Elmofongo: I don't think Chris, Jill, Barry, and Wesker were trained to jump tree to tree my monkey loving friend

Just watch the intro and you will understand:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT1JB3uv0ms

langurmonkey: I watched it. While the dogs were eating the first guy, the entire team had time to climb the trees. Think about how many people in real life, can out run dogs? These STARS people weren't using their brains. Their decision to run to the mansion would only be smart in my eyes, if they were no trees or there were flying monsters outside. But I also know that in the military, you follow orders so the STARS members are conditioned to follow orders first, then think. So I'm not condemning RE as an unrealistic game. Just pointing out, how the STARS people could of survived.

Elmofongo: ...Or instead they can pick off the dogs with their guns while they are on the trees instead of jumping off from tree to tree like a monkey, but than again after they picked off the initial dogs and possibly run out of ammunition, you might run into even more dogs with ammo this time.

Arrgh I am thinking to much into this, look Wesker wanted the S.T.A.R.S. team to get into the mansion to gather data for Umbrella of how trained soldiers can handle Umbrella's B.O.W.s and accidental mutants :P

langurmonkey: snip

keeveek: Dude, he's wearing sunglasses at night. This is where the talks about realism should stop.

Punished_Snake: ...but why this survival horror is condisered a little masterpiece?
I mean, the plot is good (it is based on Lovecraft stories), and tha fact you can control several characters is also good, but the gameplay is too linear (basically you are always on rail, you can proceed only forward).
The magic system is nice but it is also boring, because you must enchant your weapons to defeat easily some enemies, but this can be a waste of time (see the "color" of the enemy, apply the proper magic, done).
Yea, it is a good game, but why is it considered one of the best survival horror?

groze: And, yes, I get it, it's very "mature" and "intellectual" to say jump scares are lame and for kids, and that "psychological horror" is where it's at. I played Resident Evil REmake and Resident Evil 0 on the GameCube to hell and back, and it's amazing how well designed and produced those games are. Yes, they rely on a few jump scares, but the sheer amount of gross and disgusting gore the games throw our way can't be denied, and that's horror. The character of Lisa in REmake made my hair stand on end every time I heard her dragging her shackles and moaning off-screen. That's more than Eternal Darkness ever did. What scared you so much in Eternal Darkness? The torch lights suddenly flickering and the characters looking at them? That blatant jump scare of Alex in the bloody bathtub? Tell me you weren't expecting that when you examined the bathtub... I absolutely was. The problem with Eternal Darkness is that it tries to be clever. Too clever for its own good. Resident Evil REmake and 0 are just what they are: games. They rely on clichés, but that's okay, since they work. Eternal Darkness tries to avoid those same clichés but resorts to them all the same, because the truth is that the team wasn't able to do a decent horror game.

What they did do, on the other hand, was having an engrossing story, something Resident Evil doesn't have and doesn't try or need to have. They're different games, each with their merits, in a lot of aspects Eternal Darkness is better than Resident Evil, but that's because they're not the same genre of games. When it comes to horror and suspense, Resident Evil definitely takes the cake from Eternal Darkness.

AFnord: I think we have very different views on what makes horror horror. For me, blood & gore is disgusting, but it rarely adds much to the horror feel.
Nothing really scared me in Eternal Darkness either, and the things that made things a bit creepy were not the visual parts. The flickering lights did nothing for me, and neither did the jump-scares (which were predictable). Rather it was the background noise early on during the WW1 section, before any enemies appeared, and then there was also the sound of "something else" moving about in the main house. I was not sitting at the edge of my seat, but I found those things mildly creepy. But much like Resident Evil & Silent Hill, a lot of the general horror feel is instantly killed once it comes to combat. For me, the most important part of horror is a sense of helplessness, and when you are the god of fighting (or at least a competent solider, in RE's case), I have a hard time actually feeling helpless. When I don't know when or if I'll get attacked, when there is "something" out there, something potentially dangerous, I'm far more likely to feel scared than if I know what it is, where it is, and that I need to kill it.

Elmofongo: Well here try the free game One Late Night , scariest non-combat PC First person horror game I have ever played, its scarier than Amnesia:

http://www.onelatenight.com/

Punished_Snake: ...but why this survival horror is condisered a little masterpiece?
I mean, the plot is good (it is based on Lovecraft stories), and tha fact you can control several characters is also good, but the gameplay is too linear (basically you are always on rail, you can proceed only forward).
The magic system is nice but it is also boring, because you must enchant your weapons to defeat easily some enemies, but this can be a waste of time (see the "color" of the enemy, apply the proper magic, done).
Yea, it is a good game, but why is it considered one of the best survival horror?