|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:56 am
 |
|
|
 |
What I was getting at, is that since the early 90's, there have been plenty of fighting games made that are better than Street Fighter 2. I still don't see why people are STILL hyped about that game. Yes, it was the first fighting game, like AITD was the first survival horror of its kind, and Tomb Raider was the first platformer of its kind. And yes, we remember them and praise them for that. But innovation HAVE been made, and there are games out there of the same genre that are more fun. It doesn't mean we have to sweep the original under the rug, but frankly, if Resident Evil 1 WAS the first survival horror, I'd still get more excited about Silent Hill 2.
I like Tomb Raider, but if I had to choose between Tomb Raider and Uncharted, conditions being that I can only play one or the other for the rest of my life, I'd sure as s**t pick Uncharted.
I'm not talking about importance, I'm talking about sheer enjoyment. Heck, it's like... Slasher films. Halloween might've been the first, but I enjoy Nightmare on Elm Street a whole lot more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:58 pm
|
|
|
|
I'm not saying I hate SFII. I just don't think any video game, no matter what it started, deserves THAT much credit. I mean, there are still organized video game tournaments out there, what do they play? Street Fighter II.
Did it do a great thing for video games? Yes. But people definitely overblow it. They say things like, "The animations are STILL perfect. The gameplay is STILL better than anything since. The art is STILL the best." No, they're really not.
Did AITD do something great for survival horror? Sure, it did. But like you said, we're not joining AITD guilds. I can't say I beat Alone in the Dark over 30 times and am still replaying it to this day.
I don't hear many people at all saying they're still playing the original Doom or Wolfenstein 3D. I don't see any organized Pong tournaments.
People often give lots of credit to Final Fantasy 5 and especially 6. But they're not saying, "Final Fantasy 1 is STILL the best RPG out there."
Acknowledge and appreciate the game that started something, but don't worship it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:27 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:49 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:02 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:29 pm
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Vankala Wow guys. I am really, really angry about what happened at Fort Hood today. If you haven't heard:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fort_hood_shooting
My cousin and her husband live there and while I'm relieved that they're okay I'm upset that this happened in the first place. You would think the security would be great, considering its an Army base, but it wasn't. Apparently, all you needed to get in is a Driver's License, so anyone could get on base. scream
I'm sorry i brough this here. I'm just really upset and frustrated about this and had to vent. Kind of ironic though, don't you think. I mean it was a freakin psychiatrist! Aren't they supposed to be... You know... Stable?
He was a Major too.
Biohazard EXTREME I'd join, if I still RPed. It's been ages, and I just can't commit the time to it anymore. Sorry, man.
Same here. I just can't get into it anymore. Damn shame, too. RPing used to be one of my favorite past times.
Biohazard EXTREME Acknowledge and appreciate the game that started something, but don't worship it.
Umm... isn't that pretty much what I was getting at in my last post...?
In the case of SFII, I think the main problem there is that the game has just never been your cup of tea in the first place. I mean, I was all hyped up for SFIV... but I also downloaded the HD Remix of SFII, and eventually I just found myself ignoring IV all together in favor of HD Remix, because, well, it's a better game (and it also didn't help that after I got my new PS3, I couldn't transfer my SFIV game data because Capcom's Jewish, so I lost all my s**t and my trophies. I only unlocked all the characters over again and I haven't touched it since). I don't know what to say. It's one of those games that's just aged well, like Tetris or Q-bert. It's the simplicity, I think. I'm not going to go so far as to say the animations are still top notch (though HD Remix's are pretty nice), but yeah, SFII gets more than enough of its due props. The main thing with the AitD VS RE thing is that AitD usually doesn't.
The way this debate always used to start was this: You'd be in some RE forum and someone would mention something about AitD offhandedly. Then someone would pipe in saying something along the lines of, "******** AitD; it's an RE clone." and then you'd reply, "Uhh, no it isn't. It's actually the other way around." -- and then there'd be this huge debate, and even when you presented the facts and they were staring these guys right in the face, they'd still refuse to accept it. They'd fall back on Sweet Home, which is a ******** joke. One time someone tried to say that the original AitD was never released in Japan, so there's no way Mikami could have seen it or even known about, which is another ******** joke. And even if Mikami didn't know about Alone in the Dark (and he did), you can't invent something that's already been done.
Yeah, RE is better. There's no dispute there. The graphics were better, it had cooler monsters, better combat mechanics, etc. And I know I ripped on the item boxes earlier, but I get it. The whole theme of RE is being a survivalist. You can only carry so much, so you have to decide what to bring with you. Sometimes you start the game with only your combat knife (essential to any survivalist), and you got the herbs and all that. So RE definitely introduced the whole "survivalist" kind of theme, but other than that, RE was just AitD all over again. And how many so-called "Survival Horror" games like Silent Hill went with RE's whole survivalist theme?
Thomas Edison invented the lightbulb. Then years down the line someone created a better lightbulb that's brighter and that can last for, like, two years without having to change it. So what's more important to that object? The guy who invented it, or the guy who improved it? Who built the foundation? Way I see it is, if there was no foundation established in the first place, there'd be nothing to build upon. So while I'll of course always take the better, more convenient, long-lasting lightbulb over the original Thomas Edison model, I think the name Thomas Edison should be more intrinsic to the lightbulb than the guy who enhanced it is. Because in the end, no matter how much more enhanced or improved it's been, it's still the lightbulb: Thomas Edison's invention, and Edison gets the credit. Rightfully so. Unfortunately, that's usually not how it is for Alone in the Dark. And that's bullshit. That's all I'm saying. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:18 pm
|
|
|
|
Although I agree with you. I think the publishers of Alone in the Dark should've given it a bit more attention. I mean, hate it or love it, Capcom's a release whore. We got RE1... Then we got Director's Cut... Then we got Director's Cut Dual Shock version... Same with RE2, then they port RE2 and RE3, and port, and port, even as far as the GameCube, which was like miles ahead graphically. But still, they pushed it and made it accessible.
AITD didn't get that kind of exposure, unfortunately. I mean, every once in a while I catch myself with the most embarrassing pieces of ignorance, but sometimes that information just isn't that accessible, you know?
I guess it's not an excuse, I just wish AITD, the first three games particularly were more accessible.
As for SF2, even if it's not my cup of tea. It's still a one of a kind case that's incomparible to anything else. As much as people loved Super Smash Brothers, they consistently moved on. To Melee, then Brawl. I honestly don't know many people who say, "The original SSB is STILL better than Melee or Brawl."
Even if Street Fighter isn't my cup of tea, just in terms of pure Street Fighter, I enjoyed Alpha more than 2. The sprites were better drawn and more fluid.
That's another comment that bothers me about SF2. They say, "It was really fast paced" but... All they do is increase the frame rate, which made the characters look awkward and twitchy.
I mean, it's hard to be more overrated than Marvel vs. Capcom 2, but somehow, Street Fighter 2 just tops it. Somehow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:20 am
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Vankala Wow guys. I am really, really angry about what happened at Fort Hood today. If you haven't heard:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fort_hood_shooting
My cousin and her husband live there and while I'm relieved that they're okay I'm upset that this happened in the first place. You would think the security would be great, considering its an Army base, but it wasn't. Apparently, all you needed to get in is a Driver's License, so anyone could get on base. scream
I'm sorry i brough this here. I'm just really upset and frustrated about this and had to vent. Kind of ironic though, don't you think. I mean it was a freakin psychiatrist! Aren't they supposed to be... You know... Stable?
Who in this entire world is EVER stable? Everyone is corruptible given the right situation. And no I'm not saying that because Joker did in the Dark Knight. I trully believe everyone is corruptible haha. But anyway....
To jump in on the SFII talk, you know I used to play the first one with my brother when I was a kid, and it had its amusements , but me and him were a lot more entertained by Mortal Kombat. You know its funny.....I'm actually GLAD that fans of the Street Fighter series, or really any series can still get excited over the older starting games because for me personally? I get very spoiled and giddy about over the top graphics and newer gaming mechanics that let you play better and ragdoll physics that are realistic. And because of that, the games I loved from years ago I find harder to appreciate it, even if I'm a huge fan of the series, because their graphics or whatever aren't what the gfx and crap are today. I still play them yes, but the same love isn't there like it was in the beginning. So if fans get hyped over the old games? All the more kudos to them.
However in some cases, I will love the game regardless of its downpixelated graphics. Mario Brothers is definitely one of them. That's how the series was born and I actually hate seeing Mario Brother games in 3D because its not the same. Haha go figure. Sometimes though, like the case of Mortal Kombat, the need to reinvent better fighting actually wasn't really needed. Their gameplay schematics was pretty thorough and straightforward as each new game came out and didn't really need a change that much so it makes it easier to love the older games because the transition into the newer ones isnt that much of a difference, aside from the 3D or graphics and more characters.
Thee Stranger, I do agree with you on your points though. I mean, Bio I agreed with some of your points as well, but let me get straight that you're saying that the older games of SF shouldn't be worshiped unless theirs a legitimate reason? I think as long as theirs a legitimate reason then why not? I mean you guys worship the older RE games, but you have legitimate reasons to that are realistic in understanding the game itself verse people just being a fangirl/fanboy and going "omg that older game is so great!"......and then on reason to back it up. But from what you've been saying, their reasons aren't legit and sounds like their just fanboying to me and in that case I can agree with you that the older SF games shouldn't be praised like that. Maybe praised for starting the genre, but that's it.
As for AITD, maybe its not as accessible because its not as popular? I mean, yeah unfortunately, since its business based and businesses are out to make money, the more popular the series, the more accessible they're going to make it. They did it with RE AND they also did it with SH. I can understand the frustration though over the fact that some games that were great....just didn't get enough praise. The old pc game, Blood, I think deserved a lot more praise. I think it even barely got touch, but in rare occasions I'll find other Blood fans. But Doom and Duke Nukem got the praise instead. Although I'm a fan of Doom as well, Blood was just....it was just amazing and I miss it. The story was great, simple, but great and the amount of monsters you had to fight was endless. It IS survival horror in the sense that 1) its ALL horror based and 2) You never got enough ammo haha. I mean you start out the game not with a knife, but a pitch fork because your main character comes back from the dead and he starts in a graveyard area. Haha and it corse it has a shot gun, but it also had a lot more awesome weapons to choose as you advanced through the game. The movements were fast paced, and there was comedy in it too. They put in a lot of quotes or jokes off of Shakespeare or some of the lines were just classic. Everytime Caleb (the main character) would beat a boss, he would say something epic. When you defeat the spider boss he says "Along came a spider who sat down beside her and said what's in the bowl b***h?" And when you defeat the three headed dog boss he says, "Rest in Pieces" because when he dies he blows up in "pieces" haha. So yeah...its a classic game that should have been looked into a lot more. In fact that game even had multiplayer online capabilities to where someone could play with you through the levels. tsk tsk....was done by Monolith Productions who also did F.E.A.R. 2 which I have yet to buy. I'm so glad to know that at least Monolith Productions is still working on games. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:32 am
|
|
|
|
SaintChaos To jump in on the SFII talk, you know I used to play the first one with my brother when I was a kid, and it had its amusements , but me and him were a lot more entertained by Mortal Kombat. You know its funny.....I'm actually GLAD that fans of the Street Fighter series, or really any series can still get excited over the older starting games because for me personally? I get very spoiled and giddy about over the top graphics and newer gaming mechanics that let you play better and ragdoll physics that are realistic. And because of that, the games I loved from years ago I find harder to appreciate it, even if I'm a huge fan of the series, because their graphics or whatever aren't what the gfx and crap are today. I still play them yes, but the same love isn't there like it was in the beginning. So if fans get hyped over the old games? All the more kudos to them.
In fact... I think I just had a revalation. That's all it is! Street Fighter 2 is the Final Fantasy 7 of fighting games. That makes me feel a lot better.
I mean, if FF7 had any kind of multiplayer mode, I'm positive they'd be having organized tournaments of it to this day.
SaintChaos However in some cases, I will love the game regardless of its downpixelated graphics. Mario Brothers is definitely one of them. That's how the series was born and I actually hate seeing Mario Brother games in 3D because its not the same. Haha go figure. Sometimes though, like the case of Mortal Kombat, the need to reinvent better fighting actually wasn't really needed. Their gameplay schematics was pretty thorough and straightforward as each new game came out and didn't really need a change that much so it makes it easier to love the older games because the transition into the newer ones isnt that much of a difference, aside from the 3D or graphics and more characters.
SaintChaos Thee Stranger, I do agree with you on your points though. I mean, Bio I agreed with some of your points as well, but let me get straight that you're saying that the older games of SF shouldn't be worshiped unless theirs a legitimate reason? I think as long as theirs a legitimate reason then why not? I mean you guys worship the older RE games, but you have legitimate reasons to that are realistic in understanding the game itself verse people just being a fangirl/fanboy and going "omg that older game is so great!"......and then on reason to back it up. But from what you've been saying, their reasons aren't legit and sounds like their just fanboying to me and in that case I can agree with you that the older SF games shouldn't be praised like that. Maybe praised for starting the genre, but that's it.
SaintChaos As for AITD, maybe its not as accessible because its not as popular? I mean, yeah unfortunately, since its business based and businesses are out to make money, the more popular the series, the more accessible they're going to make it. They did it with RE AND they also did it with SH. I can understand the frustration though over the fact that some games that were great....just didn't get enough praise. The old pc game, Blood, I think deserved a lot more praise. I think it even barely got touch, but in rare occasions I'll find other Blood fans. But Doom and Duke Nukem got the praise instead. Although I'm a fan of Doom as well, Blood was just....it was just amazing and I miss it. The story was great, simple, but great and the amount of monsters you had to fight was endless. It IS survival horror in the sense that 1) its ALL horror based and 2) You never got enough ammo haha. I mean you start out the game not with a knife, but a pitch fork because your main character comes back from the dead and he starts in a graveyard area. Haha and it corse it has a shot gun, but it also had a lot more awesome weapons to choose as you advanced through the game. The movements were fast paced, and there was comedy in it too. They put in a lot of quotes or jokes off of Shakespeare or some of the lines were just classic. Everytime Caleb (the main character) would beat a boss, he would say something epic. When you defeat the spider boss he says "Along came a spider who sat down beside her and said what's in the bowl b***h?" And when you defeat the three headed dog boss he says, "Rest in Pieces" because when he dies he blows up in "pieces" haha. So yeah...its a classic game that should have been looked into a lot more. In fact that game even had multiplayer online capabilities to where someone could play with you through the levels. tsk tsk....was done by Monolith Productions who also did F.E.A.R. 2 which I have yet to buy. I'm so glad to know that at least Monolith Productions is still working on games.
And that's what Horror should be judged by, shouldn't it? The scare factor. And if the gameplay mechanics are functional, and the graphics are solid at least, then it should be the most highly regarded.
Now, if you look at games like Silent Hill 3, I think as far as scares, graphics and gameplay go, it's the pinnacle of the Survival Horror genre.
But somehow the majority always said, "No, Resident Evil is better." which usually is followed by the statement, "It's the origin of Survival Horror."
Which makes Stranger's frustrations more justifiable.
But even when I WAS crazy about Resident Evil, back in 2003/2004 when I basically lived and breathed Resident Evil, I still acknowledged that Resident Evil was neither the first, nor the best. I loved it for what I loved, the concepts and conventions. It was perfect to me, in that manner. It had a conspiring organization, a deadly virus, genetic research, military guys... I loved all of that. But I never deluded myself into the idea that any of the Resident Evil games were scarier than or had generally better graphics than Silent Hill. When referring to the previous generation, (PS2, Xbox, GameCube) other than REmake, I don't think any Resident Evil game looks better than Silent Hill 3. Not RE0, not Outbreak, and obviously not Dead Aim or Code Veronica. And if we're talking about scares... Well, even if you consider "scary" and "creepy" two different things, I'd say any of the first three Silent Hills, and heck, even Silent Hill 4 are both more creepy and more scary than any Resident Evil I've played.
So, Resident Evil neither started, not perfected Survival Horror. All it did was popularize it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:22 am
|
|
|
|
Quote: I think the problem with giving the credit to RE over AITD is because... We're talking about something that started it, and something that perfected it. And even if you disregard the fact that I hate RE4 and RE5, even if they didn't exist... After Silent Hill came along, Resident Evil stopped being the best Survival Horror game. As much as I love the RE classics... Even after playing my very first Silent Hill game, I acknowledged that RE is NOT the best horror game. I started loving RE for its concepts, Umbrella Corporation, T-Virus, genetic research, military organizations... Those are the kinds of things that I LOVE. And that's why I loved Resident Evil. But since I played Silent Hill, I knew that Silent Hill was both scarier, had better artistic direction, better graphics... And even then, even though I'm not really into games like Fatal Frame, what I played of it, was freaky as hell, and even though I didn't beat it, if I had, it may have proven that Fatal Frame is even scarier than Silent Hill. And that's what Horror should be judged by, shouldn't it? The scare factor. And if the gameplay mechanics are functional, and the graphics are solid at least, then it should be the most highly regarded. Now, if you look at games like Silent Hill 3, I think as far as scares, graphics and gameplay go, it's the pinnacle of the Survival Horror genre. But somehow the majority always said, "No, Resident Evil is better." which usually is followed by the statement, "It's the origin of Survival Horror." Which makes Stranger's frustrations more justifiable. But even when I WAS crazy about Resident Evil, back in 2003/2004 when I basically lived and breathed Resident Evil, I still acknowledged that Resident Evil was neither the first, nor the best. I loved it for what I loved, the concepts and conventions. It was perfect to me, in that manner. It had a conspiring organization, a deadly virus, genetic research, military guys... I loved all of that. But I never deluded myself into the idea that any of the Resident Evil games were scarier than or had generally better graphics than Silent Hill. When referring to the previous generation, (PS2, Xbox, GameCube) other than REmake, I don't think any Resident Evil game looks better than Silent Hill 3. Not RE0, not Outbreak, and obviously not Dead Aim or Code Veronica. And if we're talking about scares... Well, even if you consider "scary" and "creepy" two different things, I'd say any of the first three Silent Hills, and heck, even Silent Hill 4 are both more creepy and more scary than any Resident Evil I've played. So, Resident Evil neither started, not perfected Survival Horror. All it did was popularize it.
Now wait a second. We're talking two different things here. There's a difference between "horror" and "terror". Instead of me going on a tangent on the difference between, I'm going to assume you're a smart guy and you get what I want to say without having to say it. But on your comment of judging horror based on what scares you? Not all horror games have scare factors in them. And they're just as good. And I know games thats mainly terror, but not horror and its just as good. Then there's games with both. So it depends on what you want to judge. And what scares people is completely subjective. I don't find the RE games that scary at all. Big clunky monsters can be creepy yeah, but scary? Nah. But zombies have never scared me. They make me laugh. But ghosts however....at least you can see a zombie and most of the time know where one is if its nearby, by the obvious groaning or in RE 5's case, a random hug attack from behind. Haha. But ghosts? they came out of nowhere, and i know zombies can too, but ghosts come through walls or ceilings or maybe out of your a** (jk). And i guns aren't going to kill them. so personally, i find ghosts more scary then something physically tangible to fight.
everything else you said though i agree with. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:28 am
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Although I agree with you. I think the publishers of Alone in the Dark should've given it a bit more attention. I mean, hate it or love it, Capcom's a release whore. We got RE1... Then we got Director's Cut... Then we got Director's Cut Dual Shock version... Same with RE2, then they port RE2 and RE3, and port, and port, even as far as the GameCube, which was like miles ahead graphically. But still, they pushed it and made it accessible.
Well, I think I've said this before, but AitD got plenty attention when it first came out. It was very popular. I mean, it never reached RE's level with its rabid fanbase or anything, of course, but it was definitely in the mainstream spotlight. It had the exposure. I can remember a time when everybody was talking about it. And I think the original AitD was pretty accessible for its day. I mean, it came out during the 90s PC adventure game heyday. That's essentially what it was... an evolution of the adventure game. As unique as it was for the time, you can still see that it bears a lot of the conventions and staples of that genre. But yeah, I mean, AitD was made by a pretty small company. Infogrames certianly doesn't carry the weight or the finances that Capcom does. And that's a testiment to Capcom's marketing when their advertisements for RE effectively labled the entire genre. I think the main problem with AitD, though, was that both of its sequels were pretty lackluster compared to the original, and then RE came out and pretty much just blew it away. And as much as Capcom loves to REhash their old games over and over again, Resident Evil only got better with its sequels, and kept adding innovations to the formula. AitD never really did, so there was never any reason to go back.
Biohazard EXTREME AITD didn't get that kind of exposure, unfortunately. I mean, every once in a while I catch myself with the most embarrassing pieces of ignorance, but sometimes that information just isn't that accessible, you know?
I hear ya. The same s**t happens to me every now and then. s**t, happened to me just last night, but I'll get into that in a second. I don't think anybody should be chastised because they aren't aware of something. However, when they are informed, they should acknowledge it. I've encountered too many RE fanboys who refuse to acknowledge AitD, simply because they love Resident Evil and don't give a s**t about Alone in the Dark. They don't want to take anything away from their beloved RE. Well, I'm not saying you have to give too much of a s**t about AitD, just acknowledge what it did. Just say, "hey, I'm glad Alone in the Dark happened, because had it not, RE as we know (well, knew) it today probably wouldn't be." And I'm not saying to take anything away from RE. We all know what it did, and it did a lot, but don't give it credit where it isn't due.
Anyway, back to embarrassing pieces of ignorance. I just found this great article on IGN last night covering the history of Survival Horror. Now, I know you hate IGN, Bio. But really, this guy, or whoever the hell wrote this article, knows his s**t. It's a good article. I wish I had the little piece of information this article divulges back in the day when I was arguing with the particular fanboys I mentioned earlier. The main reason it was always so difficult is because Mikami has never once mentioned or credited Alone in the Dark as influencing Resident Evil. I always thought, "someone along the line has just had to have just asked the guy point-blank about Alone in the Dark in an interview somewhere". But I could never find any such thing. Like, I could sometimes find an interview where he made, like, vague comparisons between the two games, but never anything concrete. Well, turns out EGM (and that was my main mag; shame it's gone) posed that question, and I quote:
IGN A proud Japanese developer, Mikami is quiet about the extent to which he was influenced by a French computer game. When asked about his inspirations, he is quick to volunteer Sweet Home – a game conveniently made by his employer. For this reason, Sweet Home is often considered a progenitor of the genre – and indeed it was a relevant game – but the Alone in the Dark influence was far more obvious. Even before Resident Evil's release, the comparisons were frequent.
Despite borrowing its controls, gameplay foundations, and the signature blend of pre-rendered backgrounds and 3D characters, Mikami didn't seem to have a great deal of reverence for Alone in the Dark. Just as Shigeru Miyamoto downplays the impact of Pac-Land on Super Mario Bros by explaining all of the ways he improved upon it, Mikami was similarly quick to point out how much his game diverged in terms of tone and visual style. "I wanted to create a really scary game," Mikami said in a 1996 interview with EGM's Ed Semrad, "no ghosts or crap like that, but real monsters you could see that would come and attack." When asked specifically how his game would differ from Alone in the Dark, he remarked simply, "The graphics kick a**."
Hah. xd Anyway, here's the link to the full article: History of Survival Horror
Pages 3 and 4 are of particular interest, because it gets really in depth into the whole AitD VS RE thing, and the history and development and everything, but it also gets into a few games that predate AitD that even I wasn't aware of, like Project Firestart.
Biohazard EXTREME As for SF2, even if it's not my cup of tea. It's still a one of a kind case that's incomparible to anything else. As much as people loved Super Smash Brothers, they consistently moved on. To Melee, then Brawl. I honestly don't know many people who say, "The original SSB is STILL better than Melee or Brawl." Even if Street Fighter isn't my cup of tea, just in terms of pure Street Fighter, I enjoyed Alpha more than 2. The sprites were better drawn and more fluid. That's another comment that bothers me about SF2. They say, "It was really fast paced" but... All they do is increase the frame rate, which made the characters look awkward and twitchy. I mean, it's hard to be more overrated than Marvel vs. Capcom 2, but somehow, Street Fighter 2 just tops it. Somehow.
Haha, well, I don't know. I like both of those games. Like I said, with Street Fighter 2, I think it's the simplicity. Alpha and SFIII added a lot of new mechanics that made the gameplay a bit too complicated for some. But yeah, they definitely looked better than SFII. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
