There is something in the air- that something is an undying extension of #FucKonami, the movement that coloured the end of the 2010s in regards to the ever controversial company, as they seemingly abandoned everything they had built up in the plane of home video games, pursuing the golden goose of gambling machines.

Obviously, things have changed, but unless your name is Metal Gear, people don't seem to be forgiving. That is especially true for Silent Hill, a series I'm sure very few people here have truly played, but many know of. Many know of the botched HD Collection. Many know of the low quality games made in the afterglow of its glory years. Yet, despite this knowledge, many lack a proper context, a proper grounding to it all, and it results in the pit of thinking any new Silent Hill project must be bad, they almost have to be.

This lacking context rears its head further- people will call this game "western" or made by people who have nothing to do with the IP, yet when the credits roll I see the exact names I expected- Ito Masahiro and Yamaoka Akira. This game bleeds with their clear intent, especially Ito's, yet this goes unnoticed by many who have seemingly played this entry.

The game takes Ito Masahiro's concept of 'sakura horror', one he has talked about in the past, and rides it out for as much mileage as it can get, starting with the rather mundane notes that vaguely resemble the sakura, until eventually you're rushing down a nightmare, the walls peeling away into petals and the sakura monster following close behind. It's very effective imagery, especially amidst all the environments littered with decay, falling apart at the seams.

Its elements like these that mark Short Message as one of the first Silent Hill games in well over a decade to truly get the nightmare. It manages to deftly mix aspects of Alessa's nightmare from 1 and Claudia's from 3, alongside its own flavor- of a world constantly falling apart or in rapid decline, one that loops in on itself where it will only ever change for the worse, where the only escape is to break past the barriers placed on us that prevent us from moving forward. Acknowledgement of the past and remembering who your loved ones truly are, in a deftly Silent Hill move, one adjusted for a modern perspective.

I have to admit, I may be over praising this game at times, though it is satisfying to finally witness the series put out a single cohesive vision, for the first time since Silent Hill 4. It's a jolt to the system and only adds to my current optimism that yes, these new Silent Hill games can be great. They have the potential, and Ito has shown he has not fallen off over the years.

I suppose then I'll end this review on a criticism, and then some light praise. I do believe the main character, Anita, speaks far too often. She constantly comments on every event, and leaves minimal room at times to truly figure out what's going on. This leaves my highlights being the moments of exploration, detail hunting in the background, and of course the school section (which is one massive echo of Silent Hill's first entry). But, as a bit of praise, I quite loved the ending- people are like plants, in that they do need attention. They can't live solely off of themselves, we weren't made for that. So, the ending has the two friends, both wandering the same, lonely path, reach out to one another. With that, the sun destroys the nightmare.

It's a simple scene, but I found myself enjoying it.

Biohazard RE:2 is a game that prefers to forget its legacy in favour of mass marketability. It is the ultimate embodiment of the futility of remaking a piece of media, and comes off more as a sigh of frustrated contempt for its origins rather than anything truly celebratory or appreciative.

Obviously, that opening statement is incredibly hyperbolic and opinionated. Not every remake needs to feel like it owes everything to its predecessor, nor does every remake need to respect that origin in its adaptation. But, every remake will inevitably find itself compared to that original and inevitably it will expose the tendencies and desires of those most intimately working on it.

To discuss RE:2, we first must discuss the issues, cultures, and ultimate success of the original, as well as the state of the franchise leading up to the release of its remake. The development timeline of the original Biohazard 2 and the games that followed has always been obscured and hard to follow, but over the years many fans have been able to sketch out a rough developmental period, placing 2 at the start of a mass franchising of the series. Towards the end of its development, several projects were greenlit, in discussions, or already being developed, including its own sequel (Then titled BIO3, later named BIO4), three spin-offs (Gun Survivor, Last Escape (then called Gaiden), and a GBC title), as well as a pseudo-sequel side story (Code: Veronica), and a full fledged prequel (Zero). The impetus for all of this was the explosive success of BIO HAZARD earlier in 1996, and a lot of faith was placed in Biohazard 2 to recapture that success and expand upon it, to not just save Capcom from any potential turmoil, but to lift the company up to its highest highs and create something beyond just a simple duology of games.

Shockingly, such a gamble proved successful. While not every game in development succeeded, the success of 2 in spite of its rough development period spurred the franchise to blossom into what it is today, or rather, what it was in the 2000s. The state of Biohazard in the "FLAGSHIP" era of 1998 to 2005 is quite unlike the current "RE Engine" era of 2017 to now, and the issues leading up to both of them were drastically different.

Capcom in 1998 wanted a franchise, something that could have longtime fans who would be all over a complete media mix. Video games, sound dramas, novels (both a 'Perryverse' in the west, and canonical side stories in the east), films, amusement park attractions, even an early stage production. Echoes of this still exist today with the recent Death Island and the many stage productions the franchise saw in the 2010s.

But, we arrive at the early days of the RE Engine era divorced from the successes of Biohazard. After the series' lead writing team was dissolved, and its narrative guru in Noboru Sugimura passed away, the franchise briefly spiraled until reaching a pseudo conclusion with Biohazard 5. The idea then was a similar gamble to the one made in 1998, by putting several titles into development and resurrecting the franchise once more, only for it to fail completely. Biohazard 6 ended up being too massive to ever realistically succeed, Revelations was briefly looked upon as a serviceable title, but was ultimately forgotten when time came to port it, and Operation Raccoon City was a dismal affair that, while moderately successful, saw Slant Six closing its doors due to the game not meeting expectations.

Biohazard had effectively died, and was in dire need of rebooting, otherwise Capcom would have to close the casket on their most successful and iconic IPs at the time. So, they looked towards the past. Ports of Biohazard (2002) and Zero were released, alongside an episodic sequel to Revelations, all testing the waters of what appealed most to fans, and fans desired a return to the Flagship era of the franchise. This led to the once upon a time infamous "We do it!" video, where a Biohazard 2 remake was announced.

But, an issue arises when developing such a remake in what was the current state of Capcom. Biohazard 7 wouldn't release and receive unanimous praise until the remake was already well underway, so it too was another entry point, a way to welcome in new fans despite the original title being an explosive way to take fans of the surprisingly popular BIO HAZARD, and make them dedicated to a franchise.

What results is a game that exudes an air of contempt for what the original game accomplishes, intentional or not. Character motivations and narratives extending outside this title are effectively neutered, unfortunately reducing the narrative roles of Claire and Ada to side character territory (despite the former being the playable other half of the game), and leaving key plays like William Birkin or Brian Irons as mere footnotes in the grand scheme of things. It has no interest in pursuing the grander tale that was once constructed, and would rather focus all of its attention on the masculine, as if in an attempt to broaden its appeal further.

In the original Biohazard 2, it was often joked that Claire was the true main character. While Leon was often pushed around by his contemporaries, and was ultimately uninvolved with the machinations of the antagonists, Claire confronts both Brian Irons and Annette Birkin, having full dialogue scenes with them. Claire's scenario shines the most light on Sherry and the G-Virus, along with being the only character able to develop a vaccine for it. This isn't to undermine Leon's narrative, which is a far more personal scenario, focused on the slow character development of Ada and how Leon causes her to grow, but it is to state that Claire was a strong female character.

The Claire of the remake is not that. The scene that makes this clear is her meeting with Brian Irons, and it goes from a scene where she slowly wrestles some control her way, to one where she is tied up and forced to watch a rapist and a murderer drag away a little girl. Her second confrontation with the man only makes this worse, as she doesn't even speak to him, he only dies in a way not unlike how Kenshiro from Hokuto no Ken would deal with the scum of the wastelands. Her agency and control is robbed in these scenes, and beyond them her attachment to the narrative of the game is tenuous at best, with her role being truly reduced to the babysitter type, not even getting to wield the rocket launcher in her final boss fight.

Much of the focus for this remake seems to have been placed on Leon, in a desperate attempt at marketability if I were to be cynical. He is the character with two completely distinct costumes he wears throughout the game, he is the character who has the more emotional connection to Marvin, he is the character that the true final boss, Mr. X, is after in the labs. It is made clear time and again that he is the main character, and that Claire's role is secondary, or even tertiary, by comparison.

But, this doesn't mean his role in the narrative is well constructed. He may have the greater focus, but he loses so much in this title that it is almost unbearable. In the original and subsequent games, his greatest desire is to protect and save people, and that is why he became a police officer. In the remake, it is often shown that his desire to be a police officer supersedes his desire to protect people, best shown through how his interactions with Ben have changed, going from wanting to get him out of his cell and get him out of the city, to being dismissive of his concerns and just watching as he dies. It's such a stark contrast in scenes that it is shocking the remake version was included, but it shines a light on the shallowness of the remake, how little it wants to do with the original game.

It is almost a complete inversion of it. From four completely unique scenarios, to one scenario with three slight variations. From a man who wants to save people so he becomes a cop, to a guy who becomes a cop and doesn't really save anyone. From a strong female character, to a female character that is literally saved by the grotesque monster of a man. From a spy that learns how to open up and feel compassion for everyone (this is why she appears no matter what to give the rocket launcher in the original), to a spy that only gives into a more carnal lust for our protagonist. From actually well written antagonists, to one note caricatures in Annette and Irons.

Annette Birkin is by far the character that receives the worst treatment among the side cast come this remake. She goes from a woman who loves her daughter more than anything, despite being an absent mother, to a woman who barely knows her daughter exists. Someone whose last scene is more clearly meant to be the spiteful "Got you" in Leon's scenario, rather than the one of her daughter grieving over her corpse. A character so shallow and worthless that the narrative tries its best to forget she exists the moment she dies, her own daughter talking about playing happy families in the conclusion.

The ending is one of the worst offenders narratively as well. The original concludes on a promise of more, that these characters haven't lost hope- if anything, this has only emboldened them to go further. In Claire's case, this is revealed to be a negative trait, but it is a strong note to end on, our main cast knowing they could be out of the woods, and deciding to continue fighting. The remake chooses to end on a confused note, a shallowly happy ending where the characters act out the most vapid casual dialogue possible (an issue that persists in any scenes that feature both leads), and all that happened is forgotten.

"1998... I'll never forget it" rings hollow in the face of this ending, as it has been forgotten already. Both narratively, and in a meta sense- we have forgotten 1998. We have forgotten the struggles of Kamiya, Sugimura, and the rest of the staff. The passion that went into the original work, as well as the hope that they could continue striving forward.

Ultimately, Biohazard RE:2 has no interest in any of this, wishing to merely be another product bearing the name Biohazard, rather than anything truly meaningful under the hood. I don't discuss the themes in depth all that much because they aren't present, or are so reduced in scope as to be flaccid and not worth mentioning, unlike the original title. This is less a game, and more a product of the general ethos of Biohazard. Clean, sterile labs from the films, a Raccoon City of wide streets and traffic jams, music that is rarely present so that the scare noises are all the more noticeable, character and environment designs that do more to blend in than actually be something. Looking at the poster on this page, the game is trying to evoke the time tested blue-orange, a set of innately appealing colours to a viewer's eyes. It lacks distinction or class, leaving only a product to be consumed.

I can feel nothing other than contempt for this game, deigning itself to be more 'product' than 'art'.

inFAMOUS is a game about one's own lack of choice. In spite of all the karmic systems, optional events, the ability to save people or to harm them, nothing Cole McGrath does will wash away the label he is given. Failure, errand boy, terrorist, The Demon of Empire City. He is someone who cannot escape his mundane existence even in the most supernatural of circumstances.

It makes for an interesting character study in spite of very limited opportunities for the characters to sit and talk (though in the realm of video games, inFAMOUS has a lot of lip flapping for a title of its ilk). Cole becomes fully realized, not as a hero or a villain, but as a man unable to truly live. Weighed down by the expectations and demands of his parents, he purposefully seeks out a job he hates just to piss them off. But, that job is just a reflection of what he hates most of all- being the courier. An errand boy.

As a child he could only listen to others, as an adult it was more of the same, and as a superhero or villain, he continues to follow orders. The sole choice in the game that defines whether he listens to someone or not (that being to detonate the Ray Sphere again) is bookended with praise from the antagonist, and that section of the narrative came paired with an illuminating quote.

"Atlas was permitted the opinion that he was at liberty, if he wished, to drop the Earth and creepy away; but this opinion was all that he was permitted." -Franz Kafka

The choice is really no choice at all. Some words of praise and an aesthetic change are all you receive, but the confrontation with Kessler doesn't change. The reveal doesn't change. Cole's "destiny" doesn't change. Because inFAMOUS isn't a game about change, but about being forced into changes irrespective of your own desires.

The ultimate reveal is that Kessler is Cole himself, forcing on him the absolute worst case scenarios, offering him opportunities for harsh growth to one day make the decision himself. Kessler is no different from an overbearing parent in this way, and Cole finds himself looking in a mirror. Those expectations, that berating and that fleeting praise, were all what he saw as the 'proper' thing to do with his abilities. While this Cole sought to run away and to live his comfortable life, the Cole of the now doesn't deserve that. He's made into a monster, alienated by his friends, and eventually left completely alone so he has no choice but to face his 'destiny'.

I find inFAMOUS' commitment to these themes, particularly in its deliberate decision to not have the two narrative paths be very distinct, to be admirable. Some may call it lazy, but the employment of the karma system followed by the flagrant ignoring of most player choices leaves the game feeling more complete. It had a story it wanted to tell, and used the currently popular gameplay trend to accentuate that narrative.

I find these themes and the usage of the karma systems to be expanded on quite nicely in the follow up game, inFAMOUS 2, so I will be saving most of my true review for that title. This is mainly just a groundwork of what I found most interesting in the first game.