So we managed to score a pretty extensive Q&A with Nour Polloni Producer at Eden Games. The interview answered a ton of questions folks have about the title, and to be frank have me fairly excited whereas before I was kinda meh. In general I don't like single player titles, however the original Alone in the Dark was one of those games that got me interested in gaming in the first place.
Cutting and pasting the Q/A here for those interested:
Even though the original Alone in the Dark is regarded as the first survival horror title, for many it has always played as the underdog when compared to the Resident Evil series. Now that RE has cemented itself as a more action orientated game does this mean AITD will rise again as the premier Survival Horror game? What direction are you taking with the gameplay?
With the new Alone in the Dark we’re aiming to actually break from the genre and make a game with much broader gameplay. The first Alone created the genre and it’s that legacy of innovation that we’re trying to live up to rather than make just another game of the same type. There’s exploration and puzzle solving gameplay but also driving, cliffhanger situations, combat and generally many more big action elements than you might expect. Plus the majority of the game is set in a wide open Central Park, breaking the survival cliché of cramped corridors. One of the main things we’re bringing to the gameplay is the real world rules physics and interaction, with everything in your environment behaving and responding as you would expect it to in real life. This lets the player use and combine objects intuitively to create new tools and weapons in ways even we might not have thought of leading to emergent gameplay, which is very exciting. This variety of gameplay takes Alone out of a specific genre and let’s us present it more as an entertainment experience.
Can you tell us a little more about the leading character Edward Carnby and will he be working alone as the title suggests, or will there be other characters he can interact with?
There are stages of the game where Carnby will indeed be very much alone and have to rely solely on his own wits and resources to survive, but there’s plenty of other characters he’ll meet throughout the story, some of whom will be with him for much of the game. For example, a girl called Sarah has a vital role to play in the unfolding mystery, and Theo offers some very important guidance although he’s not around long enough to tell Carnby everything he wants to hear...
Can you explain the title prefix "Near Death Investigation"?
In fact that’s not the subtitle of the game and never was. It was an internal working title a couple of years ago which unfortunately found its way somehow into the public domain and we’ve been trying to shake it off ever since! The game is just called Alone in the Dark.
The game is set in a modern day New York City around Central Park, will we be visiting any other locales in and out of the city?
The first two episodes are set in one of the beautiful art deco buildings on the edge of the park which will be ripped apart by the end of your visit. Then after a very chaotic journey, you end up in Central Park for the entire rest of the game. If you know anything about the park you’ll know there’s plenty of places to visit ranging from a museum, subway station and police precinct, to castle, boating lake, and miles of pathways through the park’s more wild and less-travelled areas. We’ll be making the most of this city within a city and also expanding the gameplay area in another direction. If you’ve heard the legend of the ancient tunnel system under the park this might give you some clue as to what direction exactly.
The game is going to feature open environments, what does this mean exactly; will we be able to go anywhere and revisit places of interest?
You start the game following the story with a clear path you need to take, then as you get into the park it will progressively open up so that by the time you’re around halfway through the whole accessible area of the park is open to explore. We’ve replicated many of the park’s real life landmarks, so although we’re not able to use their real names in the game, anyone who’s ever been to the park will definitely be able to explore places they’ve been.
In light of having more open areas will vehicles play a part in getting from A to B?
Vehicles play a big role in the gameplay, not just to get from A to B although of course that’s important, but also as tools and even improvised weapons. The cars and other vehicles follow the real world rules of the gameplay, which means if the door’s locked, smash a window; if there’s no key under the visor, hotwire it; and don’t forget to check the glove box – it’s amazing how many Americans keep useful things like guns in there. A car can even become an improvised rolling bomb: pierce the petrol tank with a screwdriver so fuel leaks out creating a trail, get in, start driving, get out while the car’s still moving, watch the car roll towards a group of enemies or an obstacle you want to remove, light the fuel trail, and watch it all blow sky high. Very satisfying.
You are aiming for a TV style presentation similar to the TV series 24, can you explain more about this and how it will relate to heightening the player experience? Will we see future episodes as down-loadable content perhaps?
When were first putting together the design for Alone, we were all going home at night and watching this new crop of US TV action dramas like Lost and 24 totally hooked, then coming in the next day and talking about it round the coffee machine. It hit us that we wanted players to have exactly that kind of addictive exhilarating experience with Alone, so we studied how they did it in terms of pacing and content and applied it to the game. This means each episode has its own dynamic with action, plot twists, character development and cliff-hangers to keep the player on the edge of their set.
The structure does lend itself to future downloadable episodes and that’s something we’ll be looking at once the game is finished.
In relation to the episodic approach which is something Alan Wake and GTA IV are going to feature - how feasible in today's' market do you think down-loadable episodes is for a story driven game?
You could say the same thing about downloadable episodes of a TV drama and that’s something that’s been shown to work quite well. You can’t rely on everybody who plays the game downloading the extra content, so you need to provide a complete experience before you get to the downloads, but there’s great potential to deliver extra bonus content in that way. I think with the growing number of people using high speed Internet connections and the slow moves towards integrated entertainment hubs in the home this is only going to accelerate as more people learn how to consume entertainment in this way and are tempted by the benefits of extra content.
What kinds of enemies will we face, as thus far we've only seen demonic creatures? Will there be any human adversaries?
There are human adversaries in the game, but you won’t engage them in combat the same way as you will the creatures. There’s a variety of creature in the game ranging from the rat-like beasts you’ve probably seen, to bats, and transformed human type creatures, all the way up to some spectacular creatures on a very grand scale. An example of one of the stranger enemies you’ll face is transformed water which devours anyone who strays into it and can only be pushed out of the way using a strong light source.
What kinds of weapons will players be able to use? How have you balanced the use of conventional firearms with the makeshift weapons?
The gun is still a staple weapon, but it’ll only take you so far in Alone – you’ll quickly find there’s much more effective weapons you’ll need to use to get the better of most of the enemies in the game. As well as being something you should never turn your back on, fire is the most useful weapon in your arsenal thanks to its real world propagation properties and its effectiveness against many of the enemies you’ll meet, so a lot of the improvised weapons will have creating fire as their goal. For example, bullets with fuel poured on them to create flaming projectiles is much more effective. A bottle of liquor and a rag makes a Molotov cocktail, an aerosol and a lighter makes a flamethrower. This combining of normal items to create tools and deadly weapons is a cornerstone of the gameplay – we really want the player to use their imagination and their instincts with the possibility that they could come up with things even we haven’t thought of.
A lot of games are featuring differing gameplay elements depending on the whether it is light or dark; will AITD feature any similar gameplay mechanics?
Light and dark has its role to play in the game – there’s enemies that rely on the darkness to survive, others that use it to hide, and Carnby will need to make sure he has the tools to light his way through dark places. Some enemies can only be overcome using light, and every light source has a lifespan like in real life, so torches need batteries and light sticks fade adding pressure and tension to every situation.
Will there be the traditional puzzle elements associated with survival horror games, and how taxing are these likely to be if they do feature?
We do have puzzle elements in Alone yes, ranging from situations where you’ll need to apply the things you’ve learned about combining objects to create new uses to move on, to quite tricky conundrums on an enormous scale. What’s important is that there’s always more than one way to solve any situation, so the player really has a hard time getting stuck. And if they do, one of the other innovative things we’ve implemented is a DVD style menu which allows the player to skip ahead – at a cost – to the next part of the game.
AITD will feature advanced physics; how will this be incorporated into the gameplay?
The advanced physics has been used to realize the real world rules which is a cornerstone of the gameplay and to achieve the complete environmental interactivity where every object behaves and can be manipulated like its real world counterpart. The gameplay is about intuitively applying what you know about how objects behave in the real world in the game universe to use those objects to your advantage.
How many hours gameplay do you expect the average gamer to beat the story are you aiming for an epic adventure or a more condensed gaming experience?
Following the story from end to end without going exploring gives approximately 10 hours of gameplay for the average gamer, then with all the extra things to do while free-roaming in Central Park we have around 15 hours of gameplay in total.
What kind of replay value can gamers expect, as traditionally in survival horror games there are plenty of incentives to play through the story again?
We want everyone who picks up the game to be able to finish it. Some research suggests that only about 20% of gamers ever finish their games, and here we want the players to live the full experience, not necessarily by needing to earn it piece by piece in a linear way. This is why we have the DVD style menu which lets you skip if you get stuck, although skipping comes at a cost to the player.
How closely did you work with Lorenzo Carcaterra when he penned the story? Did you lock him in a room and let him just get on with it or did the team have a more proactive role?
The story was actually written here at Eden. We brought Lorenzo in to re-work the script and bring his talent and experience in novels, film and television to bear on the dialogue to make it really convincing. Also he’s a native New Yorker and we really wanted that authenticity in the dialogue. Lorenzo was not the only script-writer we’ve worked with. Like in TV series, we’ve worked with several script-writers who have each brought their unique contribution to the story.
What age rating will the game have and are you aiming for a truly adult experience?
The game will be a mature 18+ title and is definitely designed as a game for adults.
compared to the original, how far have you come in terms of game design - has the process become any easier?
Designing a game is about looking for new experiences you can give to the player. Designing a game becomes more complex each time technology takes a leap forward and gives you more possibilities. In Alone in the Dark for example, we’ve put a huge focus on the interactivity, and the work we did to make sure the elements work logically with each other is very important. With all that in mind I wouldn’t say that the design process has become any easier but it’s always an exciting challenge and one that drives us to come to work and spend much more time than is healthy trying to make our ambitions for Alone in the Dark a reality.
A lot of games have used scare factor to achieve horror status, we've had psychological horror to the more common "jump out" scares. How easy or hard is it to come up with new ways to engross and scare hardened, and not so hardened players?
For us the idea of suggested fear is much more powerful than simple scares or gore. We’ve worked hard to build a growing sense of unease in the player as they make their way through the game world wondering what’s behind the next door or hiding in a dark corner. Immersion is also key to manipulating the player’s emotions which is why we’ve minimized things like menu screens to keep the player in the game as much as possible, then there’s the TV-drama style dynamic which keeps you on the edge of your seat wanting to keep going to find out what happens next. If we’ve got your full attention it becomes easier to manipulate your emotions and create a real sense of tension in any given situation. Also, the music is a vital part of adding atmosphere and emotion, and we’ve got a really amazing score written by Olivier Deriviere which uses a Bulgarian choir called Mystery of Bulgarian Voices to sing in their native tongue about what’s happening to Carnby and New York. The result is haunting and will stay with you long after you’ve put down the controller.
What multiplayer options can we expect for this title (if any)?
Alone in the dark is a single player game.
What sort of Live integration can we expect on the Xbox 360 version of the game?
There is no specific live feature, other than the main elements, like info on what you’re playing and when being linked to your profile and achievements of course.
Will the game feature any Co-op options with AI or another human player?
Alone is a single player game, and there’s no co-op gameplay as such, although of course you will need companions at certain points in the game to be able to progress.
What influence did the original Alone in the Dark title have on this next gen version?
The first Alone in the Dark was a massive inspiration to us and we’re huge fans of the game which created a genre. That game’s legacy is what we’re working to live up to with the new Alone in the Dark – like the first one, we want it to be remembered as a game that changed what players could expect from videogames in terms of what you can do in the game world and the experience you can have.
How do you aim to make Alone in the Dark different/stand out from over survival horror titles out there?
The game contains so many original elements that provide a unique experience for the player, for example the degree of interaction with your environment, that we hope in the end the player will come to expect these features in future games and will never want to play any differently.
We'd like to thank Nour for her time and for answering these questions
I really like the implementation of allowing the player to "skip ahead" if they are stuck on a puzzle. There are many games I've stopped playing in frustration because I can't finish a certain part or I get stuck on a puzzle.
I'm wondering though what sort of penalties this will cost.
This sounds kind of amazing. I've heard bits and pieces about the game before, but now I'm kind of excited. Thanks for the interview! I really hope this game actually gets to come out. Hearing everything they're trying to do makes the delays make much more sense.
brynstar on
Xbox Live: Xander51
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
Didn't feel like making a new thread, but why the dickens are we not talking more about this game? Just watched this trailer and I read a preview a short while back, and it sounds like it will be all shades of awesome.
Just being able to actually smash through things as an effective and legitimate means to solving a puzzle? Hell yes.
Yeah, I think it looks incredible. The trailer was especially impressive. It doesn't look like it's going to use a Lovecraftian visual design, though, which is a crying shame, but it could definitely become the next huge horror/action game. It looks very innovative, and the atmosphere can potentially become insane with all the emergent gameplay options.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
edited March 2008
Is it so wrong that I want a company to actually make a 'normal' survival horror game? I guess the Silent Hill series is still doing that, but at the same time it's gotten a bit samey with the monsters and whatnot.
Ah well, I'm still quite interested in seeing how this turns out.
Well, what's a "normal" survival horror game? The trick is, the player always has to feel like they're making some kind of progress, and if the situation is too hopeless for them, they tend to give up.
l337CrappyJack on
0
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
edited March 2008
Well, like.. hrm.
I suppose a sand-boxy SH would be pretty cool. Like having to scavenge for food and stuff in a town or whatnot.
There was a time when developers experimented with making survival horror games wherein your character was basically helpless or extremely lacking in effective means of fighting back. Silent Hill is obviously part of this trend, as was Siren and, Eternal Darkness, and going back further, a few Dreamcast games and the Clock Tower series (although they just kind of held onto the adventure game conventions they were emulating).
My guess is with the success of Resident Evil 4, it has become apparent that most players would rather be a government-trained cyber-ninja with a Super meter and hyper-cancels than a 12 year old schoolgirl who levels up by eating food she makes in a cooking minigame.
Seriously, though, Resident Evil 4 set the bar way higher, and survival horror has segued into horror action or whatever it is called now. Resident Evil 5, Dark Space, and this all look to be going for the same thing, just with different variations on setting.
Ultimanecat on
SteamID : same as my PA forum name
0
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
edited March 2008
RE4 isn't horror-based at all.
Sorry, pet peeve. I love RE4 and all but it is NOT horror.
Sorry, pet peeve. I love RE4 and all but it is NOT horror.
I agree, in that it isn't terribly scary (although if you look at the back of the box, the word "horror" does appear). But its style seems to be what the industry is gravitating towards these days.
:v: Man that's lame. Without the lovecraftian setting it's seems kinda pointless. I'll skip this one then.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
-SPI- on
0
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
edited March 2008
It's kind of hard to make a SH game. What's the perfect balance between having a character who isn't some sort of combat expert but at the same time isn't a complete pain in the ass to play as?
Do you want a game where you can fight back? If so, how much? Can you kill the enemies or just slow them down? Is stealth a factor? How much of one?
What kind of camera angle? First person? Third person?
Personally, I think one of the biggest problems survival horror games have today is making too many of the monsters animalistic. Like, sure, a skinless demon dog is frightening, but wouldn't a normal dog be if it was acting like it was gonna attack you? I think they need to stick more with monsters who are human like and show humanistic AI. I envision, for example, a nurse in a future Silent Hill game that not only tries to kill you, but kill you SLOWLY all the while making you feel helpless.
ANYHOW, the main point is it's pretty hard to make a game that's scary and not a pain in the ass at the same time.
I think some of the scariest games I've ever played were the Alien vs. Predator games on the PC as a Marine. Your character is far from helpless, but the atmosphere (motion sensor w/ false alarms, limited light sources, environmental sounds mimicking enemy sounds) combined with the fact that the enemies were absolutely lethal made for some tense moments.
Beyond that, there are still some purely psychological things that are scary. F.E.A.R. could be frightening at times if you let it get to you, even if there were very few instances where something "scary" in that game could actually harm you. On the other hand, once you realize that nothing scary was actually dangerous in that game, it lost a bit of its bite.
Who knows? I never found any Resident Evil scary, but to this day I can't play Silent Hill without somebody else in the room. I'm okay with horror games incorporating action, but you are right, they really have to buff up the horror element in that case if they don't want it to be overshadowed.
It's kind of hard to make a SH game. What's the perfect balance between having a character who isn't some sort of combat expert but at the same time isn't a complete pain in the ass to play as?
I think Siren 2 did a good job with this by varying the character from level to level. Some of the characters were pretty helpless (small children or even a blind man), other characters could definitely take care of themselves (the heavily armed soldier & the woman who could control enemies for a brief period of time), and still other characters fit between the two extremes.
I don't care how boring it would get, I would pay top dollar for a game that just puts you in a city with zombies and made you survive any way possible for a certain period of time. You could barricade yourself up, but you'd also need to stockpile food, weapons and such, making supply runs, and occasionally running across another batch of survivors. That's it. That's the whole game. A sandbox zombie survival game with no real mission except survive.
But I'd be the only person who'd buy it, so they'd make it so the main character was an ex-special forces commando with a satcom navlink to a foxy government agent sending you in to defeat a corrupt dictator who's unleashed a zombie army.
:v: Man that's lame. Without the lovecraftian setting it's seems kinda pointless. I'll skip this one then.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
I think they're keeping the Lovecraft vibe, just not the faux-20's-Lovecraft vibe. The bit I read about earlier was about a Cult (element 1) Summoning an Uknowable Evil(2) That Lurks Beneath These Very Streets (3). Also, the Evil Thing Was Totally Wicked Big(4).
And hell, everyone goes on an on about "ooooh 1920's", does anyone give a shit that 90% of the stories were set in Rhode Island? No.
I don't care what era they set it in or what city, you can get through a locked wooden door, any locked wooden door, by smashing it until it breaks.
Or probably setting it on fire.
:v: Man that's lame. Without the lovecraftian setting it's seems kinda pointless. I'll skip this one then.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
I think they're keeping the Lovecraft vibe, just not the faux-20's-Lovecraft vibe. The bit I read about earlier was about a Cult (element 1) Summoning an Uknowable Evil(2) That Lurks Beneath These Very Streets (3). Also, the Evil Thing Was Totally Wicked Big(4).
And hell, everyone goes on an on about "ooooh 1920's", does anyone give a shit that 90% of the stories were set in Rhode Island? No.
New fucking York, indeed.
Besides which, did Alone in the Dark really rely on the "setting" all that much? It could just as easily be a rowhouse in modern Baltimore. If the story is good, the setting will work. Central Park is creepy.
:v: Man that's lame. Without the lovecraftian setting it's seems kinda pointless. I'll skip this one then.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
I think they're keeping the Lovecraft vibe, just not the faux-20's-Lovecraft vibe. The bit I read about earlier was about a Cult (element 1) Summoning an Uknowable Evil(2) That Lurks Beneath These Very Streets (3). Also, the Evil Thing Was Totally Wicked Big(4).
And hell, everyone goes on an on about "ooooh 1920's", does anyone give a shit that 90% of the stories were set in Rhode Island? No.
New fucking York, indeed.
Besides which, did Alone in the Dark really rely on the "setting" all that much? It could just as easily be a rowhouse in modern Baltimore. If the story is good, the setting will work. Central Park is creepy.
Did no one play 2 and 3, which had pretty much nothing to do with Lovecraft? Whatever they're doing in this new one, it's got to be better than zombie pirates and the Wild West.
I don't care what era they set it in or what city, you can get through a locked wooden door, any locked wooden door, by smashing it until it breaks.
Or probably setting it on fire.
The game is going to feature open environments, what does this mean exactly; will we be able to go anywhere and revisit places of interest?
You start the game following the story with a clear path you need to take, then as you get into the park it will progressively open up so that by the time you’re around halfway through the whole accessible area of the park is open to explore. We’ve replicated many of the park’s real life landmarks, so although we’re not able to use their real names in the game, anyone who’s ever been to the park will definitely be able to explore places they’ve been.
Hmmmm.......meaning you visit everywhere in the first couple of hours and then enjoy backtracking for the rest of it? Fancy way to say it, eh?
There was a time when developers experimented with making survival horror games wherein your character was basically helpless or extremely lacking in effective means of fighting back. Silent Hill is obviously part of this trend, as was Siren and, Eternal Darkness, and going back further, a few Dreamcast games and the Clock Tower series (although they just kind of held onto the adventure game conventions they were emulating).
Uhhh.......I don't remember feeling helpless at all in Eternal Darkness, which was actually the reason I played through the entire game. Now, my memory may be failing me, but I remember chopping off hordes of zombies and other monsters limbs and whatnot with Swords, guns, and spells.
I don't care how boring it would get, I would pay top dollar for a game that just puts you in a city with zombies and made you survive any way possible for a certain period of time. You could barricade yourself up, but you'd also need to stockpile food, weapons and such, making supply runs, and occasionally running across another batch of survivors. That's it. That's the whole game. A sandbox zombie survival game with no real mission except survive.
But I'd be the only person who'd buy it, so they'd make it so the main character was an ex-special forces commando with a satcom navlink to a foxy government agent sending you in to defeat a corrupt dictator who's unleashed a zombie army.
You just described Dead Rising, but replace city with mall and ex-specop with photo journalist.
I'm so so glad they're bringing back AitD though, great series, 4th installment kind of killed the series, or so people thought.
Why aren't there more people talking about this game? I'm already sold just by the music on the trailer. I really hope the game does have an epic-ness to it. And a decent goddamn pc port(fuck you capcom). I've always wanted to try RE4 but I can't stand having my controls so constricted and slow. I hope the PC version has the option of optimizing the controls.
Probably mentioned before, but Keanu Reeves anyone?
Why aren't there more people talking about this game? I'm already sold just by the music on the trailer. I really hope the game does have an epic-ness to it. And a decent goddamn pc port(fuck you capcom). I've always wanted to try RE4 but I can't stand having my controls so constricted and slow. I hope the PC version has the option of optimizing the controls.
Probably mentioned before, but Keanu Reeves anyone?
It's...uncanny. I knew the new design of Carnby resembled some famous actor -I just couldn't put my finger on WHO.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
:v: Man that's lame. Without the lovecraftian setting it's seems kinda pointless. I'll skip this one then.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
I think they're keeping the Lovecraft vibe, just not the faux-20's-Lovecraft vibe. The bit I read about earlier was about a Cult (element 1) Summoning an Uknowable Evil(2) That Lurks Beneath These Very Streets (3). Also, the Evil Thing Was Totally Wicked Big(4).
And hell, everyone goes on an on about "ooooh 1920's", does anyone give a shit that 90% of the stories were set in Rhode Island? No.
New fucking York, indeed.
Besides which, did Alone in the Dark really rely on the "setting" all that much? It could just as easily be a rowhouse in modern Baltimore. If the story is good, the setting will work. Central Park is creepy.
Did no one play 2 and 3, which had pretty much nothing to do with Lovecraft? Whatever they're doing in this new one, it's got to be better than zombie pirates and the Wild West.
I'm so pissed. I can't afford a 360 right now, and I hate the PS3 with every fiber of my being. I have a Wii and a PS2...does Hell have a better chance of freezing over than either of those versions being good?
I mean...Ultimate Alliance was good on the PS2. Just not nearly as shiny.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
When the game sounds like it has an awesome engine for the world, full of physical interactions.. I have no idea how they'd get it working to the same scope and scale on the Wii or PS2.
Graphics are not a dealbreaker for me. I can put up with last-gen visuals if the story and gameplay are phenomenal. That being said, darleysam has a point about the physics and all...
Fuck. I want this game, but I don't want to shill out several hundred dollars to play it.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
Posts
The PS3/360/PC version will be amazing...
I'm wondering though what sort of penalties this will cost.
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
Just being able to actually smash through things as an effective and legitimate means to solving a puzzle? Hell yes.
Ah well, I'm still quite interested in seeing how this turns out.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
I suppose a sand-boxy SH would be pretty cool. Like having to scavenge for food and stuff in a town or whatnot.
Hrm.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
My guess is with the success of Resident Evil 4, it has become apparent that most players would rather be a government-trained cyber-ninja with a Super meter and hyper-cancels than a 12 year old schoolgirl who levels up by eating food she makes in a cooking minigame.
Seriously, though, Resident Evil 4 set the bar way higher, and survival horror has segued into horror action or whatever it is called now. Resident Evil 5, Dark Space, and this all look to be going for the same thing, just with different variations on setting.
Sorry, pet peeve. I love RE4 and all but it is NOT horror.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
I agree, in that it isn't terribly scary (although if you look at the back of the box, the word "horror" does appear). But its style seems to be what the industry is gravitating towards these days.
Shame too, because there's so much potential for an interesting game set in new york around the 20s or 30s.
Do you want a game where you can fight back? If so, how much? Can you kill the enemies or just slow them down? Is stealth a factor? How much of one?
What kind of camera angle? First person? Third person?
Personally, I think one of the biggest problems survival horror games have today is making too many of the monsters animalistic. Like, sure, a skinless demon dog is frightening, but wouldn't a normal dog be if it was acting like it was gonna attack you? I think they need to stick more with monsters who are human like and show humanistic AI. I envision, for example, a nurse in a future Silent Hill game that not only tries to kill you, but kill you SLOWLY all the while making you feel helpless.
ANYHOW, the main point is it's pretty hard to make a game that's scary and not a pain in the ass at the same time.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Beyond that, there are still some purely psychological things that are scary. F.E.A.R. could be frightening at times if you let it get to you, even if there were very few instances where something "scary" in that game could actually harm you. On the other hand, once you realize that nothing scary was actually dangerous in that game, it lost a bit of its bite.
Who knows? I never found any Resident Evil scary, but to this day I can't play Silent Hill without somebody else in the room. I'm okay with horror games incorporating action, but you are right, they really have to buff up the horror element in that case if they don't want it to be overshadowed.
I think Siren 2 did a good job with this by varying the character from level to level. Some of the characters were pretty helpless (small children or even a blind man), other characters could definitely take care of themselves (the heavily armed soldier & the woman who could control enemies for a brief period of time), and still other characters fit between the two extremes.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
But I'd be the only person who'd buy it, so they'd make it so the main character was an ex-special forces commando with a satcom navlink to a foxy government agent sending you in to defeat a corrupt dictator who's unleashed a zombie army.
I think they're keeping the Lovecraft vibe, just not the faux-20's-Lovecraft vibe. The bit I read about earlier was about a Cult (element 1) Summoning an Uknowable Evil(2) That Lurks Beneath These Very Streets (3). Also, the Evil Thing Was Totally Wicked Big(4).
And hell, everyone goes on an on about "ooooh 1920's", does anyone give a shit that 90% of the stories were set in Rhode Island? No.
New fucking York, indeed.
holy fucking shit
Why isn't this getting any hype?
Also I'm really looking forward to this.
Or probably setting it on fire.
This is my kind of puzzle.
Besides which, did Alone in the Dark really rely on the "setting" all that much? It could just as easily be a rowhouse in modern Baltimore. If the story is good, the setting will work. Central Park is creepy.
Did no one play 2 and 3, which had pretty much nothing to do with Lovecraft? Whatever they're doing in this new one, it's got to be better than zombie pirates and the Wild West.
Hmmmm.......meaning you visit everywhere in the first couple of hours and then enjoy backtracking for the rest of it? Fancy way to say it, eh?
Uhhh.......I don't remember feeling helpless at all in Eternal Darkness, which was actually the reason I played through the entire game. Now, my memory may be failing me, but I remember chopping off hordes of zombies and other monsters limbs and whatnot with Swords, guns, and spells.
It's fucking amazing.
You just described Dead Rising, but replace city with mall and ex-specop with photo journalist.
I'm so so glad they're bringing back AitD though, great series, 4th installment kind of killed the series, or so people thought.
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
Probably mentioned before, but Keanu Reeves anyone?
It's...uncanny. I knew the new design of Carnby resembled some famous actor -I just couldn't put my finger on WHO.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
Nope! Mostly for the reasons you described.
I mean...Ultimate Alliance was good on the PS2. Just not nearly as shiny.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
PS3 version:
If you ask me, I'd stay away from the Wii/PS2 version. God that looks awful.
Graphics are not a dealbreaker for me. I can put up with last-gen visuals if the story and gameplay are phenomenal. That being said, darleysam has a point about the physics and all...
Fuck. I want this game, but I don't want to shill out several hundred dollars to play it.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).