Talk:Silent Hill: Origins

Too much information

I edited the plot summary, where the author was cramming way too much information into one sentence. The paragraphs didn't flow at all. The author used too many commas, and way too many dashes to add the extra information. People want to learn from this article, if you cram them with info they will lose interest and become confused. Also, speak in laymans terms, and please explain things clearly. I don't know anything about this particular Silent Hill game (it hasn't been released in my country yet)and this article was supposed to help me understand the plot before I began. Not spoil the whole thing for me. So I edited the grammar, but can someone clean up the rest??

Oops. Please fix my table editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.162.183 (talk) 10:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Suzie-too 18 March 2008, 11:06AM

New Developments

Hey guys, if you've been following the progress of Silent Hill Origins recently, you will know that there have been HUGE changes to the development of the game. For example, it now uses the traditional SH fixed camera views instead of the RE4 over-the-shoulder shots. Visually, it has improved immensely also. So i think so changes need to be made to this Wikipedia page, yes? Thanks guys :D.

Game Engine

Does anyone know the name of the game engine (i.e., middleware) used in the development of SH:Origins? Is it third-party or in-house? Aeonassoc 14:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks like a borrowed build from the previous game engines with some tweaking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.255.77.20 (talk) 01:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The game was made using Renderware middleware. Murkygrom (talk) 11:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Release Dates

This article has about 4 different release dates on it. Some that lack sources. A bit of consistency might be a good idea.

IGN is now listing the release date as May 1st 2007. Ebgames has it for August, but EB has been wrong literally countless times. IGN is the best likely source.

Does anyone ever update this anymore? The main page still says the game is supposed to be released on August 6th 2007 but IGN and countless other sites are now saying November 2007. So is the release date still August or has the game been delayed yet again? I'm guessing it's been delayed and no one has updated the information regarding it's release date.

Congrats on finally changing the release date to November! I probably should have done it a lot earlier and listed references but I wanted to see how long it would take. Awesome!

This Needs Updated

The barricade system is no longer included in the gameplay and several new details have emerged. Please see link below for a SHO interview.

http://www.evilunleashed.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7569

Article title

WP:MOSTM states that "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment". So the name for this article should be changed to Silent Hill: Origins. Anyone agree? --Mika1h 23:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I agree, and other sites like IGN and Amazon use 'Origins' too. So I'll move it! Marasmusine 08:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Release date mismatch

The page still says two different release times. The opening blurb says Q4 2007 while the infobox to the side says Q3 2007. Find a source or they both go. --Thaddius 23:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I've posted some dates based on information from IGN. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 02:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Future "production history" section

The following is a rewriting of the production section(s) for possible inclusion as soon as the game is released. I haven't added refs proper but will leave weblinks that will hopefully accomplish the same task. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 04:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Prior to the release of the 2006 Silent Hill film there was speculation that Konami was planning to release a remake of the first Silent Hill game with the film's protagonist Rose De Silva in place of the original title's Harry Mason. This speculation was fueled by an interview with the film's director Christophe Gans and a leaked list of Konami release dates which included a "Silent Hill: Original Sin" for the PlayStation Portable.[1][2] Origins producer William Oretel later confirmed that the idea of a remake of the first game had been considered by Konami, but rejected.[3][4]

Silent Hill: Origins was first announced at E3 2006.[5] The first previews of the game featured a radical departure from the original game style with the inclusion of a Resident Evil 4 style camera angle, although Oretel stressed on the game that "we're not going FPS."[6][7] Travis would have access to six weapons: three melee weapons (a shovel, a tire iron, and a sledgehammer) and three firearms (light 9mm pistol, a .44 Magnum revolver and a shotgun).[8][9] There were also plans to introduce a laser-sight for Travis's pistol and a new "Barricade" system which would allow the player to block access to areas from monsters with improvised objects.[10][11] At this time, the game was expected to be released in late 2006.[12]

Origins was the first Silent Hill game not to be produced by Konami's own staff, "Team Silent", but was instead produced by Climax Group.[13] Composer Akira Yamaoka did return to compose the game's soundtrack,[14] drawing some inspiration from the first Silent Hill 's soundtrack.[15]

In October 2006 Climax's US based team working on Origins was sacked with rumors circulating that the game production was becoming a disaster under mismanagement and "unrealistic deadlines", and that the final version of the game was expected to be only "three to four hours of gameplay."[16][17][18]. Production of the game was subsequently moved to the United Kingdom officially for the reasons of ensuring the final product would be "a Silent Hill experience" and the release date was pushed forward.[19] Later previews of the game showed that it had reverted to its final form as a replica of the original games' style gameplay, scrapping the Resident Evil camera angle.[20][21] The changes were well received by observers.[22]

On August 19 2007 a demo of the game was leaked to internet download sites. Climax promptly denied they were the source of the leaked content.[23]

Demo Info Removal

Why was the info regarding the leaked demo removed? The leak concerns the game so it is a valid point. In case some idiot rants about copyright, there should be a mention but no pointers on how to get it. If nothing is entered into the article I will reinstate the info.

It was removed because of our WP:Verifiability and WP:Original research policies. Marasmusine 07:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Animaonline.com 09:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC) I don't get it, I just added some info, the information was all correct, so what's wrong? Do you want proof or something? I don't want to mess with Konami and violate the copyright by uploading the modified image files to the web. Just contact me if there is anything I can help you with, - Roman —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Animaonline (talk • contribs) 09:19, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

The demo has been leaked. A simple search on torrent sites can confirm it. I'm not sure about the entire game being on the demo and the demo hackable so it can be played from the beginning, though. Can anyone confirm that? I do! use UMDGEN to extract the iso contents, and open it hex editor, that's the only thing I can tell you. - Throw 11:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

A reliable third party source is still needed. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 15:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

With the discovery of a reliable third-party source documenting this, I have added a mention of the event. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 15:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

According to many sites the "demo" file circulating is actually the full game and can be unlocked via a "patch" found on a PSP website. This info is coming from GameFAQs.com on the forum for the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.15.53 (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Resident Evil 4 gameplay

Is there any information about what happend to the Resident Evil 4 like gameplay? Such as why was it removed? Was it found to be to similar, so it was conisdered unoriginal, so it was removed? Personally, I think it should have stayed, any ideas?Lockgar 21:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Straight Jacket?

If it's the thing from Silent Hill 2, isn't the correct name Lying Figure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.20.31 (talk) 19:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

No, the official site and game guide both calls this one "straight jacket." Probably so they aren't confused with each other.--Sherwood-Nightshade 01:41, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know if this game will be on the ps2?

Fixed typo in Soundtrack section

"Not Tomorrow" changed to correct name "Not Tomorrow 3."

Controls

"Tank" controls needs to be clarified. I assume this means the controls where right and left always turn, and up and down are always forward and back? In the SH games starting with the second, this is referred to as 3D controls - and the "fully 3D" controls, in which to just point the analog stick where you want to go, is referred to as 2D controls.VatoFirme (talk) 11:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

PS2 Port Developers?

The entry currently says the port was handled by Monolith Productions. I have the PS2 version here in front of me, and I can't find Monolith's name anywhere on it. Monolith's page doesn't mention it at all, either. I had heard that Climax, the same team that originally developed the game for PSP, had handled the PS2 port. Does anybody know for sure?

12.19.152.102 (talk) 16:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)Dylan, 04/14/08

You're correct, it was ported by Climax. I have no idea where this Monolith rumour appeared. Murkygrom (talk) 22:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Page messed up

Just wanted to bring this to your attention that the page needs editing. Code is being shown, etc. Something wasn't edited correctly.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.82.183 (talk) 03:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Game Trivia Section

Err... this section isn't in real English, it's really illegible. It's also kind of irrelevant. Do we really care that the pinball machine is a KISS machine? How about removing it? Bug 16:55, 24 July 2008

Stuff to do before GAN

Hi everybody! Title says all.

• Screenshot of typical gameplay
• Get two-three paragraphs for gameplay
• Run-through of plot: remove OR, trim and copy-edit (ce) where needed (remember there's a neglected character page too)
• Possible OR in bad ending?
• Expand reception
• General ce
• Peer review

And that's all I can come up with for now. Feel free to cross off as completed and/or add to the list. Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Probably a gameplay screenshot with a QTE, so we have the illustration of a new feature to bolster the FU rationale. I would have put one up myself, but I haven't found one without a logo. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 20:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, a QTE screen-shot would be best. Kaguya-chan (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

A peer review would also do wonders. Kaguya-chan (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Alternatively, for the screen-shot, it could be a depiction of the "mirrors=transport to Otherworld" concept of Origins. Kaguya-chan (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, either a QTE picture or one depicting a reality shift through a mirror, as these are the 2 major changes in gameplay. Also, a spooky sound sample in the "Audio" part like the one in SH1's article would be awesome. Games with such atmosphere should definitely have a sound sample. Golden Sugarplum (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, an audio sample would be amazing too. I have no idea how to put one up through... Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The sound sample should be chosen after the "Audio" part has been expanded to include info about the composition of the music, so that the sample corresponds to the info of the part. Also, the soundtrack list format should be changed to the appropriate, as in SH1, SH2, and SH3, which I don't know how to do. Golden Sugarplum (talk) 18:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Creating the table is not too difficult, only *very* tedious. That style of table in SH 1-3 isn't any more appropriate than the traditional table/template. It's just a matter of preference. A soundtrack list is a soundtrack list, as far as I know. Kaguya-chan (talk) 23:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

This source criticising the save system is for "Reception". Hula Hup (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Some more requirements:

• expansion of "Development" if sources can be tracked down (I'll see to it) and maybe addition of an image and/or quotebox here, and of course
• the typical ref clean-up. Hula Hup (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Note: citation 51 is problematic. Hula Hup (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to mention the expansion of the lead; summary of gameplay, plot, development, and reception. Known stuff. Hula Hup (talk) 22:27, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Some sources for "Development" which I haven't checked thoroughly, so be prepared to face content present in the ones already cited in the article: [24] (general), [25] (general), [26] (audio), [27] (pre-release demo). Hula Hup (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

More content: [28] (general). Hula Hup (talk) 16:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

TLDR: everything was a lot worse before they sent to Climax UK, so Climax UK changed everything --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 22:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Silent Hill: Origins/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CR4ZE (talk · contribs) 07:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll be looking at this over the weekend. CR4ZE (t • c) 07:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

And here it is.

• Is it necessary to mention all of the regional release dates in the lead? It's pretty dull to read when the infobox covers that already. How about something like "it was released worldwide in late 2007, beginning with the United Kingdom in late October", and then follow on from that in a similar fashion.
• My main concern with the Gameplay section is that there are some important bits that are briefly glossed over where some further development would be helpful for the non-player. "The game uses a third-person perspective with alternating camera angles; the player can press a button to pan it behind Travis"—the camera alternates between what exactly? There's an example being drawn but not comparison, so how exactly the camera alternates remains unclear. "Often, actions performed in one dimension will affect the other"—no examples? What kind of actions and what kind of affectation? The sourcing in this section is really decent, and that gives you room to flesh the Gameplay out because the reviews that I'm reading give a more detailed insight into some key mechanics that could be explained better. The IGN review for example dives a little bit deeper into the combat with information that I'd say isn't crufty and would be helpful being mentioned here.
• "If no weapons are immediately available, Travis can use his fists"—but if Travis acquires weapons, he can no longer use his fists?
• "Origins also introduces the "grapple" system, a quick time event during which a monster grabs Travis, and certain button combinations are presented to the player to execute, in order for him to escape"—this is an out-of-scope that I recommend (without mandating) you act on, but this sentence is particularly messy.
• Don't refer to the player as "he or she", especially if you're using "he" to refer back to Travis, because that becomes confusing. "They" is better. Reworking sentences to use active voice is even better. You're using "he" to refer back to Travis right after mentioning the player, so it becomes hard to keep up with who you're talking about.
• "He regains consciousness in the town, and resolves to learn if the girl survived"—the girl in the road, or the girl in the house fire? Or is there only one girl? I'm a little confused here.
• "and periodically encounters an unburned Alessa, who does not answer any of his questions"—this is the girl who died in the fire, who's now alive and healed, and giving Travis the silent treatment? I'm finding this plot inordinately difficult to follow.
• "He also unlocks his repressed childhood memories"—this sentence features parallel tenses, which I again recommend-without-mandating that you fix.
• I've given up trying to understand the rest of the Plot. There's talk of Alessa coming back and freeing herself from a "spell", and then being dead and burned again later but somehow being sacrificed...again...to give birth to a god, and then she has a baby that contains half her soul... Basically, this plot section is all over the place and I have got no idea what is going on because of the way that it's been written. If the "Alessa" that Travis encounters is a spirit manifestation, it should be mentioned. That's a start that would do wonders in regard to clarity. From that, there are some parts that need to be entirely rewritten.
• What is the relevance of the entire first paragraph of Development? It's talking about a planned remake of the first Silent Hill that never actually happened.
• "The first previews of the game featured a radical departure from the usual gameplay format"—of what? And what does "usual gameplay" mean?
• Silent Hill is sometimes written without italics throughout the article (yes, I noted that the setting of Silent Hill should be written without them).
• "the release date was also pushed forward"—from what, to what?
• "the developers intentionally replicated aspects of gameplay and atmosphere from the first installment"—examples?
• "The changes were well received by observers"—Who are "observers"? Do you mean journalists? Fans? Alessa?
• What is the relevance of the Amazon listing for the PS2 port? Seems like trivial fluff to me.
• Is that all the information there is on the game's music? Would you like to include a track listing?
• "The storyline was a mixed bag for reviewers". WP:IDIOM. Please rephrase.
• You might like to split this paragraph as the second half talks about art design/graphics that would work better on its own.
• "and reviewers criticized the fewer save points"—relative to what?
• "The game's adherence to the series' formula"—same problem. What is the formula? Survival horror?

The prose is often very messy but still readable, so I won't press on too much about it, but it needs serious work if you have an FAC in mind. I'll put this on hold for the time being and let the messiness slide, but there is still lots of work to be done to get this to GA status. CR4ZE (t • c) 13:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi @CR4ZE:, and thank you for taking the time to review. I think I have addressed your stated concerns, although I would like to hear more about the issues with the prose, so that I may fix them. :) If I have overlooked something, please let me know. As for your problems with the plot, parts of the story are deeply ambiguous, such as the encounter with the demon from the Flauros at the end. That, however, is not an excuse for sloppiness. I've rewritten the section and would appreciate your feedback. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The new plot is absolutely night-and-day with where it was. Much clearer to understand, so thanks for the great work. With regards to the prose, you had sentences come up that were mouthfuls to read, especially in Gameplay. I can see that you've been doing some copy-editing, which has improved the prose a lot. I think there's still some room for concision if you're going for FAC. For example:

Origins was first announced at the 2006 video game convention Electronic Entertainment Expo, where it was revealed that the game would not be produced by Konami's Team Silent, who had developed all the previous installments, but by Climax Studios

could be

At the 2006 Electronic Entertainment Expo, Origins was announced as in development by Climax Studios, instead of by Konami's Team Silent who had developed previous installments

"video game convention" and "where it was revealed that" are redundant. E3's name is self-explanatory but there's a wikilink there for people who haven't heard of it, and "where it was revealed that" is just filler that weighs down the sentence. These are changes that are not required for the GA criteria, but I advise you to continue scrutinising your work if you have an FAC in mind. My final comments before I can pass this GAN are for the dead links the reference section, particularly everything GameSpot. They need archiving. If you can get that done, I'll pass the article. CR4ZE (t • c) 01:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I'll definitely take another look at the prose. As for the dead links, I can't tell which ones are dead. I've taken care of the GameSpot ones, but I'm unsure of what the others are. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 03:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Neither link for the PALGN review (ref #3) appears to work, but that could just be something on my end. I'll let you check it yourself, though it's probably not something I need to hold this up on. CR4ZE (t • c) 14:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Great work. CR4ZE (t • c) 14:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

original research

Hi. I would like to discuss an anonymous editor's recent attempts to describe what both of the two endings imply. To me, this is clearly WP:OR,but I'm unsure if the editor understands what original research is. I've tried third times to contact the anonymous editor, but he/she changes his/her IP address every day. @120.59.32.40:, I really would like to discuss your edits and hopefully find a compromise that doesn't include original research. Thank you, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I'll put the article on watch to see if I can help out with this problem. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:19, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

The anonymous editor is now 103.36.47.246 (talk · contribs). @103.36.47.246:, I'd still like to discuss your edits with you, and hopefully we can find something together that addresses your concerns if possible, while keeping out original research. Thank you, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Source?

Can anyone find an alternative (reliable) source for this: "According to director Mark Simmons, the Butcher character was inherited from the previous developer and was retained due to Konami's enthusiasm for it." It was sourced to a fan site, which is dead. :( Thank you, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 19:59, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

@Hula Hup and Lenin and McCarthy: does anyone have a source for the "During melee combat, Travis can perform various weapon-specific finishing moves"? Thank you! :) Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 22:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Haven't looked into Origins much, but on a related note you should revisit that Edge making of article for Shattered Memories. Right now it's just used for sales figures, but it's also got some info on earlier canned Climax games that SM borrowed from. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 01:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't... Hula Hup (talk) 13:18, 31 January 2015 (UTC)