Playing an able-bodied person

>playing an able-bodied person
>weapons and potential weapons everywhere
>never pick up any of them
>never try to fight back at all
>forced to act like a pathetic and cowardly asshole the whole time

Bravo Red Barrels.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=eVrYbKBrI7o
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

The game flat out tells you that you're not a fighter.

even a non-fighter would think of trying to defend themself

Why? How fucking hard is it to pick up a pool cue, chair leg or even lightstand and beat the fucking brains out of the lunatics trying to kill you in a nice condemned fasion? Would make sense not being able to fight something like Chris or Walrider but inexcusable whwn it's just regular crazy people.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with all the time and money that would have to go into programming a combat system

Isn't it suggesting you play as a liberal?

Fight or flight
You'd think it'd be natural to choose to fight when cornered as all living things have the instinct to do
But even when cornered this faggot just runs away
And you know he's a tough, pretty strong and fit guy.

nigga its fantasy not reality

Alot of the crazies had weapons too didnt they? Plus at no point does it imply you are some tough bad ass. Actually the opposite.

So fantasy has pacifist faggots who have no sense of life preserving by any means necessary?

Look at those people who get fucked up on pcp and tell me if you want to fight one with a pool cue. These crazy fucks don't care about their own safety and will rip and tear you with every fiber of their being. Even if you kill one, if he manages to break your leg or jab out an eye before dying you're fucked.

Yes.

>"why don't horror games allow the player to kill enemies and defend himself?"
Because that is what makes a horror game, you are suppose to feel vulnerable and hopeless, run away from the enemies and find a hidding spot.

now let's list horror games that don't do this
>Silent Hill
>FEAR
>RE
>STALKER (horror elements)
any others?

>playing an able-bodied person
>naked castrated prisioners and dead bodies everywhere
>never romance any of them
>never try to stop for a quickie at all
>forced to act like a upstanding citizen the whole time

Bravo Red Barrels

>Resident evil 2
>Silent hill 3
>The Suffering
>Dead space 1 (despite Jumpscare galore it was pretty spooky)
Not a lick of walk sim shitfest like Amnesia garbage, all have full fledge combat too.

Decades of "but why didn't horror movie protagonist do x" criticisms have resulted in nothing. Why do people not get that they didn't do x because there would be no movie/game/issue if they did?

It's horror, it's packaged and familiar. If you want something more thought out or something that doesn't trigger your autism go look for something else.

It's just a different style.... Ugh, this discussion AGAIN. Just understand already.

You play as a reporter: the most spineless type of queer there is on the planet in modern times. You should not be surprised

And it wouldn't be far more effective to allow the player to try defend themselves and fail?

True but even the most cowardly liberal faggots are still human and share the same fight or flight responses. And they can still be dangerous, see Antifa niggers and their bikelock mace.

There wouldn't be a movie because the protagonist would then be dead after plot armor protects the killer. Video games, if it wasn't obvious to you, do not suffer from this restriction.

This isn't true at all. You are such a goof if this is really so hard to understand or strange to you.

It's a white numale simulator.

>this isn't true at all.
>you literally said that's why the protagonist doesn't attack the killer; because one side would be successful and end the film.

???

I'd imagine even a pussy reporter would fight to defend himself if cornered. There's scythes and machetes everywhere and he's up against deranged but regular people.

>this this this and this .jpg
But you know it's a real femenine, noodle armed numale faggot when he can't even overpower an old lady holding a heavy weapon.

What do you expect?
This is a video game from "hold shift to win" genre.

this, the majority of the inmates are jacked as fuck and could probably break your arms and legs super easily so you literally wont be able to fight back.

This scene in the basketball court was really well done.

>this
You aren't going up against your average street thug, most of these guys are psychologically fucked and don't understand the concept of fighting "morally" so they'll do whatever it takes to transform you into a bloody pulp. They're relentless too, as seen with the naked twins.

thats what i'm saying, or was trying to say.

I miss when horror games had gameplay.

>people in this thread are seriously defending a game not even letting you attempt to fight off enemies, even if it's scripted to fail.

the game's hardly a game... why are people, in 2017, still frustrated by this? just don't play it.

kek

>t.redditor
you used meme arrows wrong friendo; as a result you confused someone else

>DUDE lets put important main plot related text into missable documents LMAO

Who the fuck green lighted this flash of brilliant game design? Fucking hacks.

Penumbra

...

>FEAR
welp time for another playthrough.

This.

play Penumbra pls
it has the perfect balance of combat for a horror game

you arent a supersoldier but still have the ability to kill enemies if you want. the game still strongly encourages stealth

The game literally states that you are NOT a fighter

>b..but why not program in fights even if they end in you failing

They could do that, but then again if you are gonna just die pretty much all of the time, why the fuck waste time and resources programming in a combat system??

>why spend time making the game better?

>the game would be so much better if encounters ended basically the same as they currently do!

Its the little details that can take sonething average and make good

Yes, it would be better if the threats in a horror game could be taken seriously by proving that you cannot, in fact, just fuck them up with a weapon instead of just saying "you can't do that". It would be a better game if there were enemies that could be dispatched or hampered, increasing the shock value when others manage to turn the tables. It would be a better game if that players can act like that character would instead of handwaving it away with "I'm not a fighter" as if survival instincts shut off after declaring yourself a pacifist.

How about this instead? You can't really fight back at them, but you can stun them or trip them to ground to give you time to escape.

But that would be "wasting time and resources programming in a combat system" which is the exact opposite of what you said a second a go.

Sounds good to me. Adding more interaction betweem the player and the game always helps

That's some next level shit reading comprehension when you don't understand your own words.

You fucking termdrop fight or flight, you dolt. Ever notice the extra word in there with all your bitching that he doesn't fight?

He chooses avoidance. I.e., flight.

>implying they are the same person

Antifa aren't liberals.

>"Blake is not a fighter!" I keep hearing.

The dude doesn't look a skinny, weak pansy to me. Really look at his hands and arms for once, niggas. He doesn't look like your regular lefty faggot. He should be able to punch someone's shit out.

The player should choose. The game shouldn't choose for the player. Kind of why most games are boring as fuck now.

It worked for alien isolation, which is pretty much the best hide n seek game ever made. It strikes a great balance of being able to distract and fend off the alien. You can even try to fight back only to end up dying with it being completely your fault.

Maybe you shouldn't jump into the middle of an argument if you don't want to be mistaken from someone taking part in said argument.

>why do I have to put Tetris blocks in the right place? I'm a BIG STRONG MAN, I should be able to just slam down the Tetris blocks until they fit in the holes
>I don't know the difference between video games and real life

>he wants more resident evil tier "kill everything" games

>Implying that's not how Tetris should be.

>implying im not the original person you were referring to

I dont understand this. There are flabby weak people of any political affiliation

I dont play horror games really. Amnesia was so boring it turned me off from the genre

>fighting incredibly buff tiny dicked twins

Good luck fag..ill be over watching them eat your kidneys

How about you just not assume the person you're replying to is the same person?

>See battery and flashlight
>Can pick up the battery, but not the flashlight.

Tell me how this makes any sort of conceivable sense?

I would have liked the ability to fend off enemies who grab you with a weapon but that's it.
If he was actually capable of fighting back it'd have been incredibly stupid.

>Roided up retards with complete disregard for their own safety powered by pure anger and nuggies
>Somehow capable of being stopped by a pool cube because user fantasized it as such

Why would you use the flashlight instead of the night vision camera, besides the time you drop the camera?

>"I want combat to exist for realism's sake even if its rarely effective" is somehow equated with "I want to be able to kill everything".

Some friend of mine refused to play this game because he said it was based on some actual event and he found it offensive. What the fuck was he on about?

>get ambushed after a prolonged period of silence
>shrill trumpet scare chord blares to the point of ludicrousness
>start associating the sound with absurdity
>tension jumps out the window because every major threat is announces with a silly determined PAAAAAAARP noise that isn't scary

Gritty nudity and guro aside, how is this even a horror game?

It's somewhat based on Jonestown.

Shining a flashlight is easier than looking through a fucking camera, user. Not to mention having a backup light, a make-shift club, or a blinding instrument.

youtube.com/watch?v=eVrYbKBrI7o
2spooky4me

True, but with the night vision camera you're not giving away your position while hiding in the dark.

>he wants more walking simulator with jumpscares horror games

It doesn't hurt to pick it up, though.

And from a gameplay perspective, having to choose between the wider field of view of the flashlight or the security of the camera would be interesting.

Hiding/Stealth/Running Away=/=Walking Simulator

So it's like thief without gameplay?

Yeah, you do make a really good point.

Horror games that have nothing but Scooby Doo chases and abruptly smashing serenity with loud noises are just as bad as RE action schlock desu.

>Stealth
o i am laffin
the "Stealth" systems in these games are completely fucking irrelevant, and the complete inability to fight back not only makes these not survival horror games, but it's a huge immersion breaker when the enemies are just people, no matter how scary they are.

they might not be walking simulators, but they're closer to walking simulators than to survival horror games. Outlast and Amnesia are trash and exist only as viewbait for youtubers and twitchfags

What works in one game doesn't work in another.

Both sides of this argument are faggots. Horror games can have combat and still be tense if they balance the game around it. Managing your resources, picking your fights, how long you should take aiming and other decisions can be super intense to make when fighting a bunch of enemies. The opening sequence of RE4 where you're being rushed by a horde of villagers did this very well the first time that you played and you had no idea how long this was gonna last or what was gonna happen.
But if a game is designed around not having combat then it can also be scary as hell if they find the right balance between being vulnerable and interactivity.
Both mechanics are fine and games are supposed to be diverse, it would be boring if all horror games had guns or if all horror games had lockers to hide in

By "stealth" you mean "crouch to turn invisible," right?

>if a game is designed around not having combat then it can be scary as hell if they find the right balance between being vulnerable and interactivity

you're right, but they haven't made that game yet. Alien Isolation is the closest to that and you -can- fight back

Why do you have to be able to kill shit for it to be survival horror???

Why cant I just hide in resident evil?

Liberals the game: If you kill your enemies they win. fuck your god

>push button and activate event
>hide
>move to next room
>push button and activate event
>hide
>move to next room

this is the whole game.

>they are just people

Have you played the game? When thry catch your ass they throw you to the ground like you are nothing. Fighting them would be an exercise in futility.

>But if a game is designed around not having combat then it can also be scary as hell if they find the right balance between being vulnerable and interactivity.

But there is a difference between "not having combat" and "not having -effective- combat". All tension is drained when your character is surrounded by weapons and is facing human or almost human enemies yet cannot attempt a swing at them because the developers sacrificed immersion to cut costs. No one is saying that the combat should always work or even -ever- work, but allowing the attempt cements the enemies as a credible threat and not "well, I'm supposed to believe the enemies are a threat because the game said so".

you don't have to be able to kill shit, but there needs to be actual mechanics. inventory management, something to actually do. just... mechanics, interactivity, of any kind. In Outlast your ability to interact with the world is limited to walking, running, and crouching to turn invisible. Mechanically, it has more in common with walking simulators like Dear Esther than it does with most Survival Horror games.

>survival horror
>survive
that's why I have to kill shit - to survive. I know most video games and movies are made by cucks and jewish producers that have never been in a fight in their lives, but a real man, a real human being put in a dangerous life or death survival situation would fight back. only a cuck who gets his daily joy from his first starbucks of the day wouldn't be able to understand this. this is basic human nature, basic survival instinct. I don't care about "muh drugs" "muh pyschos" bullshit, I'd fuck up anyone who tried to tussle with me

Last I checked, throwing someone is something that "just people" are capable of doing, and "just people" with strong arms are not insurmountable obstacles when you have a weapon.

>You're not a fighter.
>Stuck in a monster house trying to save your girlfriend.
>Get a cool mask with powers.
>Kill everything.

I don't have to be able to kill shit I just want to be able to do more than run and open doors

put some gameplay in my game plz

as says, just because fighting them wouldn't work out well for you doesn't mean in that situation you wouldn't try. IF you were cornered or thought you were gonna die you'd try, not being able to fight is an immersion breaker. You don't have to be able to actually kill your enemies, but not being able to fight them is shitty. Well done examples of this are the alien in Alien Isolation, or Jack Baker in the 30-40 minute part of resident evil 7 that is actually good

>shoot enemy
>move
>shoot enemy
>move
>shoot enemy
>move

wooooooooooooooooooow

this is the whole game...

F.E.A.R wasn't scary at all, still a very good game. The game is very very short tho

sounds more interesting than push a button and hide desu

at least shooting an enemy requires aiming, at least different enemies might need to be shot in different ways, in different places, or with different tools. Still better than the glorifed walking simulators that modern horror games have become.

Resident Evil 7 was a really nice breath of fresh air despite the fact that it was only a 5/10 game for me. I hate that the genre is so boring and stagnated that a game as mediocre as RE7 can feel like a gamechanger