Incline Post-decline gems

[Machocruz]

In theory, a 3D game requiring the same kind of tight platforming as the best of the 2D genre would be superior because it is more fun to move around in 3D space than 2D for these kinds of games.

Yes then it would be a different story. Side view merely allows for clearer judging of distance, jump arcs, etc. That's all. Developers figuring out how to do the same for 3D would be a game changer. The best solution so far is to have the player kind of auto-stick to a small surface they've jumped on. Dying Light does this, but it doesn't allow the type of flow that 2D and looser 3D platformers do where you're fluidly jumping from surface to surface without pause.

I did rent Maximo when it came out. It is underrated, and not for casuals. I consider it a H&S game first, but he platforming is more dangerous than most 3D games. The industry didn't follow its lead unfortunately.

 

[Ash]

The problem I had with Maximo was not so much in its gameplay. That was serviceable though nothing special at all and a little bullshit in difficulty at times as per ghosts and goblins tradition. It was the aesthetics and music. Lvl 1? Graveyard with shitty music. Lvl 2? Graveyard with the same shitty music. Lvl 3? Graveyard with the same shitty music. Lvl4? Graveyard with the same shitty music. The full soundtrack is 27 mins long and bland to boot. Pathetic.

No other game worth its salt does this. It reminds me of Medievil (yet another 3D PS1 action-platformer that is superior, and starts in a graveyard) but shit. I'd also rather play Ghouls and Ghosts (1988 - Arcade/Genesis/SNES) instead. Every level is vastly different in aesthetics, music and flow. As is old school monocled standard. So, the game clearly drops the ball when it comes to the standards of its predecessor, and the old school in general. Unfortunate as the gameplay is fairly decent, but again not great. Still probably a slight improvement upon its predecessors but that's not enough to save it compared to other, better 3D platformers.

When it comes to the precision of 3D platformers, I don't consider there to be a problem at all. First person or third. Obviously 2D is the most precise as there's one less axis to factor and side view helps with footing as you said, but I don't consider there to be any objective unavoidable "issue" that needs resolving with 3D here. Skill issue and whining for sure. Many 3D platformers control like a dream. Turok, Dying Light, hell even Maximo...and classic Tomb Raider despite its tank controls. It's pure precision once you get used to it. Many 3D games also provide great assistance by drawing a blob shadow directly underneath the character that's always present. It doesn't get more precise than that. People just suck.

Ghouls and Ghosts Genesis Soundtrack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hl4q6H1jkc

From 1989, on a 4MB cartridge with a slightly longer and far more interesting soundtrack. Maximo is decline.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

The first Alone in the Dark would qualify, surely. Resident Evil was basically just a lift of that.

Yes and no. Alone in the Dark pioneered 3D survival horror (or pseudo-3D), but Capcom themselves had already made Sweet Home for the NES so the grounding was there many years before.

No. Putting in permadeath and limited item space does not make a RPG a survival horror game. Or even a pseudo-survival horror game. It's just a RPG. That opens up a whole can of worms that dilutes a genre, that, as others point out, is already diluted to the point of near uselessness. You could theoretically do a RPG-style survival horror game, but Sweet Home is not it. It's not a genre as restrictive as Ash's bizarre description (which would remove most of the RE games from contention too) but of key elements the two agreed upon games share (AitD and RE) Sweet Home contains very few of them.
The earliest game I've seen that could be counted as survival horror that isn't just someone hyping up a game that's clearly a different genre is Ubisoft's Zombi, but it still obviously lacks elements the genre would get later on. Ultimately anything earlier than Alone in the Dark is lacking in considerable parts of the genre, but not as much as half the shit people label survival horror on Steam and Itch.io.

 

[Ash]

It's not a genre as restrictive as Ash's bizarre description (which would remove most of the RE games from contention too)

That's the point, silly. Most of the Resident Evil games aren't survival horror, but action horror.

When gamers talk of subgenres such as "traditional rogue-like", "character action" or "souls-like", you know exactly what you're getting as defined primarily by gameplay design, as it should be. This is correct.

When gamers talk about "survival horror", "Immersive Sim" or "metroidvania", it's a complete crapshoot because what defines them is more subtle and poorly understood. Metroidvania is supposed to be like SoTN (the combination of Metroid-style gameplay with RPG elements). If it is not an RPG, then it is just a metroid clone/metroid-like. The vania part as defined by SOTN is lost. But this is not how the public interpreted it. Anything is a metroidvania if it is side-scrolling and open. That's the new reality and nothing can be done about it. Same with survival horror. My description is bizarre? No, mine is spot-on, it is the general gamer public as usual that is wrong including you. To be a survival horror, it needs to be a horror game with special emphasis in survival and horror via gameplay design, like the first handful of Resident Evil games, or Darkwood. It doesn't need everything I described just as every soulslike doesn't need estus flasks, but it does need to be close. e.g even the first Silent Hill qualifies despite no inventory restrictions. Even silent hill 2 qualifies despite being a terrible game. It still has restrictive saving, gimped character (control), low quantity of action and enemies don't drop resources when killed etc

 

[Häyhä]

No. Putting in permadeath and limited item space does not make a RPG a survival horror game. Or even a pseudo-survival horror game. It's just a RPG. That opens up a whole can of worms that dilutes a genre, that, as others point out, is already diluted to the point of near uselessness. You could theoretically do a RPG-style survival horror game, but Sweet Home is not it. It's not a genre as restrictive as Ash's bizarre description (which would remove most of the RE games from contention too) but of key elements the two agreed upon games share (AitD and RE) Sweet Home contains very few of them.
The earliest game I've seen that could be counted as survival horror that isn't just someone hyping up a game that's clearly a different genre is Ubisoft's Zombi, but it still obviously lacks elements the genre would get later on. Ultimately anything earlier than Alone in the Dark is lacking in considerable parts of the genre, but not as much as half the shit people label survival horror on Steam and Itch.io.

You rating my post "fake news" is really taking a piss.

In retrospect, Sweet Home is considered a landmark game and is often cited for laying the groundwork for the survival horror genre. It served as the main inspiration behind Resident Evil (1996) which was a massive critical and commercial success, launching a multimedia franchise. Later games in the future continue to pull inspiration from the game through the use of quick time events, inventory management, and ghost story elements. Sweet Home's Metroidvania-style exploration, storytelling methods, and horror elements have been cited as precursors to key elements found in other successful games decades later.

Sweet Home is most definitely survival horror RPG and was the main inspiration for Resident Evil, same people worked on both games for the same company. Tokuro Fujiwara, director of Sweet Home was a producer on RE. It has horror, it has survival with characters permanently dying no less, therefore it's "Survival Horror" in every meaning of those two words.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

To be a survival horror, it needs to be a horror game with special emphasis in survival and horror via gameplay design, like the first handful of Resident Evil games, or Darkwood. It doesn't need everything I described just as every soulslike doesn't need estus flasks, but it does need to be close. e.g even the first Silent Hill qualifies despite no inventory restrictions. Even silent hill 2 qualifies despite being a terrible game. It still has restrictive saving, gimped character (control), low quantity of action and enemies don't drop resources when killed etc

All right, fair enough. The way I read it implied even the first three RE wouldn't even be in the survival horror category.

You rating my post "fake news" is really taking a piss.

In retrospect, Sweet Home is considered a landmark game and is often cited for laying the groundwork for the survival horror genre. It served as the main inspiration behind Resident Evil (1996) which was a massive critical and commercial success, launching a multimedia franchise. Later games in the future continue to pull inspiration from the game through the use of quick time events, inventory management, and ghost story elements. Sweet Home's Metroidvania-style exploration, storytelling methods, and horror elements have been cited as precursors to key elements found in other successful games decades later.

Sweet Home is most definitely survival horror RPG and was the main inspiration for Resident Evil, same people worked on both games for the same company. Tokuro Fujiwara, director of Sweet Home was a producer on RE. It has horror, it has survival with characters permanently dying no less, therefore it's "Survival Horror" in every meaning of those two words.

Really? Copy/pasting Wikipedia? Wow. They did start if as a remake of Sweet Home, but they also at one point planned on including a cyborg and making it a FPS. By the time the game was actually finished, basically none of that beyond a few neat similarities in character and map design. It's just Japanese politics trying to downplay how much the game owes to Alone in the Dark, something blatantly obvious to anyone who's played both games. "It has horror and characters can permanently die" describes a good chunk of '80s CRPGs, do you want to tell me that Wizardry is a survival horror game? Because that describes Wizardry too in the key components. Moreso than Sweet Home, actually, because death might be there in Sweet Home, but it's really difficult to do unless you intentionally throw it, unlike in Wizardry.
EDIT: I'm curious, do you consider Resident Evil 4 to be a survival horror game?

 

[Häyhä]

Really? Copy/pasting Wikipedia? Wow. They did start if as a remake of Sweet Home, but they also at one point planned on including a cyborg and making it a FPS. By the time the game was actually finished, basically none of that beyond a few neat similarities in character and map design. It's just Japanese politics trying to downplay how much the game owes to Alone in the Dark, something blatantly obvious to anyone who's played both games. "It has horror and characters can permanently die" describes a good chunk of '80s CRPGs, do you want to tell me that Wizardry is a survival horror game? Because that describes Wizardry too in the key components. Moreso than Sweet Home, actually, because death might be there in Sweet Home, but it's really difficult to do unless you intentionally throw it, unlike in Wizardry.
EDIT: I'm curious, do you consider Resident Evil 4 to be a survival horror game?

Sweet Home is widely considered survival horror and hugely influenced Resident Evil with the same people making it, end of story, I don't really give a shit whether you consider it to be or not. Anyone with half a brain can make the connection. Also, I never said Alone in the Dark DIDN'T also influence RE nor did I downplay the game or it's legacy in any way.

Wizardry is a fantasy RPG, where as Sweet Home is obviously horror so stop being facetious. It's a matter of what is the MAIN setting of the title.

And yes, Resident Evil 4 is survival horror. That's enough of this thread de-railing for me.

 

[Ash]

I was on board until you said RE4 is survival horror. It definitely shares similarities, a slight base design crossover, but non-stop action, frequent checkpoints, quite linear, enemies dropping resources, never have to carefully plan your route - which enemies to remove or run from is not a factor, inventory and resource management is barely a concern despite the lovely grid implementation...no.
Survival and horror (and even realism) have significantly reduced emphasis than the prior 3 games in favor of action. Nothing wrong with that, but it isn't survival horror. It's a third person shooter with a few minor survival horror similarities.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

Really? Copy/pasting Wikipedia? Wow. They did start if as a remake of Sweet Home, but they also at one point planned on including a cyborg and making it a FPS. By the time the game was actually finished, basically none of that beyond a few neat similarities in character and map design. It's just Japanese politics trying to downplay how much the game owes to Alone in the Dark, something blatantly obvious to anyone who's played both games. "It has horror and characters can permanently die" describes a good chunk of '80s CRPGs, do you want to tell me that Wizardry is a survival horror game? Because that describes Wizardry too in the key components. Moreso than Sweet Home, actually, because death might be there in Sweet Home, but it's really difficult to do unless you intentionally throw it, unlike in Wizardry.
EDIT: I'm curious, do you consider Resident Evil 4 to be a survival horror game?

Sweet Home is widely considered survival horror and hugely influenced Resident Evil with the same people making it, end of story, I don't really give a shit whether you consider it to be or not. Anyone with half a brain can make the connection. Also, I never said Alone in the Dark DIDN'T also influence RE nor did I downplay the game or it's legacy in any way.

Wizardry is a fantasy RPG, where as Sweet Home is obviously horror so stop being facetious. It's a matter of what is the MAIN setting of the title.

And yes, Resident Evil 4 is survival horror. That's enough of this thread de-railing for me.

People also widely consider Slender, Five Night's at Freddy's, Clock Tower and Amnesia survival horror games. Next to Alone in the Dark, Resident Evil, Sweet Home and then Resident Evil 4. The whole point of this derailing has been that people like you go "oh, you have to survive and it's horror so it's survival horror." Which tracks with how often RPG gets boiled down to "oh, you play a role in it". Kindly explain to me in such a way without using the words "survival" or "horror" the gameplay similarities between Sweet Home and Resident Evil that can't also put Wizardry in the genre.

See, there's a reason why I brought up Wizardry. (And RE4, but I'll get to that) There are very few games which can manage something more terrifying than slowly making your way up or down in Wizardry only to end up in an incredibly dangerous encounter. Just barely making it to the surface to restore your party's health. More to the point outside of the QTEs it has everything listed as a survival horror element in the Wikipedia copy/paste. And it does share multiple other similarities with Sweet Home. Clearly, this means by your definition, Wizardry is a survival horror game. After all, you have to survive and it's horror, so it's survival horror.

The point I was trying to make is that Resident Evil 4 is not a survival horror game because it prevents you from winning without killing a ton of enemies and incentivizes you via enemies dropping a ton of items. Which is comparable to why Wizardry and Sweet Home are not survival horror games, not only are you incentivized to kill everything you come across you're downright required to do so if you want to win. But you do think RE4 is a survival horror game, so I must admit, I can't really argue with that. Just like by your own definition, Wizardry is a survival horror game, fantasy facepaint or not.

 

[Lemming42]

"Survival horror" to me still means shit like Alone in the Dark, Resident Evil 1 - 3, Dino Crisis, Fear Effect*, Martian Gothic, that Clock Tower sequel on PS1, etc. I know nobody else uses it like that anymore but I don't know how else to refer to that specific type of game with fixed camera angles, pre-rendered backgrounds, tank movement, stuff like that.

Is there any other term for that specific genre?

*not even a horror game, i know

 

[HeatEXTEND]

And yes, Resident Evil 4 is survival horror.

eh.....

 

[Ahnx]

Here's my all-time top 10:

Deus Ex
Diablo 2
Civilization
Doom
Elite
Fallout 2
Arcanum
Red Dead Redemption 2
Disco Elysium
Star Control II

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

"Survival horror" to me still means shit like Alone in the Dark, Resident Evil 1 - 3, Dino Crisis, Fear Effect*, Martian Gothic, that Clock Tower sequel on PS1, etc. I know nobody else uses it like that anymore but I don't know how else to refer to that specific type of game with fixed camera angles, pre-rendered backgrounds, tank movement, stuff like that.

Is there any other term for that specific genre?

*not even a horror game, i know

When you get down to it, that definition actually fits as a genre. That's how I use it. I guess you could always say RE-clone, since even if survival horror is tainted everyone knows what you mean by RE-clone. The problem with survival horror is that as a genre it's used more like horror. What I mean is, there's a difference between the mechanic genre which determines how a game plays and the setting/thematic genre which determines if it's sci-fi, modern or set in ancient Egypt. Much like how people can't understand how a roguelite isn't really a roguelike, so roguelites somehow became roguelikes and roguelikes became "traditional roguelikes", that's gone on with survival horror, but without the nice new name. Until someone thinks up a nice name that catches on among the masses things are a bit fucked. Hey, maybe "traditional survival horror", or as I'm sure some of us will call it "real survival horror".

 

[Naraya]

Every list without Quake is invalid, simple as.

 

[Beans00]

Any game where enemies or the environment tries to kill you = survival
Any game that tries to scare you = horror



I win again.

 

[Vic]

what if the game tries to kill you with jumpscares

 

[Nifft Batuff]

I cannot think of any gem post 2005. Just some few passable games.

Edit: ah! I forgot Stalker (2006).
Maybe also Hiversaires and Kairo (around 2010 I think).

 

[rêve]

The witness. All you need to know is that it's an ingenious puzzle game in which all puzzles are 100% logical, thus a walkthrough is not necessary. Looking up anything else on the game may spoil it for you, be warned. One of the best games ever made.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Come on, people. Put your reading comprehension panties on. Do not post all-time lists, only the ones since 2005 or so, as per thread title.

 

[Zlaja]

PS1 had of note:

Doom
Doom 2
Final Doom
BRAHMA Force
Duke Nukem 3D
Alien Trilogy
Descent
Descent 2
Exhumed/Powerslave
Quake 2
Disruptor
Hexen

PS1 was an awful system for this type of PC-centric shooters. All these ports offer an inferior gaming experience.

ALL the onimushas? Only the last one is approaching greatness and even that probably doesn't deserve a prestigious rating

How can you prefer the mediocre Dawn of Dreams over the best Onimusha, which is Onimusha 2?

 

[Ash]

PS1 had of note:

Doom
Doom 2
Final Doom
BRAHMA Force
Duke Nukem 3D
Alien Trilogy
Descent
Descent 2
Exhumed/Powerslave
Quake 2
Disruptor
Hexen

PS1 was an awful system for this type of PC-centric shooters. All these ports offer an inferior gaming experience.

Fake news. Games that were originally designed and played as keyboard-only shooters (the majority here) played just fine. A d-pad and numkeys are functionally the same (well, d-pad is better).
Games that transitioned to mouselooking (Duke Nukem 3D, Quake 2), THOSE played markedly worse, though were perfectly adequate for those that may not have had a PC. I owned both of these on PC, PS, and N64, so I actually know what the fuck I am talking about. I wouldn't always have access to the family PC and was interested in version differences anyway.
Once again I need to educate: most of these games were originally played by almost everyone with the keyboard-only. NO MOUSE. A mouse was not a common household item in the early-mid 1990s, and these games weren't even programmed for full mouselooking anyway, so at best you'd just get mouselooking on one axis if you did try. Early FPS was sub-optimal in this regard, but at the end of the day functional. Just as it was functional if not more comfortable on PS.

Furthermore, it's irrelevant you faggot. We were talking about PS1 vs PS2. Generally, all games play markedly better on PC. You can tweak them, mod them, play with multiple forms of input mouse controller joystick whatever. Generally, you can do anything a PS1 or a PS2 could do and more.

Not all of these are even ports, but unique experiences. Brahma Force in particular is a very impressive game, and plays extremely well. I just discovered it a couple weeks ago and it is a total hidden gem of the 90s: https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...t-prestigious-game-you-never-heard-of.148879/

When it comes to the ports, for one I'd pick the PSX version of Doom over vanilla PC Doom. Only with sourceports and mods does PC doom become obscenely superior. Otherwise I prefer the horror atmosphere of the PS version, not to mention no quicksave faggotry for pussies. INB4 people that have never played it tell me how wrong I am.

Stop being a massive ignoramus.

How can you prefer the mediocre Dawn of Dreams over the best Onimusha, which is Onimusha 2?

Now that's a mediocre game.

 

[gabel]

Speak for cRPGs only. Most other genres are doing very, very bad. For instance, when was the last good stealth game? Also, when was the last stealth game that was actually truly stealth, not stealth but you can run around beating everything up without consequence or difficulty if you want to.

There hasn't been such a game since the 90s/early 2000s in my book. People say the NuHitman games are good (I've not played them), but I've played older Hitman which are more puzzle games than anything, much of the game time involves casually walking around in plain sight in disguises than actually sneaking around.

The two Styx games, Styx: Master of Shadows (2014) and Styx: Shards of Dakness (2017), are well worth playing.

 

[Lemming42]

Speaking of old FPS control schemes, I always really liked the mouse-only control in Doom engine games (and I think Build games were the same but I forget). Mouse forward and backward to move the character, left and right to rotate the view. Left click to shoot, hold right click to toggle strafe mode, middle mouse (if you were a bougie tech-head who actually had a mousewheel) to activate doors and switches. Wolfenstein 3D, in particular, I can't play any other way.

Being able to control your exact movement speed was great, I always used it to peek slowly around corners and then back into cover. I wish some of the modern throwback shooters would allow it as an optional control scheme.

 

[Ash]

Glorious Build engine games had full mouselook support, though many players still didn't own a mouse and played without. Only in '96 did programming FPS with full mouselook become standardized, after eventually catching on from the exceptions like Marathon & Terminator: Future Shock (which are otherwise mediocre). Most of the ports in my list are 93-95 with no full mouselook.

PS1 is well worth looking at even for a high standards PC-only FPS fag for Brahma Force ( ), Disruptor and Alien Trilogy (though AT later got a port to PC). I would say Doom port also but most are allergic to a real challenge - you have to beat each level without a save, only can save in intermissions like a boss.
N64 is well worth looking at even for a high standards PC-only FPS fag for Turok, Turok 2, Doom 64 (see nightdive remasters of all three) and Duke Nukem Zero Hour (third person game but it plays like an FPS).

Or you can just be a faggot and play any FPS released after Y2K, which are almost universally on rails barebones hitscanning shit with like 3 enemy types on average and the jump height of a toddler.

 

[janior]

alien trilogy is laughably easy