The fog is so thicc and yummy and thicc and its so very derivative of resi remakes and yet i want to eat it. The acting is great, the cutscenes are great, the twist on all the puzzles and areas are great, the combat is actually pretty solid AND IT LOOKS SO DAMN GOOD. The best fog thats ever been in a game alongside some of the coolest lighting with dim bulbs that barely cast a glow across the room.
Rip fixed camera angles tho that part will be missed sorely.
Bloober is on thin ice with me after The Medium, that game was absolute trash both writing and gameplay wise. I'm surprised this actually seems to have turned out decent, but I'll wait and see what Stephanie Sterling has to say.
My bar is usually low for enjoyment so much so i even enjoyed blair witch a fair bit but the medium was irredeemable. I was very pessimistic that sh2 would turn out even worse but honestly it doesn't even really feel like a bloober game. I guess they can do well if they aren't doing their own writing and only tweaking existing gameplay design
Lmao same. Felt so lame seeing all of the backlash towards the game and it's developers fade away because it visually looks good and isn't a total disaster gameplay wise.
Like that's good but I think the original core problem is still that these utterly tone deaf developers are handling a monumentally important piece of art and that problem doesn't go away no matter how satisfying the shotgun is
I could see the average g*mer not caring about the handling of the tone as long as the gameplay is good.
The curtains are blue!
Considering how The Medium panned out, I'm not expecting bloober to approach any of the subject matter handled by Silent Hill 2 with any of the care it requires. I'm gonna wait around and see what folks have to say before I consider giving it a try.
I've been playing Metaphor Re:Fantazio with an eye on jumping in on launch, but damn. I've had a Silent Hill itch for a minute and somehow I forgot that it was releasing the same week... fuck it. I think I'm going to get this and play Metaphor later since I usually burnout on Persona/SMT games before I beat them anyway.
I didn't have a console in the late 90s - early 2000s so I have no nostalgia for fixed camera angles and can therefore objectively state that they were bad
Mechanics are inseparable from, and an integral part of the rest of a game experience, narrative, mood, and all. And in a game like this with what it was trying to do, fixed camera angles are a significant mechanic that can and do affect specific mechanical experiences and functions on the player and how they engage with the game world which reinforce core narrative experiences and moods in ways that, though I didn't play this remake and see how it changed things, feel and seem pretty fundamental to the experience.
Forcing you to move through the game world, and even feel claustrophobically stuck, within the confines of the oppressive clutches of fixed cameras, restricted vision, and commitment to meaningful actions and movements among the set design and especially sound design, are objectively powerful design choices which are significant in the ways they mechanically capture and reinforce the oppressive aspects of the story and environments, and of the horror, disorientation, mistrust, mental illness, trauma, repression, fear, lack of control and agency in one's torments and constructs, etc. of the world and narrative; that I feel like would be significantly lessened and undermined with options and movement and vision being made freer and turned more into an "action hero game."
Like I said I never played this remake and don't keep up with modern games much so can't speak specifically to how they managed to account for this and restructure things to reconstruct or "fill-in" some of these aspects or if they did (maybe they expertly did it), but not only do I strongly disagree that fixed camera angles are "objectively bad"--- even just hearing there's no fixed camera angles in this remake sounds actually really weird to me; like if you were to make a 007 Goldeneye remake that's isometric view game, but much more extreme because Goldeneye isn't a serious artistic game trying to say and do something real other than "be fun." Or similarly if Fatal Frame didn't make you have to use the camera to see the spirits etc. The mechanics are inseparable from the point of the game. And the more serious the game's narrative is the more the mechanics matter in how that narrative is experienced and so the story "told" (or lived, via the player through the characters mechanically)
It's more like if you were to make a goldeneye remake that was a dual stick shooter because the n64 controller was an early fumbling attempt at 3d controls. Fixed camera angles were a necessary technical strategy to save polygons for the character models for like a generation and a half. All the justifications of them as Actually Art are cope and nostalgia.
This take is so ridiculously stupid it falls apart under its own logic. If fixed camera angles were supposedly a technical limitation to "sAvE poLgyOns" why do they not feature in 99% of the games on the generations those games came out on?????????
Why does it only feature in a select few survival horror games????????
It's almost like it was a design choice or something
Famous survival horror game FF7
Famous survival horror game Crash Bandicoot
Alone in the Dark (1992) was a PC game that basically created this fixed camera angle type of gameplay 
making op downbear means the take was hot enough
im right tho
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
3rd International Volunteer Brigade (Hexbear gaming discord)
Rules