Scared stiff: Why should we care about Silent Hill: Homecoming?

For the series' sixth installment, Konami has handed the blood-soaked baton over to external developer Double Helix Games, a recent mash-up of The Collective and Shiny Entertainment. The result is this fall's upcoming release, Silent Hill: Homecoming, and we recently puzzled our way out of mist long enough to ask the game's lead designer, Jason Allen, just why we should care about this latest return trip to Silent Hill.
We began things by asking Allen what he considers to be his favorite example of survival horror done right, a question he was initially apprehensive to answer. "That's a tough question," he told us. "I'm always loathe to pick a favorite amongst the many titles I've played."
He went on to describe two series that "have always left an indelible mark" on the developer's psyche. "The first," he began, "was the System Shock series on PC. It [had] one of the best atmospheres of any game I've played; truly capturing the feeling abandonment."
"Our mandate was not to change the existing game but to improve on certain elements whilst maintaining the core experience." |
"Secondly for generating fear," he added, "the Fatal Frame series I've always felt was one of the greatest... The first time I played the game, I couldn't play it alone and at night. I had to wait for daylight before I'd brave those dark hallways." This last bit made us chuckle, if only to know that we were not the only ones to come away terrified by Tecmo's take on interactive horror.
But of course, Allen's heart at the moment belongs to Silent Hill. "I felt it has the greatest depth of characterizations and the most compelling narratives of all the survival horror games I've played." But will this carry over with his team's own telling of the Silent Hill mythos?
"Our mandate was not to change the existing game but to improve on certain elements whilst maintaining the core experience," commented the game's lead designer, who told us of his belief that when it comes to survival horror two "prime components" are puzzles and fighting.

Of course, some explanation is in order. "Very often the puzzles are abstractions and have little to do with the core of the narrative. We've tried to focus on making the puzzles an integral part of the narrative experience; to ensure that the reason for solving the puzzle and the puzzle's construction are understandable in the context of the journey."
He continued: "Secondly, we've tried to focus on making the combat more accessible to casual gamers, whilst providing depth for the more experienced players. That said, Silent Hill has always focused more on the narrative elements of survival horror and not simply been about killing the next monster."
"We've tried to focus on making the puzzles an integral part of the narrative experience." |
As it stands, we remain hopeful that Double Helix will manage recapture the series' near-trademark sense of dread and leave us shopping for a change of pants when Silent Hill: Homecoming ships for the Xbox 360 and PS3 this September.
For now, however, we look to wrap up our look at some of 2008's most notable survival horror titles tomorrow by analyzing just how creepy little girls can be in Monolith's upcoming follow-up to F.E.A.R., Project Origin.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Gbogdan @ Jun 25th 2008 4:30PM
I'm tired of developers trying to make their games "casual friendly", like when he said that they are trying to make the fighting more "casual friendly". Just because someone doesn't play games that often and is considered a "casual" gamer does not mean that they are to retarded to open up an instruction booklet and learn the moves nor does it mean that they are so unintelligent that they cannot figure it out for themselves.
J @ Jun 26th 2008 3:04AM
Did you know most people don't even read the manual these days? Most of the time they're printed in black and white, to save money, since developers know few people will actually see them.
And it's not just about "casual" gamers. I think they're also trying to take new gamers into account. For inexperienced gamers it is very frustrating to want to play a game and complete it, only to be stuck at certain points simply because they aren't "skilled" enough.
born2kill @ Jun 25th 2008 4:33PM
Isnt that creature in the pic ^^ a ripoff of the Condemned 2 oro guys?
Maurice M @ Jun 25th 2008 4:40PM
I hate being the only one that thinks the majority (or half) of the game should have no combat at all. Just empty rooms and streets. Long stretches of just emptyness and isolation. That was what I loved about SH2 especially. You'd walk a mile and the only thing going on was Yamoaka's kick ass soundtrack and tons of random strange noises to freak you the hell out. I loved SH3 as well, but it removed a ton of the roaming and isolation the first two games had. I do like the sound of making the puzzles less abstract though.
Slayer @ Jun 25th 2008 4:49PM
You know, Silent Hill 4 removed everything that pretty much made it Silent Hill. If 5 is anything like 4, I'm going to be disappointed.
Mr.ESC @ Jun 25th 2008 6:52PM
Actually they should just contact the original team and beg them to make the game or at least get some hints from them.
What make SH unique was that it was already unique.
The first silent hill well it was looong, the story was interesting, multiple endings, okay combat. Sort of a mix of the action genera with the adventure genera but the start was bad if you ask me since is hard to get scared when the radio alerted you of any enemy in the area, I made fun of that at first but it is very useful in the nightmare world when everything was dark and you could only see a bit.
There is nothing like running around without a map in a nightmare world, almost blind for all the darkness with the friggin radio making noises like crazy and monsters everywhere. It was even better when you had low ammo and almost no health.
Silent hill 2 was more about the story, it wasn’t scary at all but it was good.The story was just great, the ending isn’t very original but it isn’t predictable either because you are more worried about the town it self, the girl and the fatso and everything going all around you…oh and the invincible Pyramid head wrecking the town chasing you at the best moments.
SH 3 had better graphics and was more focused in the action but the story was still great.
SH4 was like a courage the cowardly dog episode. It was weird but not scary.
Finally I believe Silent Hill is basically a successful mix of claustrophobic environments, a rich story and epic music. The game play itself is okay, it could be better for example I liked the enemies in SH:0 since they were hard, too bad the bosses sucked. The bosses in Super Mario Galaxy gave more fight than them.
P.S The reason why I didn’t mentioned 0 is that there isn’t much to talk about, if you liked Silent Hill you could probably like 0 as well.
TX2 @ Jun 25th 2008 8:09PM
Silent Hill 3 was about Confrontation. Which is why it had so much focus on combat.
And now that I think about it. Yeah SH4 was a courage the cowardly dog episode... but I personally find that awesome!
J @ Jun 26th 2008 3:04AM
Without the monsters, all that darkness and all those awesome noises wouldn't even be half as scary. You'd know there was nothing there...
I've considered this many times as well. But it always comes down to the idea of a threat. If there is no threat, there is no tension, no anxiety.
Seishino @ Jun 25th 2008 4:55PM
Here's hoping by "casual friendly" he doesn't mean "without consequences." One of the strongest tools for creating a sense of dread in horror games is knowing full well that any combat you may enter into will inexorably drain your puny life bar even further towards the abyss. For that you want combat not to be masterable, but to be a constant struggle.
Zootittles @ Jun 25th 2008 4:56PM
Q: Why should we care about Silent Hill: Homecoming?
A: We shouldn't. Stick a fork in it, Konami.
OTAM @ Jun 25th 2008 5:06PM
Don't you talk bad about my Silent Hill.
The Room already hurt me enough.
Rob Accomando @ Jun 25th 2008 5:42PM
This game should be sweet on a 105" diag projector screen, surround sound with the lights off
Kenny @ Jun 25th 2008 6:20PM
what the fuck? silent hill 4 was a great departure from 3. sure the gameplay wasn't that good but its style was so different that the silent hill aesthetic was still there, but made it a whole new monster. this game will not have the impact silent hill 1-4 has had. looks like shite too.
Mr.ESC @ Jun 25th 2008 6:32PM
Silent Hill 4 is a lie.
SH4 started as a spin off.
Kenny @ Jun 26th 2008 1:31AM
and that's what makes it good. it takes what silent hill made and twisted into its own atmosphere. and yes i do know its a spin off as the subtitle suggests. give me some reasons to hate silent hill 4. i've already got my share for silent hill 5. and i know that the game isn't out.
Chase @ Jun 25th 2008 8:38PM
"Why should we care about Silent Hill: Homecoming?" Because the drunken chicks are easy?
Toasty Toaster Man @ Jun 26th 2008 2:40AM
Vagina monster?