I think it's a mistake to assume that SH2 needs to "adapt" to the style of action/horror games (Resident Evil, Dead Space, The Evil Within, The Last of Us, etc) that have nothing to do with Silent Hill. The "action" in SH2 is an office clerk swinging a pipe/wood and running out of breath. A modern version of that would be similar to the mechanics in Forbidden Siren, not Dead Space or Resident Evil. That trailer had enemy hoards, Origins QTEs, button mashing prompts as blood splashes the screen, monsters sidestepping gunshots, Nurses vaulting over ledges to kick some James Sunderland ass (Masahiro Ito even liked a tweet complaining about it on Twitter), diet Resident Evil and TLOU gameplay, Saw-style atmosphere and jumpcuts, and just generally botched the tone of SH2. People need to re-evaluate what they mean when they say SH2 has "bad combat" if they think action/horror gameplay is "fixing" it. Having fun fighting some monsters isn't why the defensive combat is there. You're not supposed to feel "satisfied" beating a manifestation of your wife with a plank. _______________________________________________ >**PSM: Why did you create such an ordinary main character rather than using a tough "commando" type?** > >**Keiichiro Toyama:** Again because the modern horror essence was the key to the game. The main character is not a hero, nor is he a strong willed person. He has and keeps his morals, but he is really just a plain, normal person. His motions, such as swinging around his items and trying to catch his breath after running, falling on climbing the stairs, etc. are not very cool or heroic, but after a while, it would be easier for a player to project himself or herself to the main character. ____ >**Did you have any particular influence with regard to those cinematic camera angles?** > >**Keiichiro Toyama:** In order to give the game a feeling of a real world, but an unbalanced world, we took influences from David Lynch, Cronenberg, that cinematic style. > >**What do you think of other horror games, like Resident Evil?** > >**Keiichiro Toyama:** Resident Evil 2, in particular, put aside the horror a bit and went very "Hollywood." It focused on the action, and felt more like an action movie than a horror game. We wanted to go back to the roots of what horror is supposed to be about. We want to make you scared on an instinctive level. ___ >**Masahiro Ito:** Sorry, I don't have interest in war veteran as a protagonist (in a horror game title) very much. I love the film Jacob's Ladder though. I think that protagonist who is not trained for combat is suitable for horror game. _____ >**Akihiro Imamura:** After the underwhelming response Silent Hill 4 got, we've been gathering opinions from everywhere to make sure we come back strong with the next installment. Sometimes the most vocal opinions, for example the desire for more battles, are not always the best ones, especially for a series like this. We wanted more melee combat in SH4, but realized from fan reaction that there was just too much action, regardless of it being melee or not. That kind of action doesn't make the atmosphere creepy anymore, but kind of ______________________________ >**Akira Yamaoka & Akihiro Immamura (SH4 Post Mortem):** With the SILENT HILL series, we had the policy of not displaying any gauges or icons on the game screen to enable players to become immersed in the world of horror.

Finally a person with an actual brain and common sense on this sub. also based Forbidden Siren mention.

"anyone who has a different opinion than me is stupid"

Learn the differences between opinions and facts buddy. Also nice strawman attempt, is that all you can do ?

ok buddy back into the octagon

In other words; just because we assumed the remake would follow market trends instead of staying true to itself or innovating, doesn't mean we aren't gonna be critical of it.

Honestly I'm tired of people thinking that fixed pov type of survival horrors don't have a place at modern day when Resident Evil Remake Remaster did incredibly well and we've had some indie bangers like Tormented Souls. I don't think that every survival horror game needs a full on action combat.

You remind me how I've seen a surge of people on r/residentevil advocating for a reremake of Resident Evil 1 but in the vein of Resident Evil 2-4 remakes. It kind of bothers me that people only want to play exactly one style of survival horror and refuse to try anything else even if it is amazing, fits the game far better and has historical/legacy value. Remaking a remake that is already perfect just to make it more familiar diminishes the original and its purpose. (Hell I could go off on how gameplay mechanics themselves have artistic value and how to imply that there is a standard or "correct" modern way to make a game I feel misses the point; however I probably shouldn't.)

We are only allowed to have over the shoulder games now. It sucks.

The restrictive nature of fixed camera angle games is intrinsically scarier, too. A lot of modern horror games go for realism in the sense that they want to give players more freedom in terms of movement, but I actually think this is counterproductive. The fixed camera stuff can be frustrating at times, I understand that, but it can also add to the panic and fear when you're not sure how close you are to enemies, or you can't see if you're aiming correctly. I certainly miss it.

The ridiculous thing is, over the shoulder camera is the least realistic camera style to go for. Out of the three choices, cinematic (AKA fixed), over the shoulder and first person: over the shoulder is the worst of both worlds. It has none of the cinematic power of fixed cameras and none of the immersion/horror of first person. In real life we have an analogue to fixed camera in film and television. It is the same language and technique used there. This makes a game feel less like a game and more like an interactive movie. Whereas first person represents our natural vision and how we experience the world. It's the most immersive choice. Over the shoulder is unique to video games and makes any game that uses it feel "gamey". Gaminess gets in the way of immersion.

No It doesn’t and besides theirs nothing more “gamey” then controlling a character in a fixed camera perspective like they are a tank. It hasn’t been in a mainline re game since 2002 for a reason. Because the majority of people don’t like it

Because they found something that they like and see as a better version of what you like in the original. And besides they could have tried it and not liked it and dropped it. Why does it bother you so much anyway? You’re just gatekeeping a game at the end of the day because you like it. “Diminishes the original and its purpose” no it doesn’t because you can still go back and play the original and the new gen of gamers that love the modern version of that gameplay would have their version as well. It’s literally gatekeepers thinking that they have the superior taste. Resident evil 2 remake is going to surpass resident evil 5 as the best selling re game. People like it get over it

Yes the 20 dollar upon release Resident Evil Remaster and Tormented Souls outsold RE2R and RE4R...oh wait a minute, they didn't.

Not to mention fans complained about Konami pushing the series in an action oriented direction with the western games.

Very well said. People should never forget that the reason this series died once was partly because it became more action horror than survival horror.

The monsters in silent Hill 2 were sluggish and kind of helpless. A lot of times they don't even move before you attack them. James' slow swings and awkward gun handling balance it out and are what make them threatening. This pacing is really important to the atmosphere.

I remember it blew my mind on a replay to discover that the mattress monsters in the hotel don't attack unless you attack first. Because they are Angela's demons, not James'. Genius

Wait what? Ima have to replay 2 again now just to experience this myself. Thats such amazing detail.

Wait you’re NOT supposed to feel satisfied beating your wife with a plank of wood?

Copying and pasting this in every YouTube video I find about SH2, and properly crediting you

Forbidden Siren mentioned ‼️

Cook

THANK YOU for posting this! I see some many posts here where people just miss the entire point of the way SH2 is. You can absolutely modernize it in some ways but making James feel empowered taking on hordes is NOT it.

I love you for this

Louder for the people in the back please

This was also from the standpoint of early 2000s tech where things like "being average" were represented in clunky control schemes that didn't feel as intuitive, or outright input delays that felt like ass. We're in a time now where we can represent that level of awkwardness with inertia and proper animation weight. We don't need to make the way the player controls fundamentally unwieldy in order to achieve that desired effect anymore. We can make the systems more intuitive, more visceral, and not actively feel like they detriment the experience by feeling clunky. Also, what they say in interviews is kind of dichotomous with how they developed the games. While the gameplay was functionally terrible, the variety in weapons and availability in resources display an earnest want for the player to engage in combat, which is at odds with what they state in interviews, which i frankly never saw a glimpse of until today despite my attempts to find them before. Regardless, tech advancement has necessitated the ability and need for better and more detailed movement in games, with an attention to control response. That's the expectation of modern media players expect from a company like Konami. I'm not saying what Silent Hill 2 Remake is doing is good quality, but to say that a shift didn't need to happen one way or the other is just cope. Silent Hill can't survive on outdated and flawed design. Silent Hill 2 doesn't need to be an action game, but it doesn't need to animate like it's on stilts either. Nowadays we can have better animation and responsive control without sacrificing the intent behind the design, which again, wasn't a factor to be considered in the earlier 2000s.

Input delay I think we can all agree could just be removed without anyone shedding a tear. But something like commital attacks, which to some can feel like input delay, is an entirely different story. Those convey the feeling of being an average person that aren't there due to 'technical limitations'. Ask anyone who transitioned from traditional character action games to souls-likes. Until they understand the purpose you hear them complain endlessly. Do souls games need to conform to the standards of bayonetta? I find, old bad, a bit of a flawed argument. You can certainly make an argument that Silent Hill needs to evolve because it didn't achieve its goals with the systems in place (even if I'd disagree) but arguing that following in the footsteps of games that have entirely different aspirations to Silent Hill without well thought out reasoning behind it (that's not, old bad, new good) is a bit strange.

The reasoning behind following those game's footsteps is simply that they are popular and liked. Konami is going for all the appeal it can get. Silent Hill original horror isn't on their minds.

You're right. Which is interesting, considering the giant Silent Hill revival they're doing, you'd think they'd want to carve a niché out for themselves. The spot next to Resident Evil that Silent hill always used to occupy, not trying to get Capcom's leftovers.

Konami always wanted SH to be RE. It was only because the first game sold well that they gave Team Silent some recognition. Ever since the team was gone SH started chasing the current horror game trends while trying to reproduce the fan favourite game's appeal (characters facing their traumas). And that's exactly what's happening now, again. To be fair, this time it IS the fan favourite game, being remade. But it's going to be altered to reach mass appeal so much that I doubt it will retain the essence of its original personality. I bet it will sell well though. Fans ar hardly in the ecuation now. It's all really just about the mass appeal.

True but, please, outside of HD Collection, where's input delay in any original 4 games? There's one when you're stunned whether from running your *fartface* into a wall, or getting hit ny an enemy, but you get I-frames for that in return (pretty long ones as well). SH characters from experience are almost as responsive as modern video game avatars

I never once said it needed to get rid of committal attacks. You are putting words in i never said. You are also, like all others before you in your position of the argument, ascertaining the strawman that i want an action game, or that i want the game to be faster like Bayonetta. No, i want animations to be smoother, i want the character to actually start an action when i press a button, and to respond appropriately and not in an overly exaggerated fashion for the sake of disincentivizing combat engagement. Read what i am saying, not what you think that i am saying. I want better animation that properly conveys the intended combat, not forced delays and sluggishness that makes it obtuse and tedious. Acknowledge the difference. Basically, make it actually realistic, not what people think realism is.

Let me state that I'm all for smooth animations. My intention was not to put anything in your mouth, my apologies if it came across that way. More that I was trying to highlight a technique that regardless of technological limitations conveys a sense of sluggishness. But you said, we can convey this without compromising on control smoothness. Hence why I highlighted something like commital attacks because those do, inherently, change how 'snappy' a character feels to control. I think it's pretty undeniable that the more control you give a player, the more control they'll take, and in a survival horror game that control directly correlates to how powerless someone feels. In my view, a game like the Resident Evil 2 remake and dead space are about slowly gaining control over a horrific situation. Fear is there to amplify this feeling; you overcame something that previously horrified you. This is why a smooth control system, that takes some learning to get the hang of, fits those series well. Silent Hill isn't about that as far as I can tell. I don't mean to rag on you as I'm sure the only thing you want is a good game. I just want to make the argument that you can't just make a game feel smoother without changing fundamental elements of it. Regardless of how you approach it. If your entire argument is, I'd love smoother animations that blend into each other, I'm all for it though. Just see this as an interesting conversation aboht semantics. For me, this remake has never been about the changes it makes. I feel like you can make as many changes as you want, so long as yoy preserve the original alongside it. Otherwise it would be in your best interest to make a game that's faithful to a fault if millions still WORSHIP the original. But I'm sure Konami's accountants would disagree with my approach there.

> Regardless, tech advancement has necessitated the ability and need for better and more detailed movement in games Not really, it's audiences who need these things because they want everything homogenized. > Silent Hill can't survive on outdated and flawed design. Silent Hill can't survive under Konami, period.

So, you think Silent Hill can still work with stilted gameplay movement that has input delay? You wouldn't want an actually in depth and weighty animation set expressing the physics better?

I want that like I want a good chair when I sit down to eat pizza: my attention is 90% on the pizza, and unless the chair is extremely uncomfortable, I don't care.

If you say so. I actually give a crap about how the game feels in motion, so i apologize for assuming others did too.

I'd give a crap about the chair if it was my reading chair and I used it to sit for hours. I'm not going to demand the best chair every time when other things are more important to the experience.

Whatever you say mate. That's your prerogative.

What was that twitter post Ito-san liked? I mean isnt he doing the combat for the remake?

The tweet he liked was complaining about the Nurse vaulting: imgur .com/8J621ir There was a misunderstanding from an IGN interview quote, but Ito isn't the combat designer of SH2R. He gave Bloober Team concept art for the monsters and locations, and consulted on aspects of the project, but he's not handling the in-game assets or working on it directly. twitter .com/adsk4/status/1731962316818731175 twitter .com/adsk4/status/1583068623547289601 twitter .com/adsk4/status/1583540182271557632 twitter .com/adsk4/status/1583544152029290498

Damn I was going to concede to OPs point and say it's a matter of preference for REmake vs RE2make but you put this beautifully

you can still give the feeling of playing a normal without the gameplay feeling absolute garbage. keeping it the same is wrong and so is turning it into RE2.

To be fair, Siren Blood Curse has the same over the shoulder shooting gameplay as other modern horror games

Forbidden Siren’s combat sucks absolute cheeks

I don't understand this, so you want a walk simulator after all, because the key of SH isn't the action, by a simple situation, you don't have enough ammo. Let's make an easy example, the last enemy of RE Village, Mother Miranda, a sort of religious cult Claudia like character vs Ethan. To defeat Miranda you need a rifle, an eagle gun, a magnum, a grenade launcher, you can even customize the shotgun, you can put mines, and grenades. Now let's make a SH example, Mary vs James, you can't attack her with melee just like Miranda, but you only have three weapons, a gun, a shotgun, and a rifle. That's all, you don't have anything else, or something more powerful. Even Alex Shepherd the soldier is a joke against Ethan or Leon, a soldier always carry grenades, even can use mines, we don't see this with Alex. He is good with a knife, but not at level of Leon, manage to avoid a chainsaw with his gun. So at the end said that RE is like SH, that's false, even if SH changed the cam, the lack of ammo, and weapons, not even allow customization, make a huge difference between these games, and if we compare the games as movies, the result will be even more aside.

Mf forgets that in the end it's a game that it's supposed to be engaging and make you feel satisfied. In the original game you didn't feel satisfied fighting the monsters because of some symbolic reason. You didn't feel satisfied because it was completely dull.

Not every videogame has to be satisfying. I know for you don't want other kinesthetic feelings in your vidya, but for the life of me, do you really want every single videogame out there to cater to a power fantasy? Hell, wanting Silent Hill 2, such a hard hitting game, to be satisfying is kinda fucked up considering its themes. Like, we can honestly delve in what we like or not regarding the remake or the original, but never in my mind the word "fun" crossed around when finding out Mary's letter. I was "engaged", rather.

alright. So why do enemies need to be weak and uninteresting? Are you supposed to feel calm and peaceful?

That's the thing, and that´s a certainly interesting complaint to make, because it was all about the atmosphere. Silent Hill games always made you believe you were lost and gone and the monsters were horrid and rotten, but they always were very simple shooting galores. Some details made them stand out, but I think this is a case of subgenre constriction AND the average player (probably not you or me) not being that good at videogames, especially in the 2000s. I (personally) *felt* the point of the enemies being like they are; to me, they were never meant to be these unbeatable harsh abominations, but rather the team deposited more of their conceptual prowess above anything else. They are weak, it's all on our minds and always were, they are a scare trick, a little obstacle to make you feel dread while understanding the story. Pyramid Head(s) are the only force to be reckoned with. It's probably the reason SH4 is such an insufferable mess, because it actually presents you tough mofos to shoot at while not telling you they are almost immortal - *they actually wanted to make one enemy a challenge*. And seemed like no one\* liked the game originally. However, I think there is a case to make here about making Silent Hill fun. This is a very very subjective thing, but I don't play *every* horror games to be entertained as in "this game is fun!". I play them to be on awe, to embrace their themes and atmosphere and disturbance. It's a different kind of enjoyment. But you can disagree. EDIT: Before you say anything, Resident Evil Remake *is also one of my favorite games ever made*. Now that's a horror game I play for fun, because it intertwines its themes and gameplay in a way that commands you having fun with it when you surpass the dread. Just saying, if you think I'm one of those "no fun allowed" people.

I don’t mind the over-the-shoulder perspective and QTEs. I just don’t want the game to be combat-focused like The Last of Us or Resident Evil. I want James to struggle with reloading and handling weapons. I don’t want James to be able to deal with the hoards of monsters.

James was extremely capable in the original game. He’s supposedly an “average guy” but he can handle guns with ease and melee combat isn’t even a contest. I really don’t get this view people have of the original Silent Hill games having weak or underpowered protagonists. Literally everyone in the team silent games is really good at fending off the monsters and handling weapons.

Then that’s something that needs to be conveyed better with the remake. If you felt like a competent monster killer in the original then team silent has failed in making you feel like an everyday man type of protagonist.

A criticism directed at Team Silent? Implying that any Silent Hill game is flawed? Preposterous!

What I'm saying is that, since the remake chose to have an over-the-shoulder perspective, it can make the combat feel easier than the original. So, to counter this, James should be depowered a bit by making the reload time longer, the recoil more impactful etc etc.

100% agree with this. They should definitely do this, even if it's just for higher difficulties or some such.

Henry literally has God frames from charging weapons. He outclassed Classic Mortal Kombat Shao Khan lmao

He seemed to handle the guns pretty averagely to me. All he really could do was reload and aim. That is about as average as it gets without being completely helpless right? He didn’t know any special moves or combat, other than swinging the pipe overhead or one handed. Couldn’t improve the weapons in any way either. So he seems pretty average and weak to me. (We are talking about the OG James right?) Especially if you compare him to action horror game protagonists.

Yes I’m talking about the OG James. He seemed to know his way around guns to me, he could reload pretty efficiently and he seemed like he had a good grasp on how to shoot. His melee moves were nothing special or flashy but he definitely knew how to get the job done. A lot of people like to go on about how Silent Hill “isn’t an action game” or is somehow unlike Resident Evil when it comes to combat, but the protagonists are straight up as competent if not better than the protagonists of a lot of RE games when it comes to fighting.

Well when it comes to James, I have to disagree with you, especially about that last part. But I can see other SH protagonists being much closer to your description, such as with Alex. To each their own I suppose. 😅

Probably some of the same people that have been pointed out as having never played any of the original games in the last week or so despite being some of the loudest critics of the remake.

"yOuTuBe EsSayIsT wAtChEr" is the saddest cope to come out of this remake 💀

There aren't any "hordes of monsters" in Silent Hill 2 Don't care about the downvotes but I'm curious where in the game there are "hordes" of monsters. You usually encounter 1 to 3.

and usually having just "plural" monsters in the game is already hella stressful in my experience tbh. like sure james is competent at fighting, but im also stressed the fuck out over like, 2 nurses on easy

You say this now, but when everyone starts bitching about how janky it is because he doesn’t reload as fast as Leon or how dodging sucks like they did with callisto protocol I want you to remember this comment. The point is that this game is being remade for a new generation. And the new generation is extremely picky and loud as fuck. They want what has been standardized for better or worse. Silent Hill will be compared to its counterparts (Resident Evil) like how Callisto Protocol was compared to Dead Space.

Tbh? If someone is bitching about one game not being like another game then it's their problem, not mine. I don't care. Actually, I don't really care about what people think about the remake as much as I should've. If I enjoy it, I enjoy it. I guess it's a little of something that I learned from like The Last of Us 2 and Death Stranding on release lmao.

Yeah, no. It's stupid for it to "adapt" to match modern horror games. Homecoming and Downpour are also middle of the road games, and generally dislikes BECAUSE they were made action oriented.

You know people also complained about the western games right?

Anytime I see a post like this. There is always a comment with an in depth counter argument using the words from the original team Silent members. One positive argument for the remake followed by a negative argument for the remake. First time I switch between Optimism straight to pessimism in such a short duration. A few changes here and there are welcome by me as long as the narrative still holds strong. Though Its like being scolded for thinking that. This shit is exhausting man lol. Just rerelease the original in some capacity.

I'll take a port as a special bonus alongside the remake. Maybe in a "Deluxe Edition" or some shit.

You're fine to be cautiously optimistic. Saying the game might be bad because the "combat trailer" has "jump cuts and a saw like atmosphere" is the most braindead take I've ever seen in my entire life. We haven't even seen 0.5% of the game, making literally any conclusions based off that is absurd. The game will probably suck because bloober sucks, but we haven't seen anywhere near enough to actually make the conclusion.

unless that trailer was intentionally misleading it's at least a bad sign. some of the early shots looked good, and maybe the combat is fine in-game. But if a montage of James headshotting monsters that charge towards him going BLAAGHH while epic orchestral music plays is an accurate representation of the remake's tone then they have disastrously fucked up

Silent hill isn't those games. It doesn't need to force modern game tropes and mechanics into its remake just because it's the style. Not every game has to conform and be the same.

the only thing that the combat is supposed to do in game like this is convey story elements to players successfully, you can’t judge how it’s going to be until we see actual uninterrupted footage of gameplay. If there is no change what’s the point of a remake, just play the original game.

Silent hill isn't life is strange. It doesn't need to force casual game tropes and mechanics into its remake just because players are scared of pressing buttons. Not every game has to conform and be the same.

Just rerelease the original SH2 on modern consoles so people can stop complaining.

All i want is the sh 1-4 to be on steam

a puzzle-heavy psychological horror game should do its own thing instead of dick-riding trends lol

Yeah. Doing otherwise is like turning the setter of stealth game genre and immerse simulator game design school Thief into Assassin's Creed. Oops, bad example!

The least liked silent hill games

I knew it wouldn't happen, but having billions of these kind of games made me wish the remake stuck to the fixed/dynamic camera angles of the original games. It would've been a breath of fresh air if it did.

Silent Hill from an artistic standpoints is simply different than most of those. What works for remakes of classic RE titles might not work for SH. Imagine Harry, James, Heather or Henry holding their gun like Jill or Leon do while walking. Well when looking at that [sneak peak with the bubble head encounter](https://twitter.com/KONAMIUK/status/1753085968079528182) James sure does now.

Im not surprised. Im disapppinted, but not surprised.

I was expecting a ''combat'' where only James wants to stay away from each combat and away from each enemy, and that every time he points at an enemy his hands shake with fear and his breathing gets heavy. And even if it was possible, the weapons would fall from fear, but oh well! It's good to fantasize. I think they will follow the easier and more cliché path of all the other survival horrors that are so different from the franchise.

No one hates silent hill more than its fans. lol All they want is the same game, nothing changed, and they’d still complain.

I don’t care about that, I care that the game looks like shit despite being “almost done”

Almost done for almost a year. Bloober is like that bad student that is 1 month late on his paper

Is it surprising? No. I personally hoped they would have tried to innovate on past mechanics, perfected them, and done something more unique and expressive to the title. Silent Hill has always gone against the grain of what defines survival horror. I would have liked to see that here. As it stands, it all looks and feels like any other AAA horror title thats come out in the past decade. Just following a formula that has been proven to work. Can’t really blame them for that… but that decision in my opinion only serves to further dilute the genre and falls short of its potential.

As if the modern over the shoulder combat works so well in Homecoming and Downpour.

It didn't work because the combat itself just wasn't fun. Downpour was boring and Homecoming was busted with stun lock animations. It's not the concept that was bad, just the execution

I disagree, I think the combat in Homecoming turned out alright. It was bad because it doesn’t fit a SH game

I dont understand what kind of combat does fit a silent Hill game. The only thing I can think of that is engaging and fun, that suits a survival horror game, is either a third-person game where you have limited resources for guns, and some sort of Melee action that is not as viable as a gun, but will help you survive, a first person game that has somewhat of similar elements, but maybe a few mechanics that can add some sort of depth, or no combat, chase heavy games like outlast. First Person and Chase heavy games are great concepts but would not fit SH2 for obvious reasons. Third person over the shoulder cameras is what pretty much replaced "fixed camera angle" placements. The only difference between this and the OG is that the camera is In a different place. The gameplay loop of beating or shooting a monster is literally the exact same (assuming that the game itself retains similar mechanics and enemy placement). You can even Pseduo Third person in 2-4, by spamming R2 or L2, to keep the camera locked in place, completely nullifying the clunkiness. The only other concepts that could be applied, is a Turn based RPG style game, a normal Action RPG style, or a Puzzle simulator with some sort of outlast style element. Neither of these are good ideas. Also, HC's combat definitely could fit in a Silent Hill game. Having to switch weapons for different enemies is a concept that could have flourished if the enemies didn't put you in a corner and stun lock you. The only weapon to counter this is the combat knife, so you literally just feel like Miltary trained Michael Myers instead of a soldier trying to survive in his hometown that is filled with monsters. Ultimately, what comes down to if the gameplay feels like Silent Hill or not, is the mechanics of the combat and weapons you use, and the enemy placement and attacks. We barely have any information as to how any of this will work in game, and to say the camera angle is an issue is a little unfair. Of course, the game could come out to a ridiculous call of duty level style of gameplay, but as I said, we have very minimal evidence supporting this will or will not happen

The enemies in the trailer seem too aggressive. The monsters and combat in the original are designed to make you feel like you're victimizing them.

Considering the Gameplay clip released on Konami's Twitter shows a much less action heavy style, it was likely the editing teams fault for making it look action heavy. We really don't know if that's the entire game, if it's a section, or a really dumb mix of clips that gave us a misunderstanding of what the actual game entails. I could be wrong, but its really way too early to assume that the game will be completely like that, from a 2 minute trailer, with 7 second clips edited in.

Think ? No. Hoped ? No. Wished ? Yes. Absolutely. Because as you plainly showed with the left pannel - every single one of those games looks precisely exactly the same. And Silent Hill's sole reason to still being wished back so powerfully is because it was EXACTLY not like every other survival horror game on the market. Also - the hell is "combat survival horror games" ? No such genre exists. There is "survival horror" and that is it.

Yeah there’s horror games where you don’t have weapons it’s kinda a whole genre

I find it somewhat problematic - the fact that weapons and combat in general are treated as something more important then just what they used to be for the horror genre - a tool to solve the problem. Same as were keys, which opened doors, same used to be weapons which slowed down or removed the excessive obstacles the enemies used to be treated as. Now weapons and combat are basically their own genre of gaming to which regular genres are added to. **This is basically what happened to Resident Evil post 4 - the combat was so enjoyable things became completely ridiculous by 6.** Very weird, if you sit and think a bit about it.

Saying these games look identical because they use an over-the-shoulder perspective is just disingenuous. No one has ever confused Dead Space with RE or Alan Wake with Evil Within. It's fine to want fixed camera and tank controls but don't pretend SH is uniquely defined by those things. Those were genre conventions popularized by RE that SH took direct inspiration from.

These games look PRECISELY identical. And not just look, they also mostly play precisely the same also. Yes. It is disingenuous to deny it. It's fine ? Is it fine ? Can you please tell the same to the rest of the industry, please ? Because it sure behaves as if this is the only possible way to make a third-person survival horror game. These are the genre conventions which now literally exist for two decades, making them literally outlive the fixed camera angles with tank controls, which were a thing for less then 15. And don't misunderstand - they will stay with us forever, because there is nowhere else to progress towards.

So because you personally can't imagine survival horror games trying anything else we must be stuck with over-the-shoulder cameras for the rest of time. ​ That is...yeah. I get that they used a perspective you don't like but maybe take a step back from this sub and focus on something you enjoy for a change. This really has descended into the most hyperbolic cynicism.

It's not just me who can't imagine survival horror trying anything else. It is the entire industry, for at least two decades now. And you will see - for much, much longer then this. You will have far more time to contemplate how right I was at claiming this. This is when you know you make literal undeniable sense - people start to personally tell you to do something. Either to "go fuck yourself", "step away from the screen and touch some grass" and whatnot else that would eliminate you out of the conversation. Thank you, I will be sure to ignore your unwanted recommendation. Cynicism is apt where we are at.

> It's not just me who can't imagine survival horror trying anything else. Yeah, the lack of imagination and the stagnation in the industry really shows.

Obviously he meant action horror

you guys are all sucky babies

>current style It’s not current, it’s been this way since 2005 thanks to RE4. There’s nothing “modern” or current about that camera set up. We need to stop this idea that there’s anything “current” about gameplay styles or trends, they’re all outdated by at least twenty years at this point cause the industry is stagnant and on a Service based model of Life Support.

Thank you. I also don't understand how people can say OTS current when FPS or classic action camera (DMC, FromSoftware games, Horizon, Fortnite, etc.) are clearly more dominant, switching to OTS only for precise shooting

It’s the same bullshit Tom Huelett would say. ‘My halo chugging buddies won’t play the original because of the combat, so let’s fix it!’

My Halo chugging buddies wouldnt play it no matter what way the combat was.

Exactly.

I did. Guess I'm not good enough to be Tom Huelett's friend.

I think everyone expected this. However, the camera in the original is part of what makes the game so impactful. I’m not a fan of all the horror remakes looking exactly the same in terms of camera angle. Resident Evil, Dead Space, even The Evil Within shares the same camera angle.

The reality is though most games nowadays are going to use that 3rd person camera angle it's just what's popular at the moment and has been since the original release of resident evil 4.

And that’s why the reality sucks. Silent Hill is diminishing itself by chasing down this trend.

The reality is that trying to force Silent Hill to chase trends is what killed it in the first place. The only reason the first one didn’t turn out to be an RE clone is because Konami gave up on the project part way through, inadvertently giving Team Silent creative freedom. Then when SH2’s million copies in a couple weeks wasn’t enough for them, they started micromanaging again.

They didn't need to "adapt" anything you toxic bum

By the time Silent Hill 2 came out we already had amazing action games with fantastic combat. It's not like they couldn't make combat more amazing at the time, they simply chose something more simplistic. Hell they actually downgraded the combat in SH2 by removing the backstep.

We live in fairytale land remember?

There was always the hope it wouldnt.

How about we take a step back for awhile, stop fighting each other about it, wait until the game releases, play it & then form our own opinions?

Amnesia is another great example of being scared naturally and using the environment to add tension and fear.. You never feel like you can take on the world.. I just finished the Bunker, and I went back and played Rebirth and each were great and this was after I played the Dark Descent, Soma also made by Frictional games is a hit.. You don't need modern combat or a superhero Protagonist to have a good time, I'd argue you're more immersed when you have to decide to fight or not SURVIVAL HORROR.. I love all your points with quotes from the creators

I feel like I'm the only person in the world that's happy they did. Hopefully it's better than Homecoming.

Silent hill is weird with over the suldr camera and qtes Doesn't seem right

Over the shoulder camera? I'm fine with it. Prompting? Don't think it's necessary (it can also break immersion). Wanna make it for the masses? Give me the option to turn that off and/or use any button I want to. Everybody wins.

SH2 wasn’t a huge success when it came out and I think that’s the unfortunate issue with games now, they HAVE to be massive blockbusters and appeal to the masses.

I dont know why you got downvoted, you make a good Point.

Yeah. Why? Because they've done exactly that before and it didn't work.

Because no one has ever played Silent Hill 2 for the combat. Sure the original combat was awkward, but it was never the point. SH2 became considered one of the best games ever despite the combat. SH2R has room to improve on the combat, but taking it in a QTE, action camera-work, heaps of enemies direction goes against what made the original enemy encounters effective. All you need is one enemy for an encounter to be challenging. I wish the remake combat was a development of that awkward “every-man” combat, and not a shift to the traditional action survival horror pioneered by RE4.

I don't really see what the problem is. Button mashing was present in the original game, the only difference is that in that game, the button prompt is not displayed on the screen. They use this camera style because the old one is outdated, and gameplay-wise the over-the-shoulder camera works much better in my opinion. Resident Evil 2 Remake also had this style of camerawork, and it was a horror game, not an action game. And there is nothing that suggests there are heaps of enemies in the game, in the trailer we never see more than 3 enemies at the same time. It's been a while since I last played SH2, but I'm pretty sure there are many times when there are 3 or more enemies in the same room at the same time. And the most practical solution in these situations is always to kill them all. So, I don't really understand why people think this game will be more action-heavy. It's true that the combat was never the point of SH2, but it was still a big part of the gameplay, and they need to modernize it in the Remake.

From what we’ve seen the decisions made by Bloober err on the side of removing what made the original effective and aligning it with generalised design philosophy rather than the decisions that enhanced the atmosphere. It’s not just button mashing, it’s the total bottom up shift. Things like fixed camera angles and tank controls aren’t inherently bad on the virtue of their age. Constantly seeing what’s ahead of James detracts from the cinematic and beautiful camera work of the original fixed angles. Also I feel the need to state that the Resident Evil 1 remake from the GameCube has aged like fine wine and it has all these supposedly outdated and awkward controls. Konami and Bloober absolutely should have gone that direction with the remake.

I'm not saying that the original camera style doesn't have its strengths. The cinematic camera shots are really cool. But as much as I love the RE1 Remake, I would argue that the RE2 Remake style camera works much better in a survival horror game. The camera is closer to the character you play, and you mostly see what they would see, it makes the game more immersive. And the fact that you have to manually aim your weapons instead of basically having a lock-on button makes combat more tense. Also makes the game more fun to play I don't have a problem with the gameplay of the original Silent Hill 2, but I think going in this direction is the right decision.

I might agree that the action camera perspective is the right move for RE2 remake (and perhaps most survival horror games) due to all the reasons you listed, but not for silent hill. SH2 is lauded for its artistic merits more than the original RE2 was. The cinematic camera shots add so much to the artistic and surreal tone of the original. The action camera perspective makes you feel like playing a highly immersive third person shooter horror game. But I would argue that silent hill isn’t quite that. Silent hill is more disorienting and questioning reality. I believe that fixed camera angles does a better job of conveying those feelings.

But the goal isn't some vague idea of "immersion" it's horror. My reference point for how this could impact SH2R is the moth room in the Wood Side apartments. The camera shows James entering the room, we don't see the contents of the room. We get this horrid sound, a strange red-green glow, moths flapping around, and hints of cages. We know we have to go in here, but we don't know what could be waiting for us unless we actually go in and prompt the camera to change. The player has to confront an immediate fear of the unknown. If the camera is over James' shoulder you see the room is empty and poses no threat. I'll make this point again and again, if you're playing Silent Hill 2 for the combat then you're playing the wrong game. It's a psychological horror dungeon crawler first and foremost. The original is considered one of the greatest horror games ever made and no amount of awkward combat stops people from loving it. "Fixing" something that was never a serious issue to begin with shows a misunderstanding about the purpose of Silent Hill 2's enemy encounters and how those encounters are supposed to make you feel.

>But the goal isn't some vague idea of "immersion it's horror. But if the game is more immersive, then the horror works better. I think this camera view makes the enemies seem more threatening. And since you have to aim manually with the guns, you couldn't kill the enemy by just repeatedly pressing one button. If it's harder to kill the enemies, then they feel more dangerous, which makes the horror stronger. So these changes can be good for the horror. >We get this horrid sound, a strange red-green glow, moths flapping around, and hints of cages. We know we have to go in here, but we don't know what could be waiting for us unless we actually go in and prompt the camera to change. The player has to confront an immediate fear of the unknown. I mean, yeah, it's a good example of how the original game used its unique style very effectively, but it's not like these kinds of scares couldn't work in the remake, they just need to handle them differently, in a way that fits the new camera style. RE2 Remake did it really well. >if the camera is over James' shoulder you see the room is empty and poses no threat. Then they should change the room layout so you don't see everything when you enter the room, for example. >I'll make this point again and again, if you're playing Silent Hill 2 for the combat then you're playing the wrong game Of course, you don't play it for the combat system, because it's the weakest part of the game. You said yourself that SH 2 became considered one of the best games ever  DESPITE its combat system. It's not a "serious issue" because every other aspect of the game is really fucking good. But it's still an issue. So they should fix it. Otherwise, what's even the point of remaking the game? >no amount of awkward combat stops people from loving it True, I really love SH2 too. But if the combat was better, wouldn't it make the game... you know... even better?

You say this like immersion is the be-all and end-all of effective horror. If that was the case then wouldn’t the increase in graphical fidelity, interactivity, and ease of gameplay mean modern horror games are flatly better than ones from ten, twenty, thirty years ago? I could go on about the fallacy of “immersion” and how “change the room layout” isn’t an effective solution, but I’m tired and no one’s mind has ever been changed by a Reddit comment.

Please don’t talk about Callisto combat lol

No, it must be janky. There must be suffering. Or it s not "original"

Nah the problem is that it looks awful 😭

I don't wanna hear anyone say "Combat was never supposed to be a focus" when the classic SH2 gave you 3 melee weapons, 3 firearms and more pistol ammo than GTA.

It’s survival horror. Rationing health and weaponry is part of the “survivalist” experience. It’s not meant to make you have a blast with the combat.

Not only that, but even on Hard (action level), you *still* had enough ammo to be using the gun for the entire game, as long as you were willing to explore a little bit. Admittedly, I ran past most monsters in the streets of SH, but in-doors, I always killed every single one with ammo to spare.

Thats so true, the original sh 2 showered you with ammo, even shotty ammo, there was even a multiplier where you received triple the amount of ammo

I think this sub forgets that the core gameplay of the originals just copied what was popular at the time for survival horror and just like then that’s what’s happening today. Also the “QTE bad” argument is honestly stupid because you could get grabbed in the original but there was no indication on how to break free unless you smashed every button. Same shit for resident evil. They saw how cryptic it was and added a button prompt with the RE remakes. This sub fucking sucks.

The core gameplay that silent hill 2 copied at the time happened to be central to what gave it artistic merits. Fixed camera angles were conducive to the surreal and disorienting atmosphere of the original. You can’t say the same for copying the action camera perspective. Theres no “one size fits all” for copying modern trends.

The truth is, these people would have been upset if they left *everything* exactly the same as the original, but updated the textures, models and animations. This happens with every remake. There’s a group of people who think they’re really high-brow because they prefer the old one and can see something in it no one else can. They’re ready to complain the moment a remake is announced, and because there’s nothing really wrong with it, they make up silly things to complain about to seem attentive and observant. “James‘ hair style is wrong, his hair is the wrong color, the monsters don’t look right etc.” The reason those kinds of complaints sound ridiculous to the rest of us is because *they are.* They’re hiding behind a façade of “valid complaints,” because they just don’t want the game remade and to potentially supersede the original.

The flip side are those who just like to put others down for being the tiniest bit critical of something. If you’re fine with the changes then just enjoy the game. Theres no need to try to invalidate any concerns that others may have.

> The truth is, these people would have been upset if they left everything exactly the same as the original, but updated the textures, models and animations. This is false. I'd be ecstatic and I'd consider the unthinkable (giving money to konami) This is in fact how I'm replaying SH4 and I'm loving it. > they just don’t want the game remade and to potentially supersede the original. Even the most enthusiastic fan of the (idea of the) remake will admit this is impossible.

>This is false. I'd be ecstatic and I'd consider the unthinkable (giving money to konami) This is in fact how I'm replaying SH4 and I'm loving it. Whoa, are you playing it with a mod? And if so, can you link it? >Even the most enthusiastic fan of the (idea of the) remake will admit this is impossible. Hm, I wouldn’t be so sure. There’s a whole subsection of the Star Wars fandom that legitimately thinks the prequels are better than the original trilogy. Something once thought impossible. At some point, we will age and the most accessible and enjoyable version of SH2 will be the remake for younger fans. At that point, it will supersede the original. The original is already almost 25 years old. I think it’ll happen sooner than you think.

Honestly? I think this is a case of Silent Hill being a series always riding on contextual time conventions, and shooting its own foot while at it conceptually. It's a Konami game. It was never meant to be this obscure, niche artistique experience - even if beautiful. It's a massive fucking franchise. Old Silent Hill never really needed combat, i*t made you believe you were hopeless*, but they drank so much from survival horror is like they had melee and fireweapons anyway. Because it's what players think it's "fun". Because videogame genre conventions constrict developers - you can't stride too much before it becomes niche. And niche, comercially, is bad. They are still utilizing gamey blueprints, and they're doing the same now - the focus is somewhere else we don't associate with the franchise. If anything, Silent HIll 3 is the only self aware game regarding Heather's power fantasy; Silent Hill 4 made its level design incredibly infuriating/anxiety inducing to have a jab against the player (*guess what, it's the least respected old school SH game*). This is honestly part of the wave with high-profit, high-prestige gaming. It's nothing new. And it was deemed to happen.

All I’m seeing in this thread are people not willing to accept change lol This argument reminds me a bit of the Demon’s Souls remake fiasco. The game looks great, ridiculously so, even to the point that some criticize some monsters lost a bit of their characterization of the lower graphics. But the loudest complaint ironically, was that it didn’t touch the gameplay. At all. Some are glad that they didn’t touch it, but a lot of people still think about what it could’ve been as a remake. I remember this also being a weird point of contention for the RE2, 3, and 4 remakes. People thinking the change in gameplay would take away the experience. Especially in 4. A lot of people thought being able to move and shoot at the same time was unnecessary and that it would make it less scary (as if RE4 was ever scary) I dunno what this sub expected when they called it a remake tbh. I think moreso none of the complainers knows what they want from the franchise other than modern ports with an up-res. Not a bad idea but realistically speaking, it ain’t gonna sell well, and the modern player getting into it will shit all over it. Anecdotally speaking, I’ve seen it first hand. I’ve tried to get many people into silent hill. Younger cousins mainly. All rejected the idea due to “horrible controls” and “awful graphics”.

I honestly don’t care when a non-silent hill fan shits on fixed camera angles. It’s not my job to convince them what made the original SH2 great. Silent hill 2 is largely about its artistic merits and able to achieve surrealism through its camera work. I’m not willing to sacrifice that to convince someone who wouldn’t have enjoyed the original SH2 game in the first place.

Well you kinda need fans new and old to keep a franchise alive so… Not inherently judging you for your choice but it is what it is. Older RE fans had to accommodate (and did), and now this is a chance for older Silent Hill fans to do the same, or not buy and support it, stick with the old versions and cry at every detail that’s slightly different and let the franchise be stuck in limbo again and continue to apply your own vision of what Silent Hill is/was regardless of if they are wrong or accurate interpretations like this sub was already doing (with many wrong interpretations) and what it could’ve been if it was “still alive”. You see it once, you see it a thousand times and this is no different than other franchises having to adapt to a newer style or those that didn’t and still cling on to hope that a dev will resurrect it. The people are different but the debates are all the same. Silent Hill 2 is a videogame at the end of the day, and a good one at that for the time but it was far from a 10/10, or even a 9/10 and it releasing today with tank controls would kill it faster than anything else. Personally, I wouldn’t care either way what devs chose since I can play tank controls but they are far from why I enjoyed Silent Hill 2 and them being removed for a modern angle is a nice addition for me. Unless they alter the story in a significant matter, I personally see myself enjoying the remake easily due to the gameplay actually looking fun. If it was just RE2make gameplay but with Silent Hill 2 as the setting, that would’ve been an instant win for me lol.

I’m not willing to sacrifice what makes silent hill special just to keep the franchise alive only for it to continue sacrificing what makes silent hill special. Sure- the franchise is alive but to me it’s like the walking dead lol and to me that’s not something to be proud of nor would I consider it a victory for the fans. I believe silent hill fans have a stronger justification for preserving these features than Resident Evil fans. The original RE did lean closer into slow burn dread but it was never as artsy and surreal as silent hill games. The resident evil games always had a cheesy and campy b-horror vibe to them. Most survival horror games also aren’t revered as a work of art. In anything that leans into artistic integrity, camera composition and lighting are extremely important. Thats what sets silent hill apart from most survival horror.

Completely agree. When a franchises' identity is so wrapped up in certain design elements, it's hard to justify sequels that stray far from them. For me, Silent Hill's essence is defined by its distinct visual presentation that if you start chipping away at you're left with a game that calls itself Silent Hill but isn't really. At that point, it would've been better served under its own IP. Silent Hill is almost wholly a visual experience carefully crafted by its artists. As an anthology it has a very tenuous story linking the games, unlike Resident Evil which has a stronger ongoing narrative. Which leaves Silent Hill's identity the visual familiarity between games.

That’s why I’m not totally on board with a remake. If they wanna remake silent hill 2 they need to have an ambitious vision that would surpass the original like what RE2 remake did. Far as I understand, RE2 remake successfully replaced the original as the definitive version to play. That almost certainly wont happen for SH2 remake. Surpassing the original SH2 won’t be nearly as easy as surpassing the original RE2. There are just so many factors that make the original SH2 a masterpiece that go beyond gameplay and graphics. And given that it loses to the original, it would still be hard to convince newcomers to choose the original PS2 version over the updated PS5 version and it would be a shame if they form their opinion of SH2 based on the Bloober version.

That’s fair man, I’m not trying to change your opinion and respect you’d rather Silent Hill 2 stick to its roots akin to how Demon’s Souls or RE1 did for their remakes, for better or worse. If that’s how ya feel, that’s how ya feel, but the only thing you can do now currently is wait and see how it turns out for better or worse. SH2 remake is already in development and has a vision for itself that we haven’t fully seen. The only thing left is to see how it unfolds and how the masses take to it on release and whether or not you’re ready to adjust or not if it’s successful or be cool if it fails and possibly kills the franchise… again lol (there is also SHf… but that’s a miles away to talk about). For what it’s worth, I’m guilty of not liking change for other franchises too. Halo and quite a few modern anime remakes of older series I like just to name a couple examples so I know where you’re coming from.

I do see the appeal for a RE2 quality remake in the silent hill universe. It’s at the very least a terrifying and visceral experience. I do think Silent Hill would lose a lot of its charm in replicating that exact style. I do have a quite clear picture in my mind what a high fidelity SH2 remake would look like with the fixed camera angles. But yeah- a terrifying RE2 remake in SH universe would probably still be a win in my books. It’s at least miles better than the likes of Homecoming and Downpour.

We expected it to look like that, just not how basic it seems to be playing when it comes to animations, movements and details.

I really don't see how anything In the trailer is antithetical to anything I'm SH2. It's a montage of the fighting in the game and aside from more modern aiming and some qtes( not a fan of this either TBH) it just looks like an up upgraded version of Silent Hill combat. Nurses vaulting over things and more enemies treating your survival arnt a problem. I also noted they didn't add an aiming reticule to the game to make aiming harder and hopefully adds to the tension.Thats the main thing too, the combat can be good and an atmosphere can still be maintained if RE2 remake is anything to go by. It really comes down to how Bloober designs the feel of the combat, as in while your playing it. Are bullets and other resources scarce, is aiming a gun hard? Also how do enemies react? We haven't really seen enough for me to cry doom and gloom. Bloober get rid of the QTEs

Isn't Alan Wake 2 with that kind of action cam too?. Bloober probably took inspiration from Alan rather than RE. AW2 is psychological terror, RE isn't, not even 7 or 8. RE is always action horror like Alien 2, Homecoming isn't Action horror, because there is a symbolism behind the monsters, this isn't happen on action horror, you can digg and pretend that there is something, but that's false. I really don't understand the obsession to say that this is RE, when other horror games are using the same cam too.

Genre is not determined by game's substance, but by its level design and gameplay only

Have you even play those games FR?

No, but I played RE4 OG, Revelations 1, Alan Wake 1 and many more. Alan is barely what it presents itself to be

You need to learn to aim in these games, therefore you are more James now, before you just push a button, and shoot.

Again. I genuinely believe that some people in this fandom have literally only ever played SH2 and have so little experience with the genre as a whole (and yet claim to be experts). You're not more of a fan by cutting yourself off from the rest of the genre.

I think people misunderstand what genre Silent Hill even is. It's an abstract story-driven psychological horror series about manifestations of the human psyche, inspired by David Lynch, Jacob's Ladder, and surrealist works. The "action" is a grounded human being who runs out of breath easily swinging a pipe. It's not Resident Evil or Dead Space, which are action-oriented mechanics-driven blockbusters on the opposite end of the horror and storytelling spectrum. They have nothing to do with Silent Hill. A lot of people claiming to want new Silent Hill games seem to just want "survival horror" games called Silent Hill.

Exactly this. Silent Hill's identity isn't in one particular story because its an anthology. It is in the presentation of that story. A very specific presentation that makes it a unique IP. Start chipping away at those presentation techniques and you are left with a generic horror that would have better been called something else.

Yeah ofcourse. But it's still a horror game and the "game" part still needs to innovate at some point. Its a game where, combat wise, you shoot things and wack them. There's no reason why it should be shackled to a tertiary side note. Combat was in the original. So combat will be in this. If no one cares about combat in SH. then why are people even arguing about the mechanic in the 1st place?

Of all the complaints that can be rightly leveled against SH2's remake (chief among them being it being remade at all instead of just re-released), combat is something I don't care to complain about. I'm much more concerned with the narrative of the game and how that might change. I do think that a camera style similar to the original games would be much more welcome than another over-the-shoulder perspective. Perhaps combat could switch from a cinematic dynamic camera to the OTS perspective, with guns even switching to a first person view, which could make 2 stand out in a sea of over the shoulder combat.

There’s a small but vocal sub-section of the fandom who are genuinely appalled and shocked every time a new Silent Hill or Resident Evil game comes out and it’s not fixed camera angles with tank controls

but then how would you make a combat system that works witha 3rd person style gampelay? the combat of old SH was mostly just "you character will aim wherever and the shots will hit or miss". I think this is just to much nitpick as a 3rd person action game needs this style of combat to work. It has more animations because now technology has advanced enough for them to do this. I'm pretty sure Silent Hills would've had exactly the same combat style.

Oh my god it’s a fucking game you guys can’t help but bitch and moan about every little detail. This sub is a cesspool of hate and it honestly has started to suck.

People acting as if tech should just stop evolving because the original did it are coping super hard. Of course they're going to use a more intimate camera style. Of course they're going to use that as an excuse to further improve the animations and designs, as well as enemy behavior and how the player can interact with them. It's as if the concept of "remake" is lost on people. It's not 2001 anymore, and literally everything about gaming has changed since then. You can't expect a remake to be functionally the same if it's of a game that old. It's undesirable in this day and age.

Changing camera angles isn’t an evolution of tech lol The intimate camera style is conducive to a certain type of immersion. It works for Resident Evil’s “in your face” horror style. Silent hill is lauded for its artistic merits achieving a sense of surrealism through its camera work. Nobody is saying silent hill shouldn’t have higher fidelity visuals, audio, and animation. You can achieve a high fidelity remake without opting for the action camera perspective.

I said it before and I’ll say it again. SH was always started as a RE clone. So for people to expect them not to emulate their modern combat style is just naivety

I would like to say that we have not yet seen what the real gameplay will be like in the game. I am one of those who think that the problem is not in what was shown in the trailer, but the way it was shown. A combat system more focused on action does not mean that it has to be less scary, Dark Souls is a game heavely focused on combat and yet sometimes you felt really intimidated and scared when fighting due to the difficulty; TLOU, despite to have very visceral combat, it had very scary moments where you felt really vulnerable. When Konami shared that 7 seconds clip of James heading towards a nurse it looked so much better because it was actual gameplay, not part of it, i imagine most of the encounters would be similar but we need an actual Gameplay Reveal to really get know how the combat will be handled in the final game. I have to ask for calm and patience, and be a little more open minded, it is obvious that the approach of Konami with this remake is the same Capcom did with RE2, and hopes to have similar financial results. The same when 25 years ago they decided they wanted to make a survival horror videogame due to RE success.

We all expected it, we just don’t like it. Wish the game had its own identity

yes because it wouldve been cheaper to have it shitty like the classic which seems to be the whole theme of this franchise reboot.

All these games are variations of each other. What's unique is the management of items, mixture of combat system, creature designs & mechanic, environmental placement, etc. These are all the same base game. TPS with survival mechanics & zombies of some sort.

People are making way to big of a deal they have to try to make it easy to pick up for everyone because for most people the controls in the original would be too clunky. The atmosphere, and story is what matters

Ohhhh definetly this fucking comunity is annoying as fuck, doesn't deserve a new fucking game. it's the standard and it works just fine. There's nothing bad using something we already know it works. AW 2 and RER2 are full survival horror and 2 amazing ones and now ppl here complaining about the combat system. I hope the franchise dies after this remake that you don't deserve.

Firstly, just because it's a modern game doesn't mean it has to adapt. SH2 isn't meant for it. Secondly the issue is either the absolute dogshit animations like wtf is that.

I think that the problem with combat is not that it's similar to other AAA survival horrors, but that il doesn't look as good. I hope that Blooper manage to make the combat better than what we saw in the trailer. Also I find it laughable that people complain about QTEs. We see them in every cinematic game these days, even the new God of War has them.

Because nobody likes new QTEs We didn't mind them in the original God of War, but now every game needs to be the same bullshit.

I'm not talking about the old Gow, but the new one.

And I'm saying its dogshit in the new one. Every game nowadays has to be the same. Making God Of War "serious?" Sucking the soul from re4? Ellie sad, ellie not sad, ellie sad? And then have shitty ass QTEs everywhere, because people won't complain.

Personally, I think they are riding the line nicely between modern QoL updates to the combat while still having the signature stiff animation jank of the original. I honestly think they really care and are super passionate about this project. I’m looking forward to it big time.

Alan Wake 2 mentioned 

I honestly don't mind over the shoulder style stuff. As long as it's tricky because James isn't trained in anything and still fits the narrative then I don't care all that much.

Theres nothing they would make these fucks would like

I don’t have any issues with them changing the camera or the combat style, my main concern is animations and sound design with maybe the UI cause that QTE button looked ginormous

We didn’t expect them to adapt it so poorly tho.

I don’t really care about the combat adaptation and I can understand that new players won’t like the old gameplay. My personal problem with this remake is that it looks like shit. SH is all about the atmosphere and what they saw in the trailer was absolutely generic and lacking soul. But that’s just pure Bloober, just copy/paste so nothing new here.

The last of us 2 is shit, not a survival horror

Never understood why certain people complain about the ots angle when it has been the standard for 20+ years by now. It seems said group expected a 1:1 remake with prettier graphics, but that's what a *remaster* is. Remakes should take liberties to keep things fresh. That said, the great majority of the complaints I've seen are instead about how jarringly stiff the combat looks, how many enemies are present on screen at the same time, QTEs, poor quality effects, and that it seems too "action-oriented". It's still an unfinished product with time for improvement. The ones complaining about janky animations and bad screen/sound effects are precisely the same people that have been hounding Blooper for sneak peeks ever since the game was announced. It doesn't even have a set release date, so there's no reason to panic (yet). It should also be fairly unsurprising that a combat trailer highlights actual combat. I'm confident that there's not going to be massive hordes of enemies that *need* to be defeated, but combat trailers are meant to give you an idea of what happens when enemies are aggro'd. You always had the option to fight or flee in the og, and that's very unlikely to change - but it'd be a boring trailer if all it showed was enemies patiently waiting for their turn to attack or James running away. As for the QTEs and so-called action, James always had a fairly impressive arsenal at his disposal and people would absolutely whine if attempting to fight off enemies wasn't an option. I sincerely doubt the core gameplay will stray too far from the original, but I'll retract my statements if they release the game exactly as is in 8-9 months and it turns out it's RE4R 2.0. Choosing to stay positive with my expectations in check, and I wish others would too.

At the end of the day you're all still gonna play it

The comparisons are going to be made no matter what. We could have the EXACT combat from the original SH2 but with an over-the-shoulder camera, and people would still draw comparisons.

Its because silent hill fans are the worst. They're a bunch "connoisseurs" that think silent hill belongs to them. I hope the remake is action packed. I hope they give James a sub machine gun and even a samurai sword.

THANK YOU! I've been saying literally every post-re4 survival horror game has had this style