![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
uberreinigerI didn't think it could happen but it has. The plague of "reimaginings" has finally hit me where I live.
They "reimagined" The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and it sucked. They're "reimagining" Hellraiser without Doug Bradley which can only mean it will suck. They "reimagined" The Hills Have Eyes and unless you're a pervert whose fantasy is to see Claire from Lost get raped by nuclear test mutants, it was nothing special. They're remaking A Nightmare On Elm Street and the burden rests entirely on Jackie Earle Haley's diminuitive shoulders to make it not suck.
Now they're "reimagining" the first Silent Hill game for the Wii. And it's going to suck.
Like many Silent Hill fans, I have been clamoring for a remake of the series' first game for years. When I initially heard it was finally happening I was pleased, even if it was happening on the most soccer mom-friendly of game consoles. A few days ago I heard a very nasty rumor that this remake would not include any combat. I wasn't worried because crazy rumors happen all the time.
Last night in the grocery store I read the Silent Hill cover story in this month's Nintendo Power magazine and discovered the ugly rumor is true. You are supposed to run from the monsters - ALL the monsters. There will be no combat at all.
I call bullshit. SH has always been about ordinary, mild-mannered people facing their own depraved and brutal sub-consciousness. Standing in a dark hallway beating a possessed nurse to death with a sledge hammer really gives you a feel for that. And how far will you REALLY go to rescue your daughter? Are you willing to put a twelve-gauge round into a squealing deformed baby's face to get her back?
Apparently not now. Not on the Wii. You're just supposed to go hide. Who exactly was supposed to be the little girl in this situation again?
The game's designers are defending this departure from the visceral by saying "the Silent Hill games have ALWAYS stressed evasion over combat." Riiight. And yet the only way to get the "cool" endings on some of the games in the series was to rack up a high body count. Indeed, in Silent Hill 3 the protagonist's choice to slay the monsters (if they even WERE monsters,) was an integral part of the plot!
Call me a macho violence-obsessed caveman if you want, but to me Silent Hill without the ability to fight back against the horror is a cobra without teeth. They've promised an increased emphasis on puzzles, which SH has always needed. But if I want a puzzle game with no combat I'll go play Myst.
In the magazine interview the game's lead designer likened the new-and-improved Silent Hill 1 to the new Battlestar Galactica series in the way it will change the roles of characters and shuffle things around. Here are the following ways in which the new BSG improved on the idea of fugitive humans vs. robots: A paranoid, deluded man sees visions of an attractive blonde woman who tempts him to give in to his dark desires. The evil of human nature is just as great a threat as the inhuman forces the heroes face. And in addition to lumbering, quasi-mechanical monstrosities, some of the enemy look and behave exactly like ordinary humans.
Sounds great except SILENT HILL ALREADY DID THAT! Seriously, that's the entire plot of Silent Hill 2. Silent Hill doesn't need this kind of glitzy "reimagining." It's imaginative enough as it is.
If I ever get my hands on a Wii I'll be glad to give the new SH a chance. But it's not going to be the same. SH fans will know what I mean when I say that I think I'm going to have the sensation of there once having been a HOLE here, but it's gone now.
They "reimagined" The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and it sucked. They're "reimagining" Hellraiser without Doug Bradley which can only mean it will suck. They "reimagined" The Hills Have Eyes and unless you're a pervert whose fantasy is to see Claire from Lost get raped by nuclear test mutants, it was nothing special. They're remaking A Nightmare On Elm Street and the burden rests entirely on Jackie Earle Haley's diminuitive shoulders to make it not suck.
Now they're "reimagining" the first Silent Hill game for the Wii. And it's going to suck.
Like many Silent Hill fans, I have been clamoring for a remake of the series' first game for years. When I initially heard it was finally happening I was pleased, even if it was happening on the most soccer mom-friendly of game consoles. A few days ago I heard a very nasty rumor that this remake would not include any combat. I wasn't worried because crazy rumors happen all the time.
Last night in the grocery store I read the Silent Hill cover story in this month's Nintendo Power magazine and discovered the ugly rumor is true. You are supposed to run from the monsters - ALL the monsters. There will be no combat at all.
I call bullshit. SH has always been about ordinary, mild-mannered people facing their own depraved and brutal sub-consciousness. Standing in a dark hallway beating a possessed nurse to death with a sledge hammer really gives you a feel for that. And how far will you REALLY go to rescue your daughter? Are you willing to put a twelve-gauge round into a squealing deformed baby's face to get her back?
Apparently not now. Not on the Wii. You're just supposed to go hide. Who exactly was supposed to be the little girl in this situation again?
The game's designers are defending this departure from the visceral by saying "the Silent Hill games have ALWAYS stressed evasion over combat." Riiight. And yet the only way to get the "cool" endings on some of the games in the series was to rack up a high body count. Indeed, in Silent Hill 3 the protagonist's choice to slay the monsters (if they even WERE monsters,) was an integral part of the plot!
Call me a macho violence-obsessed caveman if you want, but to me Silent Hill without the ability to fight back against the horror is a cobra without teeth. They've promised an increased emphasis on puzzles, which SH has always needed. But if I want a puzzle game with no combat I'll go play Myst.
In the magazine interview the game's lead designer likened the new-and-improved Silent Hill 1 to the new Battlestar Galactica series in the way it will change the roles of characters and shuffle things around. Here are the following ways in which the new BSG improved on the idea of fugitive humans vs. robots: A paranoid, deluded man sees visions of an attractive blonde woman who tempts him to give in to his dark desires. The evil of human nature is just as great a threat as the inhuman forces the heroes face. And in addition to lumbering, quasi-mechanical monstrosities, some of the enemy look and behave exactly like ordinary humans.
Sounds great except SILENT HILL ALREADY DID THAT! Seriously, that's the entire plot of Silent Hill 2. Silent Hill doesn't need this kind of glitzy "reimagining." It's imaginative enough as it is.
If I ever get my hands on a Wii I'll be glad to give the new SH a chance. But it's not going to be the same. SH fans will know what I mean when I say that I think I'm going to have the sensation of there once having been a HOLE here, but it's gone now.
