/vr/ - Retro Games

Also,
>58 people who worked on Origins also worked on SM
Now THAT is something. That was the only time something as close as "a" team worked on 2 SH games.

>>4931092
> Then Konami disbanded them and put them on hold to the the arcade game, the comics, the PSP "experience" UMD, and the movie, ie to whore the franchise out as much as they could.

Konami did not want to make the movie. Gans wanted to make the movie. He pressured them for years and years and years, and they always said no. Only when the series was dying, after The Room, that they accepted, and the success of movie is pretty much the only reason the franchise was still alive after that.

>That's why you have Pyramid Head in the arcade game, in the movie, in HC, in minikart games, even though "Team Silent" had made a point of not using him again.

>That's why every other game down the line is about the protagonist dealing with psychological issues and a big monster representing said issues chasing them, even though only one game of the original had that

Okay, you're just parroting whatever you heard everywhere now instead of actually understanding the games and the movie.

So, let's start from the beginning:
in SH2, Pyramid Heads' main role are that of "god"'s executioners. This is pretty clear between the game extablishing the lore, between the painting with a PH on it, and the actions of all the PHs in the game.
Then, there is one "pretend rape" scene, which may represent James' sexual frustratation, but that doesn't change anything. Like established in the game with all the characters, and with James specifically, each takes the SH lore elements and sees them "his" way.
So if it's true, it doesn't change that PH's roles are that of executioner. Notice that I use the plural, there are at LEAST 2 different PHs in SH2, and only one of them in one scene may represent the protag's psyc issues. All the rest of the time they're just that, executionners...

>>4931092
> If you bother to read the credits, you'd see that the same members appear throughout the four games.

Okay, and let me ask out, what proportion of percentage of the team does "10 to 26" people make? A lot less than the majority, that's what; and let's not forget that Mobygames include in its credits, and therefore in those numbers, creatively meaningless jobs as far as the game is concerned like Tech Support, Cover Artist, Special Thanks for publishing/marketing guys from EUROPE, etc etc.

Don't give the "these numbers are the key people" argument. The number ONE key member, the one who made the decisions of what was Silent Hill, was the director of 1, who left after 1, and for the key positions, devs who actually worked on several games, usually had a completely different job from one game to the next, the only exception of which being Yamaoka. Wonder why they used him as a "team silent mascot"? Because that's all they had.

So no, it's not "ONE team". You could find the same numbers, and more, of "devs who worked on this other game" if you looked at many other unrelated games from the same company, especially in the PS2 era the amount of people working on a single game became huge.

The very fact that The Room is included in this logic shows how biased it is. The Room started as a non SH game, was developped at the same time as SH3 for quite some time (meaning the key people were working on that), then they decided to turn it into a SH game and suddenly the team BECAME "Team Silent".
But you tell me it's okay because "a group of 10 people who worked on SH1 also worked on it". Yeah, and a group of 12 people worked on Castlevania and on Goemon for N64, and that was one generation before The Room, meaning less total devs. Does that make Goemon a "Team Castle" game?

Not only "team silent" isn't one team, it was also a marketing tool, which everyone fell into and which backfired against them when they didn't have an excuse to use it anymore.

>>4929787
>Franchise is dead. Konami killed it by disbanding Team Silent and giving it away to idiots that think Pyramid Head, Nurses and spooky otherworld transitions are Silent Hill.

So let me get this straight... the creator and director of Silent Hill leaves after the first game. Then, some other people make SH2, they give a COMPLETELY different reason for Silent Hill to even exist and for everything going on in it, only tying it to the original story through a hidden optional document to read, they recycle the lore (nurses, dogs, spooky otherworld transitions); and all of that is totally fine.

Then, when western devs stick to what was always Silent Hill, it's not okay because "not Team Silent" ?


>nothing threatening about SH2 monsters

I'll agree with that. SH2 can get all the praise it wants for its storytelling and astmosphere, but it fails in terms of gameplay.
The only thing it does right gameplay wise is the puzzles, most of them anyway, and the fact that there are difficulty settings for puzzles was a fantastic idea that should have been re-used.

>>4929768
Are you kidding now? Hardcore SH fans will argue to the death that The Room, as heavily flawed as it is, is a masterpiece, solely because it was made by Japs and by "Team Silent"....
Even if when the devs started developing the game they weren't called "Team Silent" and those same days became "Team Silent" when they decided to turn The Room into Silent Hill: The Room.

>>4929735
>>4929630
You're using hybrid games as examples for your "let's imagine" argument, to the point I don't know anymore whether you're one of those people who'll argue to the death using examples they know are farfetched instead of admitting their feelings were wrong or if you're just trolling.

Anyway - your example games are action-adventure/RPG games with real time action. Yes, you take out the RPG, they become action-adventure games like Zelda, because they're not pure RPG games.
Now, try and apply your argument to a pure RPG like Dragon Quest....

Btw, the sole fact that you have to use "let's imagine that this game" shows that such games don't exist under that genre.

>>4929763
>to find commonality between games to which the labels have already been applied

No, it's the contrary; and whenever people, reviewers, did it the other way around, it doesn't catch on. For example when it came out some magazine reviewers would call House of the Dead "survival horror", try and find mention of that under that genre these days. Another example is people calling Zelda an RPG.

>>4929494
This is exactly why SH was doomed since the movie and Homecoming

>do the same thing again
>it's stale

>do it differently
>fans complain

personally I thought the first movie and Homecoming were great. In terms of gameplay, HC had better survival than any other SH game.

If Resident Evil 2 remake does well, maybe we'll get a remake or reboot or something.

>>4928029
Yes, they are. When we say that stats are the only thing that defines RPG, we mean, the only thing that defines it in regards to pure adventure games.

The only time a game can be called "RPG" and isn't an adventure genre is if it's actually a hybrid game, a game of another genre that use stats but which has no other adventure elements. For instance, a pure Beat'em Up but with stats and levels. They'd call it "Beat'em Up/RPG" which is in fact short for "Beat'em Up with RPG elements".

[cont]
In movies we do use themes to define genres, but video games have more to them then that, so using themes wouldn't be precise enough, not to mention games which are pure gameplay and literaly have no theme, so we don't care about the story or theme (except for one exception), and use gameplay mechanics.

Yes, if an action game and a RPG both have a similar love story, the experience will be the same in that regards but they won't be in the same genre, that is the limit of VG genre defining, but I just explained why.

Imagine if instead we'd classify all games with love stories into "Romance", with no regards to gameplay mechanics, that wouldn't help to tell how the game plays like, which is the whole point of the classification.

We don't say "Action/Romance" or "RPG/Romance" either because imagine how complicated it gets, which again makes the whole point moot, genre defining is that so we can simply and quickly understand what the product is like.

The only exception to this is "survival horror" because it became such a booming and preciser sub-sub-sub genre that it called for a genre name of its own, and the theme is part of that in this case.

>>4927958
> If most people who play a game say it feels like playing an RPG, but your taxonomy rules it out because it has no XP/Stat system, then your taxonomy is probably wrong.

If "it feels like a RPG" but it has no stats, then it's an adventure game.
That or the person's "feelings" are very subjective to his experience. For instance, imagine the guy who says that has only played JRPGs, then he reads a visual novel with a jRPG-like story, he could say "this feels like a RPG". That would due to his narrow vision or RPG and to the story, but, unlike in movies, we don't use the story to define VG genres, and i'll explain why below.

>>4927958
I think your problem isn't that you want definitions to use subjectivity, but that you have a hard time drawing the line between subjectivity and objectivity. If we listen to you objectivity doesn't exists.

You say I moved the goalpost by I didn't, in my example I could say "the movies intends to horrify people, it's a horror movie, objectively you can look at the definition of horror in the dictionary and find those intentions in the movie".
Yes, it's true that horror is subjective, and that horror evolves and stops being horror the second you get used to it. Movie makers know that too. If their horror movie fails to horrify a majority of people, then it's still a horror movie, just a bad one; hence why I used the word "intend to horrify", so we don't have to base it on feels for the definition.

>>4928749
>What happens when similar experiences are the result of substantially different mechanics?

The only way this can happen is if two games or a different genre, with different mechanics, like a RPG and an action game, have a very similar story with similar themes.

>>4927849
The only part of subjectivity involved is when nitpicking on the corners. For instance, on where is the limit of a particular sub-sub-sub genre, or for hybrid games, etc

For instance, let's imagine that Zelda had a couple more RPG elements other than "heart pieces". Let's say the shield and sword would gain levels after times when used. Then, we could argue whether that is enough to quality Zelda as Action-RPG, or whether we should call it an Action-Adventure game with RPG elements.

>>4927529
>>4927505
Bringing subjectivity in any genre defining makes no sense, genre definining exists to help classify things for everyone, so subjectivity is out of question. For example

person A:
>Night of the Living Dead horrified me
>therefore it's a horror movie

person B:
>Night of the Living Dead didn't horrify me
>therefore it's not a horror movie

Both persons are wrong. Night of the Living Dead is a horror movie because it INTENDS to horrify viewers.

>>4927774
You can't compare with tabletop games because it's a whole different media which genre defining works differently.

>>4927576
Dungeon and Dragon is a theme, not a video game genre. Only for movies themes and genres are linked.
Most of the things you list are themes, the other are mechanics of the adventure VG genre

>>4927472
>vs Zelda which doesn't have the stats and is solely Action-RPG.

I mean solely Action-Adventure, I just had to fuck it up at the end

The only thing that defines RPG is stat based gameplay, stat based combat, stat based character growth, etc

Zelda is an Action-Adventure games:
action mechanics: twitch based controls
adventure mechanics: exploration of a world, figuring out what to do, where to go, solving puzzles, etc

The confusion comes from two things: people are generally retarded regarding VG genre defining, probably because it works differently from movies (which are defined by themes), most notably video game reviewers have always sucked at genre defining too.

Another thing that doesn't help is that, RPG is a sub-genre of the adventure genre, so yes, there are common points between an Action-Adventure game and an RPG: the adventure part.

A good comparison example would be Final Fantasy Chrystal Chronicles, it's an action-adventure game but with stat based gameplay.
The action is at the same time based on twitch based controls and stats, with character stat growth. So FF:CC is an Action-Adventure-RPG; or in short Action-RPG (because "adventure" is part of "RPG" so saying the two would be redundant), vs Zelda which doesn't have the stats and is solely Action-RPG.


>>4927268
Video game genre defining is defined by gameplay mechanics, not "feelings".

>>4924208
Dreamcast emulation
PS2 version
use terrible the d-pad on the Game Cube version
OR get an adaptor to use a PS2 pad on GC. Actually I'm sure there has to be one for Dreamcast as well.

>>4922280
I wouldn't say that. I'd say they had creative IDEAS but the actual design is pretty bad and uninpisired. The possibilities of the Gravity reversal (it's Gravity Man, not Star Man) are barely scratched.
In Flame Man stage the moving platform over oil is just a remake of the same thing in MM4s Pharaoh Man stage, except on straight lines, one platform at a time and wih no enemies.

>>4915805
> game is clearly designed around Bass' moveset.

How is that true? You can literaly skip or make ridiculously easy all the platforming segments with Bass.
The point is: you can play the game normally as MM, but the game is really hard. So, if you want, you can play as Bass which makes the stages easier but killing (most of) the enemies and bosses painful.

>>4916432
>This, 4, and 9 are my top three MM games.

Great taste. I'd also be willing to R&F at the top as well if it didn't have such bullshit moments, for instance there are 2 moments in the game where no matter how good you are, you literally can't avoid getting hit unless you know what's coming. I know "2 moments" isn't a lot but it's still 2 bad game design elements I'd never find in 4 and 9.

>>4923816
Emulate the game or buy a Dreamcast to Playstation Pad adatpor.
I got an adaptor like that for Gamecube just for RE games and one for Xbox just for Genma Onimusha.

>>4922405
Yes

>>4922265
Played the PC version recently and worked perceftly. I used windows compatibility mode but I'm not sure it's even required.

it DID crash once.

>>4909221
>>4912551
>IIRC you can combine tranq darts with something else to make OHK darts.

Here:
>Poison Dart is the result of the combination of any An. Dart L with a Resuscitation,

>>4922189
Play the PC version or emulate the Dreamcast version.

>>4919590
>there's no point fighting enemies because they'll just respawn

That has to be one of the most common misconceptions about the game.
Enemies don't exactly "respawn". If you kill an enemy, no enemy will come to its place until the next arbritary game progression event you do. It's just that, after certain events, quite often, the same enemies there were before will appear in the same rooms.

For example pic related:
>first time you get there, 2 of those
>Kill them, room is clear until you get to make/fetch the stabilizer/initilazer
>at that point 2 more of those appear in this room

I'll grant you that the game could have, and should have, spawned different enemies, swapped things around, after a progression event rather than always putting the same. Probably also a consequence of the lack of enemy types.

>>4922103
> less fun than in 1/2/3.

I mean Resident Evil 1/2/3

One thing I have to say against Dino Crisis, is that all the action, whether is dodging or shooting, is generally a bit less fun than in 1/2/3.

Also I kept praising RE1/3 for having bosses which give you B solution, that you don't have to shoot; but Dino Crisis would have gained for at least one boss that needs some heavy shooting. Another boss that's not the T-Rex for instance.

It also feels like the game could use another enemy type.


>>4920890
If you want ammo, play the game on Very Hard. It's crazy how much ammo this mode gives, you can kill everything on your path granted you know where all the plugs are.

To give you an idea, after beating the final boss (bad ending), I had 34 Grenades and 9 Heat grenades left, even though I did use about 6-8 grenades on enemies late in the game AND I even had 3 un-used plugs left. In other modes I never even found more than 24 'nades total.

There is probably a way or another to unlock Very Hard on PC without having to beat the game on Normal and Hard first.

The main difference on Very Hard I think is the lack of continue and the absence of Ressurection packs; but either way due to the ammo it's tons of fun.

If you're stuck with normal: remember that boxes break the fourth wall. You can teleport items from one red box to another red one.
So look everywhere for plugs, and as far as opening boxes go, prioritize on Red boxes, those have the most ammo. Green have the most healing and yellow are in between.
I recommend focusing on only two colours since there isn't enough plugs for everything, and it's better not to have your items scattered all over, so go Red+Green or Red+Yellow.

>>4919806
To answer my own question about Arrange:
- Some codes/passwords are different
- You get a LOT more Ressurection packs
- I think enemies may deal a bit less dmg, not sure.
That's about all I found.

I beat the one in CV3, using Grant, Jap version.