-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
rubik's dude
Member
Any where you aren't expected to John Wick your way through hordes of enemies, killing any sense of tension or dread. Bonus points if they don't pad the game out with reskinned zones, one after another. I literally couldn't believe I had to trudge through the hospital and South Vale a second time, and that I had more reskinned zones to look forward to after that.
rubik's dude
Member
Hospital -> Otherworld Hospital
South Vale -> Otherworld South Vale
Lakeview Hotel -> Otherworld Lakeview Hotel
For about a third of the game, you're going through the same zones all over again.
And yes, do you remember the gallows in the prison? A literal horde tries to ambush you. Moments before that, when you overload the circuit breaker, another horde of enemies attack you. It felt like Resident Evil.
Yeah, play original. It's half the length of the remake and is much more cohesive experience. Yes, they bloat it too much, but the main problem is that they didn't do anything to expand on original's, let's be honest, shallow gameplay mechanics and just filled it with padding and tons of enemies. It's become much worse in the latter part where mob is waiting for you behind every corner, game became tedious and boring, and any horror atmosphere is already long gone.
Last edited:
bundylove
Member
PLease tell me what would be a good horror game then.
Your thoughts are all over the place
Ulysses 31
Member
You should check out the original(avoid the HD collection version, PC Enhanced Edition is prolly the best) if you're not bothered by the old graphics and tank controls.
People thinking they've experienced Silent Hill 2 only having played the remake are kidding themselves.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
I half agree. I am at South Vale and while I enjoyed the Hospital, the Apartment I felt had an over abundance of enemies. They balanced this out by handing out a lot of ammo and heals. You are shooting a ton in this game. And at some point you know the enemies, the ones that explode with gas, the mannequins you need to shoot in the legs, and the nurses which I mostly used my shotgun on. You also start to notice enemies always seem to come in packs of 3. There is some stealth added, where you can down and then kill enemies with your melee weapon if you are silent and without light, but the combat is very standard fare overall.
The problem is that they padded the dungeons with more enemies, and more layers into puzzles. Every time I was kind of done with an area but ofcourse an Otherworld version still has to be done afterward.
I would say the remake is great though, and ofcourse the gameplay is far superior, but the original with updated gameplay would probably my pick. Its much better paced. I don't know if I would do another run of Remake, while I beat the original about 3 or 4 times.
rubik's dude
Member
Not sure why you're having trouble following along, my complaints have been consistent: too many enemies, too much padding.
Tank controls and older graphics aren't a bother at all. I'll definitely check out the original.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Member
RE4 is a much bigger offender when it comes to enemies?
I don’t really see these as big negatives but to each their own
bundylove
Member
CAn you name a horror game that you would consider better than silent hill 2? In third person of course.
Madison vr is way more scarier but its different.
So yes please tell me which game you would prefer over silent hill2
freemandos
Member
Exactly. It's fine loving the remake (I don't but I was mostly entertained and can see people enjoying it), but I don't get this idea unless it's thinking about the more superficial idea of Silent Hill 2 more than its substance.
Team Silent entries weren't so combat focused and full of jumpscares and enemies. That was one of the differences between Silent Hill and Resident Evil unlike this remake. Silent Hill had a lynchian surreal vibe, much more than this remake, and it was one of its main traits. The fog, the darkness and the radio were far more about the "you know there's something bad but you can't see it". And while the ots camera was expected in the remake, it works worse than latest RE games unlike the classic camera, which was one of the best of the genre if not the best, with that psychological and cinematic feel and far more mobility for the player than other franchises at the time. Oh, and the OG Silent Hill 2 has a more claustrophobic level design and its know to be a less "gamey" entry than the others. Also, original Silent Hill games were much better giving you the choice of avoiding combat. And I could say more.
About the enemies and the padding, the original is only 8-10 hours and while the enemy variety isn't bigger the town isn't so superpopulated by any means and you can avoid most of the monsters. Its difficult is the lowest of the four original games but my advice for the first time is playing all in normal difficult or combat on normal with puzzles on hard, don't put combat on hard! There are veeery painfully frustrating parts on hard.
freemandos
Member
RE4 is a TPS with much more enemy variety and more ways to defeat them and it's made to enjoy fighting them. SH2R wants to be a psychological survival horror game with a far less varied bestiary, a more vulnerable playable character, a more claustrophobic level design, a more limited combat system (because of the different genre) and yet it's a very combat heavy game against lots of enemies for +20 hours. It's not the same case.
rubik's dude
Member
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs and ironically, Layers of Fear. To make myself clear, I prefer those over the Silent Hill 2 remake, not Silent Hill 2. I haven't played the original SH2 yet.
That's honestly a good description. I'm a huge Lynch fan, and I got heavy Lynch vibes from this game. From the way the characters acted (slightly aloof) to the impending sense of dread that made it seem as if you were in a dream/nightmare.
Unfortunately it got ruined because of the over abundance of enemies and combat and padding that made every area a chore to get through.
This is why I'm keen on playing the original now, because it sounds like it does away with all of the issues I have with the remake.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
The original probably still has a better atmosphere, its quite desolate. I can't help to feel SH2 Remake is more gallery like, it pushes you towards set pieces more and it doesn't really let you avoid enemies. For example take the swimming pool section from the apartments with the Snake coin, in Remake there are like 6 enemies swarming you. In original I think there is one. The original also has this moments where the camera pans above you and you see James running towards the screen, or it pans around him. The original game plays with camera perspectives more, adding to the atmosphere. Add up that you can probably beat it in 8 hours and it has minimal combat, its a perfect game to binge and get all endings for.
SH2 original felt soothing and unnerving at the same time. You can explore it sort of at leisure, but you feel very uncomfortable doing it. I think this was its purpose.
SH2 original felt soothing and unnerving at the same time. You can explore it sort of at leisure, but you feel very uncomfortable doing it. I think this was its purpose.
Last edited:
bundylove
Member
But then you are not in the same genre arent you.
You prefer walksim hide and seek ones nit actiin adventure ones. So this is a you problem not silent hill 2 problem.
As i said name me another third person horror game that is above silent hill 2.
Layers of fear is utter garbage.
But i would have said at the very least fatal frame series or the latest alone in the dark.
So dont mix up the 2 different styles of horror.
If you only like those type of walking simulator hide and seek games go play visage or madison or other similer type of games.
rubik's dude
Member
It doesn't matter if you agree or not, Amnesia, Layers of Fear, and Silent Hill 2 are all survival horror lmao.
I don't care, I didn't ask what you think.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs and Layers of Fear over Silent Hill 2 remake for me.
bundylove
Member
Bullshit biddy.
Especially machine of pigs . Get outta here with your crap
I played all amnesia games.
Its not the same style.
Dont bullshit me
But also, just one look at your account and anyone here can tell your intentions with your bs about layers of fear shits all over silent hill 2.
Bet you didnt even play silent hill 2 max yoi watched some youtubers . Max.
Last edited:
bundylove
Member
I got all endings in the original silent hill 2.
I played it to nauseam.
The first one was shorter but was more or less the same setup. Really didnt like the school in it since we are talking about enemies galore
Part 3 was a bit different and was very combat focused.
The room....hated it.
Beyond that i played maybe one of the reboots but nothing else.
As of today i say sh2 remake and silent hill 3 are my favorites
Last edited:
rubik's dude
Member
No sorry I haven't played any Silent Hill 2 yaoi games.
bundylove
Member
Figures. I hope you bullshit people better in real life
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Hey Bloober, you ever going to fix the god damn ps5 pro version of this game? These fuckers realized how messed up their game looked with PSSR and reverted Performance mode back to original upscaling but didn't do the same for Quality mode for some god forsaken reason. So if you want to play with higher resolution and much better lighting, you're stuck with some really messed up image quality.
No communication as to why they did this so it comes across as extremely lazy and like they don't give a damn.
No communication as to why they did this so it comes across as extremely lazy and like they don't give a damn.
N1tr0sOx1d3
Given another chance
Ah thank you! That explains that then. I had no idea they pulled PSSR out of performance mode and left alone quality. You’re quite right. I want to play in quality mode but can’t due to the severe image quality.
What an odd decision.
Killer8
Member
I would bet money that they will. On SteamDB it shows they created a private branch on Dec 11, which was a couple of weeks after the last patch 1.06. I'd take that as an indication that they are still working on the game. The patch was probably delayed due to the release falling on the Christmas holidays.
Cr1ptkeeper
Member
Still waiting for the patch that fixes image quality and performance in performance mode. Hopefully they're still working on a patch.
Looking at other games, such a patch to fix major image problems sometimes takes up to 6 months...
Looking at other games, such a patch to fix major image problems sometimes takes up to 6 months...
freemandos
Member
I don't consider personally Layers of Fear a survival horror game, but...yes, I see Amnesia games (specially The Dark Descent and the Bunker) and Visage as survival horror games too. They all have the basis of supply scarcity, decision making, vulnerability, horror themes, exploration, isolation, enemies wanting to kill you, etc. Ok, I know, A Machine for Pigs doesn't have inventory (it isn't the most controversial Amnesia game for nothing), but you can understand my point. Just because it doesn't have combat it doesn't necessarily became a walking simulator. Otherwise...do you see Clock Tower games within the walking simulator tag and not survival horror? Since when? Resident Evil put the survival horror term, but the definition itself wasn't created by Capcom at the 90s, but by journalists and the audience. Even we can say, despite the word being born with RE, it wasn't even the first o the second one of its kind. And it isn't weird a genre or subgenre becoming more diverse, just like games like Call of Duty and Half-Life are considered FPS despite being very different comparing to Wolfenstein or Doom of the 90s. Or Flash-Back a platformer game.
Anyway...he made the comment about the excessive number or enemies and the padding of SH2R. I played the four classic Silent Hill games over and over and I see the same. Silent Hill 2 (the original) lengths 8-10 hours and the remake while telling the same story and even copying most of the dialogue (with worse delivery to me btw, but this is another subject) and being twice longer or more. It's fine if you're ok with this but it isn't so bullshit that other people can think differently either. In classic Silent Hill games you can avoid most of the enemies and these were in a smaller number than RE, even 3 and 4 (and btw, 4 was critisized partially because the more presence of combat at its time and Team Silent wanted to change that for the cancelled fifth entry, so imagine something like the remake in its glorious days). SH2R wants to respect the same psychological horror focus of the original SH2, (the less combat heavy of the four japanese entries btw) and yet it makes a much bigger focus on combat against a bigger number of enemies, with not much more variety and for +20 hours at the same time. Again, you don't have any problem and there are a lot of more people who doesn't either and it's ok, but it isn't so nonsense about others thinking the opposite. I replayed the first two SH games (again) just before starting the remake and I think the same: it has too much enemies and padding (among other issues).
freemandos
Member
Are you a David Lynch fan? Oh, boy, you'll have a great time with the original game. I'm a David Lynch fan too...and I started to watch its work precisely because being fan of Silent Hill. And that's one of the many reasons why I don't love the remake.
I think you'll be fine. The original is the least combat heavy japanese Silent Hill game and that franchise before Homecoming was already far less combat focused than a RE game (and classic RE games pre-4 and the first two remakes already give more option to avoid it than SH2R). And I'm not even talking about the number of enemies being even smaller if you play SH2 with combat on easy (I don't recommend this though, the original SH2 is already the easiest of the four games).
Last edited:
Itchy Tickles
Member
The cringe of the gatekeeping in this (and many other messages from others) is pathetic.
You do know being able to enjoy the remake and it's improvements over the original is OK? Team Silent aren't gonna have a break down and feel hurt. In fact some of them worked on this and others have already praised the remake, but what do they know.
It's fine if you prefer the original of course, but acting like the remake doesn't have a heavy impact is just fanboying. I loved the original and loved the remake, but yet again "fans" like you and others here with ego and self ownership of something not yours is embarrassing.
Talking like you have the authority / power to tell someone what they should like and prefer is sad. I fucking hate "fans" of anything that act like it's their life's work, that they are experts on it, and people must think like you or its invalid.
The remake is fantastic in every area, outside of performance, sadly. It added some new stuff that fit in naturally, tweaked old stuff so it felt better, actually made boss fights intense and exciting, had atmosphere like no other game (imo) from its visual, audio, and level design, new endings that were pretty fucking good, and so much more.
Zuzu
Member
I liked the puzzles, the characters, the dialogue and the boss fights. The story had thematic depth to it that you don’t see very often in AAA games. It also did a good job of delivering a compelling horror experience in some parts. But the combat became boring and tedious because of the lack of enemy variety (wrt to normal enemies - not bosses, which were good). The combat mechanics, like the gunplay and the dodge mechanic, were pretty good, but the high amount of combat with very repetitive enemies pulled the experience down for me.
Last edited:
freemandos
Member
Loving the remake over the original is ok. Hell, even don't wanting to play the original because he/she doesn't like the classic survival horror style is understandable. Thinking about "playing the remake is understanding how was Silent Hill 2 at its time and all its essence so playing the original isn't necessary" is another story. Imagine something like that with the Psycho 90s remake (because colour) even if it copies the dialogue and the plot, or talking about Bram Stoker's work with his Dracula book using the Coppola version of the story as basis (or any Dracula movie adaptation and I LOVE a lot of these movies, Terence Fisher films ftw). I think this is what he is talking about and I honestly agree.
One thing doesn't exclude the other anyway. If any person makes me the question "I wanna play SH2, which version?" I say this: both, play the original first and then the remake.
Last edited:
fart town usa
Member
The remake is way too long for the story that SH2 tells, that's the fatal flaw IMO. It's also balls easy on Normal. The game is also a near masterclass in efficient level design, I think that's the most impressive thing about it.
Obnoxiously long though. I dont see myself playing it again.
Obnoxiously long though. I dont see myself playing it again.
Last edited:
rubik's dude
Member
Gatekeeping, you mean when the other guy was crying about Amnesia and Layers of Fear not being "real" survival horror games? Which you agreed with? lmao
freemandos has been nothing but level-headed, at least he has the presence of mind to appreciate the remake while realizing its fault compared to the original. His input has been valuable, and on his recommendation I'll be playing the original.
You and the crybaby are the trolls gatekeeping survival horror for others. Blind fanaticism for a mid remake.
Last edited: