fire to actually kill stuff, for example, is a good idea.
The vast majority of enemies can only be killed with fire. Ethanol ridden bullets, molotovs, aerosol cans, anything you can get your hands on that might explode, thus become extremely valuabe, making the game actually feel like a survival horror game.... except that there are lots of bullets and lots of alcohol, making it just another generic shooter.
The ability to swap between 1st and 3rd person is also a good idea - personally, I'd preffer to play in 1st person, as it's more immersive and, well, horrifying if you look at the horrible monsters through the characters' eyes. However, it's obviously not finished; you don't turn in 1st person; rather than change the control scheme, or revamp both control schemes to work together, they just left it.
For example, you don't turn, you move anyway, making precision weird, and just... well, shitty. It also makes the platforming (yes, you read that right) horrible, whether you're in first or third person mode. So, nope, they couldn't even get a first person mode right.
Let's look at a game that does this well, Siren: Blood Curse. Also a mediocre game (but not a horrible game, like this one) with a few good ideas, it also features the ability to play in first person, except if you choose to, it actually contributes a suprising amount to the game's atmosphere, instead of just... existing. This is obviously what Alone in The Dark's devs tried to pull off, and they failed.
They wanted a, "The player's probably going to want to play the majority of the game in one mode, and only switch to the other when neccesary", just like Siren's devs thought, except here it's just fucked up and stupid and doesn't work and I hate this piece of crap.
The combat also mimicks the first game's. While the first game had a very precise, well-functioning combat system that was a lern-2-fly-noob kind of thing that you'd actually get better at the deeper you got into the game (along with exploration and micromanagement in general, showing the game's learn it, master it mentality) this game can't even do that right, because it's like Carnby doesn't have elbows. His weapons and weapon just go everywhere and don't hit anything.
[HEADING=2]So, what just is Survival Horror?[/HEADING]
Survival Horror finds its roots in Japan, duh.
Compare Silent Hill 2, 3 and 4 to Doom.
In Silent Hill, you are alone, in a foggy, scary, monstrous resort town/mall/your own home, whatever, with horrible, grotesque abominations that you have too much in common with you for your own comfort, that all hate you, and want to you dead, but maybe only to relieve their own pain.
Defining gameplay points include strategical thinking, management, limited items, and an emphasis on puzzles, but also gameplay, making a balance of the two, all while staying scary, but not in "oh look at me I'm a clown on fire" way, but in a more subtle way. So, "disturbing" and "psychological" might be better words than "terrifying", but it's all still there.
In Doom, you are on Mars, and you're a musclebound guy with a huge minigun shooting demons and zombies and zombie-demons and the minigun's bullets explode.
Defining gameplay points include explosions, standing on a pile of corpses, more explosions, finding cool guns, and making things die.
Survival Horror, unlike Western Horror, depend of emotions and psychology, much like Japanese horror, rather than Western Horror's... average fare. And they don't mix well.
Japan has attempted to make western horror movies. Sweet Home itself is based on a movie. The movie is cheesy, narmy, and it's definetely worth a watch simply because it's shaped like itself (it also served as footing for many Japanese actors today).
Whereas, America's attempts at Japanese Horror (Alone in The Dark 2008, for example) have all been about as successful as America's attempts at their's.
It's only in European countries and cultures do the two mix. The Bunyip, Lamb Tree of Caunterbury, Man-Eating Trees, and west Asian and Russian horror stories and fiction, do these two elements really mix.
Next time, a closer look at Silent Hill (specifically the two best known game, 2 and 3) and me rambling on about how awesome the Japanese are at making people shit themselves.
