| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| JLG
3th Post
 
New Customer
|  "Re(5):Silent Hill 5"
, posted Tue 17 Aug 23:53
quote:
For what I can say, I'm not sure of these games have any interesting character in them.
Yeah, I think that's a flaw in general with first-person perspective games (and forgive me if I'm making a dumb over-generalization), the character exists only to be a stand-in for the player. Since SH relies so much on characters, I don't think first-person all the time would work.
quote:
Since character blandness (and in recent SH, bad scenario development as a whole) is the bigger problem of the series so far, I don't see the game going in a direction I like.
Thank god Siren 2 will be there in late 2005.
I'm willing to cut the Silent Hill team some slack with what direction they choose to go in, if just because I like 1 through 3 so much. That said, I am adverse to the new stuff SH4 is bringing to the table, but I hope to be proven wrong once September rolls around.
I don't find the characters bland - I think it's more of case of dwindling reasons to drag people to Silent Hill. You can only do so many versions of the person with a person sin/secret facing it in the town (that SH2 did that so well weakens the need for another one). I wonder if Team SH is getting carried away with ramping up the action aspect of the series; it was understandable in SH3, since it tied in with the story, but invincible ghosts and a limited inventory (if what I hear is correct about SH4) I don't like. (But then, I still bought Siren. Haven't started it yet, but that's because I'm a real wuss.)
|
| Undead Fred 1856th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
  
    
    
    
   
| "Re(6):Silent Hill 5" , posted Wed 18 Aug 02:07
quote:
I'm willing to cut the Silent Hill team some slack with what direction they choose to go in, if just because I like 1 through 3 so much. That said, I am adverse to the new stuff SH4 is bringing to the table, but I hope to be proven wrong once September rolls around.
I don't find the characters bland - I think it's more of case of dwindling reasons to drag people to Silent Hill. You can only do so many versions of the person with a person sin/secret facing it in the town (that SH2 did that so well weakens the need for another one). I wonder if Team SH is getting carried away with ramping up the action aspect of the series; it was understandable in SH3, since it tied in with the story, but invincible ghosts and a limited inventory (if what I hear is correct about SH4) I don't like. (But then, I still bought Siren. Haven't started it yet, but that's because I'm a real wuss.)
Yeah, I shudder when I hear of things they changed for SH4... so, there's first-person sections now? I seriously hope they don't make SH5 all first-person... that makes me nervous (and not in the way SH games are supposed to make you nervous). But it's too early to worry about that now, I still haven't played 4 yet (but I read that first spoiler without thinking... SADNESS). And we have a limited inventory now? Bleh. Magic pockets aren't really that realistic, but RE-style inventory management is a gigantic pain in the ass.
Yeah, I'm actually glad they're going to wait for the next one. It was seriously in danger of being reduced to Hollywood summer blockbuster levels. 1 and 2 are the best ones in my opinion... 3's not bad, but it started getting that hint of feeling rushed and drifting away from what made the first two so great. Now 4's sounding disappointing from what I've read. I'm sure the graphics will be pretty, but everything I had respected about the series up to that point had been changed. I'm hoping I won't be totally disappointed by 4, but at least they're giving 5 time instead of cranking it out in under a year.
|
| Krzyzewski Man 839th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(5):Silent Hill 5" , posted Wed 18 Aug 12:39
quote:
From what I can tell, it seems that the even numbered games are the ones that are bad.
Oh. So you consider SH games after the first one to be any good.
Oh.
He must be shrooming.
quote:
Doom. System Shock. Undying. FPSs can be scary, too. Heck, when you don't have 360 degree vision, you feel even less safe.
For what I can say, I'm not sure of these games have any interesting character in them.
Que? System Shock's Shodan is one of the most famous video game villains of all time. The family in Undying had some excellent characters, particularly Aaron and Lisbeth(sp?). And considering that in first-person games, you're essentially the main character, things are as interesting as you want, to a point.
quote:
Since character blandness (and in recent SH, bad scenario development as a whole) is the bigger problem of the series so far, I don't see the game going in a direction I like.
They need to put in some old people. Or, at least, people less normal than usual. Silent Hill shouldn't be populated by anyone that's anywhere near good mental health.
Hmm... you know, SH5: Senile Hill might be a good idea. I mean, hell, if nursing homes are as bad as they are in real life...
The resident lapsed Catholic progressive absurdist.
|
| deisied
25th Post
Rare Customer
| "henshin" , posted Wed 18 Aug 17:50:
silent hill is one of the series that relatively benefits from being part of the community, i dunno, just playing through sh2 or something, i can imagine not getting it as much and thusly feeling more detatched from it than 1, but I think it's probably the best, the first was pretty excellent though, more surreal as far as a series of events goes, and that's always cool in my book. Still, 2 was more full, and the psychological angle of course, and better monster designs than whoa skinless dog!(i.e. might as well be resident evil). The Average Guy in Brown Coat thing is a sorta understandable argument, but really isn't the point, unless of course you're comparing it to Siren.
i tend to not give a crap about a lot of people's opinions on SH though, including japan's, because they just care about OMG HEHE CUTE UNLOCKABLES KYAA!...die
[this message was edited by deisied on Wed 18 Aug 17:59] |
| JLG
4th Post
New Customer
| "Re(8):I Am a Pretentious Twit" , posted Wed 18 Aug 22:22
For me, I can't really choose any one over the other. Every SH has its strengths; 1 for the atmosphere and settings; 2 for the story (probably what makes everyone consider it the best, since the twist near the end was such a shot in the gut), enemy designs and the clever way of deciding the endings (how you act in the game determines if you get a good or bad ending); and 3 for the characters and design.
quote:
oddly enough, the even numbered titles have the most indepth and cohesive overall stories.
Well, 3 is meant to fill in and continue where 1 left off, so I don't know if that's the case.
quote:
I agree, and would also like to add that the characters seem more meaningful and symbolic in Silent Hill 2 and 4 then Silent Hill 1 and 3. Claudia would have been a really neat character if we knew more about her. Vincent too.
I'm going to be veeeeery long-winded and veeeeery pretentious and rambling, so I apologize in advance. I have to use my useless college English/Cinema analyzing skills somewhere. I put on my beret. Don't hurt me!
I thought SH3 gave us enough to know about them, though it did come all at once at the last area. SH3 has great characters, it's just that the pace at which we learn about each character is a bit off at times. Claudia is a great, tragic character whom fundamentalist religion has doomed (how timely!). Vincent, on the other hand, is a bit more realistic and has more earthly, material desires. He says how inconvenient it would be for him to have God born. Two sides of religion that clash; who says they aren't symbolic? Claudia's also in interesting character, not just because she fully accepts the consequences of her actions and is so blinded by religion to continue doing dreadful things, it's the rare case of preacher doing what they preach. Heather is the innocent that religion sacrifices for its own purposes, but Claudia, too, is shown to be a martyr as well, only her innocence has been corrupted by the cult. Claudia (if you read her diary where she looks at books on things like child slavery and wishes she could make a difference) probably would've become a very noble person if she grew up under a different religion, or no religion at all.
Heather, too, is an interesting character. She is just a normal person with unusual, supernatural memories suddenly flooding back. It's not quite as surprising a twist as in SH2, but the twist here is probably more devestating:
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
not only has the cult caught up to her (the song that kicks off the game is "End of Small Sanctuary"), her father, SH1 Harry, has been killed, leaving her alone. They thought they could escape, but the cult keeps pulling them back in!
Heather's divisions within herself - the suicidal, scarred Alessa side (shown by the Memory of Alessa boss on the merry-go-round) and the side that wants to live (Cheryl/Heather) - also provide depth to her character.
End of Spoiler
Heather also is more resistant to the wiles of the town than previous characters - whereas Harry and James were drawn into and wandered around the town acting like pawns of the evil forces at times, Heather is more direct and focused (which mostly explains why you don't explore the town as much: she's focused on ending the matter more than exploring and discovering things. Though I do wish there was more of the town featured; what fun would be had if there was a scenario that had Heather exploring Alessa's old school. Just having Heather, in the alternate class room, react to a list of the class' resolutions by commenting that none of those resolutions included betraying their friends, while a nice jab, only makes one more interested.) (Damn, that's a long paranthetical.)
I can be accused of looking too hard into things, I admit. Sorry...
|
| Undead Fred 1857th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(9):I Am a Pretentious Twit" , posted Wed 18 Aug 23:25
Yeah, I'm not sure why people here don't seem to really like 2... I thought it was the deepest one of all of them story-wise, actually. 1 was a classic, 2 was really really engaging (only complaints were clumsier fighting and less "reliable" ending system), and 3 was okay, but it seemed a little rushed. Plus, I'd rather they not tie into the previous games at all, really. I liked the semi-nostalgic side of SH3, but I WANT loose ends and unanswered questions in SH. It's the only game I've ever played where I see things and try to figure out what they really mean and what's really happening and so on. That's what I loved about the SH series... it raises questions about what's going on, but doesn't spell everything out for you. It's a whole lot scarier that way.
As for the comments about the characters being generic- again, something I've always loved about SH. The game has a lot more believability since the game features a lot more average characters that aren't really strong, aren't masters of fighting, and get winded. You know one of the reasons why games like the Suffering aren't scary? Because you're a muscled-up convict from death row running around kicking ass. Average characters in SH games lower your confidence that your character's going to survive the game, so things are a lot more intense. I still find the characters interesting, even though they're fairly generic-looking.
|
| Undead Fred 1860th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(9):Silent Hill 5" , posted Thu 19 Aug 15:53
quote:
Then the vast majority of the Silent Hill community are morons.
Ahhhhh, what were we thinking? We were so blind... of COURSE Siren is far better in every way. It takes place in Japan and doesn't have any filthy Americans in it. Everyone who likes Silent Hill is a CONFORMIST. :(
quote:
And since I've trolled enough today here is why I despise SH2 as much as 3 and 4 : a plot twist doesn't make a character. And even if you try to give "psychological depth" (but you must never have opened a book to call him deep) to a character, the character must exist beforehand. He has to have presence, charism. Unfortunately, the acting in the whole series is so awful I can't see any character there, just beautiful human-shapped polygon (and an awful voice actor). Why SH1 is above the rest is because it had that nightmare thing that didn't have anything to do with the stupid main character (the "waking up suddenly at random places", waking up over and over and over). That was the clever thing in the game, that was what made it interesting. A SH without that clever and original idea is just a Bio Hazard clone, with some slightly better details and some slightly worse.
(read the analysis od the characters in SH3)
A.... Ah.... I don't know where to begin. It's.... aha.
Well, in terms of VIDEO GAMES, Silent Hill has much more "psychological depth" than many other games out there. Yes, I agree, a plot twist doesn't make a character, but I don't really think bad acting in a game really takes character away either when it has other elements backing it up. Bad storytelling and bad writing can do a lot more to damage a character than just acting. If the acting was on like a Troma level, then I could probably see what you mean about bad acting, but I really didn't think it was that bad. I've seen much worse in video games. I thought the writing in SH had been pretty good so far, and the acting is fairly decent (even the slower, more deadpan acting in the original). I think SH is very different from the RE series, nightmare mode or not. I did miss the "reality warp" thing from SH1 and 3 in SH2, though. Well, they still had it in 2, but it wasn't as obvious in that game.
I think the series has been good so far, and even if they screw up SH4, I doubt it would ever be so bad that I'd take it back to the store. Plus, they'll have SH5 to make up for SH4 if it causes too much SADNESS. At least now they're going to take their time between sequels.
|
| Iggy 4146th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
 
| "Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Thu 19 Aug 17:53:
quote:
Ahhhhh, what were we thinking? We were so blind... of COURSE Siren is far better in every way. It takes place in Japan and doesn't have any filthy Americans in it. Everyone who likes Silent Hill is a CONFORMIST. :(
First, I'm the biggest asshole here, so don't you start assholing me.
Secondly, not only is Siren better in every way, but you're right, part of what makes it better is because it's set in Japan. Because, you see, both games are made by japanese people, and though I can trust japanese people to make interesting japanese characters, experience has tought me they just can't make interesting non-japanese realistic characters. Every character in BH and SH is just stereotypically boring, following the image of "a typical bland hero so the viewer can identify".
And don't try to make me sound as a racist anti-american person, I can do it very well myself if I feel like it.
quote:
Well, in terms of VIDEO GAMES,
In term of a work of fiction, the Silent Hill series don't score quite high. The 1 had interesting ideas, the 2 had the plot twist, then the 3 had Douglas second costume, and the 4 had... its trailer. It's good, but it's not because it's better than, say, BH, that it has to become a standard.
quote:
Silent Hill has much more "psychological depth" than many other games out there.
Explain.
Explain what you mean by "psychological depth". In a game, a scene with psychological depth... I would see a little bit of it at the end of the Escade scenario of Legend of Mana...? I could find 3 or 4 games where I can say there is "psychological depth" here and there. SH is not one of them. Siren isn't either. The characters of Siren don't have time to show their "psychological depth". They are kinda in a hurry. At best, Miyata has some scenes where you could find some hints of his "psychological depth", but it's not in the game, it doesn't have to be there (and it's in Maniacs).
Siren is superior to SH because the scenarist doesn't try to bullshit you by saying a lot of things about a cult, a church and whatnot, but without any details, not because they want you to "think", but because they didn't take the time to create beforehand a valid religion. I mean... Valtiel. Now that's a well thought element of the cult!
About bad acting or not, to each his own.
I'll keep my own definition : Good actor : Marcello Mastroiani, Bad actor : anyone in SH or BH.
And now, let me finish this bottle, will you.
[this message was edited by Iggy on Thu 19 Aug 17:56] |
| Undead Fred 1862th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(2):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Thu 19 Aug 18:52
quote:
First, I'm the biggest asshole here, so don't you start assholing me.
Secondly, not only is Siren better in every way, but you're right, part of what makes it better is because it's set in Japan. Because, you see, both games are made by japanese people, and though I can trust japanese people to make interesting japanese characters, experience has tought me they just can't make interesting non-japanese realistic characters. Every character in BH and SH is just stereotypically boring, following the image of "a typical bland hero so the viewer can identify".
And don't try to make me sound as a racist anti-american person, I can do it very well myself if I feel like it.
Heh heh. Nah, I just wanted to throw out more irrational reasons to hate SH. I don't know, your arguments started to sound like RE fans VS SH fans or even people that argue over whether Chevy is better than Ford (yes, I've heard it before... it's really sad). My point is that it crossed into raving fanboy when you post a bunch of "OMG HAHAHAHA LOOK WHO ELSE THINKS SILENT HILL SUCKS" articles or info. Just calm down a bit.
quote:
In term of a work of fiction, the Silent Hill series don't score quite high. The 1 had interesting ideas, the 2 had the plot twist, then the 3 had Douglas second costume, and the 4 had... its trailer. It's good, but it's not because it's better than, say, BH, that it has to become a standard.
Explain.
Explain what you mean by "psychological depth". In a game, a scene with psychological depth... I would see a little bit of it at the end of the Escade scenario of Legend of Mana...? I could find 3 or 4 games where I can say there is "psychological depth" here and there. SH is not one of them. Siren isn't either. The characters of Siren don't have time to show their "psychological depth". They are kinda in a hurry. At best, Miyata has some scenes where you could find some hints of his "psychological depth", but it's not in the game, it doesn't have to be there (and it's in Maniacs).
Siren is superior to SH because the scenarist doesn't try to bullshit you by saying a lot of things about a cult, a church and whatnot, but without any details, not because they want you to "think", but because they didn't take the time to create beforehand a valid religion. I mean... Valtiel. Now that's a well thought element of the cult!
About bad acting or not, to each his own.
I'll keep my own definition : Good actor : Marcello Mastroiani, Bad actor : anyone in SH or BH.
And now, let me finish this bottle, will you.
The "depth" thing was from what you had said before. I know I had made some comment about SH2 being deeper than the other games, and I thought that's what you were talking about in your post about there being no "psychological depth" in the series. Yeah, horror games don't have the most room for psychological development, but there is still room for character development. Personally, I thought the SH characters had plenty of depth. They're not the deepest ever, but they do have plenty of character, and they often have secrets that come out over the course of the game, too. I don't care if you think SH is the best ever, but I'm just saying the games aren't that bad.
Whether Siren is better than Silent Hill or Pepsi is better than Coke or whatever is another issue.
|
| JLG
7th Post
New Customer
| "Re(4):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Thu 19 Aug 22:32:
quote:
It didn't "fill" anything. It added. And the result is an incoherent patchwork.
How so? The cult itself is further defined: The cult worships a dark force they think is a benevolent god. It's a pagan religion heavily influenced by Christianity (which explains why martyrdom, judgment, paradise is brought up so often). The details are all in the church: the paintings which depict the cult's mythology, the book in the library that gives a historical background to the cult. It gives a motivation not just for Claudia, but the cult's in the past (the most we get about paradise is Daliah's spiel at the end, so the Claudia and the game's repeated references to the borrowed Christian ideas of salvation and kingdom come do help).
quote:
Did "Silent Hill 2" need the cult?
Well, if it wasn't for the cult giving control of the town's reality to the evil god, there wouldn't be a SH2, now would there?
EDIT: Actually, I think I may have went overboard here and ended up sounding like a jerk. Sorry.
Without the snark, what I mean is if someone plays SH2 and wonders how the town got that way, they can look at SH1. That's why SH can work as a series and why the cult backstory exists in 1 and 3; if you have something extraordinary happen, you'd better give some kind of reason eventually (it can be still mysterious and ambiguous), or else it makes everything and the effort pointless and wears on the audience's patience.
Oh, risking stoking the fires the Siren-SH flame fest, and Siren and SH (I'm just asking for trouble, aren't I?), gameplay-wise at least, are nothing like each other. Siren, from the first scenario I bungled through (I died a couple times, forgot to read that newsletter... it's going to be real rough playing through the rest of the game when everything is so stacked against you, or at least, a sucky player like me), is a stripped-down stealth-survival game. Yet Siren's format seems ill-suited to tell an engaging story - if I go ahead and make a bold assumption the rest of the game is like the first part I played - you don't even have enough of a break to catch up on the backstory...
Essentially, if we were to use war movies, Silent Hill would be Terrence Malick's The Thin Red Line and Siren would be.... only the Normandy battle scene from Saving Private Ryan.
Incidentally I have a mobile phone photo blog thing.
[this message was edited by JLG on Fri 20 Aug 00:46] |
| Undead Fred 1864th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "Re(4):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Fri 20 Aug 00:00
quote:
The only Silent Hill I've played was 2. It had really nice textures on xbox, probably the best textures I've ever seen in a game still... and that's the only good thing I can say about it. Oh, the prison was creepy. That was cool too.
I didn't feel at all engaged by any of the characters, whatever their nation of origin was, and so didn't care about their stories. I mean, the main character was a guy who lost his wife... and that's all I remember. That and he always got picked last for baseball in school with the limp wristed way he swung that board.
For me, it lacked anything resembling an immersive quality, which is something that a horror themed game must have to be effective.
Okay, that's cool. Personally, I liked the SH series a lot, and the believability of the characters and environments really interested me. As for the country of origin crack, I meant that as a joke. Just messing with Iggy. Anyway, I love horror, but I'm used to so much bad horror and disappointing horror that anything well-done at all is really great. That being said, I thought SH was well-done even without the starvation factor factored in.
Anyway, the comments about the cult- actually, I wish each SH was pretty much unrelated. The first two weren't related by any means other than the town itself. I mean, in 2, we still knew the town had some evil force in it, but they didn't have to mention the town's religion to explain the evil stuff happening there. When the games' stories have little in common, it plays up on the nightmare aspect, which I really liked. Plus, you have less of an idea what's really going on, so you can't figure out what will happen next.
|
| Ammadeau 1079th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member
| "Re(5):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Fri 20 Aug 03:56
quote:
Oh, risking stoking the fires the Siren-SH flame fest, and Siren and SH (I'm just asking for trouble, aren't I?), gameplay-wise at least, are nothing like each other.
... so that means Siren has good gameplay then?
I haven't played Siren, but Silent Hill 2 from a purely gameplay standpoint, managed to be both bland and awkward at the same time. If you strip away the story and setting, all you have left is a terrible combat engine, lame puzzles, and lots and lots of fog. RE is no prize pig itself, but at least it let you shoot zombies occasionally.
I don't know why I'm bashing SH though since I have nothing against the series. If other people like it, more power to them.
Got Next - it's a gaming site I write stupid things for
|
| JLG
7th Post
New Customer
| "Re(6):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Fri 20 Aug 10:27
quote:
And it has very little to do with what we saw in the first game.
The cult wanted to birth god to bring about paradise as per Daliah's final speech at the end of SH1. So there's the motivation.
quote:
The town became what it is because of the events of "Silent Hill". Hence we don't need the cult anymore, and "Silent Hill 2" proved that.
Right, because Silent Hill explained what happened to the town, SH2 was free to do a more personal story. If someone plays SH2 and says, "Who cares about some guy's dead wife? I want to know what happened to the town." You can point them to 1. And 3 if they want to know more about the cult. But, if I'm not mistaken, some people here don't like that it's a cult, not something else. Only no one's suggested what that something else could be.
quote:
You can write an horror story without a "cult" element in it. And seeing how they've been handling the cult thingy so far, they definitely should go that way, in my opinion...
I'm not saying you can't. P.K. Dick did something in the spirit of SH with The Cosmic Puppets, only
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
with superpowered children and ancient gods, which someone could find just as silly as a cult. And not to mention Jacob's Ladder, but the premise wouldn't last a series without getting old...
End of Spoiler
It's just that, from what I'm reading, people are objecting to the cult story just because it's a cult.
Ammadeau: I walked right into that gibe, didn't I? Combat isn't one of SH's strong points, though they have been trying to work on that with 3 and 4. But then again, SH is more about exploration and evasion than battle (this aspect Siren takes to the extreme). Plus Siren is hell-bent on realism, (and if you can stand one more movie metaphor) making it something like The Blair Witch Project to SH's The Shining.
I hope I'm not wearing on people's patience...
Incidentally I have a mobile phone photo blog thing.
|
| Iggy 4156th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(7):Re(10):Silent Hill 5" , posted Fri 20 Aug 11:10
quote:
from what I'm reading, people are objecting to the cult story just because it's a cult.
No, at least I object because it's nebulous, never explained because not constructed at all, and they never took the time during the development to think carefully to it and build it completely. Instead, they decided to make it a vague thing they can manipulate and "expand" whenever they feel like it in any sequel.
There is nothing wrong with a cult. The one in Siren works perfectly and has reasons to be here, precise goals and hierarchy, as well as an established way of working, and everything is set in stone in the first, and last game which will feature it. Nobody thinks there is anything to add to it, so they close the chapter of the mana religion and begin something completely different (and without a cult this time) in Siren 2.
The cult in SH feels exactly like the Umbrella organization, you don't know anything of it except what part of it they create in each game, and both should have crumbled long ago, but for a reason are still here. (I think Umbrella is finished in BH4...?)
quote:
I hope I'm not wearing on people's patience...
Of course not ! It is just a local fashioned mini flame war we are having here, you're completely welcome to participate !
|
| Undead Fred 1866th Post
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
| "RE:Silent Hill 5" , posted Fri 20 Aug 11:57
quote:
No, at least I object because it's nebulous, never explained because not constructed at all, and they never took the time during the development to think carefully to it and build it completely. Instead, they decided to make it a vague thing they can manipulate and "expand" whenever they feel like it in any sequel.
There is nothing wrong with a cult. The one in Siren works perfectly and has reasons to be here, precise goals and hierarchy, as well as an established way of working, and everything is set in stone in the first, and last game which will feature it. Nobody thinks there is anything to add to it, so they close the chapter of the mana religion and begin something completely different (and without a cult this time) in Siren 2.
The cult in SH feels exactly like the Umbrella organization, you don't know anything of it except what part of it they create in each game, and both should have crumbled long ago, but for a reason are still here. (I think Umbrella is finished in BH4...?)
I really didn't see it that way. I'm not saying they sat down and wrote out the entire history of the cult with god hierarchies and rituals and a million other details we hadn't heard in the game, but I really don't think they just couldn't come up with any ideas and said "Screw it! Start the game!" They planned out what they needed to plan out and wrote that part into the story. Now, SH3, on the other hand, did sort of come across as just more stuff they added to the original story. I think the cult worked fine in the original, but I don't know if I really liked it in the third one. Of course, the monsters were awesome and the environments were really cool, but I just didn't really want to know any more about the cult because it was scarier when I didn't totally understand them. You don't know what they're planning, you don't know how to stop them, and so on.
quote:
Back on topic, I don't think Silent Hill is about exploration when you are in no way free to explore. It is about the general unraveling of the plot, while the gameplay is simply there to keep you occupied in the meantime. Most games tend to be the reverse, which is why they also tend to have terrible stories.
Actually, I thought the first two SH games had a lot of room for exploration. They had to fence you in to some degree, though (can't really model a whole state and drop you in if they wanted to keep the story moving). I'd spend hours walking up and down every street and looking at the abandoned houses and businesses and try to see if any would let me inside. That's kind of why I liked SH3 less- there was a lot less room to explore. You could still comb every inch of the buildings you were in, but I still felt restricted compared to when I was playing SH1 and 2.
|
|
|
"Re(1):RE:Silent Hill 5"