I should probably write this down tomorrow, but I love horror, I love videogames and I love writing WORDS!
On Horror:
The moody lighting and graphics are effective in building atmosphere, but what is achieved in its graphics is undermined by linear level design and poor gunplay.
I always think that when you're making a horror game you need to establish the players weakness. As soon as the player realises that they're the alpha then there's nothing to fear. This wasn't helped by the games linear level-design and the scripted enemy attacks, and it felt like the developers went through the level and said "Okay, there hasn't been a battle yet, put a monster in here!".
It feels like the developer didn't have the confidence in assuming the player would find their world interesting, so they had to spice it up with arbitrary battles. The problem however is this is that this is the games weakness. The game cannot build atmosphere when you're getting into arbitrary battles every 3 minutes, and it needs to take a step back and concentrate on scaring the player as opposed to empowering them with battles.
This isn't helped when you have linear level design. You're literally going down a straight path the entire demo and it hurts the game because unconsciously the level design is acting as a safety blanket for the player because they know they're going in the right direction. If you take this away and make the environment more open then the player will feel more vulnerable because there is no immediate 'right' thing to do, and this is pretty much the reason why games like Resident Evil 2 and Amnesia own because you've got to have the confidence to progress.
Opening the level design would also help with the really boring, really arbitrary monster battles. At the moment, you walk down some street, some monster appears and then you kill it. If you introduce a open level design, you instantly give the player another alternative : The ability to avoid or escape combat. You want the monsters to be tough and scary, when you're constantly killing them then that's kinda defeating the purpose.
On Mama Robotnik threads:
They're bad.
On Gameplay/gunplay:
It's boring and chunky. This is probably something that doesn't need to explored because its obvious, but the gameplay is so repetitive. Some monster appears, you shoot it/hit it and then you finish it. Apart from the clumsy/disconnect feel that I won't bother going into because I'm lazy, the repetitive nature needs to be addressed or at least made enjoyable for it to be successful.
The fog monster really highlights this. I can only hurt him if I kick him when he's leaping at me? Why can't I counter ordinary attacks? It's especially hilarious when I see him stop, take two steps back and then leap at me which is basically inviting me to kick him. Give him some unique attacks, make him vulnerable while doing so which rewards a observant player.
If you want my opinion, I think the game could be onto a winner with the toxic gun thing (?). It would be interesting if you made it basic combat, in the sense that you need certain kinds of toxins to defeat certain kinds of monsters. It would implement some kind of strategy into the gameplay, and it would also make the player more observant of their surroundings.
Actually, that would fix the arbitrary kill finish. I mean at the moment it's stupid because you got to do it with every enemy and that has to be fixed, but if you made it so finishing enemies off would actually reward you with certain toxins then that would implement a risk/benefit dynamic into the game. Do you shoot him and be done with it, or do you run up to him to extract some shit to kill another foe?
fuck the po-lice.
