Akira Yamaoka is 40 tomorrow, Feb 6th.  Since it's already the 6th in Japan, here it is early.  Happy birthday to him!

And yes, I thought he was younger than that too.

-Mike

Happy birthday from me too!

Have been listening to the new Silent Hill Zero OST a lot these last few days, will be posting my thoughts on that album in a few days.

He doesn't quite look 40 and that's good.

I'm probably not as Yamaoka fanatical as I was back in 2005 and 2006 when I first discovered Silent Hill and the music, but every now and then I like to bust out his other works including Shin Contra. His work on Silent Hill 1~3 (especially 2) is unforgettably marvelous sound production.

Truth be told, I never really dug iFutureList or much of what he's been doing outside of Silent Hill lately, but I still keep my eye on him. I can't wait to hear the Silent Hill Zero and SH5 soundtracks -- I'll need to get a PSP and a PS3 to play both games since I'm also a series regular.

I am amazed at how young some of my favorites are. Not too big on Yamaoka, by virtue of not usually playing the games he's associated with, but I hear so much about him that I might be inclined to check his works out.

I guess it's the time to ask. Are the Silent Hill games worth playing through, at all? I played an hour of the first two, but didn't really progress . . .

I'm pretty sure there's some kind of Law against not having played any Silent Hills in this day and age.
There should be at least.

The first one was great, excellent atmosphere, and scary as all Hell, but the soundtrack wasn't very interesting I thought. It's pretty much industrial music all the way, with some very sparse melodic stuff here and there.
The story was really deep, but you have to read a synopsis of it to make any sense of it, cos the game does a pisspoor job of explaining, well, ANYTHING.

The Second one, well, it is to this day probably the game that is mentioned most when people talk of excellent story-telling in videogames. I certainly have never seen it done better. It is a very emotional, shocking, deep, depressing and most of all Beautiful story of a man searching for his presumed dead wife in Silent Hill, after recieving a letter from her. The soundtrack has been hailed by many as the best in the series, matching the emotionally intense nature of the story and the somewhat unsettling serenity of an abandoned fog-consumed town. Not as scary as its predecessor but top quality stuff all the way to the end anyway. You OWE it to yourself to play this game.

As for 3, not many people seemed to like it. The story is rather dumb, that's for sure, the female protagonist that so many fans had been clamoring for was a bit too cocky for me to care about, but I totally loved the soundtrack, and as far as atmosphere and disturbing imagery go, this one is my favorite by FAR. Puzzles on Hard Mode will melt your brain.

And 4!? Well, I think our old friend Jay likes it, making it a total of....1....person I have ever heard say that.
The soundtrack is again great, but you'd actually have to BUY the CD to be able to listen to it, because hardly any of the music is actually in the game.
But the gameplay was a mess of frustrating elements. Limited Inventory a la RE (none of the previous SH games have limitations), invincible Ghost enemies that come throw walls and doors to hunt you, and they will hurt you just by being CLOSE to you, they don't even have to touch you,  and then, when you think you've played through all the levels, the game makes you go through all of them AGAIN, but this time dragging an NPC with you whilst  being followed around by another undefeatable lunatic.
The story was decent, if somewhat far-fetched, the First Person bits in your appartment are pretty cool, and I'll admit, the Water Prison is one of the most original "dungeons" I've seen in a survival horror game, but other than that, I hated it, played it once, never touched it again.

But like I said, get SH2.
NOW.

Oh and, Happy Bday, Yamaoka-san!

SH3 is my favorite actually...
I love everything about it... the settings, the story, the characters, the music, etc.
I think Heather is actually by far the most likable main character in the series, and Douglas is great too.

"Pisspoor" is a word with negative connotations, implying that you thought the fact that SH1 doesn't serve the entire story to the player neatly on a plate is a bad thing. If so, I disagree strongly. I thought one of the most awesome things about SH1 was exactly this "pisspoor" aspect. SH1 is much darker and more hardcore than its sequels, and one of the reasons for this is its story, which was intentionally made obscure and ambiguous to enhance the feeling of confusion and alienation the player experiences in the game. I tell you this: if SH1 had explained everything and tidied all loose ends up, it would have been much worse of a game. The way the story messes with your mind and confuses the hell out of you is brilliantly done, and adds immensely more to the overall experience than any of the monsters or bosses. To make a simple but close-to-hand analogy, its like in horror movies that have great atmospheres as long as they keep you in the dark and don't show the monster (or whatever) - once its out of the closet and everything is "explained" and neatly categorized (in other words: dealt with in a safe way), all the steam and atmosphere evaporates. This is exactly what happened to the Silent Hill-series from SH3 and onwards. The creators of the SH-games forgot what made the series so awesome in the first place: the unique atmosphere. Incredibly ironic, as I recall reading an interview with some of them back in 1998 (before SH1 was released) were they accused Resident Evil of "going Hollywood" and leaving the horror genre and becoming a straight action game (which is true). Funny when you consider that this is the way the Silent Hill-series has taken since SH3, and its a way that fits it very badly, as it can't really compete with RE as an action game.

SH2 is still very good as you mention, but SH3 was the first nail in the series coffin. By going back to the first game and "explaining" it, it not only seemed dumb in itself for lacking its own story, but did real damage to the experience of the first game as well. SH Origins is even worse: like SH3 wasn't enough, they're going back again to throw even more "light" on it. Not only are they unable to come up with any new story or characters, but they have to milk this cow for all its worth and in that process throw shit on the few games they actually got right (the first two).

I liked SH3 as a game, it was very well-done, and I enjoyed playing it, but it just wasn't the same as the first two. Parts of it felt like a parody of the earlier games, and the story and some of the conversations were just so dumb. Its hard to believe it was done by the same people who crafted SH2's perfect tale. SH3 marks the point where gore for the sake of gore - a sure sign of desperation and lack of ideas - became dominant in the series.

SH4 - now here it started getting really shaky. The game-play got worse, and the game is just such a half-baked mess in so many ways (no wonder, it was developed in less than a year's time). I do like aspects of it, though. The story is kinda quirky, but it has a strong surreal charm, and its leagues above SH3's. At times, SH4 was kind of a dark, twisted Alice in Wonderland-type of story, and to its credit, it featured new characters in stead of leeching off the first game as SH3 and SH0 did. However, the characters were all pretty boring ad one-dimensional. Looking back at it, I now realize that SH4 was the point were I started have strong doubts about the series.

SH Origins... The less said, the better. I feel this game completes the process of SH 3 & 4, that of turning the series into a mindless stock survival horror affair where you control a guy running around in abandoned buildings beating up strange creatures. Nothing wrong with that, just not what I expected after the first two games.

That the series has been handed over to various American development teams really shows that its not the same thing anymore. The only thing still alive in this series is the music, which is excellent as always.

Sorry for the bitter rant, I just have strong feelings for this series, and its sad to see what its become, because its really rare to find works of art like the first two SH games. I guess SH has become just another "franchise" (exactly the right word). I knew it was inevitable - I just hoped it would take a little longer than it did.

My suggestions to Idolores and others not familiar with the games: check out SH 1 & 2, and all the soundtracks. The music in SH has such a strong stand-alone quality that you really don't have to play any of the games to enjoy it (like Amazingu pointed out, hardly any of the music on the SH4 OST CD was actually in the game to begin with, but its still awesome).

Yes times ten. I highly recommend SH2 for the epitome of SH gameplay/atmosphere, and if you like that you should go back and then play SH1 and SH3 back-to-back to get the main story and backbone of the series. SH4 is up to you, but I don't recommend playing that until you've played the first three so you can see what the series is all about - then fire it up and form your own opinion. Personally, I wasn't too crazy about it, but I know a couple of people that really enjoy it.

And a happy birthday to Yamaoka! I need to find some cake.

Totally agree with you on SH1 and 3, Daniel. SH1 could be interpreted almost an infinite amount of ways and there was no right answer. It was entirely possible that all or none of that game happened. That's one of the things that made it great.

SH3, on the other hand, was like an episode of Buffy or what I imagine Charmed to be like, though I never made it through a full episode of that. It had awful cartoon characters and a linear dull story of an evil cult. Early teenage cack basically. Looked lovely of course.

Though I actually enjoyed 4 and Origins, even with all their many faults.

One of the reasons why Konami didn't explain the first game (other than what DK* mentioned) is that there is no way that the ESRB would have allowed a game to come out that blatantly went into detail about all of the dark and morbid things that go on in the first SH. It's noted in the plot guide that Dan Birlew wrote that the censorship and just what could get bypassed by the ratings board was what sculpted the "pisspoor" way that things were explained. I do agree with both Amazingu and DK**, though. It would have been nice to have at least a little more explanation as the game progressed, but at the same time it really did enhance the confusion and total WTF Factor of the game.

That said, if it wasn't for SH, I wouldn't have started digging around into plot guides and deep FAQs about the series. I'm at a point where I have read and re-read the SH1 and 2 plot guides so many times that I can practically recite them from memory. Here's the FAQ if you haven't read it... I read this more than just about any other piece of literature that I have:

http://db.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/file … l_plot.txt

Personally, I really enjoyed the game and having some continuation and throwback to the first game was really cool for me, but they could have downplayed it a little more and left it somewhat ambiguous like the first title. But as you said, it was very well done and I'll bet that fans of the first two will surely enjoy it if they haven't played it yet. Although, fighting a giant penis with teeth still makes me feel a little uncomfortable***.

Did you ever finish SH4, man? I made it to the crucial "halfway" point and then maybe put in another 10-20 minutes before just giving up. I was hoping and expecting the same type of formula from the game, but the four things that killed it for me were: 1) ghosts, 2) inventory management, 3) the slight change after the "halfway" mark, and 4) instant death from you-know-who. If even a couple of those above things were changed or omitted, I'm sure I would have stuck with it to the end.

As far as SH Zero goes, I only made it to the second real "level" in the game - the Asylum - and ended up giving it up because I wasn't getting that SH atmosphere from the PSP. I was going to pick up the PS2 port so I could play it in a proper atmosphere, but now I'm not so sure... reading your points about it now I'm not so sure. Maybe I should just let the series' story stay where it is with me: SH1, 2 and 3.

The SH series are some of my favorite OSTs of all time and as I beat the hell out of this dead horse I'm just going to say it: even if you don't like the games, check out the soundtracks. All of them. Even though they are all connected in one way or another, each one has its own vibe... and they all rule.

* Can I even call you that?
** Ah, crap, did it again.
*** I wish I was joking about this.

The cake is a lie...

Sorry, just couldn't help myself.

Yeah, you can call me DK, no problem.

The question is: is the plot guide's explanation true? I too love Dan Birlew's plot guides for the first two SH games, but sometimes I feel he's too quick to draw conclusions. Its been years since I read them, but if I recall correctly, he mentions somewhere that while writing the guide for SH2 he was in contact with Team Silent, and also asked them about how close his interpretation of SH1 was to what they had originally intended. He got some vague answer (probably distorted through translation back and forth) that "yes, that is correct". I feel this is kind of a weak brush-aside answer since they probably didn't want to discuss a previous game's story with someone who's supposed to write the guide for the second game (its also possible that he talked with someone who was heavily involved in SH2's development but hadn't been much so with SH1). Anyway, those are kind of the vibes I get from the common explanation offered retrospectively for SH1, as you quoted:

Question: Is this Konami's official position? Or is it just Birlew's own speculation? In both cases, I find the conclusion severely lacking. Let me explain why.

If Birlew just assumes this personally, its obviously just speculation. He speculates a lot like that throughout the guides, most of the times its very good and thought-provoking stuff, but sometimes it lacks foundation. He claims for example (I think it was in the FAQ section of the SH2 plot guide, not sure) that they couldn't depict James' suicide in the "In Water" ending of SH2 because Sony wouldn't let the developers portray a suicide on their console. However, there have been other such scenes in other games, for example a very disturbing shotgun suicide in Forbidden Siren 1. Its entirely possible that the assumption about ESRB is similarly unfounded speculation.

Birlew's speculation aside, Konami has really been trying to drive home one interpretation of SH1's story through SH3 and SH0. Personally, I don't believe what we're seeing "explained" to us in SH 3 & 0 was their original intention. My case here is much weaker, its their series after all and their call to make, but it just doesn't ring true to me. Whatever they say, its entirely possible that they originally made SH1 one way, then changed their minds as to what the game was all about when the need arose in SH3 to "tie together" the storyline. This has happened many times in different series (just witness IGA's pathetic attempts to bring order to the chronological chaos that is the 20+-games Castlevania universe - just leave it already and focus on actually making a good non-portable game!). As more and more new fans flocked to the series to see what all the fuss was about, there was a real need to hook them up with a simple, easy-to-swallow lowdown of what SH1 was all about (since most of them couldn't be bothered to pick up an old PS1 game to see for themselves, which is just their own sad loss). The possibility also exists that the staff has changed considerably during the course of the series, which of course effects the way that the back-story is re-interpreted  in subsequent games. I wouldn't be surprised if Yamaoka is the only person from SH1 still left in the development of the series. Oh, wait.... I guess he is, since every aspect of SH0 except the soundtrack was made in the US! Case in point.

From what I've read in developer's interviews over the years and the twists and turns in the games themselves, I really get the feeling that SH1 was originally intended to be something else that what Konami's "franchising" has today made it. The story's presentation wasn't "pisspoor", and it wasn't intended to bypass censors to any large degree. I really think the original game was fully intended to be ambiguous and hard-to-get, purposely obscure and vague. The rebellious, "punky" style of early developer's interviews and the draconian style of everything in SH1 convinces me that this was intended to be a thinking man's horror game, the antitheses of RE's "Hollywood". We can see traces of this intention still lingering in SH2: it had a much more straight-forward story, but there were still lots of things left unsaid, stuff the player had to figure out on his/her own. In SH3 and every subsequent game (as well as the movie, perhaps the worst offender in this) this was gone with the wind, and that is perhaps what I miss most in the series today.

??? I don't remember anything like that. Care to specify? (When I think about it though, there were a lot of strange objects in that game that could've been interpreted in different ways... ).

Yeah, I did. I actually got all the endings. SH4 isn't as bad as people say, but its hardly mindblowing either. I think reason why I tend to play "devil's advocate" for it is because my brother (who also like SH) absolutely hates it with a passion, and that has forced me to see some of the game's good points. I still feel the apartment aspect of it is great, even though it could have used some more work. It created a very specific, strange atmosphere.

SH Zero isn't really a bad game. It just didn't give me anything, it felt just like an ordinary horror game, which is why I was disappointed with it. It felt very far removed from what I experienced with SH 1 & 2. I agree too that the PSP format totally wrecked the atmosphere: if you're thinking about playing it again, you should definitely go for the coming PS2 version.

Yeah, I think you're right about him talking with Team Silent. Maybe they weren't able to publicly speak about the game? Either way, I do think that his guide does provide some solid ground for speculation, and I agree with most of it.

Could be. A few years went by between SH2 and the game you mentioned, so maybe there was some leniency in their decision? Or it could be just speculation. Games were different back in 1999 as far as content and censorship goes, I feel, so his claim about the plot having to be implied does make sense.

RETCON! RETCON! Mortal Kombat does that about 40 times per game release (because they need to... because the stories are awful). But going back to what I said in my last post, maybe it's better to just keep whatever the story is to me and not dig deeper into SH Zero for plot points. I don't like how they were inferring that Alessa was an evil little bitch in school, like in the movie. That wasn't the case at all when she was a kind in the original SH, IIRC. Wasn't she an outcast who was always picked on? A recluse? I can't remember if it was SH1 or SH3, but I remember walking into a classroom and remember seeing a desk that had the words "WITCH" and stuff carved in it. I want to say that it was in the last part of SH1, but I'm not positive. Maybe I should go back and play it again.

Yeah, I think that the boss fight in the mall with the splitworm was essentially a giant weiner with some cuspids. This isn't exactly the best pic of it because of the angle, but I think you'll see what I mean. That entire fight is metaphorical to being in the womb to me. Basically, Heather in in the basement in a very run-down, fleshy room, which I feel is symbolic of a uterus or womb. Heather is in that room (representing what is inside of her womb), and that giant cockmonster is thrusting and and out of those holes in the wall, making for a very sexual boss fight. I can't really put it into words, but the themes of evil and/or sexuality, as well as duality, are huge overtones in that scene.

I may have to go back to this one and try it again. I can't remember too much off the top of my head... obviously the Hole in the wall, and some enemies and the golf-swing style melee combat. I do remember being aggravated more than I have ever been with an SH game, which is usually never. We'll see, though. I've been much more patient with games these days once I get into them, so maybe I'll find something I like.

Quick personal sidenote, DK - I think you were the one that posted about the Demento OST a while back. I've been into a lot of ambient and creepy music recently, mainly RE4, DMC and some of the spooky stuff from Michigan and RE Umbrella Chronicles. Do you still dig the album and recommend it?

I think I have most respect for Yamaoka because of his capacity for sound programming and everything associated with it. It's also impressive he is able to adopt producer roles on the Silent Hill games and films, though I'm not sure if the decline in the series could be partly attributed to him. I don't like his attitude on interviews, but I've heard a lot of it is an act anyway and his willingness to state controversial opinions is kinda refreshing.

The only Yamaoka work that I really enjoy is iFUTURELIST, however. Very quirky fun album with lots of stand-out tracks. I find his Silent Hill works quite overrated but still enjoyable enough, but I've never played the games so that's probably why they're impersonal to me. I liked how he preserved the intense sound of Contra: Shattered Soldier, but preferred Fujimori's tracks and most other additions to the series.

A lot of people seem to think Yamaoka's career started in 1999 because his earlier works aren't exactly well-known. Has anyone here heard Poyters' Point, Lightning Legend, Road Rage, or Kensei: Sacred Fist by him?

I remember reading an interview somewhere with him where he said that he was one of the best sound programmers in the business or something like that. He's a cocky dude, but I'll be damned if I don't love it. To me, he talks a lot of talk, but he also walks one hell of a walk. It's good to see someone else digging iFUTURELIST, too.

All of your points are valid and good.

Maybe this is the best thing to do. I maintain my view that SH1 was originally intended to be as ambiguous and confusing as it came across as being to most people, and personally, I thought that was one of the game's great strengths. The fact that Konami from SH3 and onwards decided on one of multiple explanations and then ran with it I find unfortunate, as they've really painted themselves into a corner now and pigeonholed the entire series. Since SH3 and SH0 are so blatantly and obviously about "evil cult" stuff rather than the psychological aspects present in both SH 1 & 2, they have pretty much determined that the rest of the series will continue to go in this direction, thereby limiting it severely and snuffing out the breath of fresh air that the wonderful ambiguity of the first two games managed to create. I definitely agree with Jay's description of SH3's story as juvenile Buffyesque "occult" stuff, and it seems like this is increasingly the fate of the entire series (as both SH4 and SH Zero proves).

I think it was in both games, actually.

Also, I totally forgot about the worm boss fight from SH3.

That depends... I still like the Demento OST, but I think the reason for that is that I've since played the game and have memories to associate the music with. Not sure if I would have still liked it as much if I hadn't played the game. Its an OK ambient/horror score, but it tends to get boring after a while. You could download and sample a few tracks if you want. I guess the one-sentence review for this would be "Very weird abstract ambient horror-score, but still very calm".

EDIT: Also, sorry to the_miker for hijacking the thread like this.

Likewise, man. This has been a great way to have some fun and talk about some good gaming this morning.

I'll go stream some tracks and maybe I'll end up picking it up. I dig abstract and calm, so we'll see.

Hah, are you kidding?! He's played 'em all, and I'm sure that once he gets home from work he'll have plenty to say about it.

Guilty! Borrowed the first one once but never got a round to playing it.

Not plenty, but I have a little.  First, wow!  I didn't expect my little Happy Birthday post to spawn all this talk about Silent Hill.  I'm glad to see so many people have such strong opinions on the series, as it's easily the one series of video games closest to my heart.  I do somewhat agree with Daniel K (I won't call you DK ) about the series being murdered by the new American and European development teams.  It's kinda sad when you think about it, cause Team Silent really made some masterpieces back in the day.  I'm talking about Silent Hill 1 through 3 of course.  No video game, or even movie or TV series for that matter, has ever affected me as much as Silent Hill 2 has.  The story, characters, music, sounds, and just the general psychological feel of the entire game really brings that one home for me.

MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR SILENT HILL 2 BELOW, HIGHLIGHT WITH CAUTION

Going back to what Daniel K said about the series going down hill lately.  I'll give one big example for me: It's very sad to see the best "villain" from the series being pimped out so often lately.  I'm talking about Pyramid Head obviously.  He was in the movie, and now he gets referenced to in SH Origins with the OST cover/artwork and a painting in the game itself.  He might be in the game more than that, I really can't say for sure yet as I haven't been able to bring myself to finish it.  In SH2, the way I see it anyway, Pyramid Head was used as a way for punishing James for his sin.  Pyramid Head was James' physical representation of his guilt which kept coming back to remind him of what he did (every time Pyramid Head "killed" Maria in the game, symbolizing how James killed his wife).  Therefore, Pyramid Head should only exist in James' version of the town and should not exist in Rose's or Travis' story.  Man, Zane was right.. I could definitely go on and on about this, haha.  To sum up though cause I don't wanna ramble.. SH1-3 were the good old days, it started to go a little south with SH4 and the movie, and now it's pretty much hitting rock bottom with Origins and SH5 which is shaping up to be a Jacob's Ladder ripoff with more guns.  I hope they prove me wrong about SH5 cause we need a comeback from these past few entries in the series.  Ah well, at least the music is always brilliant and Akira has some say in what makes it into the games.

I'll end with this..

SH2 > SH1 > SH3 > SH4 > SH0

-Mike

BAM! Excellent point, dude. Here, have some spearmint gum:

http://www.sweetiesonline.com.au/produc … armint.jpg

I've only completed the first two (played a little bit of part three, but not enough to comment on it), but I've always liked the first game more for the quality that Daniel K mentioned.  Also, the world itself feels more open, and the progression less linear.  Those aspects allow me to enjoy the gameplay more.  SH2 is like a more melodramatic and linear version of the insanity that was SH1.  It's also good, but in a different way.

The music in the games is different as well, though they're both good.  Once again, SH2 is more 'normal' and straightfoward in that department.  The music is more listenable and it tends to be more calming than unsettling.  SH1's music was just as befitting of its game world, but it's less listenable on album, and so sometimes it seems to me like it doesn't get the appreciation that it should, especially since SH2 was more influential on where the music and the games would go.  It's one of those situations where I feel like some people view SH1 as a mere stepping stone to what they consider the peak of the series, both musically and as a game.  I feel like such a view overlooks the unique qualities of the first game and score.  Well-crafted though the second game may be, the first game and score possess their own merits seperate from the merits of SH2.  Crazed nurses aside, SH1 was simply a title with a slightly different vision of Silent Hill than the one which SH2 put forth.  A version that emphasized chaos and mystery over the emotion of tortured souls.

Basically, the world of Silent Hill is more the focus of the original game, whereas the second game is more about the characters within it.  The first game deals with external demons while the second game deals with internal ones.  I can see why people would prefer the story that focuses on human issues with the world of Silent Hill simply serving as a backdrop or personal hell in which one is forced to deal with those issues, but I prefer the first game's approach in which it's the world of Silent Hill itself that takes the forefront.  To me, it created a more unique and memorable atmosphere.

Your skills of deduction never cease to amaze me, Kalabakov

Of course I agree with the fact that one of the best aspects of SH storytelling is that, in fact, they DON'T tell you everything. Putting all the pieces together yourself is a rewarding experience and makes for interesting conversation amongst fans.
I just personally felt that SH2 did this better, in that they give you enough to work with, but they let you fill in the details yourself, whereas SH1 pretty much gives you a blank sheet with some random words on it and it's up to you to write pretty much the entire story.

On the other hand, maybe it's just my underwhelming intelligence that's the problem here.

Also: Boobies.

My sentiments exactly.
I knew I could count on Kalabakov to drop his two cents, I was looking forward to it actually, but I'm glad to see more people feel strongly about this series.

And yeah, SH2 still keeps me busy to this day.

I AM sorry to hear about the poor reception of SH Zero, although I will still be picking up the PS2 port once it hits stores. There was NO WAY I was going to play a game like SH on a PSP, so I'm still looking forward to it.
Plus, it saves me from actually GETTING a PSP in the first place.

And, yes, I also totally forgot about the Worm Boss in SH3.

Which is odd, because I usually never forget a Penis....

I guess that's up to personal taste. Personally, I preferred SH1's more obscure story, I like when the pieces of the puzzle are more dispersed (although SH2's story is so great, I can easily see why most people prefer it).

One of the things about SH1 that really shook me when it came out (besides the awesome soundtrack and atmosphere, the unique world and imagery it created, etc.) was that here was a game that actually put faith in and appealed to the player's intelligence and ability to piece together the story for him/herself. It didn't lead you by the hand or assume that, just because you're playing a game, you have to be force-fed some contrived and simplistic drivel in order to progress. That aspect is rare enough in books and movies, and much more so in games (especially back when SH1 was released). Most games take the safe way, that of explaining everything in order to not confuse the dumb average gamer (sorry) and ensure that he/she will gobble up the inevitable sequel. I really liked Team Silent's courage back in the "good old days", not only were the first two SH games stylistically groundbreaking and refreshing, but they actually challenged you to think. This is one of the key aspects I feel has been missing since SH3. In SH3 and every subsequent game, they basically go to great lengths to explain everything and thus ensure that the player will "get it". Its an unfortunate move, since it has eliminated one of the things that was so great about the early SH games. I feel this is the reason why the formula is feeling increasingly stale (to me, anyway) - like I said in another post above, its becoming more and more running around in abandoned buildings, beating up monsters and watching "scary" occult shit happening (in SH1 a lot of weird shit happened too, but because of the way the story was constructed, you never knew if it was occult or something else). As long as the series is developed by other companies and teams (as is the case with SH0 and SH5), I don't see this changing anytime soon. Konami obviously want to make money on the series (nothing strange with that), and going back to its origins (pun kind of intended) is probably risky now when SH3 and subsequent games have pretty much determined this new direction.

It seems like an obvious move in the horror genre one would think, to engage the viewer's/player's mind, but most horror movies and games don't and in stead only focus on blood and gore (external fears), which is why they usually fail so miserably, and why the genre as a whole is considered so "B" and cliché. Basically, the only non-PC horror games that I can think of that have the quality of actually getting inside your mind and messing with it are SH1, SH2, and Rule of Rose (a beautiful experience which I recommend if you like SH2, although its a clumsy and pretty slow game - some patience required). Eternal Darkness is also good, although I don't really consider it horror, more like a dark adventure game.

Eh, enough ranting about this. As is evident, I've thought about this stuff a lot and like to vent my opinions when opportunity arises.

Yup, that about sums it up, in my objective opinion.

I would also recommend the Fatal Frame series, although they also require some patience. I think FF1 can be beaten in 5 hours or so, and that's well worth your (as in everyone's) time.

There we go. Had to fix the quote to fit the post. ED is my favorite horror-action game, but it's much more mythological than scary. Some jumpy moments, but like DK said it's a dark adventure game, that is also worth everyone's time.

And, if you dig the X-Files, I would hesitantly recommend XF Resist or Serve for the PS2. Think of a more RE-style horror/action games with some gameplay hangups and cool tie-ins with the show.

Happy birthday Yamaoka! Just waiting for my SH0 to arrive. I really like almost everything he has done, but my favorites are SH2 & 3, Shin Contra and iFuturelist (this took some time to get in to, but now I just love it).

He's somewhat older than I thought though.

I love the Fatal Frame series as well (or "Project Zero", as they're called over here), have played through all three of them countless times. The reason I didn't mention them is that, scary and phenomenal as they are, they're not really psychological horror. Their backbone is basically monster (=ghost) hunting/fighting and mansion exploring, like most survival horror games, the fear is external. This is not necessarily a knock, though: I love them to death, and unlike SH, that series hasn't gone bad yet, I still look forward to new games in it (in fact, the third one was my favourite so far, love the "dreary" feeling of it).

What I mean are that SH1, SH2, and Rule of Rose are the only games I can think of that I would unequivocally call "psychological horror", where there is strong doubt over what is actually happening through large sections of the story and what's in the protagonist's confused mind. In these games, the personality and back story of the characters played a significant role in the actual story, while in most other games its usually interesting filler that could have been omitted/altered without much difficulty. As scary as the Fatal Frames were, I wouldn't really call them psychological horror - most of the characters and their psychology took a backseat to more external factors (with some exceptions).

The reason I mentioned Eternal Darkness is because its a borderline case. Its mostly about occult and mythological stuff, but a lot of the punch in the experience also comes from psychological effects. Thanks for the correction also, it is indeed an awesome game. Very heavy on the Lovecraftian influences for people who enjoy that kind of stuff.

Please note: All games mentioned in this post are great experiences, and recommended to anyone looking for a good horror game.

Ah, I gotcha, dude. FF was very cerebral for me, mostly due to the fact that the combat is all done in first person and the fact that the series is just damn creepy! I see your point though, but I think that I took it a lot more psychologically than other people might. I'm not kidding when I say that the first time I played the first FF, I was physically ill by the time I finished because I was so scared. I forced myself to play through the entire last two chapters of the game in one sitting, in a dark basement with a big TV and surround sound. I was so scared that I almost puked.

EDIT: Speaking of looking forward to the new games, I am very much looking forward to Fatal Frame 4. Why? Two reasons: 1) It's going to be on the Wii, and 2) f'n Grasshopper Manufacture (SUDA 51, Takada/Fukuda) are going to be working on it. I am PUMPED.

I'd say that the very first encounter of Silent Hill says a lot about how it differs from Silent Hill 2.  The way that everything is constructed so as to be like a slow descent into madness rather than just having the lights go out and seeing a monster appear.  Judging by my experience with the early parts of Silent Hill 3, that subtlety seems to have been lost, as it hurls you into a nightmare scenario from the getgo.  Any game can throw you into a crazy set of circumstances, but the first Silent Hill constantly left you guessing as you teetered between one world and the other.  Starting with Silent Hill 2, the sense of buildup and focus surrounding 'the change' seemed to diminish, as emphasis was placed on character melodrama.  In SH1, you'd slowly see the world changing and often hear a siren before things became freaky.  Add to that the way that things seemed to get worse and worse before the environment returned to a more normal state, like when you're trying to escape the sewers and there's a building sense of panic with the music getting louder and more monsters coming out of the woodwork.

There was a real craftsmanship to the roller coaster of madness that was Silent Hill, and that's what made it feel more than random and more than a 'blank slate'.  It gave you enough to keep you intrigued in terms of the players but it also kept you on the edge of your seat with its unpredictability.  Silent Hill 2 relied heavily on Pyramid Head, whose appearance you came to expect, and on cramped environments with events that felt very scripted.  The almost organic dynamism of the world of Silent Hill was definitely toned down in favor of a more linear, character-driven experience in the second game.  If the second game is more polished in terms of how it develops its characters, it's because it's less ambitious and more deliberately structured than what the original game went for, so it's probably just preference that causes a person to favor one approach over the other.

Since it was brought up, I also enjoyed Eternal Darkness a great deal.  It's a shame that it didn't sell very well.