/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10072791
Or no wait, the new game came out 2 months ago. Well either way, an excuse to try the series.

1 is mostly a puzzle game with a few combat sequences. Which is good, since the combat is pretty damn bad. It's a bit rough around the edges compared to RE1, and it can be a bit tricky at times just trying to figure out what the fuck you are looking at, but it's a decent game and mostly enjoyable except towards near the end. Most puzzles follow some form of logic, mostly.
2 is mostly shooting zombie ghost pirates and being shot at by zombie ghost pirates with a few puzzles. This is bad since the combat has gotten worse by giving the enemies guns with unlimited ammo. You either get the first shot in or you get shot to death. Puzzles range from simple to troll logic. Never finished it since by the time I got out of the hedgemaze I already wanted to kill my character and watch them be buried at sea.
Never played 3, but it looks more like 2's gameplay than 1's.
Jack in the Dark was some small extra thing with Edward Carnby's niece or daughter or whatever. I never figured out how to do anything in it back when I tried it, and kept getting killed by demonic toys anytime I tried anything. Definitely felt a lot more like 1 than 2.

>>10072791
This is a good >>10073108 outline, but I would add that except for Resident Evil lifting an almost EXACT carbon copy of the overall framework of the Alone in the Dark core gameplay in terms of controls and presentation, there's basically no "survival horror" aspect to the latter; the structure, approach and general logic is modeled after point-and-click adventure games, down to the fact that you can save your progress anywhere at any time.

I know people familiar with RE will be quick to point out there's not that much resource scarcity in it to really call the game "survival", but the contrast for a novice player between that game and AitD in terms of general experience is pretty notable if you're not willing to ignore it.

Anyway I had no idea a remake was in development; can't say I'm particularly excited but yeah it's odd it has taken this long for such a project to pop up. I assume a lot of new players will be rushing to play the original now in order to validate their pre-existing opinion that it's better lol

>>10072791
The first game is a puzzle adventure. I hate RE and its trashy fans for obsessing over the surface theming or whatever. like I don't go around talking about how Mario is the creator of the mushroom genre or Sonic influential in racing genre, they're platformers wtf.

>>10073330
Well until the 2001 game, THAT is just a straight-up RE clone in AitD's setting. It actually does some really neat stuff with light and shadows and ties it into the gameplay but goddamn the voiceacting is bad, which is wierd because Carnby is voiced by David Gasman who is a genuinely talented VA.

Nth for make sure to get the GOG version of 4, avoid console versions they are all shit

>>10073858
Did gog fix the problem where New Nightmare doesn't really want to run on Win7 or higher?

>>10073330
>I assume a lot of new players will be rushing to play the original now in order to validate their pre-existing opinion that it's better lol
Better you play the originals for yourself to see if you like it or not than to just watch a YT video that tells you it's bad. At least then you're forming your own opinion.

>>10072791
Came out years before resident evil, Capcom completely ripped it off. To this day I imagine the developers of alone in the dark must be fuming about the whole situation honestly

What's the best way of playing AITD in the year of our lord 2003+20?

>all these posts derailing a normal thread where OP just wants to get into the series
The only thing these games have in common with RE is fixed camera angles but you wouldn't know because you haven't played either like typical /v/tards who are no different from normalfags aside from always looking for reasons to shit on everything to fit in. You take your 'opinions' from 4chan and Youtube and probably think that Silent Hill utilizes the fixed camera as well

The original three Alone In the Dark games get sillier with every entry. It's kind of amazing, really.

>>10074359
DOSbox the original games, gog for New Nightmare. Not retro but while I like 2008, I see it as an unintentional comedy more than anything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k8KYp0aaJY

>>10074439
I mean, once you add ghost pirates and cowboys into your story, if you don't go silly then it just comes across as wierd.

>>10072791
Alone In The Dark 1 - 3 are considered classics, and a few butthurt cucks will angrily scream about 2 because it has more combat, though it has some genuinely innovative ideas in it for the time, such as including stealth segments.

New Nightmare is closer to what people normally think of when they hear "Survival Horror", while the original trilogy are more puzzle games.

>>10073925
I was able to run the GOG version on Windows 10, and it seems to run at 60FPS. At least the animations seem smoother than they do in the PS1, and the artwork and lighting of course look nice at a higher resolution. That said the one issue with the GOG port compared to emulating the PS1 version is the music quality. It seems poorly converted and I don’t know if there was ever a fan patch for it.

>>10074482
It's true, but they go absolutely apeshit in the second half of AITD3, it's hilarious. Great final boss too.

OP here, I beat AitD1 last night, took around 4 hours first time simply because you can die so easily and there was a lot of "where do I go?"
I gotta say, didnt expect it to become a Lovecraft game by the end. Game was interesting if a bit jank.

>>10074975
Also I'm going to play 2 and 3 but first I have to ask, is there any real difference between playing as the 2 protagonists in 1? I played as the dude since I know he's the MC in all later games.

>>10074330
During the lawsuit regarding the AITD rights (which the publisher had stolen from its developer) it was mentioned Infogrames threatened legal action regarding Capcom plagiarizing their game and settled with receiving a bunch of money to shut up about it

>>10076063
Wierd considering outside of the fixed camera stuff, RE mechanically took way more from Capcom's NES game Sweet Home which came out 3 years before AitD.

>>10076229
No, Sweet Home was just an excuse Capcom came up with to try and worm their way out of the legal threat but internally there was no question they had deliberately ripped off AITD

>>10076243
Anon if you don't see RE's DNA in Sweet Home, you didn't play Sweet Home. Especially considering unlike the first AitD, Swet Home actually is a survival horror game.

alone in the dark is absolute dogshit with gameplay based entirely around trying to avoid instant death traps which theres no way of knowing about other than trial and error, so you have to constantly be saving and reloading the game. its not like its even challenging, just mindless and repetitive. thank god capcom came along and actually made the genre good.

>>10076250
This is your brain on conditioned Capcope

>>10075385
The difference is mostly cosmetic; I think the lady runs a tiny bit faster and her attack timings are a bit different, but that's because movement in the game is animation driven. They're not intended to be different at all.
I remember a time when there was a shitload of misinformation about it online though, because a lot of people conflated the first game with RE1 and The New Nightmare for some reason. Pretty much every videogames website and even Wikipedia would parrot some bullshit about Carnby being action oriented and Emily having more puzzles.

I think AitD's setting and premise are a lot scarier than RE.
The remake will fuck it up, though, because I doubt any of the devs on that will have read any 1920's - 1940's horror fiction or have any clue how to capture any of the distinct atmospheres associated with same.
For certain they are going to jettison all of the written material you find in the game because it will ring to them as being 'generic'. Which it is.
However, the genre it represents has not often been effectively represented in games. Attempts are made, usually poorly, and non-attepts that are not even related are often incorrectly conflated with old horror/sci fi. Eg, RE4 sometimes being mistaken as 'Lovecraftian', probably because it has some eldrich-looking monsters and the initial town is Innsmouth-like.
The developers of the remake will probably try to 'correct' the flaws they see in the game's story/premise and in doing so make it more like the games of today, ironically MORE generic and familiar to modern players, rather than harkening back to a bygone style that has some chance of unsettling today's players almost just by being so far removed from thier comfort zone.

tldr: we will know the remak devs don't get it if they leave out the close-up of the frog.

>>10075385
They're the same game with the same texts, except for very minor details:
>The text before starting the adventure is different.
>There is a photo of Emily in the mansion. If Emily examines the photo, she will recognize herself. It's just one line.
>Carnby's kicks apparently have a little more reach, but it doesn't matter because you'll be using weapons very soon anyway. There might be some other minor differences because of the animations.
>Ending is the same for both characters, except for a little tiny detail:
Carnby gives a jump to celebrate he managed to survive, Emily raises her arms victoriously.

>>10076339
Ok just wondering becuase I was told New Nightmare is effectively 2 entirely different games depending on the protagonist, and didn't know if the original did it too.

>>10076431
>think AitD's setting and premise are a lot scarier than RE.
It is...when it isn't goofy as shit. Which it often is, unintentionally, because of the primitive graphics and how hilairously sudden the instant deaths can be. I used the game over screen for the OP image because of how often it came up.

>>10076431
>The developers of the remake will probably try to 'correct' the flaws they see in the game's story/premise and in doing so make it more like the games of today, ironically MORE generic and familiar to modern players, rather than harkening back to a bygone style that has some chance of unsettling today's players almost just by being so far removed from thier comfort zone.
To play devil's advocate here, so much of Lovecraft's work (which AitD is so inspired by that apparently it was originally going to be a CoC game) is rooted in fears unique to Lovecraft himself. The man was afraid of EVERYTHING, to the point of outright xenophobia. The idea that his white, middle-class Christian existence wasn't the centre of the universe scared HIM.

Meanwhile in the modern world, many people are used to the idea of existential pluralism. The idea that no-one is the centre of the universe; that we all just have our own perspectives on life. And many people are used to the idea of existentialism in general. The idea that life has no inherent meaning, but is given meaning by the act of us caring about it. Life matters because we say it matters, and that's enough. And many people are used to the idea of human civilization being fragile and transient. The idea that everything we know and love could be snuffed out in a second, by forces utterly beyond our power to control or resist. We have generations of people growing up under the shadow of nuclear holocaust, to say nothing of the looming catastrophes of our modern day. So Lovecraftian Cosmic Horror doesn't land for modern audiences, unless they're just as sheltered and xenophobic as Lovecraft himself. The perspective that scared Lovecraft has become normal. Modern Cosmic Horror knows that Lovecraft's style doesn't land any more, so it doesn't try to replicate it. No-one actually tries to replicate Lovecraft directly. And when anyone does, their horror usually falls flat and comes across and boring and over-written.

>>10077076
That sounds way too psych101.
Lovecraft is just a man who lived 100 years ago, you don't really know anything about him and you can't actually tell anything from his books. The objective interpretation is that he wrote a bunch of stories about doomed men who slowly lose themselves and accept their fate either willingly or otherwise.
I find the "books don't translate" explanation much closer to the truth. In a book you are told what to see and think directly. Yes you envision it with your own mental images but you cannot imagine someone who is afraid to be brave, or someone sad to be happy. By comparison in a game the moment you get control you start jumping on people's heads and breaking shit so there is no easy way to force the player to even empathize with someone feeling negative. At most you can use cheap shock like killing a loved character or putting in a jump scare.
To make a truly doomed game you'd need to make a really fun game that slowly takes away the fun. You start to lose abilities you invested in, fun companions vanish after implying cool quests would follow, whole sections of the map with cool collectibles disappearing. But who'd want to play that?

>>10077663
>you don't really know anything about him and you can't actually tell anything from his books
You can gleam a lot about the man from his personal correspondeces because he wrote a fuckton of them, way more than the amount of literature he wrote.

>>10077663
>about doomed men who slowly lose themselves
They don't, everyone around them sees them as crazy but once it goes to their internal narration they're completely sane and lucid. They just understand things normal people can't.

>>10074330
When you rip another game off and make it so much better that the older game is only remembered as a footnote of your game's success story, the idea might as well have been yours from the get go.

>>10072791
None of them are jank, just old.

>>10073330
>Anyway I had no idea a remake was in development
Iirc carnby doesn't have a mustache anymore because the devs are fucking cowards.

>>10074359
I prefer the original MS Dos version released on Floppy Disks. They made a CD version that has dubbing for all the parts where you read books, documents... But I don't like the dubbing, I prefer just reading the documents at my own pace, it's as they made it just to justify the CD release..

>>10077768
Dude, come on. There's ripping off and ripping off. They literally took every aspect of the formula and blatantly copied it. Sure they added to it but a few years later, in the early 90s that was no joke tech-wise, the aitd team would have improved and expanded upon their own formula too.

>>10078403
I mean I beat the original and it kinda was. You definitely have to get used to how it plays.

>>10078406
On the other hand, the characters dress like they're actually in the 1920s now and not the 1880s. The guy who wrote Amnesia and Soma is behind the remake and honestly my problem with those games was never the writing.
I just have to see if it ends with an evil pirate spirit in a tree that you burn down, and if it has a giant demon anus that keeps you from leaving.

>>10078529
>the aitd team would have improved and expanded upon their own formula too.
Not him but they tried and they fought each other so much over the direction of the series for 2 and 3 that it killed the development team.

>>10076250
They copied the 2D background with 3D gameplay from aitd and copied the door animation and ui elements from sweet home. I mean you could say they lifted the zombie shit from any number of movies do it's safe to say nothing of resident evil is literally any of their own work, yet they spin money off of it to this day. Incredible really

>>10078547
It all came full circle when New Nightmare was effectively a REmake clone. Thankfully RE never thought to copy AitD 2008 in kind because goddamn that game is....it's like the definition of a development dead end, because NO ONE copied and refined the shit it did.

>>10073330
>Anyway I had no idea a remake was in development; can't say I'm particularly excited but yeah it's odd it has taken this long for such a project to pop up.
They were actually going to make one back in the PS3/360 era but because 2008 was shat on by everyone, it was cancelled since it was going to be by the same studio. Or so I've heard.

>>10074482
>>10074526
Honestly I love the direction 2 and 3 went simply because 1 is a straight up Lovecraft story, but the next 2 games with a focus on pirates and cowboys is the kind of shit Robert E Howard (who was a good friends of Lovecraft) would write when he wasn't being paid to do Conan stuff. I doubt that was an intentional shift but I love that it happened.

>>10074489
>and a few butthurt cucks will angrily scream about 2 because it has more combat
The problem with 2 isn't that it has a lot of combat, it's that you can straight up get shot from offscreen.

>>10077759
For example. He was supremely racist. Didn’t know how to end stories. And wrote crazy interesting stories

>>10074330
>I imagine the developers of alone in the dark must be fuming about the whole situation honestly

>2015: Frédérick Raynal thanks Shinji Mikami for finally admitting the obvious, but long denied by Capcom, link between his Alone in the Dark and Resident Evil. Mikami recently recognized the influence, after years of not being able to do so because of legal deals between Infogrames and Capcom. "At the time, I was no longer with Infogrames when there were all these stories. But I was told that Infogrames was not happy and that afterwards there was no problem. I was not aware of it, but yes, there had to have been a deal. I admit that it really hurt me. I've never, especially at the time, seeked recognition. But receiving the opposite was hard. When the team and the creator of the game said, "No, I've never seen Alone in the Dark", it was such a dishonest lie. It hurt me for a long time. And there, a few months ago, when he finally said that of course Alone in the Dark had been the essential inspiration, otherwise it would have been a First Person Shooter ... Well then I can't wait to meet Mikami to thank him for that. Because it's a real relief. I believe that it must have weighed on him too, and that suddenly, being no longer under contract, he needed to say it. Thank you Shinji Mikami, I hope we will see each other soon. Being open about it, it made me extremely happy."

Single-handedly pioneered the survival horror genre that became Capcom's cash cow, yet didn't care about the money or fame, but just wanted to hear honesty from Mikami after 20 years of being denied his respect. I have nothing but admiration for him.

Is this settlement between Capcom and Infogrames documented somewhere? That kind of thing coming to light would be pretty big news but I can't find a single mention of it anywhere.

>>10078932
I hate to be that guy but he clearly didn't know where to take the series considering his team made (most of) 2, then left Infogrames and a different team made 3 which was a much better sequel.

>>10076431
Not to tempt fate here, but there's no fucking way it can be even remotely as bad as 2008.

>>10077663
>To make a truly doomed game you'd need to make a really fun game that slowly takes away the fun. You start to lose abilities you invested in, fun companions vanish after implying cool quests would follow, whole sections of the map with cool collectibles disappearing. But who'd want to play that?
Anon...

>>10079140
Oh no, he had plans for the series but wasn't recognized as the author of the first game and didn't get paid for it so he left while Infogrames applied their full know-how of making crappy games to 2 and 3

>>10072791
I have only played the first Alone in the Dark and I think it is an experience worth having. Even back in the 90s, my cousins and I found the game more funny than scary. Especially with how goofy the playable characters looked which didn't help with their goofy slapping and dumber ungraceful kicks. Sword swinging was silly looking too, reminding me the laughs from making the pirate fucking somersaulting with every hit. The game is not long, but not only was it funny it did provide me a level of comfort in controls when I did first played the original Resident Evil.

>>10078932
That quote is like a fever dream in text format. Some sort of translation hell I guess, but what the fuck.

>>10079297
But 3 is a good game, it fixed a lot of the problems with 2 and felt like a much better in-between of it and the first game.

Ok I have to ask, what exactly did Infogrames say in regards to Capcom and saying they "stole" the idea. Because I have a couple important questions for such a supposed lawsuit.
Did Infogrames ever copyright the mechanics used in AitD that they claimed RE copied? If not then what is their legal case, there's no law against making "another one of those" when seeing a game is popular, if there was then why didn't Infogrames go after Konami for Silent Hill? Did they in fact hold the rights to limited-resource games built around exploring a mansion with monsters that uses fixed camera angles and puzzle solving? I'm not saying RE didn't copy AitD's homework, I'm asking what exactly did Capcom do wrong? There's a million crappy Doom clones out there but id never held the rights to demon-based fps games, some have even used assets stolen from Doom and nothing happened.

>>10079513
kek, yeah

>In 2015, Frédérick Raynal expressed his gratitude to Shinji Mikami for finally acknowledging what had been obvious for a long time, but historically denied by Capcom - the undeniable influence of Raynal's game, Alone in the Dark, on Mikami's Resident Evil. Mikami recently recognized this influence in an interview, explaining that a private legal settlement between their companies, Infogrames and Capcom, previously prevented him from doing so.

>Raynal shared his thoughts, saying, "By the time Resident Evil came out and these plagiarism discussions arose, I had already left Infogrames. All I heard at the time was that Infogrames wasn't happy about it. Eventually, the issue seemed to have been resolved, but I was never made aware of any financial or legal deal." "I didn't care about receiving recognition back then, but what hurt me deeply was when Mikami and his team claimed they had never even laid eyes on Alone in the Dark; it was such an insulting, dishonest lie. It hurt me for a long time."

>"However," Raynal continued, "a few months ago, when Mikami finally acknowledged that Alone in the Dark was indeed the major source of inspiration for Resident Evil, and that it would have otherwise become a First-Person Shooter, I felt an immense sense of relief. I'm looking forward to meeting Mikami and personally thanking him for his honesty. I believe this weight must have burdened him as well, and now, without Capcom's NDAs, he felt compelled to speak the truth. Thank you, Shinji Mikami, I hope we can arrange a meeting soon. His candidness about the matter has brought me tremendous happiness."

>>10079741
You'll never get official info because it was a backroom deal, regardless of if a plagiarism suit could have been won or not (and I assume European courts would have settled in Infogrames' favor), I assume the biggest thing is they wanted to avoid bad publicity.

Silent Hill is different enough in design, even very different from RE1. It uses 3D instead of pre-rendered backgrounds, setting is a whole town with various building instead of a mansion with zombies, etc.

Whereas RE1 wholesale ripoffs entire aspects from AITD1, not only the overall camera, mansion setting and gameplay structure but also individual small moments, like the monster breaking out of windows jumpscares, or how opening the main mansion door will kill you.

Infogrames was a notoriously shitty, scummy company. In France it's well-known they invested in the gaming press so journos would shill for them and give good reviews to their bad games. I guess that could also mean slandering the competition.

>>10079741
Because it was settled with both Capcom and Infogrames agreeing to keep the settlement under wraps, no detail is known beyond what transpired through Raynal and Mikami

>>10079718
I feel 3 is "what if 2 but with cowboys instead of pirates, also more cutscenes". It's kinda crazy they had a real time rendering technological advance and they just pissed it away by including more cutscenes instead

According to >>10076063, details about the Capcom deal came out in an unrelated lawsuit. I'm actually very interested in reading about this if it's true but all I'm seeing so far is headcanon without a shred of evidence to back it up.

>>10079893
>Silent Hill is different enough in design, even very different from RE1. It uses 3D instead of pre-rendered backgrounds, setting is a whole town with various building instead of a mansion with zombies, etc.
True, but the entire reason it exists is because Konami saw RE's success and told its devs "make one of those"

>>10079893
>Whereas RE1 wholesale ripoffs entire aspects from AITD1, not only the overall camera, mansion setting and gameplay structure but also individual small moments, like the monster breaking out of windows jumpscares, or how opening the main mansion door will kill you.
Ok but if you don't copyright/patent that shit, other people are allowed to copy it. That's how it works. That's why no one else was allowed to make minigames on the loading screen until 2015, Bamco patented that shit.

>>10079927
>if you don't copyright
Patents and trademarks are things you have to apply for, but copyright iss different, it immediately and inherently exists through the creation of the work.

>>10079905
>but with cowboys instead of pirates
In fairness, that's an objectively superior choice. There aren't enough cowboy games.

>>10079936
Right my bad, I meant patent/trademark. Point is, if you don't have it written in law that you own those ideas, other people can use them. That's how it's always worked and if anything, people hate that this law even exists on the premise of "how can you own an idea? Why should you stop people from making a better version of what you made?" Now I think that's a bit extreme but I at least accept that if you don't hold legal rights to that shit, other people should be allowed to copy it and if they become more successful, that's on you for not safeguarding your ideas.

>>10079943
But the ideas *were* safeguarded in the way copyright intends them to be, by asking reparation to Capcom for infringing, which they agreed to.

>>10079957
Copyright doesn't cover game mechanics.

>>10079893
>mansion setting
Nta but this is the flimsiest part of it because there are 9000 horror movies with this premise on top of more than one Lovecraft story. Having a haunted house as your setting in a horror work is so overdone and cliche that even Alien did it in space.

>>10079957
That doesn't necessarily prove Capcom did anything legally wrong, just that they paid Infogrames some money to shut the fuck up because they wouldn't stop trying to bring it to court with little legal standing. This unfortunately is more common than you think, we call them copyright trolls and their whole thing is to harass anyone they claim violates copyright they only very loosely hold until the other party gives up and pays them something.

>Game One is a French TV channel centered on video gaming, launched in 1998 and formerly owned by Infogrames.

>At the end of 2001, a troubling situation arose when certain game reviews began to face censorship and new management disapproved of their journalists criticizing Infogrames' games, leading to doubts about the editorial independence of their journalists. For instance, in one show, a reviewer expressed harsh criticism of the game "Lucky Luke: The Fever of the West," published by Infogrames. Despite the game receiving unfavorable ratings and similar reviews across the press, the management discovered the program during its initial broadcast and refused to broadcast it again (unlike other shows). Subsequently, all reviews concerning Infogrames games were systematically re-evaluated and censored.

>The situation came to a head on February 27, 2002, during a live broadcast dedicated to Metal Gear Solid 2, where the channel's creative director announced his departure from the channel. On the same day, Marcus, the channel's prominent reviewer, also informed viewers during his live show that he was leaving due to the pressures imposed by Infogrames on journalists [and essentially urged viewers to stop watching the channel]. Fearing potential interference from management, another show was pre-recorded, in which he made the same declaration. This led to most of the other editorial staff also announcing their resignations.

>Journalists provided evidence to the national broadcasting regulatory body, exposing Game One's illegal practice of selling airtime to publishers and the management's censorship of editorial content related to Infogrames games. No action was ever taken by the CSA.

>Following this fiasco and declining sales, MTV acquired Game One, and Infogrames rebranded as Atari. Bruno Bonnell, former Infogrames CEO, played Trump in the French version of "The Apprentice" (canceled after 2 episodes) and is now in politics, as a member of Macron's government.

>>10079961
>Copyright doesn't cover game mechanics
This is due to §102(b), a specifically US doctrine that states they're within the scope of patents instead. But software patents don't exist in europe and that doctrine doesn't either, so it means fuck all to whether Infogrames had a case or not.

>>10079893
I feel like the only part that AitD could really hold some solid legal ground in saying they pioneered it was the camera because everything else was done before
>mansion setting
As others have said, haunted houses are such a staple of horror that they're a cliche, and besides the stories of the 2 games go in vastly different directions after that point.
>gameplay structure
Kinda. Thing is, AitD is a point n click more than anything, and instead of having a limited number of items you could hold they had it based on the weight of the items in question. They both have puzzles that like to kill you, but so did every adventure game that wasn't made by Lucasarts.
>like the monster breaking out of windows jumpscares
Which horror movies did before and is where AitD got it from
>or how opening the main mansion door will kill you
Isn't that directly taken from a Lovecraft story, where they couldn't go back because of something outside and had to go deeper into the house that they didn't want to be in? Though in AitD's case it was because a killer plant grew outside the door after they walked in, in RE's case it's because the dogs they ran from were still out there.

Are there a lot of similarities? Yeah, but AitD has a lot of similarity to horror films and novels in general so I have a feeling a lawsuit would be pretty damn weak outside of the fixed camera angles part.

>>10079997
It's Gamespot all over again. Or rather, Gamespot was the repeat of this. In fact the second I read this I had to see if Atari published Kane and Lynch just to see if it was always them.

>>10079893
>opening the main mansion door will kill you
Opening the front door doesn't do anything in RE1. You get a short FMV of a dog trying to force its way in the first time, then your character just says something like "It's too dangerous to go outside!" if you try to open it again.

>>10080043
Don't the dogs get in the main hall the first time you try? I remember dying to them

>>10079480
The monsters sometimes looked a little goofy, although they could still be intimidating because a lot of them are immortal or can be only destroyed by solving a puzzle. I found some of them convincing though, like the zombies, the tiny spiders or the ghost that resembles Emily, and others could be forgiven because of being early 3D. Main characters certainly looked weird, specially Emily. The Lovecraftian documents were generally well written and contributed to the atmosphere of mystery. Having to depend sometimes on the lamp, whose usage is limited, was also a little stressful. Overall, I think it worked as an horror game back then.

>>10080062
The remake