Alone in the Dark

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

It's a flawed game but I really have to say the good completely overwhelmed the bad for me. I think the bad reviews just don't understand what survival-horror is really about.

---

I just started this tonight after finishing R6 Vegas 2.

So far the game is FUN. So far the control is FUCKING TERRIBLE. Seriously. Terrible. Fucking awful. Bad. Even the first person view is excruciatingly horrible. It's bad. BAD.

But, as some others stated, the game really is fun. Not really all that scary yet?, but the scenarios are exciting.

I like it so far. Dragging half-dead wall-crack-zombies into a burning car is awesome. Let's hope the awesome keeps up with the omgwtfsux control.

I don't think the controls suck any more than the average survival horror game. I think slow, clumsy characters are kind of a part of the genre. You're not supposed to feel powerful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

I don't think the controls suck any more than the average survival horror game. I think slow, clumsy characters are kind of a part of the genre. You're not supposed to feel powerful.

---

Like you do in RE4.

Yeah, but that's why the best survival horror games are System Shock 2, Doom 3 etc.

I gave up on this game rather fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joust Williams

Yeah, but that's why the best survival horror games are System Shock 2, Doom 3 etc.

I gave up on this game rather fast.

---

Doom 3 is FAR from "survival".
I would fuck System Shocks hole though if that matters.

Games should create "survival horror" through stressful situations, fear of loss/death and appropriate atmosphere. Fearing the next time you have to bash in a door with a trashcan because you can not accurately position yourself to do so, despite your perceived proficiency with a game controller, is not what I desire in the genre.

Trashcans are not scary. Bashing in doors is not scary. Terrible controls, however, make all situations horrifying.

Despite this, I plan on playing this game later tonight :wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyne

Like you do in RE4.

---

RE4 isn't a survival horror game. I think because they released a solid third person shooter in the RE series people think survival horror game should be shooters from now on, but they aren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Six

Games should create "survival horror" through stressful situations, fear of loss/death and appropriate atmosphere. Fearing the next time you have to bash in a door with a trashcan because you can not accurately position yourself to do so, despite your perceived proficiency with a game controller, is not what I desire in the genre.

Trashcans are not scary. Bashing in doors is not scary. Terrible controls, however, make all situations horrifying.

---

Uh... I dunno, I think pretty much every horror movie ever might disagree, as characters fumble with their keys to open a car door or try to break down a door... The horror genre is full of those moments because they're tense. And Alone in the Dark intentionally plays that up with moments like trying to hotwire a car while enemies are fighting to pull you out.

It does bear mentioning that if you're genuinely struggling to swing an object at a door you do kind of suck, but to act like clumsy moments fighting with a mundane task under pressure aren't a part of the horror genre is just silly.

I mean shit, did you ever actually play Resident Evil or the original Alone in the Dark? I hate to tell you this, but nimble control wasn't on the list of strong points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

Uh... I dunno, I think pretty much every horror movie ever might disagree, as characters fumble with their keys to open a car door or try to break down a door... The horror genre is full of those moments because they're tense. And Alone in the Dark intentionally plays that up with moments like trying to hotwire a car while enemies are fighting to pull you out.

It does bear mentioning that if you're genuinely struggling to swing an object at a door you do kind of suck, but to act like clumsy moments fighting with a mundane task under pressure aren't a part of the horror genre is just silly.

I mean shit, did you ever actually play Resident Evil or the original Alone in the Dark? I hate to tell you this, but nimble control wasn't on the list of strong points.

---

I think we agree. Tense moments are good. Fumbling with whatever because you're scared is good.

It's one thing to create a gameplay element that determines the amount of control you have over a character - the insanity meter in Eternal Darkness for example - if the normal, "sane" controls are acceptable. My complaint is that the camera and general movement are not intuitive and make tasks that should be easy, quite difficult. My first few experiences with door bashing were: too far left, wrong swinging motion, too far right, finally hit the door, wrong swinging motion, wrong swinging motion, hit the door again, too far right, etc.

Sure, I just finished Ranbow Six: Vegas 2 which controlls pretty well (as a FPS should) and maybe I'm spoiled at the moment, but the third person camera/control in AitD is silly. I don't mind being slow and weak, but at least let me move my character when I want to, in the direction I want to. And maybe I do still suck at the controls. Maybe it will get better. But the first experiences need to be better for most people to stick with it.

And I did play the hell out of RE back in the day, but it's not 1996 anymore and we should expect more a "3D!!" game than slow turning, poor aiming "highly trained STARS secret assassin ninja" characters that constantly are impeded by turns in the hallway and awesome voice acting. Bad controls should not be a gameplay feature of any genre.

I'm going to play some more this afternoon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Six

"highly trained STARS secret assassin ninja"

---

I don't think they were ever meant to be super-soldiers, and that whole idea is very counter to the genre. Typically, survival-horror heroes are everymen, or close to it. They don't have powers, they aren't fast or powerful, and aren't even designed to be "cool." Being a badass isn't scary.

I actually think that's one aspect they may have screwed up a bit in this one, because while Carnby isn't super powerful or anything, they do develop this idea of a mysterious and special backstory and "save the world" plot that simply doesn't belong.

Quote:

---

Bad controls should not be a gameplay feature of any genre.

---

Not bad necessarily, but limited. Things like slow running or turning, or deliberate attempts to obscure your surroundings (using darkness, camera angles, etc) seem perfectly appropriate. There's a learning curve for AitD, but you'll get over it.

I don't mean to sound like I'm defending every choice they made, because I'm not. They got over-ambitious on a few things that didn't work. But some of what you're talking about is simply because survival-horror is a very different sort of genre that does a lot of things that would be considered "bad design" in genres that are designed as escapist power fantasies.

Keep an eye on Dead Space though. They've managed to give you solid third-person shooter controls but still stay true to the survival-horror design ethic, by designing combat scenarios that force your to be precise and strategic under pressure. They lose a little bit of the everyman feel in the process (even though they claim they're still going for that), but I think it's a compromise that will probably make the game more accessible to people coming over from other genres.