Doesn't removing combat sort of miss the point?

#11HPHovercraftPosted 5/14/2009 12:33:20 PM
But are any of these more brutal and horrific than beating something to a pulp with a steel pipe? Or a plank of wood with nails sticking out?

If brutality is all you take away from Silent Hill, the one missing the point is you.

---
CAUTION: I reserve the right to remain crass, opinionated, cantankerous, and argumentative at all times. Expecting me to behave otherwise will lead to conflict.
#12erichdusk(Topic Creator)Posted 5/15/2009 4:56:39 AM
You do realize that was the stated intent of the original creators, right? That's not my perspective.

In the original interviews with Team Silent regarding 1, and again in the Gamepro coverage of Silent Hill 2, they stated that the emphasis on melee combat was to get the players up close with the enemies, to create a sense of immediacy not possible when shooting everything from a distance. They also said that melee allows them to lend a sense of horror and brutality to your own character's actions.

Don't be a smartass.
---
Master cylinder!
#13HPHovercraftPosted 5/15/2009 10:18:12 AM
In the original interviews with Team Silent regarding 1, and again in the Gamepro coverage of Silent Hill 2, they stated that the emphasis on melee combat was to get the players up close with the enemies, to create a sense of immediacy not possible when shooting everything from a distance.

...so how is removing combat missing the point? By what particular set of mental gymnastics do you arrive at the conclusion that being chased down the street by a monster against which you have no defense is somehow less immediate than being able to cave in its skull with an emergency hammer?

---
CAUTION: I reserve the right to remain crass, opinionated, cantankerous, and argumentative at all times. Expecting me to behave otherwise will lead to conflict.
#14MrShackNastyPosted 5/15/2009 4:01:25 PM
Enough already.