Steam installeren
inloggen
|
taal
简体中文 (Chinees, vereenvoudigd)
繁體中文 (Chinees, traditioneel)
日本語 (Japans)
한국어 (Koreaans)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgaars)
Čeština (Tsjechisch)
Dansk (Deens)
Deutsch (Duits)
English (Engels)
Español-España (Spaans - Spanje)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spaans - Latijns-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Grieks)
Français (Frans)
Italiano (Italiaans)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Hongaars)
Norsk (Noors)
Polski (Pools)
Português (Portugees - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Braziliaans-Portugees)
Română (Roemeens)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Fins)
Svenska (Zweeds)
Türkçe (Turks)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamees)
Українська (Oekraïens)
Een vertaalprobleem melden
Regels en richtlijnen voor discussies
1 
Dit bericht rapporteren
Tastes are going to vary so it's impossible to predict. I haven't had a lot of time to play anything recently, but I will say you should probably assume "no". If you want a detailed analysis someone put up a video about it called "what happened" here in the forums that over 16 minutes explains a lot of things about this game, even if I do question a few bits like the sales numbers which due to lack of play time and boredom i have been trying to figure out without much success.
The bottom line is this though, when the original Fatal Frame came out it was an original theme to give survival horror, and Fatal Frame 2 was largely just an upgrade on the first one, most fans of the series seem to agree with me that it was the best the series ever was. Fatal Frame 3 made the mistake of messing around with the working formula in ways that didn't always work out, and it seems a good number of fans feel that it was the weakest part of the original trilogy.
Fatal Frame 4 (this) was developed by Suda 51 who is a well known creator, but initially turned down the game because he's not really into horror despite the themes of some of his games. He basically got on board because he wanted to mess around with the Wii at the time it as a hot product. The script he came up with is allegedly inspired by a little known horror-hentai he liked called "Crimson Climax" and there are a lot of easter eggs about it, although he greatly diverged from the specifics of that story, and of course this game really doesn't have any pornographic elements. Basically i get the impression he liked some stuff about the set up and presentation more than anything.
At any rate Suda 51 kind of wrecked Fatal Frame 4 by doing his own thing with it and developing a control scheme which was terri-bad, being far different that was was established to work on the system. This lead to all kinds of horrible reviews. This also means what your looking at here is a conversion of a game never intended to work without a broken motion control set up. This probably explains why so many people complain about the controller problems, as the core game was never designed for a controller, so you'll need to go in expecting this if nothing else (I knew this when I bought it for example).
At any rate apparently the writing and story are pretty good, as this guy is a well know writer and creator. That said remember horror isn't his thing, and apparently it doesn't really quite get to the best moments of the series that were written by people actually into that stuff. But as I said, be very happy if the game play is simply "tolerable" with this one, reviews vary, but "jank" is actually mild by the standards of some of the criticisms. As I said though this is somewhat justified as the greatest horror of this title was apparently the controls to begin with when they were in the original form, you can't expect much with a broken system being transferred to an unintended control scheme.
Main issue I have with FF4 is that it doesn't feel nearly as scary since almost all scares were spoiled by cutscenes and loud sound effects beforehand literally announcing "hey there's a ghost battle coming up". There's also a lack of urgency vs the first 3 - in FF1 you're racing against time because you can see the progression of the rope curse, in FF2 you see Mayu's condition worsening as the chapters go on, and in 3 the ghosts from the dreams invade more and more of your home and reality as time goes on. That doesn't happen in FF4's story, and while the plot isn't bad, the pacing is further diluted by having to cycle through 3 protagonists.
That said, it also has some of the most memorable room designs - Ayako's room and the Sendo's coffin room, for example.
- Replayability is horrible due to the amount of downtime you have girl trotting around.
- The game is too easy, all you need is the Type-7.
- The puzzles are easy except for the sudoku one in the directors room and the box in Sayaka’s room.
- Its overly railroady in the sense that the ghosts point you to the right direction in an obvious manner.
- The scares are too telegraphed and the ghost designs are bland.
The game is an exercise of tedium design-wise, from picking up items to traversing the environments. Even the notes are repetitive like a JRPG.
The Wii version controls better than the remaster, I tested this and its more responsive, but that can be patched if KT wants to.
If you can’t get the original trilogy, 5 is better as a game overall despite how it somewhat butchered 1’s Miku.
Despite me lambasting it, its still an ok game, the story is ok, nothing really new, but that ending song is great though.
...the biggest being the map: way too simple for a survival horror. Unless you're completely new to the genre, you'll have absolutely no trouble trying to figure out where your next destination is, because there's no maze to begin with. 3 had peaks of frustration but at least you had a map to learn and being able to coming up with an efficient path was satisfying. You won't get that on 4.
the 2nd is a lesser issue that however has no reason to be there, and that's the pick up animation for everything there is in the game. I can understand that they'd want you to go through that sequence for normal pickups, but why the documents?
Story is a lot more mysterious and vague than all the others, the location was intentionally more western to add variety instead of having another old shrine.
Still worth it though, and I do think its better than 1, and almost better than 2, but not 3.
FF1 had the difficulty that fans seem to have been craving for years now (I thought it was a bit too punishing and had some off-putting difficulty spikes) and the excellent atmosphere and many still consider it the scariest of the lot. 2 had the solid level design and characterization, probably the best upgrade system, and many consider it to have the best ghosts/ ghost design. 3 is the apex in terms of story -- just excellent stuff. Modern-day Silent Hill games wish they had a story half as good as FF3.
5 is the one that just... didn't hit the mark for most. Crappy story, lack of scares, lack of reverence for returning characters, brain-dead-easy... yeah.
This puts 4 in a weird place. You can play 4 and immediately see how it paved the way for 5. But it also has much more in common with 2 and 3 than 5 does.
I think 4 is better than 1, personally -- but that is an unpopular opinion. The excessive backtracking/ reusing old areas, difficulty spikes and general budget limitations really show the age of the fist game. But 2 and 3 are the apex of the series, and it will be very hard to beat them, both mechanically and thematically.
Tl;dr: All the games are worth playing, and 4 is definitely one of the better games in the series. But you would be hard pressed to find a wide audience that would say it is among the series' best.