Posts Tagged ‘ shinji mikami ’

Resident Evil (2002) – “Revisiting Horror”

resident-evil-mansion

Today, the name “Resident Evil” can only be associated with a modern brand of derivative military shooters. This is true regarding the main entries of the series – that slowly, but consistently, shed their adventure legacy in favor of fast-paced action sequences and increasingly convoluted plot lines – but also in the numerous spin-offs, of which the rail-shooting kind represents the most obvious and categorical insult to the nature of the original “Resident Evil”. Somewhere between “Alone in the Dark’s” cinematic viewpoint and “D’s” aesthetic sensibilities, Shinji Mikami’s groundbreaking work became a powerful and suspenseful horror video game that would lay the primary foundation of the genre. The bond that united it with its predecessors lied in the essence of the adventure video game – a genre built on the physical exploration of three-dimensional worlds, populated with puzzle pieces and small narrative interludes (in the form of text and cut-scene) that gave the spatial metaphor a narrative texture nonexistent in other segments of the video game strata. Whilst the textual quality of “Resident Evil” – an honorable dêcalage of b-movie tropes – could only amaze players on the most superficial of levels, its brooding atmosphere and tense game play design would surely leave a lasting mark. This was especially true when considering “Resident Evil’s” crowning achievement – the design of the mansion in which the game took place.

For a long time now, haunted house amusement rides have had a special part in popular culture; the seduction of entering such an ominous location feeds on a primordial instinct to face dangerous situations in controllable environments. “Resident Evil” is surely meant to be played as if a haunted house ride, and what better evidence of this fact than the change from its original Japanese title – “BioHazard” – to the sillier, yet somehow more accurate western translation? Like in “D“, “Resident Evil’s” mansion is designed with a stunning sense of ambiance that hints at danger in every corner. More than the actual fright – of which the now infamous dog leaping sequence has become a symbol – it’s in the anticipation and build up of tension, through visual and auditive cues, that the authors’ deviousness became fully apparent… Hitchcock would surely be proud. It helps that the mansion bears such a portentous and ostensible visual characterization, in both scale and intrinsic detail of its decor, making it humbling to the player. The mansion is, in itself, a work of art – its rendition of paintings, sculptures and architectonic style, thoroughly embodies the concept of an interactive art museum, so in vogue in the mid-nineties. The photorealistic quality of its pre-rendered visuals made the game not only aesthetically beautiful, but also more effective in heightening the sense of presence on part of the player.

resident-evil-remake

These were the notions which the sequels could never truly evoke. “Resident Evil 2” and “3” no longer took place in claustrophobic, XIXth century mansions, but instead spread the action across an entire city – the dimensionality of the urban landscape inevitably gave a sense of liberty and breathing space to both titles. The often criticized clunky movement of characters  – so important in forcing players to acknowledge the dangerous, uncomfortable and uncontrollable nature of their surroundings – was, with each title, softened thanks to new movements and more responsive controls. The scarcity of weapons of the original was slowly amped into a considerable array of weapons, more powerful and plentiful with each passing iteration. In “4”, besides a diminished role of exploration and puzzle sections, the cinematic angles were replaced with a pure 3D camera – meaning that zombies could no longer jump from out of the screen unseen. “5” borrowed its aesthetic and ambiance from other games, further compromising and indeed erasing any memory of the original work that was still present in the series. All of these games bore ‘good’ design decisions, sure: each made “Resident Evil” a ‘better’ game, i.e. less frustrating and more fun. But with these nefarious changes it also lost its identity, its charm, and most important of all, its capacity to frighten players, reducing a once great adventure horror game to a mindless action shooter.

Which is why the Gamecube remake of the original “Resident Evil” makes even more sense today than it did back in 2002 – it serves to reminds us of how much the original surpassed its direct (and indirect) successors. Mikami’s return to his original masterpiece only served to state the obvious: the series’ numerous additions and revisions were unneeded, and more importantly, only hindered at conveying the sense of  suspense which uniquely identified his original vision. Instead of re-envisioning the game completely (as he would later do in “4”), Mikami focused on getting players to experience what they had experienced many years before – the sense of entering a beautiful, yet menacing haunted house.  Narrative-wise the game is identical, and in terms of game play style and level design it is similar enough to capture the original’s spirit, but different enough to stand on its own. Shooting zombies finally became, once again, a conflict with the game itself, a peak in tension that served as a mere punctuating mark in a vast score of exploratory moods. Make no mistake, the remake is not an action game.

22

Mikami cleverly manages to use the remake to reference other games, like “Clocktower”, and even parody “Resident Evil” itself, but unlike Kojima, he does it with such delightful subtlety and consistency with the fictional backdrop that nothing ever feels out-of-place. He can make the most obsessive and knowledgeable hard-core fan smile without needing to break the fourth wall or giving away the irony of his playful demeanor with an obvious joke. Of course, what most gamers will appreciate in the new version of his classic, isn’t the elegant revisionism, but the update in presentation. Technical digressions aside, “Resident Evil” makes for one of the most beautiful and immersive experiences in recent video games. Every new animation and lighting scheme adds up to a stunning work of mise-en-scéne for each room, which truly makes them shine as part of a virtual art exhibit.  The soundscape completes the picture, making the game’s atmosphere as evocative and scary as possible. This remake is one of those rare occasions in which the audiovisual lift was actually used, not as a means of justifying a buy for the tech-savvy buyers, but as a way of furthering the vision of the original work.

Alas, the remake is a memory of a now distant past, a throwback to a time in which games could still balance an underlying commercial logic with an artistic drive that went beyond the confines of fun-inducing game design. “Resident Evil” is slow-paced, clunky, unpleasant and sometimes even frustrating, but only because those are the needed qualities for a survival horror title to elicit a proper emotional mindstate in players. Back in 1996, “Resident Evil” defined the genre, and perhaps not surprisingly, most of its qualities remain unsurpassed still today.  Which is why the remake, with its stunning artistic complexion, that so thoughtfully brings the original’s ambiance to new heights, is as worthy of the masterpiece title as the original.

score: 5/5

Devil May Cry 4- “Sequels Make You Cry”

davil-may-cry-4-15.jpg

“Capcom” is one of the most preeminent companies in the industry; it’s also one of the most innovative, especially considering the last few years. However, that doesn’t mean they don’t milk their sacred cows… quite on the contrary, they also have one of the more sequel driven publishing strategies. From a financial point of view, their tactic is quite sound: use “R&D-like” small production units to produce new and innovative concepts, and then explore the established franchises till they bleed, thus making enough profit to keep the boat afloat. Yet, from an artistic point of view, it’s an odd sight to see the same company name behind the brilliant “Devil May Cry” (the first one), “Killer7” and “Ôkami”, and the not so interesting “Megamans”, “Street Fighters”, “Resident Evils” and “Onimushas”.

But, the past is past, a new generation of platforms has arrived, and it remains to be seen if the financially risky creative departments will have a chance to produce new titles, considering the high production values behind xbox360 and ps3 games. So, after the original and interesting “Dead Rising”, it is with little surprise that “Capcom” now launches a sequel: “Devil May Cry 4”. “Devil May Cry”, like “Resident Evil”, has been a series filled with its fair share of ups and downs. The first “Devil May Cry” was a pure masterpiece; the second was a step backwards and the third a step sideways. So, it’s fair to say that the expectations weren’t very high. The question with this fourth installment is simple: does “Capcom” pull a “Resident Evil 4” out of the hat, or simply one more “Code Veronica”? The answer is… neither. Sadly, “Devil May Cry 4” doesn’t reinvent the series, but fortunately it has enough punch to forget the series’ uninspired past.

devilmaycry3_large.jpg

Looking at the game, it is nice to see that many of the original game’s concepts were recaptured and finally improved on this sequel. Firstly, the neo-gothic art style has returned in full force and went back to basics. Instead of opting for the grand-scale scenarios of “DMC2” and “DMC3”, that mixed modern urban settings with the neo-gothic architecture and some horror inspired scenarios (with mixed results), “DMC4” goes for a more classic approach, forgetting the modern settings and replacing them with nineteenth century architecture that blends much better with the neo-gothic style. In the character department, there is also a return to the series roots, with more serious (but not exaggeratingly serious) designs replacing the often ridiculous monster design of the series. And thanks to more powerful hardware, everything looks even better, with crispy HD quality and great lighting effects that make everything shine; it’s easily one of the most visually impressive games around, thanks in great part to its art design and technical execution.

The tone of the game as also taken a leap backwards to the first “DMC”, forgetting the over the top humor of “Dante’s Awakening”, and going for a more B-movie feel: either stupidly serious or seriously humorous; it’s still is charmingly funny and witty, without going to the point of being “too” ridiculous. This goes well with the plot, that though mind numbing, manages to keep some interest in its unfolding. This is, in no small part, thanks to the virtuous cut-scene directing from the hands of Yûji Shimomura (director of “Versus”), who had already worked in “DMC3” and “Onimusha 3” with great results. His cut-scenes are among the best ever seen in a videogame, and it is impossible not to notice that they are done with great cinematic flair and style, though without the limitations of a real camera. [You can see for yourself how good the cutscenes are, Opera Cutscene, Nero vs Dante Cutscene]

devil-may-cry-4.jpg

But those are mere details, what really matters in a “DMC” is the actual action, the one where you can take part of. And it is there that “DMC4” doesn’t do as well. On the good side of things, besides series’ veteran Dante (that comes with all the moves from previous games), there is a new playable character named Nero, that actually plays differently. It’s a not a difference you’ll notice immediately mind you, but as the game moves on, it’ll become all the more apparent: Nero’s movements were thought from scratch and forget many of the unnecessary complications of Dante’s moves (the numerous styles and weapon combinations). Nero has only one way of playing, and because of that, his gameplay feels much more modern and intuitive. Yet, many of the classic moves still make an appearance, and the somewhat obtuse and dated control system hurts the game… a lot. The reason for this lies in the use of subjective directions to make certain movements; the problem with this is that “DMC4” is too frenetic and action-driven for the player to be constantly trying to find out which direction Dante or Nero are facing, and which enemy they are targeting, especially if you consider the elevated number of enemies in each arena and the awkward camera angles (that are as bad as the ones in the first game, which dates to 2001…). So, while some progress was made in the gameplay department, its quirks and old-school approach just don’t cut it by today’s standards, and are hardly deserving of a sequel.

111048-37.jpg

“Devil May Cry 4” fails to be a true sequel to the first game in the series. It’s better than its two predecessors, but not enough to make it a masterpiece. The reason for this probably lies in “Capcom’s” design department, that chose Hideaki Itsuno (director of “DMC2” and “DMC3”) for director; meanwhile Hideki Kamiya (director of the first “DMC”, “Resident Evil 2”, “Okami”, “Viewtiful Joe”) and Shinji Mikami (director of “Resident Evil”, “Resident Evil 4”, exec. producer of the first “DMC” and many, many other things) are probably doing something new that will drive games to a whole new level. It’s a shame that “Capcom” isn’t always capable of reinventing its franchises, but one must understand that in order to innovate, they first must cash in on their series. Besides, how many masterpieces can gaming geniuses Shinji Mikami and Hideki Kamyia create each season anyway? Not many, I’m afraid…

Overall: 3/5