*Employee* : "Hey Boss I need a week off of work starting now!" *Boss* : "Excuse me?! That's highly irresponsible. What unscrupulous and contrived reason did you engender that could even..." *Employee* : "Joseph Anderson just uploaded" *Boss* : "... Oh, shit negro, that's all you had to say! Lemme get the keys, we'll close up the whole shop mothafucka"
When I was in college, a friend of mine was playing Amnesia: Dark Decent. There was this room with deep pits instead of walls, so you had to watch your footing. The lights were off, the sound was loud, and when a monster showed up in the room, he scrambled for somewhere to hide. He couldn't find anything, and as the monster's screams grew louder, he jumped into the pit to avoid getting eaten by the monster. He chose metaphorical suicide over getting attacked. The fear doesn't necessarily come from the fear of dying. Being caught the the monster seemed worse than death, because you don't know what horrors await your avatar after the screen goes black. And you don't want to imagine your character going through that.
Maybe that's your interpretation of a scene like that, but for me, and I would imagine Joseph too, imagining what would happen to my character after death isn't something I do which is also why I don't find horror games scary
That is the exact point Joseph is trying to make... or well, I certainly think soo, I could be misunderstanding him entierly. But anyhow, Your friend in that game hopped of that ledge cause he diden't wan't to die by the clutches of the monstrosity, which is pretty smart, but I've got a single question for you; where did that pit take him exactly? Ohh right, the death screen of course. The reason why people like Joseph (I belive) and I aren't scared of horror games, isen't cause it dosen't have something like, say perma death; but instead cause death is more or less a scapegoat than anything else, and cause of that the fear of death disapears and just becomes another boring loading screen you've gotta sit through. Take a look at something like, The Forest, when you "die" you don't get the traditional death screen and instead you're shown that the canibals are taking you somewhere. (That being one of their caves, for the folk out there whom don't know) This set's the player back a few notches in their progression, forceing the player to not only get out of there, but also then treck all the way back to your base wherever it might be. This makes your first death increadibly scary, and subsequent deaths becomeing more of a hassle; rather than just the old boring loading screen. I just wanna make it clear that it ain't that, because the death screen exsists in the first place, the game can't be scary in anyway possible. But instead that the game is just letting you go for free, without punishing you with anything; aside from the teeny tiny loss of progression.
Scp containment breach scared me the first time. There were only 2 scp's that i feared to come across, scp 096 the shy guy. I needed to get in a room to activate a generator and than to find another switch to open the next door to progress. It was scary and frustrating because 096 loved to walk around in that room and when you saw its face.... well you can run you can hide he will find and kill you. Scp 106 the old man made me shit my pants. He can walk through walls he has always that evil smile on his face and he doesn't run or crawl after you, no he just walks and he can just go through a wall and appear were you are. And sometimes he ambushes you when you would least expect it. And when he gets you goodluck getting out of his dimension. You can only walk in there no sprinting only walking. And when you take too long to escape that place he will come after you and kill you. Than again it only scared me the first till the fifth time because the levels were randomly generated i always played on perma death. Keeps things more interesting, and that way i don't get desensitized. Desensitization for horror games is really easy to obtain cause you are experiencing it. In horror movies indeed empathy can counteract desensitization.
I mean that sounds like a good in-universe explanation but I'd wager that somewhere in his mind your friend was thinking "Fuck well lets get this over with so I can not fuck it up next time." when he jumped off that ledge. Whatever horrors they may inflict you are not party to, you can only imagine, in which case that isn't really done by the game but entirely an invention of the player. Now if it was something you actually experienced in game that would be different, and potentially interesting, but that isn't the case.
This is a really strange argument to me because what makes a piece of media scary in my eyes isn't the death of characters. It's the ideas and themes that are scary. "Is the protagonist going to live or die" is such a mundane idea that it can never scare me at all. When I play Silent Hill I'm not scared because I'm worried if my avatar is going to die. I'm worried because I do not understand what is happening or why its happening to me i. e. fear of the unknown. Something much deeper than simple mortality drives all good horror. The monsters are simply a delivery device for those themes. So when you say games are just horror themed I feel like you're missing the point. Those themes are the horror.
@@haloljt As general concept I agree. It can be a very interesting and nuanced topic. But the way it's being presented in this video it is simple. A binary "am I afraid X character is going to die or not". Not exactly a mind bending idea.
@@jakespeck5307 you have a point. But I do think he is onto something. Your own character in a video game isn't a particularly good vehicle for confronting the player with mortality and finitude...
After thinking over Joe’s streams, I’ve come to the conclusion that Joe doesn’t really get attached to characters. That’s probably relevant to this video.
Your post is exactly why I can't play horror games but am fine watching horror movies. I sort of identify with my game character, because I am the one in control I think.
Probably is why his critiques are so good, can't really enjoy the stories as they are because he can't turn off the critical part when playing. Think in game design its called entering the magic circle.
No joke, I was thinking about Minecraft Hardcore Mode when he talked about making the player scared of dying. Hiding in a hole for the entirety of a night because you didn't manage your time in the mines and came back out after dusk is terrifying, especially because you know you'll be ambushed by creepers and skeletons hiding in shadows as soon as you step outside.
The problem here seems to be that you consider death to be the ultimate source of fear. There are many other things people are scared of, such as torture be it pshycological or physical, situations where they have no escape and even gross imagery. Death isn't the only thing you are trying to escape from when you play horror games, you are running from constant stress and a disturbing atmosphere.
I don't think that's what he's saying. Death undermines everything that came before it if it's handled poorly (which most horror games do. HECK ! Which most *games* do, even the best ones). And that, in contrast, death in some games can enhance everything that came before if it's handled in a clever way. He brought up Don't Starve, but he could have easily brought up games like NieR:Automata or Darkest Dungeon, where death is used to enhance the themes and/or aesthetics of the game, not just because the game needs the player to have a failstate. Death should be a tool in the designer's belt, not just a state. If the goal of a horror game is "Make the character survive until the end of the story" (most horror games revolve around that basic plot structure), then well... It better have a good handling of why I shouldn't die and what happens if I do because the game itself makes a big deal out of death. Everything else is handled by immersion, but immersion is easily broken by things that don't make sense in the game's world. But that's an industry-wide problem we have yet to solve. Game designers are too afraid to mess around with conventions like death. Too many games are still stuck in the era of the "Game Over" which is a concept that needs to disapear in my opinion. Few game designers are really commited to push the medium forward in truly innovative ways, and that's a pitty.
I'd take that further and say it's uncertainty that you're trying to escape, be it in life or fiction. Wanting to know is the human condition. And even what we do know, we want to understand. And what we don't understand scares us. Torture and other such things bring on psychological stress because you don't know what the torture is or how long it'll last or how painful it may be. And when you do know those things there's a level of expectation that your mind tried to commit to in order to relieve itself but it's not sure if the torture will actually abide by thise things so it's still troubling. Sometimes we fear what we already know but still don't fully have answers for. Just think: right now there are trillions of microscopic organisms living on and inside you. A good portion of them aren't 'you' and don't serve your benefit but an even greater a question is 'are they all that's there'? There may be even smaller organisms on them and so on and so forth. And they just exist while you pay attention to you life and what you CAN see. Like cancer; if you have it, sure you are afraid of dying, but you're more afraid of the idea that some small entity has the power to impact your overall well-being and you can't directly confront it by yourself without medical help. And it doesn't do it out of spite or hatred; no, it's even worse. It doesn't feel emotions. It just does it because that's what it does, and it replicates itself so it can spread to your kids, and their kids, and your loved ones. That's terrifying. There are things far more terrifying than dying and being gone forever. That's why immortality is always seen as a negative in tropes. Sure you live forever but everyone you know and love dies and you have to see that for generations. You can amass more knowledge and wealth but what good does it do you if you don't have to worry about mortality which is a driving factor for us to succeed in life; so we can die with accomplishments and never be forgotten. I just think his argument that games aren't scary because you don't die permanently is silly. The only logical extreme of that statement would be that you'd have to make a game where you die and the game is no longer playable. Like die once and you're effectively left with a physical or digital paperweight. That wouldn't even be scary, it'd just be a fustrating waste of time, effort, and money.
@@thaddeuscheeleyjr.369 I agree with everything except your assessment of his video and I really think all you're doing here is insulting his intelligence. He never meant to say that petmadeath is the only way a game can be scary, he only said that the games he played didn't scare him because of the nature of death in them. And he gave an example of a game where permadeath enhances the experience, but that doesn't mean that he thinks that every game needs permadeath. It's a gameplay element that needs to be built around and I don't think he pretends like adding permadeath to everything makes it more scary. Death in most horror games is a meta element: You, the player, failed to overcome the challenge of the game so you triggered the failstate which brings you back to the last safe point for you to retry. That takes you out of the experience and breaks any form of immersion, you start seeing the elements of the game as just that: elements of a game. For some genres that doesn't matter that much, but for immersion-based genres such as horror, that shouldn't happen if you want your player to stay in the experience. I agree with him to some extent, horror as a genre needs to step up its game and truly use the medium of video games to enhance its qualities instead of defaulting back to using structural elements that should have died long ago with arcades. Since Dark Souls more and more games are starting to add in-diegesis elements to either explain death or use it as a mechanic, and video game as a medium is all the better for it.
@@arenkai To be fair, I think you are giving him too much credit. He is without a doubt intelligent. But the only thing I see is you putting words in Josephs mouth. You have made some excellent points that I can, eventhough i disagree at heart, can agree with. I think you are saying alot of intelligent things and passing it on to him without taking credit for it yourself. I watched the video twice and this is not what he is saying. If it is, he hides it very well.
@@Jungbeck Maybe I'm extrapolating too much on what he actually says, you may have a point here. But what he said is what triggered my thought process, so I can at least give him credit for that. The thing is, as a game designer, people like Joseph that are always willing to challenge the established rules are a breath of fresh air. The part about horror as a genre having immense untapped potential is a quote from one of his streams. I could even go further and say that video games as a medium still has immense untapped potential that too few game directors are willing to explore. So what he says in this video doesn't sound asinine to me, I can understand that people can't buy into them when they are so lazy with their meta.
Analyzing your stance as a game designer, it seems to me that you in particular value mechanically-induced emotions more than thematically-induced ones. Mechanics tend to affect emotions more directly than themes, because themes require you to perceive a concept and then care enough about it to feel something; mechanics, on the other hand, play with feedback, which is inherently more direct an influence. Given how you say that Silent Hill 2 isn't scary, my suggestion appears somewhat plausible. That game is not really meant to scare you, it is meant to display psychological horror. I.e. you are expected to be scared of thinking about the ideas it puts forth, rather than the presentation of their manifestation. In those games, presentation serves only to undermine your reasoning enough so that you can be more susceptible to the emotional weight of the symbolism contained within what's presented. If you as a type of player find yourself unable to be scared of thoughts, well, yeah, no surprise that you didn't get a thrill. A man who thinks much, such as a video-essayist, is unlikely to be thrilled so easily, just like how a martial artist doesn't get impressed as easily from combat challenges.
I have the exact same problem: The typical Horror-Games do not scare or horrify me at all. Sure, the Atmosphere can be tense but im not scared or horrified. The only games that horrified me in some sense were Bloodborne and Dark Souls 1 (bcs it was my first souls-game and i knew nothing. The environment was always a threat). Like you said: The mechanics affect my emotions much more than themes. Im just playing RE7 right now and the jump-scares dont work at all (for me). But the Atmosphere is really good and i can see that some might be horrified by this game.
I don't think this has anything to do with him being a video-essayist, he's just a mechanically-minded person. aside from that, your analysis is spot on.
The way I see it his critique is not a matter of what in the game is inducing the emotions, if it was movies would also be unable to scare him. The problem is that horror games fail - due their own mechanics - to convey suspense of disbelief therefore there isn't any room for horror to be present. . A person enter the game with the knowledge it is playing a game as result it can react in one of two ways: one, they banish that thought to the back of their minds and fully immerse themselves into the story or two, they active use that knowledge to their advantage. The second type of player will do stuff like: walk straight into the monster to get a feel of how many hits it can tank; stand still to check if he regenerate health over time; lure the monster around to check how far the monster can move from spawn and etc. I think you can see the problem, playing a game knowing it is a game break the spell of immersion, and horror is the genre most affected by it because dying is a immersion breaking mechanic. It doesn't really matter if James Sunderlane will hide from Pyramid head in time, you have infinite tries to get it right. You can see that in FnaF letsplayers, as they start dying over and over again the horror start turning into frustation and the game become a task, to avoid that a horror game has to balance the threat of dying with actually killing the player. To my understanding his critique of horror gaming not being scary boils down to a failure in that balance, a movie doesn't suffer from that problem (to him) because there isn't any inherent mechanic to take him out of the movie (like dying and respawning for games)
@@JojonathanOliveira Maybe I'm just different but the thing is that failing and being placed right back into the stressful environment of the horror game is what makes dying scary, and the only reason I wouldn't be terrified of dying and losing progress, is if that progress wasn't all that big. If I just saved a minute ago I don't care if I fail, however if my last save is right before I have to go into a segment where I have to run away to get into another segment where I have to sneak around then its a different story.
It's funny, as soon as I saw this video pop up in my feed I expected roughly everything you talked about. Through your various videos I've come to understand that you're the sort of player who is rigorously dedicated to a mechanical experience, and anything that doesn't match up narratively and mechanically will suck you out of the experience. This was most prominent in your Bloodborne video where you mentioned that you don't necessarily buy the game's plot, which is quite telling (you're the only person I've ever heard say this). For most of us, we're able to suspend that disbelief and work the tension from the opposite angle. It's not that we don't feel fear because the mechanics don't allow it, but rather we feel the same fear that we'd feel from a horror film and simply relegate the mechanics to a place in the back of our minds where it won't pose any more of a nuisance than a necessary evil by which we experience the game. We're not even considering the idea that we might respawn on death, we're trying to get through without dying and empathizing with the character so hard that we forget that gameplay even exists.
Thanks for typing up a comment that just explains your opinion and why it's different as opposed to calling him an arrogant, full of himself asshole like every other person did in this comments section, props.
Joseph makes a good point about how because when you die in traditional horror games (dead space, RE...) you respawn, meaning dying is just a temporary setback you can actually stop being scared by the game because you understand how its all trivial meaningless lights and noises and if anything lurking in the shadows does hurt you it ultimately can't stop you. However he basically says that when the death has more meaningful consequences like in don't starve the spooky sounds and monsters do scare him because they aren't just a minor setback (this could be applied to when deaths are contextualized in game so like in until dawn were the deaths are permanent and the story continues). I think you could make the argument that "fear" from games just comes from the suspence of not knowing if you're gonna lose progress. So in dead space for instance you can retry the same room all you want but you still don't want to be there forever, so every death even though they just account for a small time setback can still cause fear for some people that are commited to continue playing while killing the whole tension for others who arent as invested.
An interesting take, but I'm not sure how "I'm a video game character, if I die i'll just respawn" is any more immersion breaking than protagonist "plot armour" in a horror story in any other medium; If you're halfway through the story and the protagonist is in a life threatening situation, you know that there's still an hour of movie or two hundred pages still to go, so basic genre sense should tell you that the writer's probably not going to kill the character you've been reading about/watching all this time.
I would even add the reverse of plot armor where everyone dies inconsequentially, like in slasher movies with dumb teenagers fucking around and getting murdered, as another thing that ruins immersion. Seeing people who lack logic to extreme levels can be extremely annoying, which is an extreme favor to games since all the decisions, at least in most parts outside of cutscenes, are perpetrated by the player.
To add a bit of nuance to this, there are MANY examples of horror fiction in other mediums in which protagonists can be killed halfway through or even earlier. Psycho is a famous example. Add to that the fact that, unlike most games, usually a horror movie/novel is more about an ensemble of many people and not just one person, death gets a lot more plausible.
I mean I think the argument in general is wack. It's just a concession you ignore to enjoy the medium, just like you allow a pause button, and the fact that everything is 2d, to not ruin a horror movie. It doesn't really hold up.
Soma wasn’t a horror game? I can’t even begin to describe how hollow, cold and sick I felt at the ending of that game. Not because a character died in a horrific way or because I was startled. But because the concept was so unsettling for me. Look at a game like Silent Hills PT. I was scared shitless not because I was afraid the character might die but because I didn’t even know who the character was and how he got there. The whole situation was so strange, bizarre and disturbing and I didn’t know what the hell was going on. Horror is not just risk of death. There are actually far worse things than death in Horror.
You were hollow cold and sick at the end of Soma because of the story and what happened to Simon, or because of the monsters that you played hide-and-seek with? I agree that Soma's story is very effective. It is one of the strongest horror experience I've had. As a story. But it's not scary as a game whatsoever.
Joseph Anderson If you’re being dismissive of a game being scary by its mechanics alone, then it looks like you have an incredibly narrow focus of what horror can be in games. Psychological horror is built around creating dread in its themes. I’d argue games like Soma, Dentention, and even What Remains of Edith Finch give theme priority over gameplay to greater effect. Like any great piece of psychological horror, thse games engage the player by making them piece together the plot nonliterally. Designing every horror game to be replayable limits how these games enagage the player into their world. If you’re looking for some inspiration, watch Folding Idea’s video on Annihilation. Not only is a great critique on Anti-Intelectualism in RU-vid crit, but it also defines horror in a way where it doesn’t require immediate payoff. And it’s a great analysis of the movie as well.
@@intheairex In what way am I being dismissive? I said in the video I can appreciate the horror in story, setting, and themes. I even said it in the comment above. What's wrong with wanting horror in the gameplay on top of that?
@@JosephAndersonChannel Oh I see. I think then the disconnect here between your viewers and your video is that most of us don't see it come off as a critique in the gameplay but the genre as a whole. - Just trying to help you out for your future vids not claiming i'm an expert on your vids or the views of youtube comments.
According to how you talk about failstates and use references from other games, you technically can't insert horror in the gameplay. Do you notice the flaw in your argument?
I agree. Horror comes from immersion, not from difficulty. Sure, it gets less scary when you respawn to try again, but making the game a chore where I have to redo stuff every time I fail? no. I believe it's scary for me because I DON'T want to die. There is no consequences on it, but I just refuse to accept death in game, so surviving becomes much more realistic and immersive.
If the mechanics are built around giving you the tools and resources to survive provided you have the skill what's the problem? If you're thinking of something like "Silent Hills permadeath" than you arent thinking outside the box far enough. Dont Starve was a great example because if there was a game like it with Dark Souls style world building picking it up after death isnt so bad.
Permadeath is actually a good feature on a lot of games (Diablo, Darkest Dungeon, Cataclysm). It changes completely the approach you have when playing. You have to be careful when losses are permanent or have a high toll. Rewinding is a mood killer since you can scout and reload the game already knowing beforehand what is going to happen.
@@ericoluizgarcia3365 Rogue Likes have great permadeath systems because each run is different and those game are (mostly) about the gameplay mechanics, restarting is part of the fun. On most horror games, specially long ones, restarting from the beginning would suck ass.
Play Stranded Deep. Those deep oceans actually scare me..and the weird sea fortress things. CREEPY! And it's an infinite ocean that goes on and on, like some form of Hell.
You don't need to meet movies halfway? How? I don't think that's true. All one has to do is take a single moment to think, "This is a movie." And all fear drains away. You're hand waving the suspension of disbelief you tacitly agree to every time you allow yourself to be scared by a movie.
Exactly, I am way more scared in horror games because I AM the one controlling and making decisions. In a movie, I have no part in it so why should I even care or get that spooked?.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 And movies don't even offer the illusion of consequence, an illusion which is enough for some people, so I don't see how that explains anything.
the best horror movies are actually ones that "could be real", because then it makes the act of saying "it's just a movie" equivalent to the act of saying "it's not real" and elevates it to a superstition
Complete opposite for me. Games scare me way more than movies nowadays. I think the interpersonal differences are in the way you look at a game. Too many savestates, or letting yourself be killed to consume less ammo next time, are perspectives that simply murder the entire horror atmosphere.
Valen Pro Same. I don't usually feel involved in horror movies and their characters, and thus, the only things that can scare me are jumpscares. Horror games though, they put me right in the middle of the action and make me feel like I'm genuinely there. This investment of having control + feeling like I'm actually there makes for a way more compelling scenario than any movie could ever accomplish.
@@lordofdarkness4204 I think the joke was that it could be interpreted as someone trying to look cool by saying they aren't afraid of horror games, not to discredit this video.
Interresting. It is the exact other way around for me. Especially in VR. In a Movie i watch i know everything is pre written and watched by hundreds already. You watch the past. Nothing you can do, so you can just relax and enjoy the ride. In a game it is different for me. No one Plays the same game in the exact same way. And "death" means i have to Play through some parts again. It hurts me in the way that it delays the, in the best case, great Story. That said, quicksave is a sure way to kill any Horror mood in a game for me.
Same. I kinda agree with what Joseph is proposing here, but I also find it completely unnecessary since horror games scare me to death already. I love horror movies, but I'm inured to them by now; what enjoyment I get out of them is purely low-level chills and horror themes. Horror games, on the other hand, trigger some sort of self-preservation instinct, and there's a very real "permadeath"-scenario for me - I get so scared I stop playing. There's very few horror games that I've finished, but I generally watch streams of them and enjoy those immensely. I guess for me, horror is all about artificiality; it's an atmospheric bit of puppet theater and an exercise in immersion, and making it more realistic seems counter-productive (and would also make horror games literally unplayable for me).
I am with you there. That fact that I am in control make my decisions matter and it forces me to confront what is scaring me rather than passively watch and ignore what I want. Although, I am also kind of with Joe as well. The beginning of every horror game I have ever played has scared me more than any movie ever will, but by the time I finish the game, I am kind of used to it and the effect isn't nearly as strong. Each death removes more and more tension, but never completely removes it (at least for me). If the autosave isn't too frequent, I can still scare easily.
Same in horror games especially VR I get scared. But a horror movie can never scare me cause it's not me being stalked, I mostly just laugh at a jump scare. But I have to go through that corner in amnesia myself then I see that monster
I’m the opposite, I can watch horror movies no problem but the second a game is a little creepy im terrified. I played what remains of edith finch and I genuinely thought Molly’s monster was gonna come for me and it was gonna turn into a horror game.
I find this interesting because i have the exact opposite reaction to media. Films and books almost never scare me, but games tend to a lot more. The main reasoning given in this video is under the assumption that death is the ultimate thing to fear. For me, what scares me more is continued suffering. Books and movies, once i character dies, thats it, theyre not suffering any more. Where as in games, i have direct agency in the characters experience, and if i dont get it right, i have to experience it again and again.
Exactly my thoughts on it. I don't fear my own death at all, I actually find the inevitability a comfort, the only inevitability that we all have to face. But suffering is something I can at least try to avoid or lessen through my actions. With a game, especially a horror game, you hardly ever get a choice in the suffering.
Yep, there’s only a couple of legitimately scary movies, when games can put relatively little effort compared to movies and books to actually scare you.
@@КристиянТрънбашев-м9о they’re movies, so its all about execution. Subject matter and concepts aren’t scary. It’s all about the writing and in the case of film directing.
"Real consequences" When you die in the videogame your console or pc explodes That would make you more connected to the character and would be really "spooookyyy"
imagine a horror movie in which the character is absolutely inmortal and inmune to any danger. it is not spooky. Ur comment looks like a meme but in case it isnt, im trying to bring you a decent explanation.
@@gregotox I would be more scared for a good character that is immortal than a character I don't care about dying in a spooky situation. Death comes for everyone, it's the manner in which they suffer that is more scary. Also, a good script, atmosphere and sound design are all way better means of creating fear than just the consequences of death.
@@gregotox The thing is NO ONE thinks that the death is the scary part. Its the tension, the atmosphere, being hunted/ chased. Dying is pretty much irrelevant and is only there in situations where you mess up. The chase scene and everything leading up to the death would be scary, and then the character has to go through it again. I could actually see a movie implementing this as a groundhog day mechanic, and it would be horrifying imo.
@@nottoday3561 "The thing is NO ONE thinks that the death is the scary part." No matter how good the rest of your argument is, you're making the exact same mistake Anderson does but even more blatantly: You're using your opinion to speak for everybody else. Even if it was meant to be just hyperbole, it was a bad one because the effect ends up being the same.
@@cormano64 Ok but his argument is already that its not scary. My argument is that games aren't even attempting to do that. How can you make death of a fictional character that can be resurrected scary. You can't, because we know they can come back. Therefore games rely on atmosphere and story to convey a sense of fear.
I think you're fundamentally failing to understand the genre here. What you're describing in your preferences and ideas, is not horror, but fright. A buzz. "That's what terror really is" Yes, terror. Not horror. Terror is a visceral response. It's a flash in the pan; it is inherently short-lived. Terror is not the point of horror. There's a reason Mars has the two moons, Phobos and Deimos - there are nuances to fear. There's fright, terror, panic... and there's dread, a sense of creeping doom and uncertainty, HORROR. Horror as a genre of fiction... isn't necessarily about fear, and is certainly not about "fright". And to be brutally honest, while you're entitled to your preferences... your pursuit of this consequence-driven buzz (which, incidentally, is not universal among audiences) is what led to the horror movie genre being absolutely flattened creatively by a reliance upon jump scares. The idea that you don't want to "roleplay as someone scared", you want to BE scared? That's not how games work. That's not even how fiction works. What you're talking about is actual simulation; you want simulated scenarios that trick your brain into thinking that they matter enough that you will be frightened by their artificial consequences. And that's fine. Pure survival games lean in the simulation direction for this very reason; that some people get more of a buzz from consequence. But survival games are not necessarily horror games. You know why Don't Starve is a horror game? It's not that it's a survival game; survival games are not necessarily horror games. It's a horror game because of the themes and narrative ideas present. That's why it manages to be horror despite having a cutesy hand-drawn aesthetic. To put it simply, whether or not you find something scary has nothing to do with its definition as a horror title. Nothing whatsoever. It's just that horror themes lend themselves well to scaring audiences, because horror is about uncertainty, and facing uncomfortable ideas... and when you're feeling uncertain and uncomfortable, you are more susceptible to surprise, and more likely to be frightened. There's certainly room for some interesting game design based on consequence-heavy gameplay. And there's a big market for it, even among those who don't actually have such a visceral terror response to it. But it's not intrinsically linked to horror, and horror games are not necessarily meant to "frighten" you. Oh, they like to. They consider it a triumph if they do, but that's not actually why everyone plays them. Additionally, a lot of people actively love horror games, and horror stories and themes, and enjoy being creeped out a bit, but don't love being frightened. I don't mean they're a bunch of cowards or something - I mean literally, being genuinely frightened is a STRESS STATE. It is an intense surge of chemicals squirting through the brain. People play games to have fun, and don't necessarily want to have to take regular breaks to avoid feeling ill from the stress of it all. I'm sure a lot of games I've played could have been more frightening, but... why would I want that? Doom is a horror game. Demons from literal, biblical hell invading a science fiction research base? That's pure horror, full of horror references and inspirations. It's not really meant to be frightening though. Exciting, occasionally unsettling, but not really that frightening.
> I think you're fundamentally failing to understand the genre here. What you're describing in your preferences and ideas, is not horror, but fright. A buzz. Can we frame this as a disagreement instead of claiming I'm failing to understand a whole genre I just made a video on? I dunno, this start here soured me a bit but I'm responding to a lot of comments right now. The title of the video is not "Why Horror Games Don't Horrify Me" it's "Scare". I think that's an important distinction and one that you seemed to have missed judging from this paragraph. Not sure though. > Yes, terror. Not horror. Terror is a visceral response. It's a flash in the pan; it is inherently short-lived. Terror is not the point of horror... Sorry to get all *semantic argument* on you but the dictionary disagrees. Horror and terror are close to interchangeable. And you can argue that it's more nuanced than that (and you would probably be right) but in the video I was using terror as a synonym to horror more than anything else. If you think this is wrong of me then just pretend I said horror instead at that part so we don't have to argue definitions. > The idea that you don't want to "roleplay as someone scared", you want to BE scared? That's not how games work. That's not even how fiction works. What you're talking about is actual simulation; you want simulated scenarios that trick your brain into thinking that they matter enough that you will be frightened by their artificial consequences. What do you mean? I've been scared by books and movies. The first few horror games I played also scared me until I played more of them and my perspective on them changed. Seemingly millions of people are scared by horror games and movies. What are you saying here? That we're lying or mistaken, or what? > There's certainly room for some interesting game design based on consequence-heavy gameplay. And there's a big market for it, even among those who don't actually have such a visceral terror response to it. But it's not intrinsically linked to horror, and horror games are not necessarily meant to "frighten" you. Oh, they like to. They consider it a triumph if they do, but that's not actually why everyone plays them. Hmm. Well, again, what authority do you have to speak for so many people? First off the comments this video has spawned proves that people do in fact play horror games to be frightened. Secondly, how can you accept the gameplay of almost every horror game working against the horror, whether that's being "scary" or not? > Additionally, a lot of people actively love horror games, and horror stories and themes, and enjoy being creeped out a bit, but don't love being frightened. I don't mean they're a bunch of cowards or something - I mean literally, being genuinely frightened is a STRESS STATE. It is an intense surge of chemicals squirting through the brain. That's fine. There can be levels of scary in horror media. Just like there can be levels of violence and gore, or maturity (or lack thereof) in comedies. > People play games to have fun, and don't necessarily want to have to take regular breaks to avoid feeling ill from the stress of it all. I'm sure a lot of games I've played could have been more frightening, but... why would I want that? That's cool. Can I have some games tailored for me, and you can have your games tailored for you? > Doom is a horror game. Demons from literal, biblical hell invading a science fiction research base? That's pure horror, full of horror references and inspirations. It's not really meant to be frightening though. Exciting, occasionally unsettling, but not really that frightening. Doom is horror themed. This was brought up in the video. Not specifically referencing Doom though.
Stop brawling, my dudes. One of you could've phrased his response to the video more respectfully. The other one could've recognised that response as a legit and thoroughly thought out criticism to his video. My compliments for the video creator, and my compliments to the critic. GG, my dudes.
Had me until you the very end. Naaaaaah, it's as much a horror game as Charlie Brown and The Great Pumpkin. "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream" the game would've been a convincing example.
@@Insomnolant1335 Why are you assuming he's upset? If anything reading his response he's more upset with how the arguments was formed, trying to speak from the position of all horror game fans, arguing over semantic definitions and the like. This isn't how you form a reasonable rebuttal, not that youtube comments are the best place for that.
But Joseph you're saying for something to be scary death has to be a potential consequence, in gaming or in movies. You're placing too much of an emphasis on death alone which makes it hard to agree with you when it's safe to say we're scared by a lot of things besides death. This video just seems like an impulse hot take rather than meaningful criticism of a genre when you completely neglect something like psychological horror just to get your point of "respwans aren't spoochy" across.
The video is about gameplay more than anything else. Can you propose a way to have consequences on a failstate (which is typically death) that are different than the ones I spoke about in the video? Has there been a game that has used psychological horror in its gameplay? Because aside from Eternal Darkness I can't think of one, and even that's a stretch tbh.
I don't find any of that scary. I can greatly appreciate the theme and setting but it doesn't scare me. I don't know if I agree that walking around an environment should be considered gameplay. If there are threats ahead, and that can make exploring dangerous, then probably. But then it comes back to combat and how I don't think any combat system has used psychological horror. Or has been truly scary. If you think an enemy in a horror game remains scary after it kills you and you respawn then we simply fundamentally disagree. Which is fine! I'm happy you find it scary. If anything I'm envious.
I guess it's not so much about the enemy or gameplay for me, that's not what I think of when imagine "scary" things. No matter how much time I've spent there (it's a lot), standing alone in Yahar'gul cathedral and hearing the Gregorian chants while looking at the architecture will always give me chills. Just like I find Kill List or even Blair Witch quite scary, it's the atmosphere and setting which I find haunting, not some tangible enemy or threat. It's the intangibles which affect us differently and uniquely, hence the disagreement. I now assume your vid was strictly about the shortcomings of mechanics within video games which dissolve any sense of fear for you. I think people, including myself, may have assumed it was about something larger or more thought provoking.
@@JosephAndersonChannel Have you played F.E.A.R. or know of it? That game was known for its use of psychological horror that drew inspiration from Ju-on and The Ring. The psychological horror can be used to scare you but for the most its the uneasiness and tension that it builds up that makes you unnerved which is really the main draw.
“Being scared” and “being afraid of dying” are different things. There is a game where you play as several people and each of them have their story and can die.
Yeah Dead Space Extraction had you play multiple characters, some of whom did die the SAME mission you play them in, and another who you even see turn into a necromorph from THEIR perspective.
Why do you assume all horror needs to rely on the threat of death? How about, say, Yume Nikki, where the horror is primarily derived from inexplicable or bizarre imagery and there's no way to die at all? Or Bloodborne, where you respawn infinitely but it doesn't make a difference because the world has already fallen into apocalyptic chaos and insanity anyway?
Edward House what’s with some people feeling the need to defend his attitude? It is OBVIOUS that his opinion and reasoning on this matter is not even half way thought through. He had nothing to defend his reasoning with. Other than ”it’s not scary”. The way he expresses himself in this video and in the comments is actually quite ridiculous.
I hundred percent respect your stance, but I also pity your reductionism if you follow this to it's natural conclusion, no fight in a game has tension, meaning any game with combat shouldn't cause you to experience adrenaline or excitement, further you can say all events in a movie aren't real, or are predefined, so feeling empathy for characters is moot. ultimately your argument boils doen to classic suspension of disbelief, we enjoy action games and movies because we choose to ignore the actual lack of tension caused by a script or respawn, horror games ask the same of you, but they have a harder time keeping your suspension up for different reasons, some which you actually completely failed to recognise, the biggest one being fear of the unknown. you almost hit it but slid past, respawning isnt what makes a horror game not scary, *knowing what will happen next does* nothing is truly scary once you know how it works, front to back. once you learm every attack pattern of an enemy, they go from horrifying beast to an automaton, only a threat if you make a mistake and not scary even if you do this is the fundamental differencE between movies and games, games are about loops, learning and overcoming. these 3 things are literally the bane of fear, its human nature to take something scary, figure it out and solve it, then feel good. fear is literally the motivator to master our world, and games are a microcosm of the human experience. a common pitfall is the permadeath solution, im sorry but this misses the mark entirely as familiarity is still fears killer, every game I've played with permadeath i still master enemies, it just takes longer due to the punishment of lost time. even in dont starve you are an unkillable god, you just groundhog further back than most game protagonists the same phenomenon happens in movies, its very very hard for a movie to stay scary on a second watcg, generally it only happens through interstellar writing and visuals, or being ambiguous, the success stories in my mind number less than ten. as i said before, unknown is the fear, and learning kills it, as i see it there is no true solution, you cannot make a game where the monster is truly unpredictable or can you? there is one thing which is starting to be explored nowadays which is makIng the monster another player. i think this is truly the best answer, as humans are entirely unpredictable, they can always do something slightly new, although i haven't yet played a game that quite pulls it off yet, i think that is the true solution tldr, you need to suspend yoyr disbelief better to at least get some fear the first time you play, and games are inherently garbage at this emotion anyway due to their core design tenets and practical limitations also great video keep it up
A true horror game would be the one were you literally have one life in the entire game and if you lose it, you also wouldn't be able to begin another game.
Well said. i think about dead space as horror is just something about it always puts you in tension even if you know where the monsters are coming from. The music, the speed of enemies that come at you, the exploding monsters. All these puts tension even if your die pulling it off is still hard next time around. Same for prey with these mimics turning into items and suddenly jumps on you unpredictably when your too invested in exploring. That made me jump shitless several times. i think horror as whole needs another genre hand on hand to execute its magic effectively rather being horror itself.
Ak47 this is what I thought of, but DBD isn’t scary. It can get tense, but it’s not scary. I don’t know how you could change DBD to make it scary while making the monster another human, but maybe someone else does.
"I'm scared of losing my progress" seems more like a problem in which you've just not allowed yourself any degree of immersion, and view every horror game as an abstraction, just seeing a string of game mechanics rather than allowing yourself to actually experience it. Sounds like an extremely boring way to consume media.
It's why I hide in comments when watching horror movies/game movies:> Some of us want to watch horror and be scared, not scarred. I think this also has to do with the aversion to the abject. Because alot of times, horror games and movies make use of the abject to incite fear and possibly disgust, through the use of blood, gore, and other symbols, and the thing about abjection is that some people have a greater reaction to it such as traumas. Can look up 'Abjection', its quite interesting.
According to his point i shouldnt experience any adrenaline whil beating a boss in dark souls because i just overcame a set of codes with my set of codes.. His vids are usually really good... But this one has some stupid arguments
@@deniselai5145 have you played amnesia or soma, both are unsettling but I'd argue aren't quiet as "upsetting" in terms of visuals. Imply don't show is sort of more their method of scaring you!
Christopher Jensen Music I don’t agree those games are scary. It just makes you a defenseless blob running from one point to another to progress & okay story
@@maxedout199 well that's your experience and I have mine! Horror is an insanely subjective, personally both those games really make me feel uncomfortable🤘🏼 and there are narrative reasons why you are defenceless!
I love Silent Hill. I think it's creepy because of its mental disorders/tragedies that you pick up on. And you do kind of wonder if we characters will suffer more or die. But I guess it's not like you're sitting on the edge of your seat scared.
@@theflowerhead i agree. It's psychological horror. It's not meant to terrify you with jump scares. It's meant to unsettle and creep you out. It's why you feel a sense of dread when you hear the radio and uncanny valley moans from enemies despite the fact that the enemies are easy to kill and don't do much damage
@@swolzer I haven’t played them yet because I want to play them in order and haven’t got a way to play the first one yet but I’m glad I still have good horror games to look forward too though knowing they will be good and I can’t play them yet is annoying
Your argument is like saying movies arent scary cause you aren't really witnessing a real death with real consequences cause they are actors lol All media requieres an important amount of "suspended disbelief"
I get the impression that you are hardly able to immerse yourself into gameworlds and protagonists. It's very interesting that you mostly try to break games down soley to mechanics. I think it's a fair point to make but diminishes the potential that games especialy video- and computergames can and have achieved. It shows with things like horror that have a number of facets and can get quiet coplex.
I think this is why he critiques so many games that are widely acclaimed elsewhere. Don't get me wrong, a lot of his critiques are still valid, but look at his Odyssey review, it's all about mechanics and not about the journey the game takes you on. That's just my take anyway.
@@caden7745 I was amazed he could make 3 Bloodborne videos and not once mention the story or the fact that the game is one of the best pieces of Lovecraftian horror ever. It was all just mechanics to him. Don't get me wrong, Bloodborne has great combat, but that's not why people obsess over that game
He may be able to immerse himself the first time he plays a game, and then go back and dissect it, similar to how a certain channel with a trophy inside an Xbox sign.
Jordan Gilbert you must have been lucky and rushed through it then. Most people I know and have watched (myself as well) took about 16-18 hours. Guess it just depends how much one is hiding and dying.
Yeah this is exactly the stance I would expect you to take. Naturally I'm in the opposite camp. I find games like Alien Isolation scary. Silent hill can be scary too. Games with perma death? No. Not at all. Unless they are short of course like SCP games. When it comes to perma death I am scared in a sense. But it is not the kind of scary I want in a video game. I am not scared for my character, I am not horrified of the story. I am simply afraid of the tedium that would come with dying. Naturally you need to meet a horror game half way to be scared. You have to stop yourself from thinking it is a game to a certain extend (which is why horror games have an easy time accidently breaking the atmosphere). For you that is not true in horror films, but for me it's all the same. If I don't meet the horror movie halfway it's just not scary, but when I do they can become incredibly scary. I think it would be somewhat fair to make a comparison. If you like a character in a movie a lot and don't want him to die because of his personality traits you might get scared for him. If you don't wanna die in a video game because you don't want to deal with the tedium of having to re-do everything you might get scared for your character. The connecting thread between those 2 very different things is the reason you are scared is not what makes a horror movie scary. You can get scared about your favourite character dying in all kinds of movies, but the kind of "scare" is entirely different from what a horror movie provides. Games with perma death can make you scared that you will die. However you will not call them horror games, just because you have this kind of scare. Isaac can be kind of scary and the same goes for don't starve, but the reason is not the perma death. In horror movies you can get scared even without your favourite character being in danger. In games you can be scared even knowing you will come back. That is why I think your line of arguing is wrong. Permadeath is scary, but it's not scary for the right reasons. It's not what makes a horror game inherently scary. It does create a feeling of anxiousness and tension, but it's different from the kind of scare you need to make a scary game (though of course there is overlap). Think of it this way: The possibility of being stalked at night is extremely scary. The possibility of failing your tests in school is extremely scary. Very different kind of scary because one is horror and the other is at most drama. Drama can improve horror but it's not what makes horror what it is. Naturally now would be the time to pinpoint what makes horror what it is. But everyone knows that isn't possible. We can make some sort of guesses though. 1)Empathy and Sympathy definitely help 2)The feeling of powerlessness definitely helps even more (this is where movies excel) 3) Atmosphere, the feeling of unfamiliarity (very big, has probably 53 subcategories) 4) consequences for actions (perma death falls under this too, even though I don't think it's a good solution) Those would probably be the biggest and if you read my comment you probably know that I would consider 3) to be the most important. Another thing would be anticipation but I don't know how to phrase it. Knowing something is coming is often scarier than not knowing. If you don't know it's coming it's a jumpstartle, but not scary. It really does become scary when you properly build anticipation. This would probably be a subcategory of Atmosphere and a point where games have the hardest time. As the developers are not fully in control in a game, it becomes very hard to properly build anticipation. If you want to then as a player you can easily destroy the whole buildup too. Now after this waaaay too long comment I just want to thank you for the video. Even though I disagree, I actually think it's a very valuable discussion piece edit: I also like that you actually interact with people on twitter. After I wrote a tweet saying that I hoped this video wouldn't be about perma-death you immediately wrote back. I value stuff like that very highly
i totally agree with you here. permadeath is a poor solution, some games can do it (although i never play those games because i "fear" dying because of how tedious it would be to restart, i buy a game to play and progress, not to restart over and over again) i don't see the appeal. it just seems cheap, like jumpscares are cheap. a good horror will unsettle you without the need for permadeath (resident evil 7 did a fantastic job in my opinion, there were a few stupid parts to the game but it did well overall i feel). alien isolation came somewhere in the middle by letting you save whenever you wanted but the save points were fixed, i think that works well. fuck games that give you limited saves, that's just cheap.
I think you got it right, as far as differentiating types of fear. Powerlessness and being immersed in the environment is what makes games scary, and death is a consequence that can reinforce these things
I think your core argument is redundant. Permadeath allows the player to feel a heightened sense of urgency in life-threatening situations. However, there is a crucial element to this emotional factor that you are missing, that is the desperation found in trying to get to the next area of a game. Games like amnesia allow you to respawn sure but you still have to hide from the enemy to advance in the game, this is where the fear is created: from the motivation to move on in the game. Permadeath games also have this element as well but with a much more severe punishment. This, in turn, increases the motivation overall, yet the type of motivation still hasn't changed. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, you potentially could imagine someone with the patience of a saint going through a permadeath horror game without any fear because they don't mind starting from the beginning. Your lack of fear doesn't necessarily come from underwhelming punishment but from no motivation.
Okay , if fear is created fro motivation to move on in the game, what's stopping you from running around a hallway carelessly, wait to see what'll kill you, respawn with the information of what's ahead and deal with it the intended way and repeat this process until you beat the game?
@@vrabo3026 Because doing that isn't fun. What's fun is running in blind, dealing with whatever the game throws at you, and pulling out ahead with hopefully as few deaths as possible. Unless you want to map out the game or glitch hunt, no one wants to play games as slowly and as tediously as you described.
A true horror game would be the one were you literally have one life in the entire game and if you lose it, you also wouldn't be able to begin another game.
@@nickduncan8376 Yeah, that is why I don't like him as a critic. Games are more than just their mechanics. The mechanics are just the vehicle for interacting with the game. He is missing the rest of the game which the mechanics were made for.
Hons Hon Central I think he can review games that are either one or the other, being solely mechanics or no mechanics. For example, my two favorite videos of his are his reviews of ‘the witness’ and ‘what remains of Edith finch’. The witness has no story and is completely mechanic-based, while Edith finch is a story that you play, with hardly any mechanics. They’re both really well done reviews. However, other games such as, well, the horror genre, he doesn’t get because he gets lost in mechanics and doesn’t feel anything throughout the story. Instead of focusing on the horror details of said genre, he dissects the game’s mechanics, therefore missing the entire effect of the genre, the feeling of horror. This is because there are both mechanics and story/environment based elements of the game, and he has tunnel vision for mechanics, and gives it priority over all else. That’s why his reviews of normal games fall short for me.
This has “Comedies don’t make me laugh” energy, and seems to completely miss the point of horror in video games. That being said, I can see where you’re coming from and your perspective was well articulated.
I don't think that's his point. I'm sure he doesn't mean to say all horror games are bad, just that FOR HIM they don't provide the experience movies can, hence the name "why horror games don't scare *ME*". As a player his views should be taken into account, as I'm sure he's not the only person for whom these mechanics break the immersion.
He only really pays lip service to the idea that it's just his opinion. He repeatedly insinuates that everyone else has just misinterpreted their own feelings.
You say films still scare you, but if you'd prevent yourself from being immersed in films just as you obviously prevent yourself from being immersed in games, I'm sure films wouldn't scare you either. It just sounds like you're not allowing yourself to be captivated by the story/characters/mood/situation of the game and instead you're just focusing on the game mechanics. Playing a game that way is the equivalent of watching a film and just think about how there's a camera operator moving that camera, that just out of frame there's a boom mic and how everyone on screen are actor who laugh and shake hands once the director yells "cut". So while the player character in many horror games are "gods" who live on without lasting consequences, movie characters are too. You can rewind a death scene and watch it again. You know the actor is alive and well in a mansion in Beverly Hills. You're aware it's just a story being told through the method of movie making. It just seems you're not cutting games the same amount of slack you're cutting movies.
You are missing the point. He is not preventing himself from being immersed, the fail-state mechanics of the game is doing that for him. The reason he argues that film still have an effect on him is that a movie, despite everything, still internally consistent in it's world and narrative- where in a game he has to mentally discount the fact that he just died as a character to move on. There is no way for him to erase his memory of this fail-state and therefor all of the tension the game has build is gradually lost for each death - since most horror games rely on the usual horror tropes to function. (fear of the unknown etc.). This is why he argues that games should be better to incorporate fail-states (through game mechanics) that add to the tension rather than actively diminish it. It is a failure of the medium that it has yet to take advantage of it's mechanics to make this true. That is all Joseph is arguing for. And he tries to come up with some possible solutions to this, but all that people seem to latch on to is that he wants permadeath. This is not what he is saying either. He even grants that this would be extremely tedious given certain games, but holds up a game like Don't Starve as a game which showcases one instance where something like this have actually been implemented. TLDR; I agree with Joseph that the horror genre within games have squandered their potential when it comes to innovative ways of reaching a satisfying fail-state without losing immersion. This is has pretty much become a meme on this channel at this point, but I hope I don't have to state the obvious and say that this is just an opinion. You are welcome to disagree, but I welcome your opinion as this could be an interesting discussion, if people could actually get past their own ego and discuss the topic at hand instead of just blatantly misrepresenting his entire video.
No offense but I found this argument pretty off. First of all, because there is horror games like Resident evil that did punish players after dying, thanks to their save game system (Which was limited and done manually in certain conditions). Second because the fear you're talking about it's not fear about what the game is offering you, but fear about losing progress. You can feel that in a lot non-horror games. The fear about having to respawn 15 minutes back in the last checkpoint wasting your effort and time (Dark souls for example). The fear about having to start all again in The binding of Isaac. That's not fear about emotions, imagery, creatures or the unknown. It's not even the same that the fear about death, because the fear about dying is about what happens next, not just to losing our lives and what we've done here. And in a videogame you always can start new game again. "Psychological horror has to shake humans heart deeply. You know, shaking humans heart deeply means to uncover people main emotions and motivations for life." -Sato takayoshi, CG and character artist of Silent hill 2
EXACTLY, there is a reason why dying in RE 1 remake and dying in an RPG game dungeon doesn't feel the same despite losing more or less the same amount of progress.
I think this is the best argument against what he presented in the video. While I think the video was well intentioned, I think you've hit upon the dissonance in his position: the type of fear he's wanting is not really the type of fear the game is intending to produce. JA proposes that, as an example, permadeath in a game like Don't Starve increases the tension a player may feel about dying (and thus losing progress). However, compare that type of fear to the fear that a game like Silent Hill is trying to invoke. The characters in Silent Hill aren't scared because if they die they lose all their possessions, they're scared because the monsters (and the psychological issues they represent) are inherently frightening, not just inconvenient. It seems then that the type of fear JA wants is not really possible from the gameplay-focused perspective he is taking, because what sort of button prompts and joystick movements could a game ask of you that would be inherently frightening, the same way that facing Pyramidhead in SH is?
I don't think it's about losing progress at all. I've played Don't Starve and Don't Starve Together for about 300hours combined and I'm still scared to venture less known areas precisely because of permadeath. Even if I lose the base I can rebuild it again, but it's the fact that there's a lasting consequence waiting at the end of the road if I make one wrong move that makes me paranoid of going anywhere underprepared. Same with Darkest Dungeon, where if I forget a single item or make a greedy choice I can lose a champion to horrific monsters in an instant. That's not to say these games are ''horror'' games, but personally I think they do accomplish it better. Games are supposed to be interactive, they're supposed to let you merge with the character to a certain extent and that's precisely why I can understand completely that death being meaningless breaks it completely. It goes from Sympathy to Empathy, which is less effective in terms of feeling fear. When you see your character die in a horrible way the first time around, sure, it can be spooky-ish (as spooky as the game designs it to be, although personally I'm startled only by jumpscares), but after the initial contact with that enemy, it ceases to be scary, you've already encoutered the horror in that particular setting. All I can do in this case is go like ''oh hey dude, I feel sorry for you that you died to that zombie boss right there, but I can't place myself in the shoes of someone who, you know, can't god damn die''. That's why movies are genuinely scary, you can't save them, they won't come back to life, all you can do is watch their tragic end and pray you're not in the situation yourself, because most likely, you'd die too with LASTING consequences. Respawns in video games break the immersion, that's why Joseph rants about it for 13 minutes as well. The biggest problem I have with this is the fact that most games ignore respawn mechanics and carry on (even resident evil because that game only limits the amount of saves, so you're actually scared of losing progress rather than death itself). Do you know of any games where they take the advantage of your immortality and place you in situations built to be scary based on that? If I have to imagine myself in the shoes of an immortal being, I'd like the setting to torture me for an eternity, because that would be actually terrifying. Unable to escape it by death, unlike the rest of ''horror masterpieces''.
What does JA actually want, what you die and the game permanently deletes itself from Steam and shuts down the computer or something? Why do movies get a free pass, when they basically suffer from the same problems that he presented.
@@redlightning0001 What I think hes arguing is that games dont have a sort of consequence that really makes death have a form of impact that cant just be mitigated from just replaying the section again, and if you die a couple of times the point of the horror is just lost because there isnt actually a punishment other than just doing busy work and just redoing what you already did. Games allow for the player, who is the main character, to deal with horror on their own terms. Movies dont have this problem. The main characters of a slasher or monster movie cant deal with the problem or killer on their own terms like a video game protagonist can. In a way something like dont starve doesn't let you play with the horror on your own terms simply because dying actually isnt something you can just reverse, you LOST that life and you cant do anything to get it back. Because of this its an uncompromising punishment, the monsters and horror have an influence on how your game plays that you cant change. What I think hes arguing for is more uncompromising punishments. Things that make it so that players dont have the ability to nullify what happened if things go bad, like how he was talking about missing all your shots and just letting the dead space aliens kill you and respawn you good as new. Its why he was saying things like the different narrative choice being reached through death, with each death giving a worse ending, or something along those lines. In a way its kinda funny because Kirby sixty four does a smidgen of what it sounds like he wants. When you fight the final boss Zero Two and try to exit on the pause screen, the game takes that ability straight up away from you and replaces it with "tough it out" instead. In a way its like the horror, zero two, is forcing you to face it and is actively taking an ability you've had for most of the game away that lets you just leave what ever sorta stage or problem you're dealing with. Zero Two has some form of power over how the player interacts with the game and I think that's more of what he wants in a sense.
funnily enough, what you're describing is what i've heard before, but from a game dev (not sure which one, maybe the one i mention in a few sentences) it went in the direction of "every reload, especially after death, will break the immersion." the ideal scenario is players surviving with 1 hp / avoiding the enemy by fractions of a meter the classic movie trope of heroes being caught right before the spikes or just escaping an exploding object by a sec is the ideal state of a game. this is btw why david cage games, for all of their flaws, are so popular. his design choice are games with no game-ending failstate. this is especially easy to achieve with multiple characters. it's fully ok if some of the characters die, but their death will not end the game. until dawn then put this idea into a horror game. another example is "the AI director" of alien isolation and left for dead. (i know left for dead is more action than horror, but witches crying / hunters jumping / tanks rumbling will still scare you and the random aspect will allow for some jumpscares) it's specifically designed to not kill you (often). the alien will run away if it applies too much pressure. but it will never leave you alone. you're always in this 50-99% level of stress, and going from 99 to 50 feels really nice. if you feel like it never lets you do a puzzle, it will stay away for a bit longer next time. all of that while still making it seem like a somewhat natural enemy.
I've just gotten off of Hunt: Showdown, and that game's got a more tangible - at least in my early hours - horror atmosphere than most as it's a combination of PVE, PVP, and Permadeath. I'd recommend giving it a shot. There's a tension in fighting other people to battle a terrifying creature first that even when killed successfully, requires extraction from the world where both monsters and other players are trying to kill you. With that said, I'm in agreement with Incompetent's comment. Death can be scary, but is best as a companion to the real fear which is the unknown. I think the fear in Hunt: Showdown mostly stems from not knowing where you're going to be and what you're going to face in-terms of other players. I think that's why Alien: Isolation was really scary for me until the third act. By the time that third act came, nothing was unknown. Levels were repetitive in their layout and design, my playstyle wouldn't deviate, and the Alien would be avoided or confronted in the same ways.
Hunt:Showdown is brilliant. The permadeath mechanic is what makes it so tangible even when the environment and the atmosphere gets familiar. Running away with the monster vanquished is just exhilarating because of the unknown. There's no way to know if everyone is after us or if there's no real danger at all. Much like when Alien Isolation came out and every critic was praising it but criticizing on how the save points were too few and far between. I was so mad about that because the long distances between saves brought out real tension in the gameplay. It was not viable to just save scum every part of the game, just learning the maps because of the replay time was so high. I really wanted to go all out to survive. I'd use that last item, that last bit of ammo just to survive for now. Or face 30 minutes of playing the same bit again. That made the fear real, it had a real consequence, it would really affect me, personally, sitting in my chair. I love running away from an enemy in a video game and, there's just something in it that makes me tingle. I'm a huge horror fan although I get most of my horror kicks from books these days. Weirdly enough, I think my love for the Titanfall series might have something do with my love for feeling hunted and underpowered and just trying to survive. Those huge mechs chasing me while I'm trying to capture a flag is just great. Not exactly horror but it invokes the same fight or flight reaction I crave from great horror games. Tove Jansson, the creator of the Moomin series said, and I freely translate the quote. "It's not much of a trick being brave, if you're not afraid"
Raycevick I would add that how well the game melds the 4th wall aids in how scared you can be. I got more scared in undertale when Omega Flowey showed up than I did in any of the recent Silent Hill games because they broke down that 4th wall. I was so invested in the world that even if I knew it wasn't real, I feared for the lives of my video game allies. You're told not to start an LP over after being the pacifist run because the characters shouldn't be made to suffer. It's not real but it feels real. I don't want to put them through the stresses of me being evil and if I stop playing before I beat the game what will happen!?
For horror i recommend looking at game called Darkwood Man the atmosphere... every night you have to hide and baricade yourself in half destroyed buildings and hide yourself from mosters and supernatural You are never safe no matter how well you prepare every second alive in the night counts 99% of the time you just hear and feel it... the monstrosities lurking in the shadows trying to look between gaps of baricaded windows some of them just walking trough and some of them trying to get inside out of pure curiosity at that moment you need to dispose of it before it eats you as quietly as possible to not draw atention of.... other things you hear outside... things that you never saw but you know its there... a certain death.
WRONG if you die in don't starve you lose the world and everything you have acquiredired whilst in Minecraft you lose the things in your inventory... See this is the problem true horror needs to have PERMADEATH. If a horror game doesn't have PERMADEATH then it isn't horror. I am totally qualified to say this since I am a review channel
@@theblackswordsman7558 WRONG. Permadeath is not scary, it's infuriating. Period. Why? because it's the same thing as restarting from a checkpoint. Only difference here is that you'll start from the very beginning, wasting hours of playtime. I don't know about you but I don't find that scary.
Silent Hill 2 & 3 are still the scariest thing I've ever experienced even 10 years later. Horror films are rarely scary as I find that there is a disconnect. I actually have the exact opposite of your logic. Horror games are more immersive and can invoke certain feelings in you that films can NEVER invoke. Also, Dont't Starve...really? The fear of losing everything you own isn't really horror, it's the fear of burden/annoyance.
@@Eggmith that was not a joke dude, he went in depth about how the permadeath works and why he likes it in don't starve. (but he also said Darkest dungeon sucked for that same reason)
Liquid Lad But he’s also misguided. What he is feeling isn’t true fear but tension. Or if it is fear, fear of losing progress. Thats it. Fear from horror games dont come from losing progress (some of it can) but from the atmosphere, the decisions you have to make, in essence the immersion. Take that immersion away like Joseph has and nothing is scary. Take immersion away from books and movies and those are just paper and ink and images and sounds.
@@brianjc720 But immersion is a two way street, if you don't care the game won't reach you. This same guy says Amnesia is boring.....let that sink in. (it also has a permadeath mode)
Why didn't you play Subnautica and Alien Isolation in permadeath mode (by not using the save stations?) Your Alien Isolation stream was so frustrating to watch because you could have gotten something pretty amazing out of it, especially in light of your thoughts on the genre. Instead, you ran and shot your way through a stealth horror game in a super perplexing fashion. Why not make it fun and go permadeath? I know it's not a random second take, but isn't this a far better option for you? I for one would have rather watched you play Alien seriously in this way rather than just running around testing all the game's mechanics and dying over and over (DR. LINGARD, REMEMBER ME?) Based on this essay, you could easily improve your own gaming experience (as well as your viewers') by simply playing hardcore.
Because the game wasn't built around it, and it would have been too frustrating. That's why I said so in the video. Subnautica could possibly work but it's so buggy that I never wanted to risk it.
@@JosephAndersonChannel I understand what you're saying, but wouldn't it have been a more worthwhile experience for you (and for the stream) to try permadeath, based on your thesis here? I mean it's a Halloween stream, right, let's try and get freaky? I was hoping you could find a way to make it entertaining by way of trying to play the game according to the parameters of reality: do not fight androids, do not run from aliens. I feel like you barely managed to make a decent attempt at the game (or even embrace suspension of disbelief in order to slip into the role.) I found this stream hard to watch because you were not even taking the situation seriously and that, yes, I actually think playing the game on permadeath (and thereby honing your skill quickly) would have seriously heightened the tension--most probably your tension, as well as the stream's. (We watched you spend 30 minutes trying to stealth attack androids for their pitiful salvage drops AND run down a hallway no less than three times and express amazement that the alien got you!) I would have much rather seen you repeat the game from the start (or after the training part) after dying instead of spending time beating up working Joes for scrap parts, or trying to hail Mary sprint through San Cristobal medical and get owned over and over. On top of all this you made no creative use of your survival tools. So many deaths could have been avoided by employing the tools the game gave you. Anyways. I like the essay (even though it doesn't apply to me) but the option to make Alien: Isolation a horrifying or at least tense experience was in your hand the whole time. I don't feel you engaged the game appropriately for the theme of the day, and certainly didn't care to attempt a serious attempt at learning the survival aspects of the game. As for Subnautica, backing up the save file once in a while is a quick remedy to death by bug. Hardcore makes the experience so much more appalling.
> I understand what you're saying, but wouldn't it have been a more worthwhile experience for you (and for the stream) to try permadeath, based on your thesis here? I mean it's a Halloween stream, right, let's try and get freaky? No. Forcing perma death onto a game that wasn't built around it would only lead to frustration. I am so happy I didn't do that in Alien Isolation because the alien has super telepathic powers when it comes to finding you and I died a few times to some bullshit moments. If the game had been short I would have considered it but I knew going in that it was long. > I was hoping you could find a way to make it entertaining by way of trying to play the game according to the parameters of reality: do not fight androids, do not run from aliens. I feel like you barely managed to make a decent attempt at the game (or even embrace suspension of disbelief in order to slip into the role.) If a game gives me a weapon, teaches me how to use it, why am I wrong to try to fight the enemies? > I found this stream hard to watch because you were not even taking the situation seriously and that, yes, I actually think playing the game on permadeath (and thereby honing your skill quickly) would have seriously heightened the tension--most probably your tension, as well as the stream's. I wasn't taking it seriously because the alien wasn't scary. So I had no reason to be cautious. I agree that the type of gameplay Alien Isolation has, if there was slightly more depth to it and it was always fair plus a shorter runtime, that it has potential. But the game isn't like that. > (We watched you spend 30 minutes trying to stealth attack androids for their pitiful salvage drops AND run down a hallway no less than three times and express amazement that the alien got you!) I would have much rather seen you repeat the game from the start (or after the training part) after dying instead of spending time beating up working Joes for scrap parts, or trying to hail Mary sprint through San Cristobal medical and get owned over and over. I was enjoying myself learning the way the androids work. I don't see why this is a bad thing. Are you talking about the area when the alien kept bugging out of the vents in the ceiling? I'd blame the game for half of that. Plus the way the scene was presented I thought the urgency meant I was supposed to run. > On top of all this you made no creative use of your survival tools. So many deaths could have been avoided by employing the tools the game gave you. I don't like using resources in games like that. It's the old Final Fantasy ether/elixir problem. I got through it all just fine. > Anyways. I like the essay (even though it doesn't apply to me) but the option to make Alien: Isolation a horrifying or at least tense experience was in your hand the whole time. I don't feel you engaged the game appropriately for the theme of the day, and certainly didn't care to attempt a serious attempt at learning the survival aspects of the game. Wait I figured from your comments here that you agreed with it? Interesting. I like that you were able to go along with it for a conversation. Good on you. I think this is a failing of Alien: Isolation, not me. But that's okay. > As for Subnautica, backing up the save file once in a while is a quick remedy to death by bug. Hardcore makes the experience so much more appalling. I think knowing there's a way to reload would ruin it for me. I think there has to be no way out for perma death to work. The game is just too damn buggy for me to bother trying. I think Subnautica would be amazing with perma death the first time through though.
I remember being really spooked by the prelude to the Omega Flowey boss fight in Undertale because of his promise to "save and reload your own death". Considering how it was staged as an impossible boss fight, I genuinely thought that this was the game's way to punish the player for making some wrong choice in the story. I even expected that after I'd failed enough times, the game would not let me continue and instead every time I'd open it, it would show me recorded footage of me failing, to hammer in the idea of consequences. Of course the game didn't actually go through with that, because that would be a real dick move (come to think of it, the Genocide route nets you something similar to this, but you have to go out of your way to specficially achieve this, as opposed to simply making different choices without much thought). But this is yet another idea of what a game could do to make you scared of losing.
I'm the exact oposit. I'm extremely sensible to death in horror games. Even if I objectively know that it's not permanent, my lizard brain doesn't care, I just don't want to die. Suspension of disbelief is fully at play and even knowing I can just retry, it doesnt matter, death feels final, and when it happens, it's so stressfull it actually is, at least for a while : I have to stop playing. With some games, I will even have to take a break after going through a tough situation and actually surviving. That's not the case with most game with death states, of course, but I don't know, the atmospheric horror completly turn on that part of my brain. However, horror movies just don't do it for me. It's not the same fear, I can fear for the life of a character I'm invested in, but it's mostly guessing and hoping. There's no weight on my shoulders, there isn't any wrong choice I can make that would screw everything up, it's pretty stress-free. I guess people are just built differently.
The possibility of a character dying isn't what makes a game or a movie scary for me. For all I know, the protagonist of a game could very well die at the end, just like many characters in horror movies do. In that sense, I can't see the difference between between games and other media. Vast majority of horror movies don't harm their main character(s) until the story is nearing its end anyway, so I can't really be nervous or scared for them when I know there's an hour of run time left in the movie. If video game characters are immortal gods, aren't characters in books and movies protected by plot armor? Both can only be truly harmed when the author chooses to do so.
Consequences for failure don't have to be death. They can be injuries, or someone else being hurt, or something being taken away. There are usually more than just the main character in horror stories. Sometimes they can surprise you by hurting/killing the protagonist. But there are other characters that can be put into danger for scares.
could have been summed up a lot more simply with the sentence "because i'm a meta gamer" not that there's anything wrong with being a metagamer, but going into horror games with a metagaming mindset is clearly going to clash and lead to a conflict of interest
Even if you arent, how do you emotionally provess a reload? D you memory wipe yourself? From an ingame perspective you just realised you are set for eternity.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Do you develop amnesia from perma-death and having to restart the entire game again? No? Just a larger sense of frustration at all that progress lost and a weaker drive to start it up again than someone who just has to reload a save? Always find it strange that people will claim things and not quite consider whether or not their opinion is hypocritical. The real problem for Joseph Anderson is twofold: 1. Video games allow replayability. With different results. How immediately something can be replayed determines whether or not something is "scary" to him. As in, it isn't that atmosphere. It isn't the story. It isn't the characters. What scares him is WASTING HIS TIME. As in, losing hours of progress, even if that progress is ultimately meaningless (like in Don't Starve, as it has no goals or end state beyond just surviving... which is so damn mundane). 2. He does not immerse himself into a game. He sees it as a series of mechanics and scripted events. His character is not an extension of himself. It is simply the way the game allows him to interact with its world. Thus, he rarely gets invested in a story. Rarely invested in a character. Rarely gets invested in a mystery. This is evident in all his reviews. For most players, this is not a problem. Fear doesn't come from a game over screen. It doesn't come from perma-death. Fear comes from a place of IMMERSION. As in, forgetting that you're a body attached to a controller moving a character around. Joseph Anderson has issues doing this. He always sees himself as a person using joysticks to move an avatar. The rest of the world has no issues engaging in this sort of immersed behavior. Put simply... if you can read book and you stop noticing that you're reading words and turning pages, and are instead viewing a movie in your brain, without even realizing you're using your eyes... This is Immersion. The same happens during video games. Successfully becoming Immersed in a movie, book, or game, allows you to be afraid. Because nothing else exists for you beyond those moments of immersion. The only place a horror game ever drops its immersion is in giving you a game over screen. At which point, you're pulled from the story. Doesn't matter if that game over is permanent or a reload. It will take you a while to get back into that immersion. The same thing happens with movies. Once you've seen the movie... and it ends.... immersion broken. Watching the movie a second time no longer carries that immersion. You know what's going to happen and you can't stop it or change it. Meanwhile... in a game... you can get that immersion back, because even if you've learned something, you're back to being immersed. It is easy to get immersed back into most books as well, because most are so long that you cannot memorize every plot point or piece of dialogue. You'll remember a vague outline, and once you begin reading again... find new things, become immersed in new ways. Put simply... Joseph Anderson lacks the ability to be immersed in things. As do you, it seems. You only fear loss of progression, because you fear you're wasting your own time. The rest of us? We get lost in the world. The characters. Even as the characters are not us and are talking of their own accord, we're lost in them. We are them. Because we are controlling them. The soldier from Doom 3 may not ever be scared, but I sure was playing the game. Not because monsters popped up behind me every 3 seconds either. It was because I was immersed and the atmosphere generally creeped me out. A random crazy whisper in a dark hallway saying "They took my baby..." was genuinely terrifying to me. Far more terrifying than an hour later when those babies turned out to be flying enemies that I had to shoot. Even when I knew what the voice was talking about as I'd seen the enemies in a trailer before ever playing the game. Dead Space 1 and 2 freaked me out because of the oppressive and paranoid atmosphere of the games, and not the creatures I was gunning down with ease. Walking down an empty corridor that had virtually no sound in those games was legitimately nerve-wracking. That's immersion. That's why people like horror games. If you can't get immersed, you can't enjoy a horror game. Ever.
Interesting... I also don't get scared by horror games anymore, but a good horror game always puts me on the edge of the seat. Alien: Isolation as an example. the Alien in Isolation is AI controlled. it actually learns with the player and its movement is unpredictable, it will most likely always take a different path each time you play the story. if you use certain tactics too often it will outright ignore them in the future (throwing flares around too often will cause it to just ignore them.) I always thought a good horror game makes sure you never feel safe. In Alien Isolation this was especially the case, even while saving the game you could actually get killed.
i was just playing dead space one and was so filled with anxiety after an hour, I had to go play DOOM 2016... it's not the death thats scary, its not knowing when those necromorphs will get the jump on you, its the tension filled sound design, never allowing me to feel safe etc
Lol dead space isnt scary at all. It's just like doom. You shred through hordes of aliens who dont really even stand a chance against you. I think I've actually died like twice to necromorphs.
I don't think fear has anything to do with facing your mortality in video games. I would argue that even if an immortal being existed our understanding of fear would still apply to them. You can be stricken with fear even when you know your life is not in danger. I think any good horror medium has to have atmosphere , the unknown(the driving force of all fear imo). Sure things like gore, disturbing images also help establish a basic foundation for what most people find scary. But true fear is only psychological. As to your permadeath argument there is no such thing in video games sure you might have to start at the beginning again but you start with the same character and can correct the mistakes that got you killed in the previous attempt so unless the game physically destroys itself after you die there is no permadeath. Anyways... You don't have to find things scary if you don't that's fine. I still enjoy all your videos.
Uhhh, you say some stuff I agree with here, but to me, your entire argument just seems... absurd and terrible. I mean, OK, yeah, the player is "immortal" in a sort of metatextual way. But by that logic, characters in a film are "immortal" because you can just rewind the film and watch them again, ad nauseam. I really don't think the fact that a game can be played repeatedly in and of itself makes it inherently not scary. Sure, a too-generous respawn system easily can, but I don't think there's something in the "nature" of being able to respawn that makes this the case.
@@JosephAndersonChannel I agree there's a difference, but I just don't see some fundamental thing that makes games inherently less scary (at least for me). Like, you say that in films and books you can't do anything to stop a character doing something stupid, whereas in a game you are "in control". But really, the art forms are more similar than you make out in my opinion. Like, in a book, the main character generally has to be pretty invulnerable, or else the book will be really short, and a game can "force" you to do stupid things (like go into the spooky house - you can't really just decide to do something else instead). Don't get me wrong - I don't not believe you about not finding games scary. I just don't find your explanation very "convincing" or at least it doesn't seem to explain it much, to me. Another thing is that, IMO, it isn't really this "inevitability" of films and books that makes them scary anyways...
That part about movie characters being immortal because you can rewind the film is soo stupid. Because that's not how you are supposed to engage in the media, unlike in video where respawning is a common phenomenon that's built into the experience. The problem with spawning mechanics is that they reduce a horrific moment into a puzzle, where the player needs to figure out the right set of actions to win.
@@shadowmaydawn I understand how a bad spawning mechanic could sap some horror out of something, but I really just don't see how it's something inherent vs. films. Obviously, yes, you aren't supposed to be rewinding a film all the time, but the respawning mechanic in a game generally isn't "cannon" either. And I definitely see how it could make it into too much of a puzzle, but I just don't think that something being a puzzle - being a "game", or a challenge - inherently makes it scary. Films and books aren't scary somehow because of their "inevitability" - because there's no gameplay involved. They are just scary because of visuals, rhythm, sound and acting etc. A game can have all of that and more, and I just don't think the logic used to show how games are inherently less scary seems very convincing.
@@RMarsupial "I understand how a bad spawning mechanic could sap some horror out of something, but I really just don't see how it's something inherent vs. films. Obviously, yes, you aren't supposed to be rewinding a film all the time, but the respawning mechanic in a game generally isn't "canon" either." Man, you really missed the point here. Rewinding a film is pointless as you already know what is going to happen. You are not rewriting the story but stalling it. The only time you are meant to rewind the film is when you have completed it. Yeah, respawning not canon but it is there in the game for a reason. The developers knew that the player would fuck up so they needed a safety net there. So you see, respawning is part of the game experience, not separate from it. "And I definitely see how it could make it into too much of a puzzle, but I just don't think that something being a puzzle - being a "game", or a challenge - inherently makes it scary." You forgot a "not" there. But here's a question, what makes the experience of reloading back to a previous save, formulating a plan based on your previous attempt then acting on that plan for it to succeed or fail scary? The low chance of success? But that is universal for gaming itself. "Films and books aren't scary somehow because of their "inevitability" - because there's no gameplay involved." I don't see how the absence of gameplay changes that. There is still a feeling of inevitability in those mediums. There is nothing that both you and the characters could do to stop this horrific moment. You are forced to watch it and that creates dread.
You have a very clinical mindset Joseph. All of your reviews tend to be very focused on a game's gameplay mechanics and not much else. I hope this isn't coming across as an insult. I would often come to your videos for a mechanical breakdown of a game (and then go to noah caldwell for the other stuff that I care about more such as cultural impact) since you analyse this area of games closer than anybody else on this site. It's no surprise that you would find horror as a genre to be lacking in what you want out of a game, since enjoyment of a lot of horror games tends to demand emotional involvement with events on, and sometimes even off, the screen. I've never played until dawn, but it seems you found it suited to your sensibilities since the stakes were rooted in what you had to lose as a videogame player. Same with don't starve. A lot of horror games are pretty light on mechanical prowess, or complexity, and you're the kind of guy that seems to really have no time for games that fumble with their own gameplay mechanics, or demand that your primary reasoning for playing be abstract shit rather than fun gameplay mechanics. I sound like an ass to be honest. All of your feelings are valid since this video is about why horror games don't scare you, rather than why you don't like them. I personally think that people's expectations for what they will get out of a horror game are more restrictive than for any other genre. A horror game doesn't have to ever scare me in the moment for me to consider it a good horror game.
The Black Swordsman I mean, it's his video. How long do you want him to sit and list off every other possible opinion one can have when he reasonably only needs and wants to convey his own ?
I'm going through all of these comments again and reading them for a second time for the next video. I just wanted to reply real quick and say that I don't think you sound like an ass. I disagree with your assessment of me but only because (of course) I know myself better than you: I choose to focus on story and gameplay in the videos, but I do appreciate many other parts of games outside of the videos. From the videos alone your perspective is fair. This video is also about gameplay more than anything and, despite mentioning in the video that I appreciate themes and concepts and stories in horror, people have ignored that to focus on only the perma-death part. It's okay though. Most of the comments are positive--the hardest criticism got liked the most is all.
I think it’s more in reference to the actual horror games he’s played, rather than something inherent to horror games. Otherwise he’d have no hope for good horror games, which isn’t true
In this video, you showed a few clips from The Haunting of Hill House, which probably means it affected you in some way. How? I love that show, but with your logic you shouldn't. That show disputes your whole point. You see the characters as adults, so you know they live when watching the scenes of them as kids; is it still scary? Yeah; Nell's death isn't scary because she dies, it's the situation behind it. Death is a microcosm of what makes good horror work in any medium. Black Mirror makes me shiver, and very rarely does anyone die. House of Leaves has no kills, but it left more of an impression than any other book. I don't like slashers cause most of them do the physical horror fairly poorly, Hush is a good exception. But psychological horror/horror of the unknown is really what you're missing in games like Silent Hill. Games like NaissancE and Anatomy could be called shitty walking simulators, but in the analysis of them you may find true horror. Basically what I'm saying is go watch Jacob Geller.
Joseph Anderson They absolutely should, but to be honest there's not a lot of ways to make the gameplay itself more "horror" like. Think about this: Us, people, can only do a few things. We can run, walk, hide, use a gun etc. Characters in horror movies and books can do the same things. You can do a lot of these in most horror games too. To me personally, gameplay in horror games should be used to make you feel like you are in that scenario, and when it comes to horror, game or movie, the ideas and the themes of the story will always be THE driving factor. There just simply isn't any other way. Some games limit your resources or ways of fighting back, and this can, from a gameplay perspective, influence the horror, but I don't see why any other steps should be taken. If you can imagine yourself in character's shoes when it comes to a movie or a book, then why is it a problem when you do it in game? In fact, I'd think a game can help you invest yourself even more, since you control your character, and your characters life is entirely in your control, as opposed to a movie or a book where you can only watch events unfold. This is precisely why I personally CANNOT invest myself in horror movies. Also, how is you dying in a horror video game and then redoing a certain part different than rewatching a scene or rereading a page? You are already familiar with both of these things. Games are not the only medium where tension somewhat disappears upon a second witnessing. And besides, good horror stories will remain spooky even after multiple witnessings. I'm getting back to my original point, horror movies, books and games are ALWAYS about the ideas, horrifying ideas. Games just help you interact with the story and immerse yourself further into it.
There is a difference between "horror" and "creepiness". You missed talking about creepiness which is what makes a horror game great. Games like SOMA, amnesia 2, silent hill 2 builds up the tension and rakes up the level of foreboding to such a level that it seems like a horror game. This infact is the quality that makes a game a horror game. Also having a good story is very important because a horror game cannot be just a series of setpieces of jump scares all the way through.
Lol, "your word is different from my word and my word is the real word that should be associated with what you're talking about, so my word defeats yours." Love this kind of thinking on the internet.
@@siggylloyd3566 Lol, "I would infer what I want to infer and find out disagreements in conversations where none exist." Love this kind of thinking on the internet.
The term I was waiting for was "suspension of disbelief" and it never came up and that's weird. Horror (just like other genre) requires suspension of disbelief. You are clearly not willing to do that with horror games which I find strange. Again this is no different from say fantasy where you must also suspend your disbelief about magic and monsters and if you're not willing to do that then don't play/read those genres.
_"Horror movies still scare me ---- yet games can't do it for me anymore."_ We are kind of like opposites, lol. I don't at all get scared from horror movies, while games are a different story.
is this the case since "ever" for you? as for me i'm really scared of horror games to the point i can't really enjoy them. but back as a teenager it was the opposite. i loved to play horror-games and it was really hard for a game to actually scare me but horror movies were the thing i couldn't enjoy. didn't play horror games for a few years but since then it shifted.
I’m the same as you when we’re talking horror games. I think games scares me more because I AM the one who’s facing the horror, different than in movies where I see someone facing it.
Same frame of thought, different conclusion. The fact that I DO have control over the actions of the playable character is what creates the anxiety for me. Just the subjectivity of fear, really.
Same. Horror movies are less scary to me because I watch other people making the decisions and they are facing the fear. In games however, it's ME facing the fear and making the decisions.
This is something I once thought about: Horror games "need"(in most cases) to be threatening, yet shouldn't actually kill you. If a horror game is too difficult, it breaks the atmosphere. Once you die, the tension and suspension is gone. The balance of threat and difficulty is extremely hard: THe game needs to be difficult enough to make most players feel in danger without actually being in real danger - this is quite a conundrum and still doesnt solve the core problems of horror games. Yet, if the player is able to get past viewing the horror game as a "game" and immerse themselves, the horror is very effective despite its flaws. A shift to, say, perma-death systems or whatever is not always possible/feasable, especially for plot-driven horror games. On the other hand: The main reason horror games do not on you is, cause of your different level of suspense of disbelief. Simply put: You view horror games too much as "games" on some level, hence cannot properly immerse yourself. In that sense, while your insights and notions about horror games definitely need bigger consideration in the horror genre, your personal experience just shows that you simply are not the target audience for most horror games. I dont mean to implicate you are not allowed to enjoy horror games or anything of the sort - and I do agree with your insights - but most horror games have no chance of "working" on you from the get-go, as you cant help but see and be influenced by those core "flaws" of horror. On the other hand, you are correct that there is a lot of interesting stuff that is possible within the genre - and personally, I find horror games with next to no threat to be quite interesting in design and execution of their horror and more "traditional" horror games should definitely take hints from that.
If you want to feel scared in a video game you have to role play slightly, you have to play in context, realistically, you can't run around like a maniac.. play it like the designers intended, you have to suspend disbelief.
Need to get yourself a VR headset, once your IN the game its gets serious, some VR titles are genuinely unnerving. And i'm 52 years old and been a gamer since the sinclair spectrum 48k.
Didn't mean to be rude, I didn't thought you would even read it. I just wanted to disagree without giving you a dislike. I pretty much think what Jake Speck and Kuro already said. I'm not that eloquent, and much less in english (you can tell by my stupid comment). I watched your Undertale and Dr. Langeskov, The Tiger, and The Terribly Cursed Emerald: A Wirlwhind Heist playthroughs and from what I can remember your approach to playing a game was experiencing it entirely, but in a way like you are a witness of it and not actually experiencing it. I think your way of playing is fine with purely mechanic based games like Hearthstone, but it kinda ruins the experience for other types. I think what you're talking about in this video is tension rather than horror. What you say here 7:30 is breaking the experience and blaming it on the design (AND OH MY GOD WHAT TERRIBLE AIM YOU HAVE, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO SHOOT). I do think that you need to meet the game halfway becuase videogames can't be perfect like films beacuse of your involvment, even in films you have to put from your side to actually enjoy them, and videogames demand more from the player. I could be talking out of my ass, so don't take me too seriously.
So really, it just feels like you're only scared by the possibility of death. I mean, that's fine, but I feel horror is so much more vast than that and that's it's unfair to act like something isn't horror but just horror-themed simply because they try to scare their audience in a different way. To me, in Silent Hill (1, 2, and especially 3) it's the unsettling design of the monsters, the unnatural environments in the Otherworld (and you flat out acknowledge the significance of visual design at 10:25, so why does that not matter to you for horror games?), the ambience through noises and Akira Yamaoka's incredible music that frighten me. Because what you're describing to me is merely tension, not being scared. I feel tense in a classic Mega Man game if I'm down to my last life as dying means I have to start the whole stage over again, but I'm certainly not scared. The two Conjuring films are terrifying to me but the people in the films didn't die in the real life story it's based on so there's zero reason to believe they might die in the movies but I'm still totally scared because there's so much more to horror than just, "is _____ going to survive?" The original Halloween movie terrifies me because of the concept of someone breaking into your home and killing people and how well the film conveys that fear, not because I'm nervous about which character will die and which ones won't.
The video is about failstates more than death. I go into alternatives to perma-death with supporting characters, progression paths, and other consequences. I think visual designs of monsters are visually captivating, not scary. Do you agree that when a monster kills you and you respawn, it's not as scary after that?
@@JosephAndersonChannel Not really. And the alternatives are the same deal, the loss of something (a life, progression, other characters) due to failing in same way. That's tension, not fear. And I think you're trying to look at fear in too much of a "logical" way when fear is often illogical for many people. I get very scared about many types of bugs: bees, roaches, wasps, hornets, even flies to some extent. There's no logic to this, I know for a fact these animals pose no threat to me aside from some brief mild pain from a few of them and that's usually only if I go out of my way to antagonize them, but my personal fears don't care about that logic. I'm afraid in Silent Hill 3 going through Brookhaven Hospital due to the unnatural sounds heard throughout the building (I mean, the development team actually took out the sound of a baby crying in one area because playtesters were TOO unnerved by it), the unnatural movement of the nurses, and the crushing ambience due to the brilliant environmental design, the aforementioned sounds, and Yamaoka's haunting music. I still get chills going down the long ladder in the mall due to the visual sight of such a long, impossible descent and the unholy sounds around Heather as she makes the long climb even though I've played SH 3 multiple times and I know nothing attacks me during this sequence. Having to replay a section due to a death doesn't rob me of this immersion, no more than having to put down a book or comic temporarily and come back to it later and get re-immersed in the story and characters again even if I have to reread a few pages. I already know logically Heather can't die as I'm playing SH 3 because the story would just end, but that's not where the horror comes from. Too many players have attested to how much SH 1-3 scared them, that's not something that can just be easily dismissed with, "well, I personally don't think it's scary if there's no consequences to death, therefore it's not real horror." I mean, I don't find Alien scary because personally that sort of alien creature just doesn't scare me, but I'm not going to dare call it not horror just because it failed to scare me personally.
@@JosephAndersonChannel I don't agree, the experience of being attacked is scary and having to go through it again is just as bad. Only caring about the momentary end result diminishes the other 95% of that experience. For me, I play as though each life in a game is my only one so I can enjoy the stakes of the experience. Sustaining a punishment like a broken arm/ leg in the game would help further the player's suspension of disbelief, but it's potential to increase their fear is as likely as it is to annoy or roadblock them. Part of your problem may also be how insular horror is as a genre. Everything has to be so relentlessly hopeless, aggressive, and scary that I often lose my investment as it feels like a monotone soup. If I can tell everyone's going to die, is an asshole while they're alive, and are in a universe that conspires to undo good decisions the screen becomes a monochrome vision of the author holding the delete key on my disbelief. Fear is a momentary emotion that needs to balanced with others.
@@JosephAndersonChannel 1: I don't always find that a moment in a game is less scary when I have to redo it. But 2: even if the scariness is diminished, what exactly does that prove? Horror movies can be less scary upon re-watch. Does that mean they weren't scary to begin with? Of course not, it means you know what to expect and can brace yourself for the scares more effectively.
@@TheFutboler22 A horror move being less scary on a second watch is acceptable and reasonable. A game can stop being scary 5 minutes in if you die early and realize you're immortal. Even if you're still a little scared, the effect has waned. Play enough horror games, or just die in the same one a few more times, and you may be looking at 5-15 hours of gameplay that don't scare you when that's meant to be the draw of the game.
I think the real reason you don't find them scary anymore is because you stream them with an audience watching you, instead of being alone, in the dark, completely immersed.
His main argument is that spooky games aren't spooky because you can't die. In that case I feel sorry for him because it means he apparently is unable to fully immerse himself in a game and misses out on much of the joy.
@@symbolicjohnson7 he kept saying that permadeath is the core factor that will drive true fear. permadeath = gameplay. you can't die = gameplay. get it?
Also he seems to barley focus on the narrative in his silent hill 2 stream he didn’t really pay attention to the story instead he only focused on the gameplay
"just like a set back caused by death should never become a tedious trip through repeated content no matter what the game is", but you said permadeath would heighten the stakes in horror games to the point of believability earlier, and unless if the game is completely randomized, like some kind of horror rouge lite, permadeath would cause exactly that: a tedious trip through repeated content. Even with rouge lites you start to eventually see repetition in content. Sure, you did qualify that instead of permadeath some other type of tangible consequence for death such as branching endings or having characters eliminated forever would work as well, but does that mean you think a permadeath horror game with un-randomized or linear content wouldn't work? If that were the case, and I might be wrong, then horror games would gain a lot of believability but lose more depth of narrative and themes. It's not like randomization lends itself well to writing.
Yeah no, much like your Subnautica review this is too flavored in personal preference to be useful. This tells us more about you than being any help with a good idea.
@@Calvin_Coolage except alot of the points he makes are statements and not prefaced with "i believe" or "in my experience" or something along those lines. He does sometimes but they are so few and far between that this is more of a general review than a personal one just from the way he worded it.
I'd say that I have the exact opposite reaction compared to horror movies and video games, and I think that it chalks up to the level of control. In a horror movie, if the main character dies there's nothing I can do. The life of the main character, the effectiveness of their resources, and how they get out of a situation are not in my hands, so I don't feel tense because I don't have to try to save them. If a character is injured and they will have a harder time doing things, I'm much less nervous because I know that whatever happens will happen. In a video game, if a character dies it scares me more because I feel as if I might've been able to save them. If a monster is chasing my character down a hallway, the only way they're getting out is if I can muster the courage to get them out of there, not if they can. Also because if some set event harms my character I know that will make it harder for ME to get through the experience. I do agree with you that when your character dies in a linear game it makes the situation much less scary since you know what's coming and the experience starts to become more of a chore. I do, however, believe that the fear of dying is much more impactful than the terror in death. I'd say that the best horror games are the ones where you die very little, but are often just barely escaping death as that makes the fear of dying magnified with the low terror of death being seen very little.
If you didn't joke around with your audience and actually payed attention to the game you're playing, you might get invested enough to get the intended emotion out of a game.
saying "there are no horror games, only 'horror-themed' games, because none of them scare me" is like saying "there are no erotic films because none of them have turned me on"
Personally I never get scared by movies. There's only one that has really scared me, and it was when I was like 10. And I definitely don't agree with afraid of death = horror. Permadeath works because of the challenge, and almost no game manages to keep it's athmosphere after multiple runs. Permadeath games usually ask for the player to be good at the game by having to restart, and not engross themselves in the athmosphere of the game.
It's interesting you chose Don't Starve, because I was thinking in my head at that moment that it needs to be a game with permadeath. The example that came up in my head was my hardcore single player Minecraft world. Death means world deletion, every single decision matters. The first time I made an expedition to a nether keep, about 60 hours in, was an insane psychological journey. How far could I push my luck, how long would my supplies last, is it worth pushing on beyond my comfort zone because if I stop here, I have to come back to get some ingredients I haven't collected yet. This culminated in a mad dash out of a giant nether keep in hot pursuit by blazes while several ghasts rained explosive shots from above. That was the most scared I have ever been in a game and I'm currently hoping my iron-man run of Rimworld will finally give me another moment like that.
@@JosephAndersonChannel because video games require actual game play. Plus ammo management in silent hill/resident evil builds tension and anxiety, the bad combat controls are purposeful for tension purpose, stealth builds a sense of the unknown and helplessness.
The biggest difference to me between the two is that in a movie you can close your eyes and passively let the movie events take place and run their course. And a game demands your attention, because passably letting time-pass is surely the worst thing you can do in most situations.so playing horror video games has actually decreased my immersion in movies by comparison.
@@someidiot6232 Exactly. It would also mean that all roguelikes are amazing horror games, because you're always afraid of dying. There are games that expertly combine both, like Resident Evil 1-3 and System Shock 2, as the horror theme is complemented by the tension that comes from the lack of resources and the fear of death, but they are entirely different concepts.
I think he just distances himself in games. Personally, when I play, I don't think "meh, I can just respawn and avoid the next thing that kills me" - that ruins everything. Without immersion, the entire gaming experience is moot - you may as well just watch someone else play.
@@justsomeone5314 it's really hard for him to immerse himself... He focuses too much on game play mechanics and not enough in the story or events unfolding in front of him... Pretty sad
How are you supposed to feel scared when watching a horror movie? You are just a spectator. You have no control. If something jumps out all of a sudden and startles you that's not fear. The only films that actually managed to horrify me were REC 1 and 2. Games on the other hand though. RE Nemesis, Amnesia, Penumbra and PT on PS4. Hell even Dark Souls is scarier than most horror movies
@@JosephAndersonChannel But do you imagine yourself to be in a characters position when that character will actively do things you wouldn't? It's hard to try and sync yourself up with that horror protagonist if you aren't in control of them, because they're more often than not acting in a way you never would. I can empathize with a character, sure, but I don't feel like that tension is as strong as going through it with a more similar proxy character because there's such a big gap between them, the victim and me, the audience.
Joseph Anderson ok, but fear is also very reactionary and subconscious. We can look at still images and find them frightening or unsettling without knowing why. The threat of death isn’t required
I think horror games take a bit of "playing along" to really enjoy, in a similar way that something like paper D&D does. And that's not for everyone, but I still enjoy them.
Without outright disagreeing as everyone else has, here's something I think the original resident evil did with regards to this specific issue that struck a good balance: By giving you a limited # of ink ribbons to save, you are actively encourage by resident evil to NOT save lest you make significant progress; nothing sucks more than not being ABLE to save at all because you blew your ribbons early when you didn't have to. This also places the player in far greater danger of losing progress: do I push on and risk all my progress or spend my last save ribbon now and hope I come across more? Without knowing what's around every corner you can't possibly know if you're making the right decision no matter which of those two options you choose, upping the tension and in many cases upping the consequences for death, really making you grip into that controller when you suddenly encounter a crimson head and it's been 45 minutes since you've found an ink ribbon and been able to save your progress.
Letícia Barreiros Kind of yeah since he mostly tends to view computer games as games in their classic conception. But this time it is along the lines of tension being essential to horror experience regardless of media. And it is consequences that create tension in the games.
Unsurprisingly, I'm sure, I feel the exact opposite. Our stories start off similarly, with me being absolutely terrified of horror movies as a child because I saw a bit too much of a campy over-the-top movie when I was too young, but as I grew up I stopped being afraid of movies. It's probably been a decade since a horror movie actually scared me (not counting startling me with a jump-scare, obviously) but I can't handle playing a horror game at all. I'm also able to *watch* a horror game just fine; LPs on RU-vid or livestreams on Twitch are both perfectly fine for me--they're no worse than a movie would be--but trying to play through those same games myself I'm just completely unable to disconnect myself from the avatar enough to be able to do much of anything. Even though I've been a gamer since I could hold a joystick, and I *know* that dying in a game doesn't mean anything except the inconvenience of having to re-play a section, that logic and knowledge is worthless in the face of the emotional reaction to the spooky sounds coming from the dark behind my avatar.
At some point any horror game stops being scary because like in my case, fear was quickly replaced by rage as I died for 70th time or just wasted my life on an incredibly obtuse puzzle. Maybe the fear comes back after thinking about a game's themes but definitely not during.
This is by far THE ABSOLUTE WORST take you have ever had on anything. Permadeath? Are you kidding me? It doesn’t even “fix” your main stigma with horror games in how the protagonist is this “immortal Demi god who can cheat Death.” Permadeath only means you have just one checkpoint and that’s at the beginning of the game to which the game gives you the chance to try again. In a horror movie, if someone dies they don’t get a chance to try again, they’re gone, you’ll never see them again. Also, Permadeath is only scary ONCE and before it even really happens. Sure on a first playthrough, Permadeath can be this impending sense of dread and make the experience more intense but once it finally happens, it quickly stops being scary and becomes frustrating and annoying along with not being very enjoyable because the player, after a few more permadeaths, is just wanting to get through the game quickly without bothering to become fully invested in it. Horror is a lot of things, fear of the unknown, fear of suffering, fear of isolation, fear of reliving the same experience over and over, and psychological fear. Your main contention with death being a slight breather from the horror is precisely the point, it’s meant to be a slight breather because before, you’re either overwhelmed by monsters or completely helpless to do anything. The impending horror comes from the fact that despite being dead, the nightmare isn’t over and you must continue to relive the nightmare if you want to make progress hence having to exit the death screen. Another thing about horror games is that they’re usually not so passively easy on the player, they house many sequences from intense and difficult monster encounters to straightforward and sometimes complex puzzles along with certain scenarios that guarantee a specific ending you’ll get based on what you do. You really think adding a permadeath is going to make most of what I mentioned, scarier? It flat out stops being survival horror and moreso tedious busywork that you’re forced to do over again. If that’s scary to you then you must be absolutely terrified of the slippery climb time trial in Crash Bandicoot PS4. Finally, the dumbest point in the whole video: “The idea is that horror games require more suspension of disbelief on the player’s part and that you should meet them halfway in order to feel scared. I reject this idea because I don’t have to to do that to appreciate scary MOVIES.” Well.....technically you really do have to suspend your disbelief in a horror film in order to become invested in it because it’s all fictional and the subject matter is uasually pretty out there (Freddy, Jason, Mike Myers, Pumpkin-head, the list goes on) along with the main characters not exactly acting like real people which is a staple of horror films. With video games, you already know you’re getting into something weird and not realistic so it’s always a good idea to try and suspend your disbelief and try to acquainted with the game mechanics along with the atmosphere. Also, awesome job on comparing films to video games as if they are even remotely the same thing. Just an all around disappointing video with a terrible “opinion.”
Just an all around disappointing video with a terrible"opinion." An opinion you find so salty that you left a very long sentence... What a salty sheep you've become.
He finds the opinion 'salty'? What? Wouldn't it be the other way around if you're going to play the 'you're just mad bro' game? Oh boy. Another elitist prick who thinks he's special because he can bleat out 'sheep! You're sheep!'. We definitely needed another one of those on the internet. How about you just don't bother if you a) can't ad hominem correctly b) can't argue against his criticism
@@employee4275 For starters, he states his opinions as absolute fact, like the whole "SOMA isn't a horror game" bit at the start And him just outright claiming that Frictional "failed" to make a scary experience. Then, he clearly did not do his research, as shown by the fact that he thought killing the WAU wasn't optional, and that he didn't know you could turn off the screen tearing effect in the options. Those were the first few things that came to mind, but not everything.
Yes, that is some serious nonsense. SOMA was the scariest game I've ever played, this video with that one makes me think he has no clue what a horror game is.
The idea in Hellblade where your save would be deleted if you die too many times seems like a good compromise, although i don't think the game actually does, only says that it does that. Pyre also has a different idea but along the same lines to create tension where losing does not lead to game over but instead the game just goes along with that loss being canon. Although its not a scary game a similar mechanic could be utilised in a horror game.
@@ducksauce2696 That's what i said the game says that but doesn't do that.The idea is there it just doesn't do anything with it. Although it should have as that would have been really interesting and imo good to create some added tension.
@@anubhavtitus yeah it's a shame Ninja Theory didn't have the balls to go for it. Would have been interesting if Sensua would kill herself if she fails to many times
Hellblade was indeed one of the most, if not THE most immersive and scary experience in my life. Because I believed the whole "it will delete your save games" thing. That and the great audio and visual design of the game. So sadly, it cant be replayed and have even a fraction of the same experience since I now know theres no threat of starting over the whole game. Great game though.
