Shattered Memories is quite a departure for the Silent Hill series – were you concerned that it was going to be too different, and that fans might be taken aback by this reimagining?
One thing we knew was that everyone (including the fans) was tired of seeing the same game template. For a series that was so different when it first appeared, Silent Hill had become too predictable, too formulaic. And, to be frank, it wasn’t “honest” that American and British developers were playing homage to themes and styles that were culturally specific to the original Japanese developers. So we knew people wanted something new. And we knew that we could only get truly excited about the development if it was something new. If the developer isn’t in love with what they’re making, how can you expect the players to be? We were hopeful that if we made something we were excited about, it would find its audience.
In terms of being “concerned” because so much was different, well that didn’t feel so risky. In reality, if we’d “tweaked” or “adjusted”, as was done with Origins and Homecoming, that’s more risky – you’re upsetting the (delicate) balance. But something so new and different, it’s something you have to come to on its own terms.
The game’s therapy sessions are a really interesting idea – were they always a part of the game, or did that concept come about later in the development process?
That was one of the starting points for the game. We wanted a way of making the story dynamic but not in a typical branching, causal way. We wanted something that would integrate the player’s interaction into the story, but in a way that was both global and personal. And we wanted to do something that could upset the player’s expectations and make them feel uncomfortable. The idea of the psychological profiling was something we fell in love with once we’d roughed it out. Not knowing exactly what’s happening under the hood and knowing that it knows more about you than any other game – that was something we got excited about from the very first discussions.
Obviously, there are a number of changes to the town, and even the puzzles you solve, based on the player feedback in the therapy sessions. Most of these are noticeable, but are there any more subtle differences you think players might miss?
Overall, people seem to miss the subtleties of how the system works. It isn’t as simple as some people think. Even these detractors are surprised at how accurate the game’s ultimate personality report reads. But that’s not surprising – because the game is taking a lot of data about your personality and this technology is based on a lot of existing research. It isn’t your typical gamey thing where doing A means that later on you get B. Every “change” in the game – whether that be new dialogue, a different look to a character, a new location, a different answer phone message or a tweak to the lighting and ambient audio in a scene – is based on polling your personality, the sum total of all things you have done up to that point. And when we say “things you have done”, we’re not assessing what you, as Harry, do , but what you as a player do. We really are trying to get a good read on the personality of the person sat in front of the TV with the controller in their hands…
It was brave to remove combat from the game – was this a solution to any potential control issues, or a conscious decision to make Harry feel more helpless?
The Wii would be an excellent platform to support gun or melee combat controls, but we never really thought too hard about that. We started with a blank slate and worked from the story outwards. So it honestly never occurred to us that Harry ought to have powerful offensive options. This was always a more psychological story where the biggest questions were about Harry and what is going on in his mind. It never made sense to have Harry shooting at zombies with a shotgun. When we discussed the action element in the game, we were looking at a lot of horror movies and books. A lot of them have a very strict pacing – alternating suspense, adrenaline, relief in varying amounts. And the ‘action element’ is often, if not always, “the chase.” This goes back to childhood too. When Hitchcock was asked how he was able to scare an audience that was truly international – an audience of different cultures and backgrounds – how he could terrify such a varied audience, he answered that it was because we learn to be scared in childhood and all childhoods are roughly the same. Childhood nightmares are universal: nightmares of running, nightmares where you are lost and confused, where you are helpless and unable to flee an attacker, nightmares of being smothered and subsumed. So that was our starting point. From there we tried to figure out how we do that in a game. There was a point in development where Harry had some defensive weapons, but in testing we found this encouraged people to be more aggressive and detracted from the simple message we wanted, which was “run for your life”.
The game has had some mixed reviews in the US. Do you think some critics are struggling to understand such an unconventional horror experience, as forum feedback seems to be overwhelmingly positive by comparison?
I think the sub-set of reviewers that haven’t liked the game as much, I think it’s fair to say they often went in with very strict expectations based on the genre or based on the franchise name. When the game didn’t match those expectations they saw this as a failing, rather than something exciting and new.
Additionally, some reviewers just don’t seem to like the idea of a grown up game on the Wii. That was disappointing to us. As the console with the largest install base, we know there are a lot of adults who own Wiis. A lot of adults who would love this game – so it would have been nice if those reviewers had reviewed the game for that audience, rather than against their own preconceptions.
And, yes, forum feedback has been fantastic. A lot of people crying, a lot of people being really moved by the story. Which was always our main objective – create an experience that gives something genuine to its players and leaves them with lasting memories.
I enjoyed the chase sequences, though they seem to have been quite divisive. Is there anything that, hand on heart, you’d change about them?
They’ve certainly been divisive. I think some people go in with the idea that we’ve “taken away” their guns and their golf clubs, so when we then make them confused and uncomfortable, they get upset – we took away their toys. The Nightmares we always wanted to be a nasty experience – so the relief is that much greater when you escape – so it was always going to be a very tricky balancing act between achieving that and not annoying the players. In an ideal world we’d have had more time to polish and balance, though that’s always the case.
I think we could have done a better job of preparing the audience so they knew what they were letting themselves in for, and perhaps done a better job of explaining how to play those sequences – using the wiimote to detect the enemies and out-think them; not getting too hung up on the map, etc. The game does auto-balance so that if you’re struggling too much (we wanted everyone to struggle somewhat) it starts dialling back the AI’s brains, etc. Perhaps we could have done more there – we did a lot of testing and work to make sure no one ever got stuck in the game, we wanted everyone to make it to the end, and perhaps there was more we could have done there for people who just couldn’t handle the chase scenes. We did do a lot of testing of the chase gameplay on non-gamers; we were worried that the intense action there would be the potential roadblock for those players. But I think we maybe should have focused more on gamers as their pre-conceptions I think made things a lot harder for them.
Shattered Memories makes great use of the Wii’s motion controls, but to a point it leaves players to figure out how they’re used. Is this to add a little to Harry’s disorientation, or a response to games which hold the player’s hand a little too tightly?
I think the attitude was that this stuff should be fairly intuitive. If it’s not, don’t include it. So that probably explains our approach – we rejected Wii control ideas that were too convoluted or too complicated; favouring the simpler, more direct ideas. Again, we tested a lot with Wii players and tweaked accordingly. Consistently we found the less experienced gamers in the testing groups picked things up easier and quicker – that kind of chimes with what Nintendo have said regarding “evening the playing field.”
The game is a good technical showcase for the Wii, with the real-time shadows and the lack of loading in particular. Was there anything you had to leave out owing to technical limitations? And do you think other third-parties are doing enough to really push the console?
We were really happy with what we accomplished here – we pretty much nailed everything we asked of the programming team. They even threw in things we didn’t ask for – a lot of the nicer visual elements weren’t in the initial design and were ideas that the tech guys and artists came up with later on.
In terms of pushing the console, it always comes down to budget and time. If a publisher doesn’t give a developer the time or budget to make a game, it will never push anything. We were lucky here that we got just enough time and budget to do what we wanted.
While the game’s ending brings a satisfying amount of closure, there are a few narrative strands left untied. Was that a deliberate decision to leave certain aspects open to player interpretation, as it certainly seems to have provoked some forum discussion?
Everything is explained in the game, somewhere or somehow. But we didn’t want to over-explain or over-egg those aspects. We knew we wanted to make a game where the story would be rich and would be enhanced by the revelations of the ending. So the game is full of time-bombs and setups that can come to fruition later. And it’s rich enough that people can have their own interpretations and ideas – that was always one of our keenest aims: to make a game that actually dealt with themes and ideas in a way that would genuinely engage and touch people. The forum discussion is great – seeing people respond personally to it, seeing that the game spoke to their hearts and minds. Reading about a girl who hadn’t spoken to her father for two years, but on finishing the game felt the need to “re-connect.” Reading about someone who had been unable to deal with a family tragedy for several years, but felt a cathartic release upon finishing the game. Stuff like that is gold dust to a game developer.
Now the other format-holders are readying their own motion controllers, would you like to remake Shattered Memories in HD for Arc and Natal? And how about a Wii sequel?
Yes to all of those. I mean, the Sony controller even looks like a flashlight! It’s great to see Sony and Microsoft jumping on the bandwagon because it means everyone will have to accept that motion controls are here to stay. And perhaps they’ll have to be less snooty about them. These things—motion controls—do add to the experience, they’re a way of broadening the audience, but also deepening the experience, if done right. For purely academic reasons, I’d love to see what Michelle and Dahlia look like in HD… Of course a Wii sequel would be a fantastic opportunity – if the Gods are willing. We did a pretty good job of knocking it out the park on this one, and if we went for round two – we’d push it up into the stratosphere.
Finally, is there any part of the game you’re particularly proud of? And is there anything you’d do differently if you had the chance to make a follow-up?
I think the thing we’re most proud of is that we made a game from the story outwards. We had a story we wanted to tell, an experience we wanted to impart, and we did it. In a way that only a game could. A story that is personal and interactive, and leaves a lasting impression. At the outset we felt that the story, the emotions and ideas, was the heart of “Silent Hill.” To know that we moved people, that we excited their brains, that is the essence of Silent Hill, and that makes us proud.
A follow up would be a whole new ball game. A new story, which would lead us down different paths. The ethos would be the same – creating an interactive experience which draws the player personally into the story. And I think having broken the ice (excusing the pun) with this one, the expectations would be set more in line with the experience, so we could work with those and leverage them to create something even more amazing. Still personal, still immersive, still un-settling, but even more amazing.
