Tension and frustration are two feelings that blend into each other, which makes the burden of making a horror game a heavier one to bear. Many fault the janky combat and aimless exploration of the
Silent Hill series, because these elements aren’t particularly fun. I know I’ve had my fair share of complaints, but I’ve still had a respect for the series because fun hasn’t ever been the goal for
Konami. The same can be said of
Climax Studios, developer of
Shattered Memories. Where
Silent Hill: Homecoming made the mistake of redesigning
Silent Hill as a western-minded video game,
SH:SM seeks to reimagine the series as an experience. It makes for the most original and enjoyable
Silent Hill since
SH3.
One gets the feeling that everything that happens in
SM is intentional, from the deafening ring of your cellphone to the trying chase sequences (more on those later). It’s a very controlled experience that can be considered an on-rails take on the series. You are always limited to the path in front of you, the puzzle you have to solve is limited to a room or two, and item management is nowhere to be found. It could almost be considered
Silent Hill for kids if it weren’t for the haunting atmosphere and sexual themes. In fact, the game resembles
Zack & Wiki in that you are always using the Wii remote to interact with the world in a literal way. You hold the controller to your head for cellphone calls, you reach out and open cabinets, and always solve puzzles with the precision of the remote. It makes for one of the most original Wii games that makes good on the promise
Zack & Wiki offered so long ago. It might seem like a gimmick at the outset, but these interactions bring you into the world and make you feel more vulnerable as a result.
It’s hard to make people care about a series as niche and redundant as
Silent Hill, so I can’t blame Climax Studios for its marketing blitz that played up the idea of this being a re-imagining and breaking psychological ground with technology that monitors the player’s state and acts upon it. Honestly, neither of these ideas would have come to my mind otherwise. Firstly,
SM plays like
Silent Hill if it leaned more on the adventure aspect than the action. There are no boss fights and the majority of the game is played within segments of puzzle solving with no sense of danger. Depending on the environment and music, these sections can be surprisingly relaxing.
Silent Hill veterans will undoubtedly feel a bit let down when they discover that the merciless sense of dread from past games is gone. However, there are nine chase sequences that add a bit of tension and inevitable frustration. Like the combat in past games, the chase sequences aren’t particularly fun and make the player feel out of control of the situation — not something you want in a video game, but has its own special result relevant to this type of game. Unlike combat, these sections are easier to forgive since they don’t have a direct comparison in other games. Also, you can’t die in
SM, at least not in the traditional sense. Similar to
Prince of Persia, failure in these sections results in a quick respawn to the beginning of a section. I found this to be a progressive choice, as
Silent Hill is an experience and not one you want constantly interrupted by game over screens nor item management and map studying for that matter.
The psychological aspect of
SM feels like a joke, if only because how Climax framed the game. It’s always at the forefront of interviews about the game, and, even worse, the game boots with a screen warning you that it will psychologically analyze you. That’s like if
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves had a warning screen that it will attempt to have awesome explosions. The psychological sections don’t add up to anything more than plot segments that help change the tone, bridge gaps in the story, and decide the ending the player will receive. These sections help give
SM its own unique identity, but it’s hardly a game mechanic that will be remembered for years to come.
SM’s biggest problem is that it reinterprets
Silent Hill conventions and calls it a day. Once you hit the mid-point after 3 hours of play, you’ve seen all the game has to offer and it's not going to go out of its way to surprise. This is a major disappointment when you consider how ripe the game is for some
Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem-type mind fuckery via the Wii remote speaker or the first person view, which is applied during dialogue heavy scenes. There are a couple standout moments, but
SM is a one trick pony that soon becomes a comfortable thrill ride when it would be more successful had it been more daring and confrontational for its duration. Then again, I can’t remember the last time a game asked me if I was a virgin in high school.
SM is a welcome reimagining not only of
Silent Hill but also the long stagnant survival horror genre. It doesn’t have the loftiest goals and it is far from having the scope and depth of a triple-A title, but there are so many great ideas at work that you can only imagine what it would have been with the resources of a bigger project. It’s the sort of game you wish was great instead of good and that you’d loved instead of merely liked. That’s still a lot more than I can say of any
Silent Hill since the first three.
It's a good game for sure and definitely the best one post-Team Silent.
It's Psychology horror
I'm not looking to send you to court for being a contrarian but it seems people blurting out HOT TAKE before a bad take are actively trying to add as little as possible to a potential discussion.
I mean, look at that comment from A_Latin_Guy. Pragmatic, justifying his thoughts, just a top of the class comment.
Hot take: This is clearly not a remake of SH1 and viewing it as such is just an obvious attempt at triggering nerds, such as myself. What a shame.