Most Anticipated Video Games

[Foggle]

Well, RE4 wasn't really what people tend to call a "survival" horror game, but I think TEW will probably be the best horror-themed game released in many years. Though Fatal Frame 5, which comes out in a couple of days, might actually be scarier. I truly hope that one is brought to America...

In terms of Japanese horror games, it's like we're living in the glory days of the PS2 era again. A new Fatal Frame and a true Resident Evil successor releasing mere weeks apart, with a legitimately great Silent Hill potentially on the horizon? It's almost too good to be true.

[talonmalon333]

Then take the "survival" out of my post, and just leave it at "best horror game".

When was the last good Silent Hill game released?

[Foggle]

Then take the "survival" out of my post, and just leave it at "best horror game".

I dunno, I think Fatal Frame 3 & 4, Siren 2 & 3, Haunting Ground, and The Suffering 2 were pretty sick. You could easily make the case for it being the best horror game released in English territories since Siren: Blood Curse, though. Also including Japan-only games makes it a bit complicated, since Fatal Frame 5 is just about to release, and it's probably going to be the best horror game since FF4. Saying "The Evil Within is the best horror title since the one that released three weeks ago" isn't nearly as impressive.

When was the last good Silent Hill game released?

Silent Hill 3 came out in 2003. Of course, there are some who'd argue that the later ones are still good; I grant that none of them are completely terrible (except for Book Of Memories, seriously wtf), but every single entry outside of the original trilogy stops being interesting, scary, and fun after the first few hours IMO.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

So, exactly what kind of horror game would RE4 be if not "survival" horror? It has got enough horror elements to count as a horror game, and you are essentially trying to "survive" throughout the entire game. It's not psychological horror like some other games, and it seems a bit nit-picky to classify it as some other sub-genre of horror just because it has more action elements than previous RE games (which, to be fair still had a fair amount of actual shooting in them).

[talonmalon333]

Silent Hill 3 came out in 2003. Of course, there are some who'd argue that the later ones are still good; I grant that none of them are completely terrible (except for Book Of Memories, seriously wtf), but every single entry outside of the original trilogy stops being interesting, scary, and fun after the first few hours IMO.

Yeah, it's crazy how fast the downward spiral happened. 3 was a masterpiece and then 4 happened.

So, exactly what kind of horror game would RE4 be if not "survival" horror? It has got enough horror elements to count as a horror game, and you are essentially trying to "survive" throughout the entire game. It's not psychological horror like some other games, and it seems a bit nit-picky to classify it as some other sub-genre of horror just because it has more action elements than previous RE games (which, to be fair still had a fair amount of actual shooting in them).

I guess some people tend to associate "survival horror" with the more slow paced style of games like RE1, where you're just barely surviving with little ammo. That said, I do kind of agree with you. It's the last survival horror game in the series, though.

EDIT: Actually, I guess Revelaitons was the last survival horror. I just forgot it, mainly because I haven't played it yet.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Even in the classic RE games you were still intended to fight most enemies, though. It's just that the controls for combat were so clunky that most people opted to skip fights, but the developers did still intend for you to kill most enemies, as evidenced by the fact that there usually was enough ammo in each game to conceivably do so, even if just barely (hence why most people opted to conserve via skipping).

To give a clear example of what I mean, take a game like F.E.A.R., which is technically a horror game, but could be classified as psychological horror, since most scares are just that, with most actual threats coming from regular clone soldiers. A game like RE4 doesn't have any psychological scares, though, and many of the horror elements deal with you attempting to survive by fighting back with deadly force. Just because it's not running away from enemies doesn't mean it's still not surviving.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Don't Alan Wake and Deadly Premonition count? Not to mention the first two Dead Space games and the Fatal Frame series? Condemned?

[talonmalon333]

Even in the classic RE games you were still intended to fight most enemies, though. It's just that the controls for combat were so clunky that most people opted to skip fights, but the developers did still intend for you to kill most enemies, as evidenced by the fact that there usually was enough ammo in each game to conceivably do so, even if just barely (hence why most people opted to conserve via skipping).

To give a clear example of what I mean, take a game like F.E.A.R., which is technically a horror game, but could be classified as psychological horror, since most scares are just that, with most actual threats coming from regular clone soldiers. A game like RE4 doesn't have any psychological scares, though, and many of the horror elements deal with you attempting to survive by fighting back with deadly force. Just because it's not running away from enemies doesn't mean it's still not surviving.

Right. Again, I do agree with you. I've played through RE1 even on its hardest difficulty and killed probably 99% of the enemies I've encountered. There's also the fact that you frequently played as toughened, well trained soldiers in those games.

[Foggle]

So, exactly what kind of horror game would RE4 be if not "survival" horror? It has got enough horror elements to count as a horror game, and you are essentially trying to "survive" throughout the entire game. It's not psychological horror like some other games, and it seems a bit nit-picky to classify it as some other sub-genre of horror just because it has more action elements than previous RE games (which to be fair still had a fair amount of actual shooting in them).

Man, I'm not the one who classifies this shit. According to the aficionados, it's apparently "action horror" because it focuses more on killing bad guys than collecting items and solving puzzles. While the previous REs still had a fair amount of shooting, that wasn't really the focus of them, except for arguably RE3. RE4 certainly has more in common with traditional "survival horror" games than the later entries, but ask people who are even nerdier than I am and they'll you it literally birthed a new sub-genre of horror game. Then you have stuff like Amnesia, which is considered "horror adventure" since it's basically a point and click except you can move around freely. Then there are games like F.E.A.R. that aren't rooted in any genre of horror gameplay but still include heavy elements of creepiness. At least, that's how I've come to understand it over the years.

They're all just "horror games" to me, but those are the commonly referred to sub-genres.

I guess some people tend to associate "survival horror" with the more slow paced style of games like RE1, where you're just barely surviving with little ammo. That said, I do kind of agree with you. It's the last survival horror game in the series, though.

I think you can argue that RE4 is actually both "survival horror" and "action horror," but yeah, basically. It's important to remember that the sub-genres of horror game are not intended to describe what kind of horror they include in the thematic sense, only how they play. Like, Dead Space is way scarier than RE5, but they're technically the same kind of game.

EDIT: Actually, I guess Revelaitons was the last survival horror. I just forgot it, mainly because I haven't played it yet.

Nah, it drops all pretensions of classic-style gameplay early on. It's more action than 4, less so than 5 and 6.

Even in the classic RE games you were still intended to fight most enemies, though. It's just that the controls for combat were so clunky that most people opted to skip fights, but the developers did still intend for you to kill most enemies, as evidenced by the fact that there usually was enough ammo in each game to conceivably do so, even if just barely (hence why most people opted to conserve via skipping).

This is only really true on subsequent playthroughs when you know exactly where to go and what to do. A smart player will save most of their good ammo for boss fights on their first run, since the only way to kill everything in the game is to use up nearly everything you have. And the ability to kill a lot of the early game enemies is mostly accomplished through backtracking, because you don't get loaded down with ammo until the halfway point in most of them. Also, REmake actually punishes you for killing too many zombies.

To give a clear example of what I mean, take a game like F.E.A.R., which is technically a horror game, but could be classified as psychological horror, since most scares are just that, with most actual threats coming from regular clone soldiers. A game like RE4 doesn't have any psychological scares, though, and many of the horror elements deal with you attempting to survive by fighting back with deadly force. Just because it's not running away from enemies doesn't mean it's still not surviving.

Like I clarified above, when people say "survival horror" they're talking more about the gameplay style than the type of scares included.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Don't Alan Wake and Deadly Premonition count? Not to mention the first two Dead Space games and the Fatal Frame series? Condemned?

They do, though I suppose you could make the argument for Alan Wake being psychological horror, since it's heavily implied that this is happening in his head (or according to fan theories, in Thomas Zane's head, with Alan awake being his fictional character). Dead Space, from what I've played of it, is definitely survival horror.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Right. Again, I do agree with you. I've played through RE1 even on its hardest difficulty and killed probably 99% of the enemies I've encountered. There's also the fact that you frequently played as toughened, well trained soldiers in those games.

I remember seeing a friend do the same for REmake (including killing off the reanimated corpses/crimson heads). Of course, it may actually be easier to not kill some regular zombies just to prevent them from ever returning as much tougher, and faster, enemies.

[talonmalon333]

I feel like the intent is the same, even if the execution is more action oriented. Just like RE 1-3, the goal is purely about survival. Well, saving Ashley is the goal, too. But for the most part, it's you and her trying to survive the nightmare together. That separates it from an action adventure game, where the objective is usually about adventuring and, well, conquering.

That's just my thoughts I quickly put together. For the most part, yeah, this isn't a topic I'm an expert on. The important part of RE4, really, isn't that it's survival horror or action horror. The important part is that it's awesome.

[Foggle]

I feel like the intent is the same, even if the execution is more action oriented. Just like RE 1-3, the goal is purely about survival. Well, saving Ashley is the goal, too. But for the most part, it's you and her trying to survive the nightmare together. That separates it from an action adventure game, where the objective is usually about adventuring and, well, conquering.

I think the argument is that RE4 leans more heavily toward shooting than exploration. Like, you never have to kill a single non-boss enemy in the older games, but in the later ones there are parts where you literally are not allowed to continue until you clear out the arena of respawning goons, some of which can shoot you back. Though the latter isn't too far out of the realm of survival horror in RE4 (since they use rudimentary crossbows) unless you count the chain gun dudes.

The important part of RE4, really, isn't that it's survival horror or action horror. The important part is that it's awesome.

Yes.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Man, I'm not the one who classifies this shit. According to the aficionados, it's apparently "action horror" because it focuses more on killing bad guys than collecting items and solving puzzles.

Tell the aficionados that I said they are incredibly pretentious and need to look at a dictionary sometime.

While the previous REs still had a fair amount of shooting, that wasn't really the focus of them, except for arguably RE3. RE4 certainly has more in common with traditional "survival horror" games than the later entries, but ask people who are even nerdier than I am and they'll you it literally birthed a new sub-genre of horror game. Then you have stuff like Amnesia, which is considered "horror adventure" since it's basically a point and click except you can move around freely. Then there are games like F.E.A.R. that aren't rooted in any genre of horror gameplay but still include heavy elements of creepiness. At least, that's how I've come to understand it over the years.

They're all just "horror games" to me, but those are the commonly referred to sub-genres.

Well, I'd argue that RE4 still had a suitable portion of puzzle-solving and non-action focused segments. And while it does have more action than previous RE games, I've actually seen people call all of the classic RE games more action focused than Silent Hill and Fatal Frame, which I think is hilarious considering how much less combat those games have than most horror games these days.

This is only really true on subsequent playthroughs when you know exactly where to go and what to do. A smart player will save most of their good ammo for boss fights on their first run, since the only way to kill everything in the game is to use up nearly everything you have. And the ability to kill a lot of the early game enemies is mostly accomplished through backtracking, because you don't get loaded down with ammo until the halfway point in most of them. Also, REmake actually punishes you for killing too many zombies.

Even so, the ability to do so is still present, and like I've said, the developers did intend for you to fight more than flee in those games. From what I've heard, they made the AI smarter in RE4 and designed them to lunge at you because they knew people had a tendency to skip fights, and the developers didn't want them doing that anymore. It just makes a stronger case that they still wanted actual combat to happen in the previous games as well.

Like I clarified above, when people say "survival horror" they're talking more about the gameplay style than the type of scares included.

Well, in that regard, I did also point out how RE4's gameplay dealt with "surviving" situations which were also intended to be scary. It's action, yes, but it's still also a form of survival, especially with some fights where you had to mix shooting with also knowing when to run away.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

The important part of RE4, really, isn't that it's survival horror or action horror. The important part is that it's awesome.

Yes.

Actually, the important thing is that TEW is basically the long awaited RE5 that took nearly 10 years to come out.