No, bad and or no combat is a defining feature of the genre. Homecoming for example was not a survival horror.Yopaz said:Bad combat is not a defining feature, but you're right, it's a trend. Emphasizing survival by any means necessary, make even generic monsters hard to beat in order to keep the tension up.Nazrel said:I would have shrugged and said "fair enough"... but you brought up the combat, showing you have no idea what I was talking about. I guess I could have been clearer... but given this is a forum for a video that explains a least the combat part of that concept... I really shouldn't have had to.Yopaz said:Actually I have read reviews complaining about the combat, the story and the environment, but thanks for pointing out that I have read different reviews than you.Nazrel said:If you read the details, the complaints in most reviews amount to "This sucks because it's a survival horror game." without the writer realizing that's what they're complaining about... and some choppiness in the Xbox version... and all but 3 monsters looking pretty generic.Yopaz said:I am surprised to hear him say positive things about this game since from what I have seen from other reviews there's been a lot of negative things that have been mentioned. Still his general opinion of the game seemed to indicate that he didn't like it very much so *I think I might give this one a miss.
The disempowerment of the player is a major aspect of Survival horror; I looked through as many reviews as I could find and this aspect factored heavily into the complaints of quite a lot of them, oblivious to the fact this is a defining characteristic of the genre.
For the sake of accuracy I guess I really should have said "many complaints in most reviews."
I assume they're confusing things like "Dead Space" and "Left 4 Dead" with survival horror.
Whether we read the same reviews or not is irrelevant, because it doesn't discount the trend.
However bad story is not a defining feature for a survival horror. When someone reviews a survival horror game and complains about the story they are not complaining about the game being a survival horror game.
Also the environment is fucking essential for a survival horror game. When they are complaining about that being bad they are complaining about the game NOT being a survival horror game.
In short, 2 of 3 of the complaints I have seen have not been a defining point for survival horror thus not all complaints are about the game being a survival horror.
The trend I mentioned wasn't the combat being in the games, it's them being panned for it.
As for story and environment...I would have shrugged and said "fair enough"... like I already said. Ergo the revision above to "many complaints".
Regardless of my own opinion on the matter, there is no trend of the issues they bring up in there regard being antithetical to the entire genre.
But the environment is most certainly not anti-survival horror though, you might make the argument it's the opposite of how a silent hill game should be; going with the more surreal and dynamic approach, as opposed to the more traditional oppressive and stagnant kind dread of the original games.
P.S. By stagnant I mean a feeling of stagnancy. I'm not calling it a stagnant approach.