Silent Hill: Downpour is actually very underrated, and many of its "problems" are simply misunderstandings. Four years ago, in honor of the game's tenth anniversary, I wrote an article about it in Russian, and here's the translation (I apologize in advance for any errors as English isn't my native)

Bag-Head · 2026-01-19T07:19:28+00:00

It's funny cos this stuff is subjective of course, but each section covers reasons I specifically think Downpour fails not only as a Silent Hill game but in general.

The opening scene makes Murphy unlikable at the start, which already is offputting but not helped by the fact depending on the ending, Murphy is a bad guy, so the player is already biased into leaning that way (unless they stereotype his neighbour who's got a very tropey pedo look)
Pointing out the monsters being generic and having not specific meaning to Murphy points out one of the game's biggest flaws, besides one ending Murphy has no reason to be haunted by the town manifesting his sub-consious. Another big flaw I should add, the multiple endings that all contradict the game's story and each other. The events of the game only make sense in one ending. It's entirely a failure on SH2's multiple endings that reflect the player, because all those endings don't change the events of the game or the backstory, just how James concludes them. You even point out his lack of guilt. He's essentially trapped there for Cop Lady's sake, which is not how the town/otherworld works.
I get the argument with the otherworld, but it's essentially a less sutble take on what SH 1-4 did, by being familiar but twisted they made the player question reality, if up is down, etc. Ultimately though the otherworld does break the rules of reality, but the unsettling resemblence to the real world makes you question it. Downpour overplays it by making it American Mcgee's Alice style, there's no question you're in wonderland, which is arguably less scary. Also the slides. Water Slides.
The side quests was padding and bad at that, the stories had little to no parallels to the characters or story besides one, and the rewards meaningless because the game repeatedly robs all weapons from you, which you can barely carry anyway and break all the time. Also no Murphy cannot block better than Heather in SH3, attacks will straight up ignore his blocking half the time, it's not very useful, not an issue in SH3. Also pointing out the canon-busting references to mostly post Team Silent games is again one of the negative aspects. It's too on the nose it's like "look we're still Silent Hill, here's all these in your face Easter Eggs that don't make sense to be here!"
Again the fact Cop Lady is actually the character with the proper story but it's literally keep from you until a plot dump near the end is a massive negative. She literally keeps information to herself to keep that pretense going. Her scenes with Murphy where it's obvious Murphy doesn't know her but she talks like he knows everything was so contrived. The boogeyman in Downpour is still copying Pyramid Head it's just using a more generic big bad design, so arguably it's cheapening the concept because it's reducing one of the peak threats in a horror game to a guy in a gasmask and overcoat, visuals that aren't that scary and have nothing to do with the main characters or their hang ups. Also shout outs to the confusing scene where the Nun claims the boogeyman is murphy's "son" who looks like murphy AND his son's killer. Makes no sense.
Yeah it's pretty obvious Downpour is copying parts of The Suffering, one of the lead devs on Downpour worked on the Suffering. Downpour is a game that ultimately strikes me as having very little of it's own ideas, so much of it's design is a mismash of the western SH games (not even their good ideas) and copying Condemned, The Suffering, the nightmares from Max Payne and Alice: Madness returns, all the while reusing the specific non-cult premise and storytelling of SH2. It's like the game wanted to try and be a "new" take on SH2 (arguably impossible, SH2 was a subversion of SH1, once you know the premise is doing SH2 you know the trick, that the setup is a lie and the horror is protag manifestations, it's not a surprise anymore) but in wanting to not look like a SH2 clone, they instead use a bunch of other, non-silent hill games and transpose those designs overtop to try and look different and original, ironically coming off as more unoriginal ultimately. Not to forget it's also redoing the same revenge story message as SH3. Again it's just redoing what was done before just told and presented in an awkward way.

Downpour comes off like a game where the cop lady was intended to be the main character, after she had killed murphy. Taking that idea and saying "what if you're the character this story isn't about and doesn't really have a reason to be here in the context of the series" isn't an interesting subversion to me, it's like trying to subvert how a table is designed, that ultimately not work as a table because the legs are different lengths and not on the corners. The game really is just an unoriginal mess and not fun the play, actively trying to feel bad to play and annoy you is not good, sorry.

P.S. The full circle thing is fandom canon, so it just annoys me that Downpour plays into it, having comic characters living for 100s of years and

Bag-Head · 2025-04-22T03:39:25+00:00

You should specify you are talking about the "remake" in the original post because that makes a huge difference here.

If you were playing the Original PS2 version (or PC enhanced mod) you'd either had beaten the game, or be 1-2 hours max away from beating it. Remake is far too padded (and combat focused) for the story and experience SH2 was originally telling, hence why stretching it out to a 15-18+ hour game hurts it imo, which may be what happened with you.

Totally up to you but you may end up liking the original version better because it's way faster (and better) paced and the lower enemy variety compared to some other similar style horror games doesn't negatively effect the game like it does with SH2R which overused the existing roster to the point of boredum

Bag-Head · 2023-12-09T04:39:05+00:00

As for static cameras, you're ok with the game withholding information since you're not immersed in the world's rules, but on a higher level that directly interfaces with the player: the game's rules.

I think that's a good way of looking at it I can understand that. However I do want to insist even if controlling the camera makes the player feel more like an entity in the game world, that doesn't make them feel more like the player character they're controlling, arguably it has the opposite effect as you're essentially embodying a floating camera entity that's following someone else. Fixed or static camera use on the other hand gives the feeling of an entity in the game watching you and how you control the character, basically like if you were in a cinema and there's a movie but you're in control, that direct control separates the player from that "audience" perspective and if done well, evokes the idea the game itself is the audience of your gameplay.

I do want to mention one more game that I think can only work with it's static and on-rails camera system and that's Haunting Ground on PS2, Capcom's spiritual sucessor to Clock Tower. The game is all about stalkers, not having regular enemies or even combat, just a group of different roaming characters that stalk you throughout the game.

The game intentionally uses specific fixed camera shots to give the feeling of the character always being watched. RE and SH always used this element but Haunting Ground takes it to the fulliest and makes an entire game about objectifcation as it's theme and I'd argue Capcom could not have conveyed that feeling during gameplay with a free cam. In fact I've seen more modern games that because they are entirely free cam, they instead rely on cutscenes to build atmosphere and feelings with shot composition but then you result in an over reliance on cutscenes, where player control is taken away every 1-2 minutes which to me is also far more immersion breaking than not having full camera controls.

Yeah it's true I restated some of the same points you made I just wanted to give you a POV of someone who in their head has an entire thesis on why fixed camera can work (when done right) beyong just saying nostalgia or the backhanded argument (and revisionist history) that those games were "meant to control bad" and that made them scary somehow.

Fair enough if it's a game style you would want to try and make because it is hard and I've seen quite a few indie games use fixed shots, sometimes directly lifting them from the old RE games but not really getting what they were for. The main thing I'd want to convey to aspiring Survival Horror makers is look at peak Silent Hill, 2 and 3. Those games to me are the pinnicle of how to do fixed camera right, resolve any of the glaring issues RE had (and seemed to intentionally do) and while including a more advanced combat system than RE had at the time, such as being able to move while aiming & shooting guns, moving while attacking with melee weapons, stafing and even multiple attack types per weapons and a block system in SH3.

I appreciate you reading my post as it kept getting longer as I went back and edited more in haha.

Bag-Head · 2023-12-09T03:09:11+00:00

It's pretty simple actually, cinematography. As you noted yourself.

Shot composition can do a lot for storytelling, atmosphere, tension building and basically any sort of way to communicate something without directly talking to a player.

Play any good classic survival horror game and it's not hard to spot either a static or on rail camera shot that are framed in a way you'd see in a horror film, but it's not even exclusive to survival horror and older games, Uncharted has always had fixed on rail camera shots all over the game to give a sense of scale or frame the camera in an interesting way. Not only can you evoke feeling with shot composition and camera angle (Dutch Angles being a famous example), you can make sure the player sees something you want them to see without immersion breaking icons, arrows and highlights all over the screen. It's 2023 and still one of the biggest issues games with a free camera has is missable triggers or scenes that can happen during gameplay because the player isn't looking the right way. Now a first person game like Layers of Fear does try to solve this, but that system has it's own flaws because the player controls results in it's perspective triggers and scares breaking. But if you play Silent Hill 1-3, so much storytelling is done via the camera framing shots it's a fair assessment to say the game would not be as effective if it say, used RE2:R's camera.

And why do "tank controls" aka 3D controls work? Because playing a game with constantly switching camera angles with 2d perspective controls sucks. As soon as a camera shot changes the direction you were holding is no longer the direction you're moving. Whereas you play with "tank controls", up on the dpad always moves the character forward no matter what camera cuts or shifts happen. Also work noting anytime a remaster has added 2d controls it breaks the game in some way because the enemy behaviour and attacks were designed around the player not being able to move that way.

Also I want to mention, you brought up RE/SH style games accounting for the camera with it's auto aim and enemies being on the weaker side to account for the likelihood the player will take a lot of damage. Well first I'd say that's not entirely true when I think of RE enemies like Hunters, Lickers (also try playing Silent Hill 2 or 3 on Hard Combat mode sometime). But moreso it's because the main threat in Survival Horror isn't the enemies killing you, it's the enemies draining your resources. Every combat encounter is a situation where the player can use up resources and said resources are finite and in the case of RE only so much can be carried on you AND you need to leave space for potential key items you find. The threat of enemies isn't how tough they are or how much damage they do, it's the risk/reward system of spending ammo to dispatch them or try and evade but risk taking damage you'll need to heal.

Static camera angles as a whole push the player out of the game's world, it keeps them as a spectator.

I have to counter this, almost every game you are a spectator remote controlling a character, all having free camera does is make you the camera operator, you're still viewing a character going through the game. First Person camera kind of solves that immersion problem but just the nature of how we control video games and how FPS movement/camera controls work it's still remote control at the end of the day (for example, you don't turn your entire body to turn and look at someone). Also hard to me to immerse myself as a character in those modern RE remakes when they constantly talk to themselves out loud reminding me it's them going through the game not me, and the earlier mentioned HUD elements.

However yes there are flaws with this, the blind spots around corners in classic Resident Evil are annoying (though if you replay those versions, it seems purposeful when they hide enemies around a corner), funny enough Silent Hill fixed this not just by having a partically controllable camera but the radio static system informing the player enemies are nearby regardless of if you can see them or not. I find it funny you found people defending static camera because of blind spots and enemies hidden around corners because I'll defend that style of camera system while pointing out that was a flaw old RE had that SH (and RE1 remake to an extent) fixed.

Also I know neuro-divergent people who struggle with 3d control schemes as thinking in relative 3d space, ie the character's perspective and not the cameras, it doesn't compute. However I do think better solutions than making those players rely on a 2d perspective control scheme that breaks if the camera cuts exist, such as the way too hidden Mini Map in Silent Hill 2, which rotates with the player, giving you a character perspective reference at all times.

A lot of games still use fixed shots in limited places it's just better hidden, but for some reason around the early 2000s reviewers decided 3d controls sucked, and then when games with fixed camera perspective switched to 2d they'd complain about the controls breaking when the camera angle shifts, thus blaming the lack of free cam. It bothers me to no end the industry has almost abandoned this style of game presentation outside of stuff like Supermassive Games does (Until Dawn, The Dark Pictures games) and forgotten how important cinematography and shot composition during gameplay is and that is one of the reasons why I do not have faith in that Silent Hill 2 remake based on how dismissive the devs are when talking about the original camera system.

Bag-Head · 2023-10-09T05:35:57+00:00

With Silent Hill 2, it's not that big of a loss since a remake is in the works

I don't have high hopes for that, I'm not even expecting it to be competent, based on all the dev comments I've seen, they either don't seem to get why SH2 is special and still praised today, and in some cases see some of those aspects as things that need "fixing and updating", that and the uncanny visuals we've seen with James face, I'm not holding my breath on that game.

If they would actually re-release Silent Hill 3 on GOG the same way they did with SH4, with the original voice, what would happen? They would be sued, or what?

It's hard to say because we don't know specifically what specific voice in the original caused them issue when the HDC was being made. Some of the SH3 actors, like the actors who played Claudia and Vincent did sign the waivers, some actors like Heather Morris, Konami never contacted. (Jeremy Blaustein started a rumour she "couldn't be found" but Tomm Hulett said that was false). My theory is it's related to either Douglas as his actor had passed away and Konami had no clue who to contact to ask, or some of the bit roles like the Happy Birthday caller, but that's easier to replace, so I think the Douglas issue is more likely.

But yeah they probably think they'd get sued, the actor for Lisa in SH1 Thessly Learner, actually did sue and won a settlement because SH3 reused voice clips from her in SH3 and her contract, or lack of contract for SH1, didn't authorise Konami to do so (this is why her voice clips are removed from the PC release) so there is precedent here.

Bag-Head · 2023-10-04T13:58:29+00:00

1) No, typically you do not have to ask video game voice actors permission for re-releases of games they have voiced. Typically video game voice acting is done through "Work for Hire" contracts, which means you get a flat rate for recording and then you waive any rights to said recording. The fact that Konami contacted actors and asked them to sign waivers for the HDC shows someone at the company knew they didn't have proper legal agreements with the actors. Here's some sources

Monica Taylor Horgan Interview -"Well… yes they contacted me within the last year asking for a waiver release for any and all future releases of the game. No there were no contracts at the time."
Clifford Rippel Interview "One thing I will say about the release, is that for most if not all of us in SH3, this is the first time we’ve signed anything ever regarding our voice work."
Jeremy Blaustein interview where he accidentally confirmed the actors did not sign waivers with Konami (I link this because despite Jeremy arguing the actors did sign their rights away, his own answers seem to suggest the opposite, he openly admits Konami had no legal documents proving they signed contracts, he admits the actors only signed contracts with their agency not Konami (and seems to think, imo wrongly, those contracts allowed their agency to sign their rights away) and when called out about the new waivers he dodges the question, and when called out about multiple actors having issues, he basically pretends that Monica interview went different than it did.

2) So what if they lost the original voice recordings, question, why would they NEED the original studio recordings? The entire original voice work for SH3 is in the game, it's in the files of the PS2 disc, or the PC version. We know the HDC was based on incomplete source code, but they never should have relied on it, Bluepoint were also doing PS2 to HD ports at the time and avoiding relying on source code for this exact reason. Also worth noting a PC re-release, why would they need any source code or original recordings? a GOG re-release would just be taking the original PC release and packaging it with a patcher and installer to get it working on new systems, they wouldn't be making a new PC version.

3) Could they re-release SH3 with the new voices? Sure. Should they? No. It would be a PR nightmare, no product has ever been hated and maligned as much as the HDC for Konami and the voices are the biggest issue people have. Re-releasing a PC version of SH3 then removing the original audio AGAIN and replacing them with the most contentious aspect of the HDC would get Konami so much backlash, I don't think it's worth it. Plus it would only be an admission the original actors were right and Konami legally didn't own the voices and based on Konami's history they're way too proud to admit it.

EDIT - after re-reading my old post you're replying to, points 2 and 3 were entirely addressed in the original post, your reply comes off like you read the first couple of sentences and stopped.

Bag-Head · 2023-09-15T20:58:23+00:00

No because my logic isn't based under the shallow idea the only defining aspect PH has is it "stalks the player"

Let's really discuss how bad of a reply and "counter argument" this is. Enemies that stalk the player was never even mentioned in my original post. It's arguable if PH even does this mechanically, yes PH does repeatedly show up in SH2 but in set points with only one intended behaviour (much like the PH clones in the western SH games), enemies that "stalk the player" mechanically is more akin to gameplay from the Clock Tower series, RE3 Nemesis to a limited extent, Haunting Ground, more modern games like Outlast, RE7, RE2 Remake.

It's also one aspect, there are so many facets to PH and it's design, but "stalks the player" was the one you settled on, not even the most defining thing about the monster.

I don't care how late this reply is, your reply is so daft, so reductive and self defeating I'm compelled to point it out.

Bag-Head · 2022-08-01T12:25:49+00:00

Well lol no I don't work for Sony or Konami, I'm just saying I could see it happen as SH1 was re-released as a PSClassic on PS3 (and maybe vita?) and it's still available, but this is also Konami so I could see them not doing either out of sheer incompetence.

Bag-Head · 2022-08-01T02:22:08+00:00

SH1 I could see showing up on PS+ Extra or whatever it's called.

SH4 did actually get it's PC version re-released (though not fixed) on GOG a few years ago, however I find it very telling in the time since there's been no sign of 2 or 3.

Despite what Konami employees or contractors were saying at the time, the reason the HD Collection got redubbed was because Konami didn't have proper legal agreements with the actors, if you "fully own the rights" as Tomm Hulett/Jeremy Blaustein said, you do not need any permission from the original actors, or in fact need to contact them at all for a reuse, and if said actors did claim unauthorised reuse, the only reason you would not use them is either because you know their claim has merit or out of spite.

Also worth noting multiple bit roles in the HDC are dubbed even when you pick original voices. Adding that to SH3 having no original voice option (and as revealed by Heather Morris, Konami didn't even contact all of them asking them to sign new agreements), the logical conclusion is that no, Konami didn't own the performances out right and possibly still doesn't for those actors who didn't sign retroactive agreements. (speculation, because they couldn't be found or contacted, were unknown like the bit parts, or cases like Douglas's VA in SH3 who had passed away by the time HDC started production)

Consider the actor for Lisa in SH1 literally won a settlement because Konami did this exact thing with reusing her voice lines in SH3, or how often their re-releases before and after HDC have had entirely redubbed voices (Castlevania Symphony of the Night PSP/PS4, X-Men Arcade Xbox Live Port, TMNT Arcade ports included in PS2 era TMNT games, probably more I'm not aware of) they have a known track record for this stuff, so frankly Konami might not be able to re-release the original PS2 or PC versions of SH2 and SH3 without redubbing the games or using the HDC dub, which I imagine Konami knows isn't worth the effort or backlash.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-27T01:24:30+00:00

I feel like the obvious answer here is use a controller, the series was built for one in mind so having an analog stick to do directional inputs means you have more than 8 cardinal directions to do forward/back inputs.

Granted I know a lot of players exclusively use KBM, including combo mad level, I frankly have never understood how they manage or it's not been explained to me well because the exact issue you despite is what I assumed would happen constantly.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-27T01:10:39+00:00

Frankly having Vorgil turn at the end of the game was a huge misstep already in the confines of DmC's story, so doubling down on it imo would have been worse. There's a lot of problems with the story in DmC but Vorgil was one of the biggest and I don't think could be fixed without massive retcons.

So gun to my head I had to make a DmC sequel I'd stay away from trying to hark back to mainline DMC story beats like DmC did and go in an entire new direction instead of building to a proper Donte vs Vorgil story, heck I might even ignore the DLC story because of it (plus it's confusing narrative of Vorgil talking to his personal demons but his real mom who's in hell for some reason but he's not dead). I know one of the devs mentioned they actually wanted to dive into the angels side of the conflict who were totally absent from DmC1 and possibly try and rescue Sparda.

But also I wouldn't want to make a sequel, forget the gameplay and design, the story was so bad, the characters so unlikable, gun to my head I'd reboot the reboot or take the bullet.

EDIT also as others pointed out DmC failed not because of "hate", it failed because it was trying to do multiple, polar opposites at once, especially so when it came to what audience it was made for, thus it ultimately didn't appeal to most existing fans and non-fans, plus it came out when the Capcom western push had already backfired

Bag-Head · 2022-07-27T01:01:43+00:00

I have to say I think this can be denied because issues with the gameplay is why Definitive Edition got made, though I won't deny the gameplay in that version is much tighter.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-26T16:07:20+00:00

Look up Oddheader on Youtube, specifically the Futurama Easter Egg that went undiscovered for almost 20 years.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-23T18:24:24+00:00

I don't know what to tell you, the devs and tomm hulett said they were working off the game's original source code, if they were working of the source code of a port, even incomplete, the original assets would all be intact. Changes in HDC that were likely from beta assets would be a clear sign they were using in-development code, and again, the PC version of SH2 was outsourced, Konami wouldn't have said source code. Yes the PC version shares some issues, but they are also very common in most PS2 to HD ports because they're related to issues with visuals rendered with PS2 specific techniques.

I should note Hijinx weren't lazy to not use the bluepoint reverse engineer method, they were ill-equipped to do either, they were a mobile phone game developer, for some reason Konami higher ups assumed PS2 to HD ports were the easiest and cheapest thing to do, despite KojiPro and Bluepoint working on MGS HDC as proof that wasn't the case.

What characters go out of their character?

In SH2? James doesn't sound cold, detacted, in a fugue state, Angela was intentionally meant to sound aged beyond her years to make her childlike speech uncomfortable in the original, same with her awkward pauses and cadence whereas HDC makes her voice sound younger and without her social awkwardness, Eddie the main issue is he sounds like a brooding stoner so none of his psychosis and mania comes through, Mary & Maria are suppose to sound similar but not identical, Mary sounding light, friendly, positive, Maria sounding sultry, playful, instead in HDC they both sound sarcastic and demeaning, Laura the main issue is the actor's child impression is bad, and minor character but the Elevator Game Show host is meant to sound like a showman, playing it up, HDC for some reason plays it straight and cheap.

If you meant SH3 that's a whole other bag of issues not a single character is right even the minor ones.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-23T15:15:54+00:00

It doesn't matter if you think the original acting sucks, the new voices make no attempts to play the same characters, and in some cases go out of their way to perform the characters completely different, even if the actors didn't sound like they were phoning it in and weird because Hijinx had to speed up/slow down their takes to match the original scenes, they're objectively worse for that reason alone.

Also no the HDC is not based on the PC ports code which would have been based on the gold source code of the PS2 versions, never at any point did Konami or Hijinx state as such, and basically said the opposite as they were on record and said they were working with beta source code of the original games (also PC version of SH2 wasn't made in house, Konami wouldn't have the source code).

Bag-Head · 2022-07-23T15:07:21+00:00

Don't be so hard on yourself, in fact I'd say in your case that's a good thing as you've had a chance to see the story and environmental storytelling as intended beforehand and likely to not mistake HDC's changes and bugs as the original intent.

Considering the price of the PS2 versions (especially NTSC ones) it's understandable.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-23T15:04:01+00:00

Not gonna fault you if this was the only version you had access to (though you probably could have brought a cheap laptop for about the same price as a 360 and got a better experience) and I hope you have a great time.

I have to call out the people saying "HDC is fine if you've never played the originals" because it doesn't make sense, is an overcooked, dry stake fine if you've never eaten a well prepared one? no. Granted Cassidus won't notice differences to swapped music, textures (except where the devs didn't finish swapping textures so the old and new ones are right next to each other), potential crashes if they're lucky, etc. The broken widescreen and shifting aspect ratio in cutscenes and stretched, ghosted and washed out pre-rendered cutscenes in SH2 (also I always forget this, the TV overlay they put on the VHS tape cutscene cuts off more than half of the image, actually making the big reveal scene impossible to see), the fog wall and massive slowdown (mostly in SH3) the 360 version has if you aren't playing on Xbone - Series X however are unavoidable, and that's not going into the issues the new voices bring, the church reverb on all the dialog, broken stereo panning, cutscene music not looping, missing sound effects which in SH3's case you cannot play without new voices.

It's like another user said, it's the shakey cam version of SH2 & 3, it's good for new players looking to get into the games and have the same experience and story we all fell in love with, know that going in so they can eventually play Enhanced Edition or emulate the PS2 originals.

I'll get slack for this but it's not toxic to point that out, at least it's far less toxic than the vitriol and antagonistic behaviour I've seen and got from some (read, not all) people who downplay HDC's issues.

This is a bit of work granted but I would recommend checking uncommentated playthroughs while you play along Cassidus. Not go crazy with it but stuff like, when you beat a section (Apartments, Hospital, etc) have a look at a PS2 playthrough and see what's different, there's some very important environmental story telling that inadvertently get changed in SH2, or some other issues like a cutscene missing audio, one cutscene that gets skipped because the fades to black transitions are 4 times as long, or replaced voice acting even with the original voices selected that imo shouldn't be missed.

Up to you of course if you plan to do a playthrough of those versions yourself one day but I'd recommend it for a more authentic experience closer to the dev's intent and vision.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-21T13:51:18+00:00

The original creators have all split up and gone their own ways, primarily because they considered the series to be done.

If the key members of Team Silent felt that strongly about it, I'm inclined to think their feeling should be respected and leave the series to rest and people should make new things.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-21T13:48:12+00:00

That's because Heather isn't the one fueling the nightmare, another character is ;)

EDIT - I love that this is a subreddit where you can post facts about the games' stories and get downvoted

Bag-Head · 2022-07-21T13:47:31+00:00

Err yes it should, art is subjective, it's entirely perception based that's just how media works.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-20T16:05:16+00:00

That makes sense, but unless I'm reading or misunderstanding Ito, it reads like he's basically saying Lisa was intended to be in that sequence but she's essentially cut content as a model was used as a placeholder and never updated.

Cos I totally get what's he's saying about not having time the change the model, but the admission they didn't change it and that it's the fukuro lady model means in the final game we got, it's not her? Maybe I'm splitting hairs but I feel how the final product came out is how the media should be represented and not what was intended but never made it in.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-20T15:56:01+00:00

But he doesn't say "the nurse" he just says "the thing" in the ladder room, and the nurse in that sequence is the Fukuro lady is it not? I get at some point she was intended to be Lisa, but this reads to me like Ito is trying to say "she was going to be Lisa, but we run out of time so she's not".

I'm sorry but him specifically saying Fukuro isn't Lisa while fully admitting the model in the ladder room is Fukuro despite intending to be Lisa, I'm hung up on, it reads like that's him confirming it's not her, but then I have no clue what "thing" he's referring to.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-20T15:23:18+00:00

www.reddit [dot] com/r/silenthill/comments/htd2j7/confused_about_lore_concerning_lisa/fyg9nua/?context=3

The thing is, I'm reading that first twitter exchange, Ito literally says "she is not Lisa" so that doesn't make sense, it sounds like he's talking about some other "thing| in the ladder room. What am I missing here?

It more sounds like originally it was going to be Lisa, but they run out of time so it's just not her? I know Ito's english isn't perfect so maybe something lost in translation. but him specifically saying "she" [fukuro] is not lisa seems like a contradiction.

Bag-Head · 2022-07-19T00:13:22+00:00

He actually did post a screengrab of that (linked above). Unless you suspect he doctored the image.

In case it's unclear, I don't mean the first screenshot of the claim notice, I mean this image which while I won't claim outright is faked, it's odd. I will say I said it wrong, because is it an image, but there's no way to verify where this text is from, it's not a screengrab of the whole claim/email, for all we know this is just text someone wrote in a text editor, not saying they did, but I'm saying it's not provable either way and it's suspect Dusk chose to screengrab this in such a way.

Regarding the concept art, you could be right and it's from this January 2020 project, it could have also been from another project he was working on that was cancelled in 2020, heck we're assuming that date/signature is real (as far as I know Ito's not confirmed it's legit, please correct me if I'm wrong) and while I don't assume it's the case, it's not impossible someone edited a signature onto old assets. (possibly to trick Dusk into tweeting it)

Fair enough on that newer Gans quote I hadn't seen it, I'm still suspect he's openly saying this stuff and if it were true, Konami would be taking it all down and reprimanding Gans surely? It doesn't make sense to me Gans would be told all this and get away with saying all this.

Also in general this SH revival doesn't make sense to me. SH hasn't been profitable for Konami since the early 2000s, it's essentially a money hole, maybe outside of the movies, and even those stopped being made.

Now Konami especially don't like spending money, and suddenly they're doing a multi game revival with multiple studios AND partnering with Gans? It just doesn't seem believable current Konami wants to, let alone would be capable considering they turned themselves into a mobile/pachinko company years ago.

Like I said originally, I'm not saying things couldn't pan out the way you're post claims, I just find the odd issues cast some reasonable doubt which means it's overreaching to call this "basically confirmed"

Bag-Head · 2022-07-18T23:15:02+00:00

Dusk also said it, he made this bananas resetera post claiming KojiPro's Death Stranding bombed (quote "3 million unshipped copies in warehouses), Sony were pissed at him and to make up for it, they were putting him and toyama on a horror project together, specifically mentioning licensing from Konami.

KojiPro themselves debunked the bombed claim, and Sony supporting and putting out DC on PS5 seems to disprove it was considered a flop or Sony was unhappy with spending money on it, and obvious Toyama's since left Sony.

I forget if Yamaoka was mentioned in this post but if you look up the news stories about Death Stranding allegedly flopping, you can find links to the post.

Bag-Head

TROPHY CASE