Poll: Do you prefer Horror games with or without Weapons?

Recommended Videos

Safe in the Dark

What is a man?
Jun 5, 2010
11,861
0
0
I've been looking at some of the Horror games and mods I own and I've been debating whether or not I like having weapons in them or if running only makes it a better experience. What do you all think?
 

glyphseeker

New member
Sep 19, 2010
155
0
0
you can have weapons just nothing huge maybe just a knife or a pipe to stun small annoying enemies and to piss off the bigger things
or guns but have a amnesia:the dark desent effect (when you look at mobs you go crazy) so fighting isnt your best option just in emergencies
 

Sovvolf

New member
Mar 23, 2009
2,341
0
0
I think its much scarier without weaponry. I'm much less scared of the horrid beast when I have an M16 machine gun in my hand. If I can kill it by pumping a few rounds into it then it ceases to be a threat and is no longer scary.

However if I don't have a gun on hand, the only option I have is to either try beating it to death (which I imagine is only going to piss it off more) or run like shit. Thus the enemy is a constant threat and running into it would be extremely scary.
 

rabidmidget

New member
Apr 18, 2008
2,117
0
0
Weapons can make for fun gameplay, but the horror can be lost if you can easily mow down enemies with a machine gun.

It's fun when you have shoddy, improvised weapons that feel like they're necessary to have even a slim chance of survival after an encounter, but are also unreliable, making each encounter feel like a real challenge.
 

Get_A_Grip_

New member
May 9, 2010
1,012
0
0
I think you need a weapon of some-sorts.
Nothing like a firearm.
Something basic, like a frying pan or a hammer. Everyday objects that pack enough of a punch to immobilise an enemy for a short enough duration of time so you can either run or hide from 'em.
 

Stoic raptor

New member
Jul 19, 2009
1,636
0
0
If they are done right.

If the guns make it easy to defeat you enemies, then it is not fun.

If the guns help you to barley survive, as in the enemy is difficult and or overwhelming, then it is fun and scary.

Games without guns are usually scarier because the enemies are overwhelming, since you cannot push them back.
 

likalaruku

New member
Nov 29, 2008
4,290
0
0
I'm prone to anxiety attacks, so I like to play it safe. Also it is indeed fun to beat the tar out of one object with another smaller object.
 

ShakesZX

New member
Nov 28, 2009
503
0
0
It's all about implementation. If there is combat, it has to be just effective enough to let the player survive conflicts, but not so much to identifiably ease them into any sense of comfort.
 

Froggy64

New member
Oct 18, 2010
27
0
0
You should have weapons, but as soon as you use them you realize that they're useless. Cue ohshitohshitohshitrunrunrunrunrunrunrun mode.
 

bassdrum

jygabyte!
Oct 6, 2009
654
0
0
It really depends on the game. The whole point of F.E.A.R. is that it's a shooter with a bunch of horror bits thrown in for good measure, bt the ineffectual nature of the weaponry in Alan Wake (particularly on the hardest difficulty setting) worked really well for me.

At a basic level, though, it's scarier when you can't fight back, so I'd say that the less combat effective the player is, the more likely it is that the game will freak them out.
 

blankedboy

New member
Feb 7, 2009
5,234
0
0
Mcoffey said:
It depends on the game really. I liked Doom 3 and I like Amnesia. That said, I'm finding Amnesia to be far scarier (I can only really play it in hour intervals, if that...), but i'll always remember how satisfying it was to finally get some real firepower and turn the tables on the demons in Doom 3.
Even more so with the classic Doom games (which I'm obsessing over at the moment as I make a campaign for them), they were designed as horror games but the pure firepower you had took all that out of it.
 

Gindil

New member
Nov 28, 2009
1,621
0
0
Weapons kinda cheapen the effect. Why is Dead Space scary compared to Silent Hill?

It's because the weapons are used unconventionally in the former.

Seriously, I don't like the concepts of most games that are part of the horror genre. It seems that they do it wrong. The main game that truly scared the bejeesus out of me was SH.

To this day, when I hear a radio crackle, I get chills.
 

Defective_Detective

New member
Jul 26, 2010
159
0
0
I've always been of the feeling that a balance should be struck.

In a horror game, is it scarier to feel impotent against the horror by having no weapons at all, or having access to a weapon or two along the way, but having the reassurance provided snatched away as you realise they are practically useless?

And I don't mean "weapon-breaking" mechanics. That's just lame.

I mean for example, picking up a revolver on the way, which you can use to shoot the odd low-level horror, but soon enough the bullets have less and less effect and/or become incredibly scarce.

Thus, nervous scrambling to find ammunition, and an emphasis on conserving ammo. The fear of running out just adds to the experience.


As someone else mentioned, the original Resident Evil games used this formula well, especially on higher difficulty levels.
 

Vibhor

New member
Aug 4, 2010
714
0
0
Weapons make the game feel much more safer.
See penumbra overture.You have pickaxe but it still makes you feel much more safer the next time you face a wolf but see Black plague.The game has no weapons and is also scarier than the first one