First Silent Hill V review.

Yeah Silent Hill is really Japanese-style horror at it's root. They need to bring back the occult, the old gods, and the cool sub-plots. I remember when the air sirens went off in the first game, I thought it was quite odd. Then I read that since WWII air sirens have been a harbringer of terror for Japanese due to all the bombs that fell on their country. Interesting.

It's like the Silent Hill series forgot that the town of Silent Hill is a character, the town is quite literally alive. Look at Lost - people love that stuff.

The trailer looked too "clean" - the town looks bright and empty. It should look more used, cluttered, old - fill it up with abandoned wheelchairs and other creepy stuff.
 
review is old... OLD!! welcome to last week!!

btw if you actually read the review the text itself does not warrant the score.

They address the game's problems as if they arent staple to the series as a whole,

but when the time comes to actually enjoy the game, the game becomes enjoyable,

only thing is you still put up with your typical shiity combat, locked doors, etc.

so yeah... sounds like Silent Hill to me.

and while I'm at it... brand new trailer = hypeness!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgqWo9I-bb8

 
And apparently the Play magazine review in the UK says the following:

"The basic gist is that while the game starts off strong and the art design is (mostly) solid, the design team really dropped the ball. Naviagation and exploration is boring, and the game desolves into "a shallow, linear monster masher with a few sliding block puzzles."

Not surprising in the least.

Maybe SH6 will be good.
 
[quote name='Nephlabobo']And apparently the Play magazine review in the UK says the following:

"The basic gist is that while the game starts off strong and the art design is (mostly) solid, the design team really dropped the ball. Naviagation and exploration is boring, and the game desolves into "a shallow, linear monster masher with a few sliding block puzzles."

Not surprising in the least.

Maybe SH6 will be good.[/QUOTE]that's actually the reverse of what the OXM review said, they said the game picks up in the 2nd half but starts off slow.

and again when has Silent Hill never had those complaints? You run around and kill monsters, that's pretty much the entire game.

you play the game for an overall experience, only once you finish the game can you really make an opinion on it
 
Even the music is starting to sound like rehashes of the old stuff.

With Resident Evil no longer being a horror game after RE4 (it's now an action game), and SH5 tanking.....


Is survival horror dead?
 
I really hope this is good. Origins was good, at the very least much better than 4, so it can be done. I don't have that much faith though given impressions and the visuals, and I'm not paying $60 for a sub-10 hour game anyway, unless it's the messiah of games. Also, for what it's worth, Team Silent wanted to stop the series after 3, but Konami wanted to milk it, so that's why the thing was outsourced.
 
I, too, bemoan the death of survival horror. It's a tough one, too, since I really, really loved RE4... but I still find it hard to realize we're NEVER going to get a 'real' old-school RE ever again. They changed gears, it was hugely successful, so that's where we stay.

I had hopes for this game, and I still do, but this is likely a last gasp for the old ways of survival horror. Alone in the Dark tanked, RE has moved on, and this seems mediocre at best. Dead Space, cool as it looks, also doesn't seem to count. It's why I get annoyed when I hear that Capcom is porting REmake to the Wii... I want remakes of the other games, dammit.

I'll likely still pick this up, but it does seem that Silent Hill will remain a series that stopped being great after two games (and Origins, since that really did seem to be the sequel I always wanted).
 
why is everyone so surprised that it received such a score? look at the review of silent hill 2-4 and origins on ps2. it goes from 9-7, so the obvious would be a 6 or so. your expecting a silent hill 6, don't expect it to go anywhere but down if it stays the same, a 5 if silent hill 6 is released. they live in a stupid state when making games, when they see the first game had praise, they stick with it on the second and when that had praise, they stick with it again. it's not going to work again and again. they need to change the game. the only parts that one should play only are silent hill 1 and 3. other then that it's just a waste.

is it that survival horror is dead or is it that you have gotten too good wanting demands for change?
 
Alright... so Wal-Mart already had the tags out for this (and other stuff out this week) today, does that mean they'll be stocking tonight, or did they just do it way early in preparation for tomorrow night?
 
[quote name='007']Alright... so Wal-Mart already had the tags out for this (and other stuff out this week) today, does that mean they'll be stocking tonight, or did they just do it way early in preparation for tomorrow night?[/QUOTE]

My Target has tags for My Japanese Coach, and it got delayed to mid-October. :lol:
 
[quote name='Nephlabobo']Is survival horror dead?[/quote]

I think survival horror just evolved.

Bioshock did pretty well. Hopefully some day we'll see Alan Wake.
 
...Neither of which is survival horror.

That's the thing - the modern survival horror game is RE 4, which isn't scary. Yeah, it's damn fun, but if you just wanna be made to shit your pants, it doesn't cut it.
 
Wow, if OXM gave it a 6.5, it must be bad. I'm expecting a 5 from IGN.

Regarding the game being out tomorrow or Wednesday.. we got the strategy guides in at work today, so I am fully expecting the game tomorrow morning.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']...Neither of which is survival horror.

That's the thing - the modern survival horror game is RE 4, which isn't scary. Yeah, it's damn fun, but if you just wanna be made to shit your pants, it doesn't cut it.[/quote]

Meh, I don't see why. Are you going to tell me system shock wasn't survival horror too? IMO these games took it a step beyond Doom
 
[quote name='Chacrana']...Neither of which is survival horror.

That's the thing - the modern survival horror game is RE 4, which isn't scary. [/quote]

Then it's not horror, it's an action game. I can't believe I have to rely on the *Wii* for a good survival horror game. (Fatal Frame)
 
yea come on guys, EVERY Silent Hill game has gotten bashed and got medicore reviews, but they are all awesome. im keeping my order with amazon
 
it's definitely not a game with a universal appeal...

unless you're talking about the universal appeal of hate, everybody is welcome to jump on the hate wagon
 
[quote name='Chacrana']Well that's a fairly good bit of news. I'm still waiting for the IGN and Gamespot reviews, though.[/quote]

Why do you care about gamespot? Its like trusting amazon user reviews.
 
The 1up review is certainly more positive, I'm glad there's a proper story with a proper ending. The whole "you decide what really happened" thing is ok if done well, but a lot of times it's just a cop-out.

Sounds like the camera angles issue is fixed, and the combat is better than other SH games, which isn't really the point of a SH game anyway.
 
loltaku, proving once again they dont kno their ish

http://kotaku.com/5056995/silent-hill-homecoming-review

wtf does "Homecoming also has some of the worst water we've seen this generation" even mean?!?!?! that's sum of the dumbest shyt I've ever read in my life... and yet they pass it off as a valid complaint?!?!?!

what's worse are the comments... sum of the ppl are straight up nom nom nom nom'ing the review up

-_-

I mean they didnt say the game was bad, it's just a very poorly written review (with spoilers too... bastards!)
 
"Title: Hello, Zombie Nurse"

Oh ho ho ho, what an incomprehensibly witty title. Those Kotaku guys continue to be a source of literary merit.
 
Gamepro said pretty much the same thing.

Now matter how much you try and spin this, SH5 just doesn't live up to the franchise. Definitely *not* a day one purchase.

Kinda sad though.............
 
Why do people hate 4? I played the demo on PS2 and it was really awesome.

I would say Silent Hill 2 has one of the best game stories ever. I couldn't make it through the first game (it was hard to control and just plain hard), I've played some of 3 but I still have a while to go.
 
See... this is my issue... I don't understand how this doesn't live up to the 'franchise'.

Silent Hill was an amazing game.

Silent Hill 2 was just as amazing, with a story that is still the series highpoint.

Silent Hill 3 was mediocre at best. Long, drawn-out sections (subway) coupled with a story that wasn't particularly compelling due to creating characters that are utterly cliche (we need a new antagonist? Sister!).

Silent Hill 4 was an interesting concept that suffered from two distinct issues: first, it wasn't a Silent Hill game. Second, it had extremely broken combat and other issues (enemies that I can't kill but cause me damage ALL THE TIME? Score!) that made the game nearly unplayably hard by the end.

So, really, it's not as if this game being 'not great' is ruining anything. I'm hopeful that it may just spur the series into pulling a much needed re-invention. Otherwise, I'm actually okay with a non-groundbreaking and "not terrible" SH game. Lowered expectations have helped... I actually loved Origins, but I think a lot of that had to do with the fact that it sort of looked like the first game.

I *want* the series to be good, but I can't help but look at it and realize that it hasn't been great since the second game. Still, I'll likely pick this up tomorrow anyway, cause I'm kind of a whore like that.
 
I like how people knock it for the combat being too easy. Man, in ALL of the other games I would kick ass on the monsters with no problem. They were just as rigid and immobile as you were, so if you just kept smacking them they couldn't do anything.
 
I always hear people say that, but this is my stance: when they went to the PS2, THAT'S the kind of combat we got.

Silent Hill had enemies that were actually a threat, or at least more so than the ones in later games... especially the outside enemies. The birds and the giant ape things could kick your ass.

I remember when I first booted up SH2 and discovered the new mummy enemy. It was cool, but it only took me about 15 seconds to realize that I could EASILY outrun them, making being outside way less interesting. That trend, unfortunately, continued through 2 and 3, then 4 took that detour into 'fuck you in the ass'-ville.

Origins was, in my opinion, a step back in the right direction. Normal enemies were actually a threat again (though, the game supplied you with enough ammo that it was irrelevant anyway), so I'm hoping this continues. For what it's worth, the little demon puppets in the theater were some of the coolest and *actually* life-threatening things in the series.
 
I'm worried about reading spoilers through these reviews. I'm a pretty big Silent Hill fan. I own all the others, although I haven't played 3 yet. Has anyone mentioned which version of the game, if any, is better to get?
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Why do people hate 4? I played the demo on PS2 and it was really awesome.
[/QUOTE]

You played the demo is the problem. I could see someone liking it from a demo. The full game is an abomination.

[quote name='007']
Silent Hill had enemies that were actually a threat, or at least more so than the ones in later games... especially the outside enemies. The birds and the giant ape things could kick your ass.
[/QUOTE]
I hated those birds. Little pieces of shit. And yes, the combat in 2 and 3 is jokingly easy and you can run from literally everything except the bosses. I remember when I first played through 3 I killed a TOTAL of 13 enemies. I just ran past everything else.
 
In-store Wednesday by 2pm, my ass, CC. Oddly, Wal-Mart didn't have it in yet, either.

Only place was GS, and I just didn't feel like running over there. Oh, well, it'll give me some time to finish up Ninja Gaiden 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top