Why have survival horror games become more action-based?

I agree. Blame RE4 I guess, that was the game that started the shift in tone. I can't say I really mind to tell you the truth. The genre was starting to get a little stale the way it was and it needed something to give it a kick up the arse. If a change in direction gives us games like Dead Space then I'm all for it. It's not as if we don't get more traditional games either, just look at Siren: Blood Curse.

Saying that they're going to be like DMC is stupid though, since that doesn't even resemble a survival horror game in the slightest, nor do modern horror titles resemble it.

Cursed Mountain looks good and so does Fatal Frame 4. Resident evil 5 on theother hand looks like its appealing to the main stream audience of 13 year olds who want action rather than suspense, Who want blood instead of puzzles.Dibdibdobdobo

Yea they do looked good. I heard there were some retarted controls in Fatal fram 4. I hope they fix it before it hits here. Thats if it does hit here.

It's really that survival horror is losing favor, and survival horror games are becoming action games.

I prefer survival horror, so I'm screwed but ah well.

But if more action = less horror it's a big fat NODJjoey

More action means less survival horror and less survival horror means less scary.

CHeck out Siren: Blood Curse. It's an old school survival horror game. Anyways, I love those kind of games, but I can't stand to play them that much anymore. For some reason, I can't play dark and depressing games for longer than 15-20 minutes. It makes me sick, which stinks, because I truly like the genre.BioShockOwnz

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

Are you guys just using one game (RE5) for the basis for your narrow minded arguments or what? There hasn't been a single game this generation so far that has sacrificed horror for action. Condemned, Dead Space, Siren, Silent Hill: Homecoming, Alone In The Dark ect. have all been traditional survival horror games more or less. Silent-Hal

No its just funny that one of the pioneers of survival horror has turned to action. IM happy the rest havent followed suit.

All those puzzles just don't make sense. In left4dead, you objective is to get from safepoint to safepoint and gun down any enemies that come in your way, as a team. No puzzles, just getting the hell out of the place!Jekken6

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]CHeck out Siren: Blood Curse. It's an old school survival horror game. Anyways, I love those kind of games, but I can't stand to play them that much anymore. For some reason, I can't play dark and depressing games for longer than 15-20 minutes. It makes me sick, which stinks, because I truly like the genre.FrozenLiquid

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

It's new old school. ;)

Has anyone noticed that over the years, survival horror games have become more action-based?Timberwolf5578

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]CHeck out Siren: Blood Curse. It's an old school survival horror game. Anyways, I love those kind of games, but I can't stand to play them that much anymore. For some reason, I can't play dark and depressing games for longer than 15-20 minutes. It makes me sick, which stinks, because I truly like the genre.FrozenLiquid

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

Stealth-based horror really isn't "new".

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]CHeck out Siren: Blood Curse. It's an old school survival horror game. Anyways, I love those kind of games, but I can't stand to play them that much anymore. For some reason, I can't play dark and depressing games for longer than 15-20 minutes. It makes me sick, which stinks, because I truly like the genre.BioShockOwnz

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

Stealth-based horror really isn't "new".

Especially since the original Siren came out in 2004 >_>

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

Silent-Hal

Stealth-based horror really isn't "new".

Especially since the original Siren came out in 2004 >_>

2003, really (Japan).

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]CHeck out Siren: Blood Curse. It's an old school survival horror game. Anyways, I love those kind of games, but I can't stand to play them that much anymore. For some reason, I can't play dark and depressing games for longer than 15-20 minutes. It makes me sick, which stinks, because I truly like the genre.BioShockOwnz

Eh, it's not really old school. It's a lot different from other survival horrors. It's stealth-based horror, which is actually a new, unique direction.

Stealth-based horror really isn't "new".

Um, yeah, it is? When games like Alone in the Dark, Clock Tower, and Resident Evil come around the mid 90s, and Siren comes out in just under a decade later? Oh yeah, you can betcha it's new.

The only other game that comes to mind which predates Siren is Thief. But even then, the supernatural elements are more of a spectacle than actually being ingrained heavily into the game's nature. Kinda like how science-fiction is a by-product of Star Wars but is not the reason it exists. Not to mention Thief feels more like a stealth platformer than anything.

What about Penumbra? :oJuggernaut140

Penumbra started off as survival-horror (with elements of Thief-esque stealth) but by the third game ended up becoming some weird brother of Portal.

Lets look at the Resident Evil series. In RE2, I remember having to find a series of chesspiece shaped plugs, cogs, and keys in the shapes of the four suits in a deck of cards. You then proceeded to backtrack to previously explored areas to open one previously locked door, pick up a key item, backtrack to some other area you've already explored and repeat. The tasks seemed so blatantly repetative and monotonous that it would be easy for your more action oriented gamer would quickly lose interest. I honestly don't think you can say that the genre is going in the wrong direction.Johnny-n-Roger

There's a purpose to the backtracking.

It gives locations character. IT's boring if you simply let the player follow a series of rooms without any need to return to them. That locked door leaves the question of whats behind it.

And by the time you return to the precinct, you can be out in a short time because what was once a large and daunting police precinct. And if you'll remember, you just need to move up to the clock tower then go down the shoot. No need to go backwards for no reason.

Backtracking is Resident Evil. It makes the puzzles matter, it makes your ammunition matter, it adds atmosphere to locations, like, say, a mansion with many locked doors.

If the gamer loses interest then they don't have much of an attention span.

I believe Siren and Fatal Frame series are still under the survival horor classification. :D Mr_Cumberdale

I think Fatal Frame is more of a horror RPG.

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"]Lets look at the Resident Evil series. In RE2, I remember having to find a series of chesspiece shaped plugs, cogs, and keys in the shapes of the four suits in a deck of cards. You then proceeded to backtrack to previously explored areas to open one previously locked door, pick up a key item, backtrack to some other area you've already explored and repeat. The tasks seemed so blatantly repetative and monotonous that it would be easy for your more action oriented gamer would quickly lose interest. I honestly don't think you can say that the genre is going in the wrong direction.hakanakumono

There's a purpose to the backtracking.

It gives locations character. IT's boring if you simply let the player follow a series of rooms without any need to return to them. That locked door leaves the question of whats behind it.

And by the time you return to the precinct, you can be out in a short time because what was once a large and daunting police precinct. And if you'll remember, you just need to move up to the clock tower then go down the shoot. No need to go backwards for no reason.

Backtracking is Resident Evil. It makes the puzzles matter, it makes your ammunition matter, it adds atmosphere to locations, like, say, a mansion with many locked doors.

If the gamer loses interest then they don't have much of an attention span.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"]Lets look at the Resident Evil series. In RE2, I remember having to find a series of chesspiece shaped plugs, cogs, and keys in the shapes of the four suits in a deck of cards. You then proceeded to backtrack to previously explored areas to open one previously locked door, pick up a key item, backtrack to some other area you've already explored and repeat. The tasks seemed so blatantly repetative and monotonous that it would be easy for your more action oriented gamer would quickly lose interest. I honestly don't think you can say that the genre is going in the wrong direction.Johnny-n-Roger

There's a purpose to the backtracking.

It gives locations character. IT's boring if you simply let the player follow a series of rooms without any need to return to them. That locked door leaves the question of whats behind it.

And by the time you return to the precinct, you can be out in a short time because what was once a large and daunting police precinct. And if you'll remember, you just need to move up to the clock tower then go down the shoot. No need to go backwards for no reason.

Backtracking is Resident Evil. It makes the puzzles matter, it makes your ammunition matter, it adds atmosphere to locations, like, say, a mansion with many locked doors.

If the gamer loses interest then they don't have much of an attention span.

You mean the new style of play? Prerendered was done because it could make better looking graphics than playstation could. We don't really need prerendered anymore, although it was beautiful in gamecube's REmake.

I just appreciate the mystery of it. I like a location that feels like there are many secrets to uncover.

I know what you're saying. You sort of get an image in your mind of the Precinct's layout, remembering the locations of all the typewriters, weapon boxes, etc. Eventually there is no need for a map. That is not to say, however, that I don't welcome their new approach, as I don't know how the old style of play would fare unless the backgrounds were once again pre-rendered.Johnny-n-Roger

I don't think you know what he's saying. To give a location character is to give it meaning, not to make it a throwaway spectacle. To give a location character is to give it a history and a purpose. It may function as an obstacle in a video game (which is what you're saying), but I don't think that was hakanakumuno's argument. I believe he was arguing the point of backtracking in Resident Evilas something "higher". I've only fully played through REmake, and I have to say, a lot of the reasons for backtracking has to do with the (back)story. It's as if the place has been lived in.

That's what I got out of what he said anyway.

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"]I know what you're saying. You sort of get an image in your mind of the Precinct's layout, remembering the locations of all the typewriters, weapon boxes, etc. Eventually there is no need for a map. That is not to say, however, that I don't welcome their new approach, as I don't know how the old style of play would fare unless the backgrounds were once again pre-rendered.FrozenLiquid

I don't think you know what he's saying. To give a location character is to give it meaning, not to make it a throwaway spectacle. To give a location character is to give it a history and a purpose. It may function as an obstacle in a video game (which is what you're saying), but I don't think that was hakanakumuno's argument. I believe he was arguing the point of backtracking in Resident Evilas something "higher". I've only fully played through REmake, and I have to say, a lot of the reasons for backtracking has to do with the (back)story. It's as if the place has been lived in.

That's what I got out of what he said anyway.

It's both the history and the psychological impact of the location, the latter which I'll explain.

When you first enter the precinct or the mansion you notice that there are many rooms you can't open. And at the same time there are more creatures than just zombies. In REmake and RE2 you are provided with evidence that there's something else lurking down there, like Lisa Trevor or William Birkin. There's a lot of stuff hidden in these places, and its the fact that this is made evident as you play adds a lot to the character of location.

And as you go through the place, you do discover more horrible creatures and, as you said, the history of the location.

There's more to it as well. The puzzles in RE games are pretty simple, its the backtracking that makes them interesting - also because part of the puzzle is the monsters you may have to face when you go back.

Edit: Backtracking is really only most important to Resident Evil. I can't think of any other series that requires it as much as RE does. Of course, not anymore, but in the old games.

And yes backtracking can be troublesome and annoying. Its stupid in RPGs and it was too much in Code Veronica.

It's both the history and the psychological impact of the location, the latter which I'll explain.

When you first enter the precinct or the mansion you notice that there are many rooms you can't open. And at the same time there are more creatures than just zombies. In REmake and RE2 you are provided with evidence that there's something else lurking down there, like Lisa Trevor or William Birkin. There's a lot of stuff hidden in these places, and its the fact that this is made evident as you play adds a lot to the character of location.

And as you go through the place, you do discover more horrible creatures and, as you said, the history of the location.

There's more to it as well. The puzzles in RE games are pretty simple, its the backtracking that makes them interesting - also because part of the puzzle is the monsters you may have to face when you go back.

Edit: Backtracking is really only most important to Resident Evil. I can't think of any other series that requires it as much as RE does. Of course, not anymore, but in the old games.

And yes backtracking can be troublesome and annoying. Its stupid in RPGs and it was too much in Code Veronica.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

It's both the history and the psychological impact of the location, the latter which I'll explain.

When you first enter the precinct or the mansion you notice that there are many rooms you can't open. And at the same time there are more creatures than just zombies. In REmake and RE2 you are provided with evidence that there's something else lurking down there, like Lisa Trevor or William Birkin. There's a lot of stuff hidden in these places, and its the fact that this is made evident as you play adds a lot to the character of location.

And as you go through the place, you do discover more horrible creatures and, as you said, the history of the location.

There's more to it as well. The puzzles in RE games are pretty simple, its the backtracking that makes them interesting - also because part of the puzzle is the monsters you may have to face when you go back.

Johnny-n-Roger

Thats very true. I understand what you're saying now.

Thats true as well. I understand that survival horror has lost a lot of popularity. I still love it though.

Just because a game is fast paced and/or action oriented doesnt mean it cant be survival-horror and since this is mostly about RE I agree RE4 wasn't really thrilling and RE5 clearly doesn't look like it is either but it's all got to do with the premise and atmosphere not being thrilling not the faster/more action oriented gameplay.

I really don't mind all that too much though, the ''horror'' is not what really draws me towards survival-horror games but the way of progressing, having to carefully manage your supplies and solve puzzles is what I really find interesting about them. Make them more action oriented if you want but at least keep the freaking puzzles and thrilling atmosphere.

[QUOTE="Mr_Cumberdale"]I believe Siren and Fatal Frame series are still under the survival horor classification. :D hakanakumono

I think Fatal Frame is more of a horror RPG.

It could be even worst next gen if all consoles take same road as WiiSyferonik