The Evil Within

Reading an IGN article on the recent pax preview;
There main argument is that the character doesn't react to anything scary.

My two cents..
The characters in the RE games or Silent Hill were detached and emotionless too when it came to scares. It was up to the player to feel the reaction as in tension buildup or jump scares for example.

Remember Chris Redfield being freaked out when he ran by those windows and the dogs jumped out? Oh, that's right, the character on-screen didn't even flinch, it was us players that tensed up!

The detached character criticism is weak and unfair argument. The reactions to this are so over the top.

Zero-Cool

Yeah that was the biggest thing I took away from it and he really made it sound awful. It made me think how uncharted and last of us characters react to what's going on around them and it really adds to the game. It would be good for the character to react to his creepy surroundings, especially for a next gen game. Still that one thing shouldn't take THAT much away from the game.

Fawk Nin

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Reading an IGN article on the recent pax preview;
There main argument is that the character doesn't react to anything scary.

My two cents..
The characters in the RE games or Silent Hill were detached and emotionless too when it came to scares. It was up to the player to feel the reaction as in tension buildup or jump scares for example.

Remember Chris Redfield being freaked out when he ran by those windows and the dogs jumped out? Oh, that's right, the character on-screen didn't even flinch, it was us players that tensed up!

The detached character criticism is weak and unfair argument. The reactions to this are so over the top.

I don't blame editors for criticising a game for this though. The early Resi games are a decade old and we shouldn't be happy with games refusing to push the boundaries past what we have seen. As games begin to look more realistic and have more realistic physics it is details like this that stand out like a sore thumb breaking submersion.

C14N

RasTa wrote: »

This is getting panned at the moment by almost every journalist at the latest reveal.

The barbed wire industry are upset too

snausages

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Reading an IGN article on the recent pax preview;
There main argument is that the character doesn't react to anything scary.

My two cents..
The characters in the RE games or Silent Hill were detached and emotionless too when it came to scares. It was up to the player to feel the reaction as in tension buildup or jump scares for example.

Remember Chris Redfield being freaked out when he ran by those windows and the dogs jumped out? Oh, that's right, the character on-screen didn't even flinch, it was us players that tensed up!

The detached character criticism is weak and unfair argument. The reactions to this are so over the top.

By modern standards, the original Resident Evil is awful. Doesn't make sense to make that comparison.

Anyway this game looks like it has lots of cutscenes and cinematic sequences, so it would really need to be convincing.

Fawk Nin

Fawk Nin wrote: »

I don't blame editors for criticising a game for this though. The early Resi games are a decade old and we shouldn't be happy with games refusing to push the boundaries past what we have seen. As games begin to look more realistic and have more realistic physics it is details like this that stand out like a sore thumb breaking submersion.

snausages wrote: »

By modern standards, the original Resident Evil is awful. Doesn't make sense to make that comparison.

Anyway this game looks like it has lots of cutscenes and cinematic sequences, so it would really need to be convincing.

This is what the majority of consumers are apparently craving for (everything I have read, lets go back to the roots of RE bla bla bla, low ammo, boxed corridors, tension and jump scares).

There's a difference in immersion levels if you talk about horror titles, and cinematic type experiences. Look at the more recent Outlast released on the PS4, this is essentially a jump scare extraordinaire with a first person view (thus eliminating NPC reaction, it's in your view) and scripted sequences everywhere.

Is this what your suggesting it should be? If not then you want it to turn out like The Last of US?

The title 'Survival horror' is as vague as it comes in terms of a video game genre because nobody has a definitive idea of exactly what it is that consumers want so this is why we get this constant mis-matched opinions about The Evil Dead.

Also;

Quote Shinji Mikami '“We’re incredibly proud to announce The Evil Within,” said Mikami. “My team and I are committed to creating an exciting new franchise, providing fans the perfect blend of horror and action.”

It was always going to be an action title, even history tells us this with RE4.

snausages

Survival horror to me implies a game that puts emphasis on obstacles and the environment over the player, if that makes sense. While RE4 is a player-centric title the earlier games are more.. player-hostile maybe? Can't find the right word. The original REs achieved their effect by obfuscating the player's viewpoint with static camera angles (notice how much more atmospheric it is when you don't have an OTS camera angle?) and, as you said, boxed corridors. 'Survival horror' was largely a creation that came from the limitations imposed by the hardware the games came out on. But I don't see why it shouldn't be possible to re-imagine that same sense of claustrophobia and panic that the original REs induced on a modern platform. Remove ammo drops, effective melee techniques and precision aiming. Make a new horror game with a clunky lock-on system like Silent Hill has. Make melee (mostly) non-lethal. Get rid of laser-sight and cross-hairs. Cut down on cutscenes.

As for the camera I'm not really sure what they could do because I think static pre-rendered environments in this day and age are a bit of an anachronism. All I know is that a lot of the horror in Project Zero 2 was lost when they remade it with RE4 camera angles for the Wii. There has to be some kind of middle ground I think.

Anyway it doesn't look like Evil Within is striving to be anything more than a serviceable action-horror. Which is fine, but ultimately disappointing. I wanted better.

Xenji

When has a console survival game pushed the boundaries in recent memory since Fatal Frame, the majority of people did not play Siren Blood Curse and Dead Space is not a horror game in my view. The genre made it big with the likes of Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Clock Tower, Eternal Darkness and more recently with Deadly Premonition and Lone Survivor. The horror genre is nearly PC exclusive at this point, the best games are not coming out on a console format and it has been that way for years, I hope that Evil Within actually succeeds and more companies go back to old school console horror games, they are a dying breed and if the Evil Within fails the whole next gen genre will take an almighty hit.

C14N

I think "survival horror" generally just means that the emphasis is on staying alive, compared to other games where the emphasis is on killing enemies or overcoming obstacles. In survival horror you should feel helpless, the idea is to escape dangers rather than beat them.

Davei141

Just because Dead Space 2&3 were very action orientated it is unfair and plain wrong to say Dead Space 1 is not a horror game.

Davei141

Davei141 wrote: »

Just because Dead Space 2&3 were very action orientated it is unfair and plain wrong to say Dead Space 1 is not a horror game.

Play DS1 on Hard with headphones on, it won't be long till you freak out. I hardly had ammo and was constantly on the run it was terrifying.

Even DS2, as action orientated as it was was genuinely unsettling.

Especially

(the return to the DS1 ship)

Zero-Cool

DS1 was brilliant, proper horror game! I never played DS2 but would be interested in giving it a go after reading your spoiler bit!

Genghiz Cohen

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Play DS1 on Hard with headphones on, it won't be long till you freak out. I hardly had ammo and was constantly on the run it was terrifying.

Even DS2, as action orientated as it was was genuinely unsettling.

Especially

(the return to the DS1 ship)

DS2 had it's moments, showing the havoc that the Necromorphs wreak on a fully populated city, the panic and disorganisation only adding to the butchers bill. That worked really well. In particular I remember the sounds of children crying behind locked doors, there is nothing you can do to help, quite unsettling.

Unfortunately the game was a noticeable step away from what made DS1 great.

Retr0gamer

I think the Dead Space games get way too much credit. The only reason they are popular is that there's really not much else to choose from in terms of horror. They're pretty average action games which get old well before the end.

If you have a PS3 pick up Siren instead.

Zero-Cool

Retr0gamer wrote: »

If you have a PS3 pick up Siren instead.

Siren is brilliant, one of the first PS3 games I got.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I think the Dead Space games get way too much credit. The only reason they are popular is that there's really not much else to choose from in terms of horror. They're pretty average action games which get old well before the end.

If you have a PS3 pick up Siren instead.

sheehy83 wrote: »

Siren is brilliant, one of the first PS3 games I got.

Yes but it's a Horror title. Full Stop. No Action at all.

DS1 is as described 'third-person action / survival horror video'

To compare the two is not relevant there two different types of games.

gaynorvader

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I think the Dead Space games get way too much credit. The only reason they are popular is that there's really not much else to choose from in terms of horror. They're pretty average action games which get old well before the end.

If you have a PS3 pick up Siren instead.

I played through it on the PC and thought it was awful. I'm actually surprised I managed to finish it. The action was dull and tedious, the exploration was strangled, the 'horror' relied on stuff jumping out at you, but it always jumped out from the same place and if it killed you, you loaded the checkpoint and were ready for it. The controls with the mouse were truly dreadful, I remember having to constantly lift my mouse because the character was so slow turning to do a 180 you ended up lifting the mouse about 5-10 times.
The upgrade system was sort of interesting, though a lot of the weapons you got later weren't better than the one you started with, especially if you upgraded it. Graphics were nice, story was presented well, but pretty generic. Lights flickering/going out often felt a bit scripted which robbed from the atmosphere a bit imho. If I hear of someone planning on buying this for the PC I always advise them to either get it for the console or use a controller.

snausages

There's not much 'survival' in Dead Space. The game has rubber-banding difficulty that throws out ammo and health when you really need it.

For me a survival horror is defined by the words 'fight or flight'. There's none of that in Dead Space, just fighting. There's no reason not to kill everything in your path.

Zero-Cool

Would I Am Alive be considered Surival Horror or just Survival? In that, a disaster hits and you are trying to find your family. You would be lucky to have more that 1 bullet at a time so you have to bluff enemies. Some very tense moments. And what about Last of Us, would that be Survival Horror (on harder difficulties anyway as ammo is more scarce)?

snausages

snausages wrote: »

There's not much 'survival' in Dead Space. The game has rubber-banding difficulty that throws out ammo and health when you really need it.

For me a survival horror is defined by the words 'fight or flight'. There's none of that in Dead Space, just fighting. There's no reason not to kill everything in your path.

Play it on hard, totally different animal. No ammo to be found.

gaynorvader

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Play it on hard, totally different animal. No ammo to be found.

That's what I played it on, I always had plenty of ammo for the plasma cutter, which seemed to be the best weapon after the line gun (which you don't get for a long time). Maybe I'm somehow 'playing it wrong'.

snausages

sheehy83 wrote: »

Would I Am Alive be considered Surival Horror or just Survival? In that, a disaster hits and you are trying to find your family. You would be lucky to have more that 1 bullet at a time so you have to bluff enemies. Some very tense moments. And what about Last of Us, would that be Survival Horror (on harder difficulties anyway as ammo is more scarce)?

It's all semantics I guess but I always think that resources should be finite in a 'survival' game. Ammo and supplies aren't finite in RE4/Dead Space, enemies drop them and you can buy stuff, but they are in the original REs.

gaynorvader

gaynorvader wrote: »

That's what I played it on, I always had plenty of ammo for the plasma cutter, which seemed to be the best weapon after the line gun (which you don't get for a long time). Maybe I'm somehow 'playing it wrong'.

Not in my experience the first ten chapters I was constantly caught having to run from necromorphs. I used a variety of the weapons didn't bank on using the plasma cutter alone.

Nobody stating you 'played the game wrong.'

That was my experience with the game. There's a section in Chapter 10 where I was without ammo for approx 5 mins. My nerves were shot.

Davei141

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Not in my experience the first ten chapters I was constantly caught having to run from necromorphs. I used a variety of the weapons didn't bank on using the plasma cutter alone.

Nobody stating you 'played the game wrong.'

That was my experience with the game. There's a section in Chapter 10 where I was without ammo for approx 5 mins. My nerves were shot.

There was parts of Dead Space that I had to just run by for dear life because I had no ammo. There was also plenty of parts were I needed to kill the necromorphs with precision shots or I was dead. The idea that you have ammo at every corner is false.

snausages

I killed everything in Dead Space. Surprised people had to run away in it.

I'm not arguing that the game wasn't difficult, but it's strictly action-horror in my eyes. Which isn't a bad thing! Some survival horror games are actually really easy anyway, like RE2 for instance.

johnny_ultimate

The thing about classic survival horror is that they used limitations to good effect - primitive controls, limited 3d capabilities, very rough gunplay mechanics, unexpected jump scares etc... It's quite the challenge to recreate that these days without feeling like something of a step back, and gaming has to a certain degree outgrown the genre. It's hard to elegantly represent artificial interactive awkwardness. Games like Outlast and Shattered Memories have tried with mixed success. It's going to take an incredibly bold game to take everything to the next level and feel fresh & scary.

You could say the recent explosion of survival games are the natural evolution, though. Tight resources, hostile environment, the threat nighttime. Maybe marrying these sort of mechanics with the atmosphere of the great survival horror efforts could result in something special.

I'd also be reluctant to write off the Evil Within just yet, based on the strength of Mikami's CV. Even if this isn't a survival horror in the traditional or even evolutionary sense, the man knows how to make a damn good game so I'd be cautiously optimistic he could still produce something well worth playing.

johnny_ultimate

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The thing about classic survival horror is that they used limitations to good effect - primitive controls, limited 3d capabilities, very rough gunplay mechanics, unexpected jump scares etc... It's quite the challenge to recreate that these days without feeling like something of a step back, and gaming has to a certain degree outgrown the genre. It's hard to elegantly represent artificial interactive awkwardness. Games like Outlast and Shattered Memories have tried with mixed success. It's going to take an incredibly bold game to take everything to the next level and feel fresh & scary.

You could say the recent explosion of survival games are the natural evolution, though. Tight resources, hostile environment, the threat nighttime. Maybe marrying these sort of mechanics with the atmosphere of the great survival horror efforts could result in something special.

I'd also be reluctant to write off the Evil Within just yet, based on the strength of Mikami's CV. Even if this isn't a survival horror in the traditional or even evolutionary sense, the man knows how to make a damn good game so I'd be cautiously optimistic he could still produce something well worth playing.

My thoughts into words, well said.

C14N

sheehy83 wrote: »

Would I Am Alive be considered Surival Horror or just Survival? In that, a disaster hits and you are trying to find your family. You would be lucky to have more that 1 bullet at a time so you have to bluff enemies. Some very tense moments. And what about Last of Us, would that be Survival Horror (on harder difficulties anyway as ammo is more scarce)?

I definitely considered The Last of Us to be a survival game anyway. You have to spend ages scavenging for resources because they are scarce and personally, I only used guns when I was really stuck because running out of bullets was a serious problem.

I kind of considered the original Half Life to be a survival game for the same reason, and since there's no regenerating health you really need to be careful.

C14N

C14N wrote: »

I definitely considered The Last of Us to be a survival game anyway. You have to spend ages scavenging for resources because they are scarce and personally, I only used guns when I was really stuck because running out of bullets was a serious problem.

I kind of considered the original Half Life to be a survival game for the same reason, and since there's no regenerating health you really need to be careful.

Guess your getting stuck in then

Half-Life on hard is a sturdy test. Especially battles with the H.E.C.U.

ShadowHearth

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Play DS1 on Hard with headphones on, it won't be long till you freak out. I hardly had ammo and was constantly on the run it was terrifying.

Even DS2, as action orientated as it was was genuinely unsettling.

Especially

(the return to the DS1 ship)

Honestly? I loved them both. I just really like the whole Dead Space universe, I even watched both of those animated movies.
I really liked DS2, because it showed a lot more of civilian places and how people live in that world. The part you have in spoilers was freaking fantastic. I did not knew that part was even in DS2 game when I played it. When I sow it in game, I really had shivers and "Well, that is freaking awesome".
DS2 had some very cool enemies. Those bastards who hide behind walls and peek now and then at you... They had me ****ting myself countless times.

I really dont agree with Retro that DS series only good, because it was the only horror survival IP in the market at that point. DS was awesome on its own.

I gave DS3 a chance and in a way it had some interesting ideas. I did gave up and turned the damn thing off when I tried to get in to area, but game said: " DERP NO LOL! YOU NEED A PARTNER TO EXPLORE THAT AREA DERP! " Well **** this ****.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Honestly? I loved them both. I just really like the whole Dead Space universe, I even watched both of those animated movies.
I really liked DS2, because it showed a lot more of civilian places and how people live in that world. The part you have in spoilers was freaking fantastic. I did not knew that part was even in DS2 game when I played it. When I sow it in game, I really had shivers and "Well, that is freaking awesome".
DS2 had some very cool enemies. Those bastards who hide behind walls and peek now and then at you... They had me ****ting myself countless times.

I really dont agree with Retro that DS series only good, because it was the only horror survival IP in the market at that point. DS was awesome on its own.

I gave DS3 a chance and in a way it had some interesting ideas. I did gave up and turned the damn thing off when I tried to get in to area, but game said: " DERP NO LOL! YOU NEED A PARTNER TO EXPLORE THAT AREA DERP! " Well **** this ****.

Dead Space 3 was a disappointment for me. I really enjoyed the Space exploration part of the game and the coop was fun but when in the thick of an actual fight they just reverted the necromorphs to bullet sponges, they eliminated all tension and tactical shooting as a result. Essentially you could build weapons and no matter where you hit the necromoprh it just died. You also were given absolutely insane amounts of ammo.

Thus completely eliminating any tension that existed ala DS 1+2

To bring the topic back to the Evil Dead; reading a non-judgmental preview of the game;

http://newenglandgamer.com/evil-within-pax-east-2014/

Zero-Cool

Game has been delayed until October 24th. Pre-order pack will give you extra survival items like a medikit, double barrel shotgun. etc.

2Mad2BeMad

NOOOOOO, was hoping this game would tie me over until destiny, then shadow of mordor
I had it all planned out
looks like it will clash with other games during that month
hope it sells well, we need a decent survival horror game for consoles

edit: also don't fancy pre ordering for all that ****e, games like these need to be started normal, don't like the extra help

Zero-Cool

Yupp clashing with Batman: Arkham Knight which will not help sales 1 bit!

ripperman

Ah no. Had this planned in my calendar as well! Love that title font, old horror movie style!

B.A._Baracus

guess they feel a halloween timed release will help sales.

Xenji

Still looking forward to this and a release at Halloween actually will give me a excuse to hopefully scare the **** out of the other half.

Xenji

Xenji wrote: »

Still looking forward to this and a release at Halloween actually will give me a excuse to hopefully scare the **** out of the other half.

I would agree with the Halloween timing. Perfect.

If they wish to delay to give the game more polish I'm all for it.

Retr0gamer

Seems the latest hands on previews are far more positive for this game than previous ones.

C14N

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I would agree with the Halloween timing. Perfect.

If they wish to delay to give the game more polish I'm all for it.

Completely agree. Once the game is out, it stays that way forever so it's worth it to wait and get it right.

Lads an updated preview of the game; it really looks like it's very much improved over the PAX demo.

http://www.gamerevolution.com/preview/the-evil-within/96999

http://kotaku.com/the-evil-within-made-me-want-to-throw-up-1579605994

Xenji

Still excited about this game and the extended demo looks really good as well.

ripperman

Looks fantastic! Can't wait to get it.

Zero-Cool

Season Pass announced.....hhhhhhmmmmmm

With only two months until the release of The Evil Within (yes, it’s still coming in October!), we’re excited to share details on our Season Pass plans for the game.

The Evil Within Season Pass will allow you to experience survival horror from a new perspective. In the first add-on, assume the role of The Keeper (aka Boxman) in a sadistic collection of mission-based maps. The second and third add-ons take you further down a path of madness in a two-part, story-driven experience in the role of Juli Kidman — Sebastian Castellanos’ rookie partner from The Evil Within. Encounter new weapons, discover unthinkable enemies, and new areas that reveal hidden motives and harrowing evil.

Priced at $19.99/£14.99/€19.99, the Season Pass offers savings on three planned add-ons for the game and will be available soon at select game retailers, PSN, Xbox LIVE, and PC.

gizmo

Reading some of the reactions to the Season Pass announcement and I'm pretty shocked at the vitriol being spouted. I mean, from the description of the DLC this looks like the very definition of additional content which has been developed separate from the main campaign. Is the core of the argument that because people think it's supposedly finished or in development now that it was cut from the main game or should be included at retail?

As a matter of interest, I looked back at the similar Season Pass announcement for The Last of Us when they had their single piece of single player content and the two multiplayer-focused ones. Same deal there, a whole lot of angry people, ones swearing to not buy it or to wait for it to hit the bargain bin. Like, did people feel aggrieved that Left Behind (or content of that nature) wasn't included along with the main game?

tok9

I haven't been paying much attention to anger towards the season pass for this game but I don't remember there being too much issue with the TLOU season pass.

That said the season pass for TLOU was initially supposed to be all MP but they switched one to SP as fans really wanted it I believe.

Anyway they actually didn't even start developing Left Behind until a bit after the game had launched.

Zero-Cool

I like Single player DLC in season passes. Multiplayer maps in season passes are nothing but FLUFF!

Very interested to see how playing as Boxman works.

BeerWolf

I've been starved from horror games - definitely looking forward to this one !

They're becoming increasingly infrequent now


The Suffering series was awesome back in the day on the old Xbox.

gizmo

tok9 wrote: »

I haven't been paying much attention to anger towards the season pass for this game but I don't remember there being too much issue with the TLOU season pass.

Well, most of the anger seems to stem from the comments sections on both articles and related ones on other sites. ....yea, I know, comments sections.

tok9 wrote: »

That said the season pass for TLOU was initially supposed to be all MP but they switched one to SP as fans really wanted it I believe.

Totally open to correction on this but all of the articles I see on the topic from around the end of May mention the single player content as being there?

tok9 wrote: »

Anyway they actually didn't even start developing Left Behind until a bit after the game had launched.

Was this mentioned in the documentary or was it just something Naughty Dog said along the way. Regardless, it does raise the issue of where people's ire really lies with this, is it content designed but not developed that is supposedly held back? Designed and developed but not included regardless of its content? This is more of a general topic though so maybe it's better suited to one of the fifty million DLC-related threads we have. I was just surprised to see it for The Evil Within given the seemingly standalone nature of the content on offer.

Zero-Cool

Lads get yer asses to the P.T demo on PS4 if ye want some horror to tide you over for a while, seriously creepy game with a surprise ending.