Terpsichore

To CoffeeJedi:

I knew there was a cult involved in Silent Hill, since that is elaborated upon in the first movie. But is the cult in the third game anything like the cult in the movie? Again, I haven't played the third game, so I don't know about it. In the first game, the cult was evil and trying to raise up their god Samael. That's nothing like the cult in the movie.

[Some spoilers ahead]

I think the supporters of this movie are being far too lenient, especially if they are fans of the series. Sure, I was happy to see Pyramid Head and Lisa, and I was glad they played "Tears of..." during the credits. These nods to the fans, however, don't excuse what I see as the unwarranted dumbing-down of a brilliant series. Besides the rubbish dialogue, the worst part about the movie was how everything was given too much exposition. First, we didn't need Chris Bean at all. His inclusion was a completely useless addition made only to appease studio execs. Secondly, and this ticked me off the most, they showed the transformation of the "normal" Silent Hill to the Otherside Silent Hill. Thirdly, they added the whole evil Christian cult nonsense. All of these errors break the core atmosphere of the first and second games(I have not played the third nor fourth).

The great appeal of Silent Hill for me was a feeling of complete immersion in a horrific alternative reality that made me, as a player, question what the hell was going on. In the games, we never, or at least rarely, see the transformation from light to dark versions of Silent Hill. Instead, the change suddenly occurs after entering a new room, or the character passes out and wakes up in a light or dark side. This is crucial to the play experience. Any reference to external reality or any knowledge of what is going on ruins the sense of immersion. There's a reason why the plots of these games are somewhat ambiguous and not entirely revealed until the end. Besides the dramatic tension, it makes the player question why reality itself, to question their own perception. To focus on events external to Silent Hill or to vividly show the darkness decaying the town in real time is to shatter the possibility that you, the player, might in fact be crazy. THe characters in the movie only have stuff happen to them, it's never assumed that they might be only hallucinating. In the first and second Silent Hill games, this is key to establishing deep emotional connections to the game.

Everything is questioned in the games, but in the movie things are simply attacked. Unfortunately, I can understand why they would change things for the movie. They wanted a horror hit, and so they had certain genre conventions to follow (scantilty clad female lead, ultimate evil antagonist(the cult), plenty of pointless shocks(pyramid head)) The problems posed to the player in the games might not translate well to the screen anyway, but I think it could with enough work.

Actually, the hard drive is probably the least expensive thing in the Ps3.

Hogwash. Of course the PS3 announcement changes their plans. Now, Microsoft will begin planning something to counter the release of the PS3 in November rather than the Spring. They'd be foolish not to have some killer app up their sleeve while the PS3 attempts to pwn our collective attention-spans.

I'd be really surprised if Viva Pinata ends up being that Ace, however. There will be something else.

Nintendo I'm more worried for. The release of the PS3 in Japan, with its expected marketing hoopla, might overshadow the release of the Twlight Princess, to say nothing of the Revolution's release. Sony's unreleased box is already more popular in Japan than the other two next-gen systems(if you believe some polls taken awhile back). Nintendo might need to work overtime if it plans to battle the hype of the PS3 being released so close to its own star products. This makes E3 all the more important. And maybe, if we're lucky, it may mean a new, Revolutionized Spaceworld. Certainly, Revolution functionality for Zelda will help Nintendo, but it will need more than just that. Although I wouldn't bet on it, Spaceworld, or something similar, might be the marketing push Nintendo needs.

America, I'm not so sure about. It's still anyone's game at this point, though Sony and Microsoft have considerable mindshare.

The thing lasted for 15 minutes, apparently. They must have racked up quite a high score.

I think the main problem with this game is that Microsoft is revising their own marketing history. Cheers on them for trying to widen their market with a new kid-friendly franchise, but MS and 360 owners had better stop criticisizing Nintendo being kiddie starting now. Remember when Bill Gates talked about Nintendo serving a "niche market?" Now it looks like MS wants a piece of that niche.

And honestly, some people here talk like the kiddie games are only played by tweeners, but many people I know who are in college and beyond play Animal Crossing and Harvest Moon, even Pokemon. None of these games, even Viva Pinata, should be seen as Kiddie games. They're just games, marketed perhaps so kids will like them, but Kingdom Hearts features Disney characters and few people call that kiddie. Maybe Microsoft finally realized that games are games, and customers are customers, not just kids or adults.

Oh snap son, IT'S DISRUPTIVE WATCH OUT!

No, but seriously, this is pretty brilliant except the 360 isn't being marketed strongly to the youngsters. Funny that Microsoft with the hardcore image is jumping on this. Doesn't Ninty usually hang with the kids? Who's got the kiddie image now?

Joking aside, I wouldn't be surprised if this really is for Windows Media Center and Vista, with 360 for the streaming capabilities.