MikeGosot

@VoshiNova said:

@Yummylee said:

@ShaggE said:

Lest we forget, there was the impromptu Phantasmagoria ER. Maybe not officially an ER, but it was totally an ER.

Not to mention their ER of Bad Dudes :P

I"M BAD!

WHERE'S THIS ER I NEED TO SEE IT.

Gosh, so many PSP games... I'm thinking about learning japanese just so i could play the games. But i don't have the time to do that, so yeah.

@Little_Socrates: Thanks for the interesting informations, dude! And it's weird to think that the most interactive medium has a hard time pulling out the "social horror". Also, your example for truly horror games are incredibly interesting, specially Hotline Miami. And i think that my use of the word horror, specially in the title was pretty bad. I made it sound like you can't have horror if you can't have a jump scare, which is not true at all.

@LikeaSsur said:

Dead Space, F.E.A.R.: First Encounter Assault Recon, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, and Slender: The Eight Pages say no, the horror genre is alive and well with camera control.

Of all those games, only one of them could scare me. And it was with a jump scare, so i guess you can see why my faith in camera control decreased.

@Gamer_152 said:

Survival horror? Arguably. But while I can see what the fixed camera brings to the horror genre, I really can't agree with the idea that we can't have scary third-person games because there's no fixed camera any more. If that's the case then surely we're very uncreative in terms of game design. The fixed camera isn't something I think gels with modern audiences though, and I'm not really a fan of it either, it feels stiff and restrictive.

After having this conversation, i think that the fixed camera is a valid option, but the lack of it doesn't necessarily kills horror. My title was... Well, not a good one, to say the least. About that last part, i think that a possible solution that would please both sides would be having a fixed cameras only in certain situations. That would be fun. To me, at least.

@GetEveryone said:

That is some terrible grammar there, son.

I'm sorry. If you can, please point out my mistakes and i'll try to get better.

@AlexW00d said:

The whole fixed views thing is cause of the first rule of horror (that I just invented) it's ALWAYS the things you don't see that are scary. Always. Which is why atmosphere will always be the most important thing, not shitty fucking jump scares.

Indeed. People saying that fixed camera is bad because they open the door to a shitty jump scare are not giving a fair chance to fixed cameras.

@Nottle: So you would argue that the parts in Fatal Frame where you can't see what's in front of the main character would be more scary if you had control of the camera? You would argue that, by giving you the freedom to look everywhere you would be too tense to know where to look? Because that same feeling can be achieved with a fixed camera. Clock Tower did a good job with that. You could see the entire room, but you don't know from where the killer is coming. You don't even know if exploring(Something that you do a lot in the game) could trigger something bad.

@ImmortalSaiyan said:

I never played a lot of horror games as I have no interest in horror regardless of medium. That said I never found the few games in the genre I did play scary. Bad controls did not make Resident Evil 1 a scary game. Make it a annoying one to play. Which could be argued adds tension but still not for me.

@MikkaQ said:

No, I think it rendered the genre playable.

I think that's why we don't see fixed cameras anymore.

@ck1nd said:

No, it simply puts the developers with a higher responsibility for creating tension in the game. When the camera is fixed, you're only getting one type of "tension" and that is the idea that something might be around the corner. That's essentially a lazy way to do things and is pretty much no different than a "monster closet." When a player has control of the camera, the developer is tasked with innovating the scare. I think the problem is that when it was a fixed camera, a monkey could scare you, but now it takes imagination.

Could you show me an example of an effective and creative scare in an horror game with camera control?

@Stonyman65: I wouldn't want it in every game too. But i would like to see a comeback in some games, after all, it's a cool way to build tension!

@Cold_Wolven: While i think that not every horror game should have a survival aspect, i really like the whole "Watch your ammo, don't waste yur resources" thing. It's done really well in some boardgames, you should try them out.

@BBAlpert said:

@hermes said:

Not really... camera control can kill most jump scares (although not always), but those are the cheap kind of scares anyway.

It does allow for a very specific kind of jump scare, the kind used in games like Slender. The bullshit (in my opinion) "Look left and see that nothing is there, look right and see that nothing is there, look back lef-SPOOKY GHOST RIGHT UP IN YOUR FACE!!" thing.

To be fair, the fixed camera allows way more than that.

@project343: Control is something that i haven't seen a lot of horror games do it right. I can't name one of them, actually. Scripted encounters also don't mean that said encounter is bad or not scary. I understand the need for games to evolve and use the interactive aspects of the medium to try and scare the player but-- HOLY SHIT, USE THEM WELL!

@Sumbog said:

Read the IMBD for A Serbian Film, that was probably the most fucked up thing I have ever experienced.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1273235/?ref_=sr_1

Edit: I recommend everyone looks at it just to realize how sheltered we are.

God, i hate that movie. I fucking hate this movie, it's so... DUMB. I'm a fan of gore, one of my favorite short stories is about girls doing Hara-Kiri because it will make them popular, but that movie was so devoid of charm and so focused on shocking the audience that it just became a pretty fucking shallow movie.

@Video_Game_King: I never played this game but it can't be worse than some of the Barbie movies, holy shit.

@SlashDance said:

I'm just not sure what liking something "ironically" even means. You either like something or you don't. It sounds like an excuse for people who can't deal with the fact that they like crappy or dumb stuff.

It's a dumb way of saying you have a guilty pleasure, i guess.

You know, that's the second time where i see horses related to an anus. Don't ask about the first time. About the rest of the game... wat. wat. WAAAAAAAAAT!!!!!