You Don’t Need A Giant Budget To Play Computer Games – A Ramble

Well, I thought that I’d talk about how you don’t need a gigantic budget in order to play computer games.

Yes, if you want to play the latest hyper-popular “AAA” games, then – yes – you probably need £40-60 (not including greedy micro-transactions) for the game itself, plus god knows how much for a RGB-lit “gaming PC” with a powerful graphics card. Popular, mainstream gaming – the sort which gets all of the attention – is an expensive hobby.

But they aren’t the only computer games and the people who play these games aren’t representative of everyone who plays computer games. For context, I’m typing this article on a second-hand small form-factor PC that I bought for less than £200 back in late 2018. It was made in about 2013, it has Windows 10, 8GB DDR3 RAM, a 1TB hard drive, an i5-3570 processor and Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics. This computer was a massive upgrade from the old mid-2000s Windows XP machines I was using between 2006-18. Whilst this computer just barely qualifies as “modern”, it’s not exactly a high-powered gaming PC.

Yet, I still play games on it. Case in point, in the later parts of December 2023, I actually got two games for it either for free or for no additional expense. And both are surprisingly fun. I don’t know if I’ll review either of them properly [Edit: I didn’t get round to reviewing either game], so this article will double up as a “first-impressions” review but it’s mostly here to prove that it is possible to play computer games – fun computer games – on a low budget with low-powered tech.

The first game was “Caveblazers” (2017), which GOG were giving away for free for about 2-3 days in the lead-up to last Christmas. At full price, it’s about seven quid. This is a fantasy genre 2D action platformer game which, following the “rogue-like” revival of the 2010s, doesn’t have a saving system. The level layouts are randomised and the weapons/magical items you find are also randomised. It is as much a game of chance as it is a game of skill.

This is a screenshot from “Caveblazers” (2017), a fun – if ridiculously difficult – 2D action platformer game.

This random chance, paired with the quick restart times and the fact that any points you score go towards unlocking more custom stuff, perks etc… means that it is a surprisingly compelling “just one more go” game, despite the absolutely rock-hard difficulty level of the boss battles every two levels (You can set a custom difficulty, but this disables unlocks). Plus, the animations are wonderfully kinetic and impactful too – especially when you smash open a treasure chest and gemstones go flying everywhere.

Yes, it isn’t a perfect game – the game is intended to be played with a controller (on a PC? I’ll never understand this!), so finding a good keyboard layout that works for you can take a while. Likewise, your character’s bow has its own set of directional controls, which can take a bit of getting used to. The game can also be a bit stingy with much-needed healing items. The real-time inventory system is also frustrating, given the fast pacing of the game. Not to mention that, whilst it includes character customisation, your character is canonically considered to be male (which seems like a bit of a limitation for a “custom character”).

Still, it’s a surprisingly fun and compelling game – like “Broforce” (2015) meets “Enter The Gungeon” (2016) – which I played quite a bit over Christmas last year. I even managed to get to the fourth level about two or three times as well 🙂

The other game was the “WGMEGA” (2021?) mod for the classic 1996 shooter game “Duke Nukem 3D”. I should add a FLICKERING LIGHTS warning for this mod, since strobe lighting effects are used frequently in some levels. Since I already have a version of the main game (from an old CD-ROM edition that my Dad bought back in the day) which works with the eDuke32 source port, this mod literally cost me nothing.

This is a screenshot from the “WGMEGA” (2021?) mod for “Duke Nukem 3D” (1996). It’s a large collection of challenging – if sometimes frustrating – levels with some really cool visual flourishes, like this area.

Something of a twenty-plus year retrospective of the works of the mapper William Gee, this mod is a gigantic thing consisting of five episodes (of varying lengths) with large levels. I’ve only played about five or six levels at the time of writing. There’s custom music and the levels are visually impressive, with a difficulty level that is suited to experienced “retro FPS” fans. It’s the sort of mod which uses the “Mini Battlelord” monster more often than you would expect, but – if you’ve got the skills – the fights never quite seem unfair.

However, the level design can best be described as “tricky”. Sometimes, you’ll get completely “stuck” until you eventually find something which would ordinarily be a well-hidden “secret area” before you can progress. Yes, older shooter games required exploration, but this mod takes it to an extreme. It’s almost a puzzle game in this regard.

Still, from what I’ve played, it’s a really cool and fun collection of tough levels for experienced players – not to mention that it’s a testament to the versatility, longevity and open-ness of classic FPS games that people can have two-decade modding careers with them 🙂

Anyway, the point of all of this is that you don’t need mountains of money or the latest technology to enjoy the amazing medium of computer games. Yes, a “low-powered” PC or a smaller budget might limit the repertoire of games that you can play, but it is still possible to play genuinely fun games without breaking the bank. The games might not be as well-known and the graphics might not be as realistic, but the actual gameplay will often be just as – or, often, more – fun than whatever new “AAA” game the mainstream gaming press is obsessing about at the moment.

Seriously, I’ve been playing computer games for approximately thirty years (yes, I got an early start…) and I have spent virtually all of that time playing them on computers which were “low-end” or “slightly old” or whatever. I think that the most I’ve ever spent on a computer game within the past two decades was maybe about £15-20 – but, most of the time, I usually either bought budget re-releases of games, second-hand games or – these days – waited for online sales. Am I any less of a “gamer” because of this? No. I am not.

As I’ve said in previous articles, gaming always finds a way.

———————-

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

DRM-Free Gaming On A Low-Spec PC – A Ramble

Well, I thought that I’d talk about gaming on a low-spec PC and avoiding games that have online DRM too. This was something I ended up thinking about after watching some PC building channels on Youtube and realising that the 3GB graphics card in the video which was supposedly “showing its age” these days would be a ridiculous upgrade for my PC.

For context, I use a second-hand small-form factor PC that I got in late 2018. It has Windows 10, a Core i5-3750 processor, Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics, 8GB DDR3 RAM and a 1TB HDD. And this itself was a massive upgrade from the old Windows XP machines that I used between 2006-2018. These had mid-2000s integrated graphics, a single-core Pentium processor (2-3GHZ) and maybe 2GB RAM at most.

I’ve also made a point of avoiding any game which has online DRM (eg: “Sign in to let us give you permission to play this single-player game you’ve bought…”) since about 2015 or so. I also pretty much exclusively play single-player games as well.

Yet, I still play computer games. And, no, I don’t use cloud gaming (since I consider it to be online DRM. Or “You don’t own what you’ve bought”). So, I thought that I talk about PC gaming on low-spec computers without using online DRM or online multiplayer. Because you can actually still play games in a situation like this. Yes, certainly not every game – but you’d be surprised.

In short, older games, open-source games, some indie games and games with good options menus are your friends here. Sometimes, you might have to get creative too – for example, in order to play both “The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim – Special Edition” (2016) and “Tormented Souls” (2021) – at a vaguely playable speed, I actually had to find an external window resizing program (called “Sizer”) in order to lower the game’s resolution below the minimum that the game allows. Likewise, in order to get “Dreamfall: Chapters” (2014-17) to run at a playable speed, I actually had to manually edit the game’s configuration file in order to get it to run at a lower resolution than the game allowed.

Still, you shouldn’t expect to be able to play the latest “AAA” games. Computer game “FOMO” – fear of missing out – is something that every low-budget player has to deal with in their own way. It’s something that you get used to after a while, seeing modern games almost as if they are something from another world. Remembering that even the “trendiest” players don’t have the time and/or money to play literally ALL of the popular games can also help here too. Being glad that you’re avoiding the many pitfalls of modern games – such as mandatory “updates”, greedy micro-transactions etc…

Most of all, it makes you think about games differently. You focus less on popularity and more on quality and fun.

There are absolutely tons of older and/or lesser-known games that will run on low-spec PCs and are ridiculously fun to play. Whether this is older “AAA” games like “Bioshock” (2007), “Fallout: New Vegas” (2010) or “Saints Row: The Third” (2011), or whether it is lower-budget retro-style indie games like “Amid Evil” (2019) or “Alisa: The Developer’s Cut” (2022). There are an absolute ton of games that will run on low-spec computers. Just because you can’t play the latest “AAA” games doesn’t mean that you can’t play games. And, of course, if you’re a fan of some older games – like “Doom II” (1994) – then there’s also a huge modding scene online, which extends the life of these games pretty much indefinitely.

And, again, not being connected to the hype or modern culture surrounding games means that you’ll have different priorities with them too. Some of the best games I’ve ever played are ones that have objectively “terrible” graphics by modern standards, but it doesn’t matter because the actual gameplay is fun, because there’s actual creativity behind the game, because of good art design etc… Games are games. Literally the only major practical difference between modern “AAA” games and old games/ modern low-budget indie ones is the graphics.

And, on a side-note: This is one of the things to remember if you’re buying a PC. Unless you are planning to play the latest “AAA” games on it or edit videos or something like that, then you’d be surprised at what you can get away with for basic tasks. Once, on the old mid-2000s computers I was using as late as 2018, I briefly tried using “Puppy Linux”, a tiny free open-source operating system. Aside from gaming, I could do pretty much all of the basic stuff with it – web browsing, writing documents etc… if I remember rightly, it even had a “MS Paint” style program for very basic image editing/digital art. If you stick to older or open-source software, then – except for literally a tiny number of things – you don’t need a “powerful” PC.

As for avoiding online DRM, this will limit the games that you can play. Thankfully, there are shops online – such as GOG and Itch.io – which make a point of not including online DRM in the games that they sell. Likewise, proper honest old-fashioned freeware games are also a thing too. Yes, you’ll mostly be limited to older games and/or indie games, but there are still tons of really fun DRM-free games and there are some advantages to sticking to these games.

You can make a backup of them, ensuring that you always have your games. There’s no middle-man who, like Steam did with Windows XP computers in 2019, can suddenly decide that your OS is “too old” and prevent you from playing the games that ran perfectly fine before this decision. There are no forced “updates” (putting you in control, especially if updates remove stuff from the game or add unwanted stuff). And with no requirement for online connectivity, games can’t force greedy things like micro-transactions on you either. You actually get a proper, honest game – just like in the good old days.

So, yes, even if you’re running a low-spec PC and despise online DRM, then you can still play computer games. The selection might be more limited, but this just forces you to focus more on FUN than on popularity. And, honestly, gaming always finds a way. Again, I was using ancient mid-2000s computers as late as 2018 and I still posted game reviews on here back then.

—————

Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

“A Tale Of Two Games”, Or The REAL Reason Why Computer Games Should Have Demos

Well, I thought that I’d talk about the real reason why computer games should have demos today – as illustrated by some experiences I had before writing this article.

For those who don’t remember the 1990s or early-mid 2000s, a “demo” is a drastically shortened version of a game (typically just one or two levels) which is given away for free. Some indie developers still release them these days, but they are much less common amongst “AAA” games these days.

Whilst there were a lot of reasons why almost all games used to have demos – including everything from reciprocity to publicity to “We’re confident enough in our game that we’ll let you try it for free” to allowing poorer players to keep up on the latest games – I want to talk about the most important one today. As the name suggests, a demo is a “demonstration” of a game. A way of testing out the game. And, if you’re playing on PC, then I’d argue that demos should be a requirement because of this.

A demo allows you to test whether or not a game will run on your computer’s hardware before you buy it. Yes, if you’ve got the latest high-end gaming machine, then this might not be an issue. Yes, people might also say “Just read the system requirements!“… but I’ve lost count of the number of games I have got to run at a playable speed on hardware that is below those requirements (by adjusting graphics settings etc..). For context, I’m using a computer with Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics, a non-widescreen monitor (I think it’s a 3:4 one) and 8gb of RAM.

Not to mention that demo versions can also reveal other technical issues that might not be covered by the system requirements too. They’re a basic compatibility and functionality test – which should be either expected or mandatory for all PC games for precisely this reason. And, to illustrate my point, I want to tell the tale of two indie horror games that I looked at back in early March….

One was a really intriguing 1980s-inspired game, a blend of text adventure and stealth/puzzle-based gameplay, called “Suffer The Night” (2023). To my delight, the developers had actually released a free demo version and, since my machine was below the requirements, I was eager to test it out before deciding whether to buy it. So, I downloaded the demo.

It loaded up perfectly well, with the in-game animation in the background of the main menu running a bit slowly – but at what looked like a barely playable speed. However, the game defaulted to a widescreen resolution – and I don’t have a widescreen monitor. What this meant is that all of the menu options were clipped off of the side of the screen, and I couldn’t reach them (even when I tried running the game in windowed mode). Whilst I was disappointed by this, I still had a lot of respect for the developers because they were honest enough to let me test out the game for free 🙂

This is a screenshot from the demo version of “Suffer The Night” (2023) running on a non-widescreen monitor in early March this year. As you can see, all of the menu options are clipped off by the edge of the screen and the game cannot be started, which is a shame because it looks seriously cool. But, again, props to the developers for being honest enough to release a demo so that I could test the game for compatibility with my PC 🙂

The other game was a really cool-looking indie survival horror game called “Oxide Room 104” (2022). This game had no demo, but – to my delight and astonishment – my computer seemed to be within the system requirements for it. Since the game has been discounted to about twelve quid at the time, I decided to take a chance on it.

Then I tried loading it. Despite the system requirements saying that it only required DirectX 11, an error message popped up saying that my computer wasn’t compatible with DirectX 12 and mentioning some vague thing about “command line arguments”. The game defaulted to DirectX 12 mode! After a bit of searching online, I figured out how to force the game to run in DirectX 11 mode by editing part of the game’s shortcut (and learning that you have to leave a space before adding “-dx11” to it).

After a false start, the game loaded properly the second time. But then it defaulted to “high” graphics settings, making it run like a slideshow on my computer. When I eventually got into the settings menu and lowered both the settings and the resolution (to 1024 x 768), it ran a bit more quickly. There were at least a couple of freezes, but I worked out what was likely to cause them – namely opening the settings menu either during or immediately looking at an “item storage chest” – and thus avoided doing this.

But then I ran into another problem, the UI for the storage chests didn’t seem to work properly in non-widescreen resolutions. Two menus would be overlaid over each other in a confusing way with no visible instructions on how to use them (later, I learnt that you can switch between them using the “1” and “2” keys). I initially thought that this rendered the game unplayable, but I decided to experiment with running it in 720p and, whilst it looked a bit “squashed” on my monitor, the storage chest menus worked properly (even including visible instructions, which had been covered up before) and I could FINALLY play the game properly!

This is a screenshot from “Oxide Room 104” (2022), a first-person perspective survival horror game – with puzzles, inventory management, combat etc… – that is set in a creepy motel. Whilst certainly not without it’s flaws – such as over-used voice-acting, non-rebindable keys, QTEs and a “rogue-lite” mechanic that also punishes you for dying too – it can actually be a reasonably decent and genuinely scary horror game whenever it wants to be. The general atmosphere of it is kind of like a mixture of an old PS2 “Silent Hill” game and something like “Outlast” (2013) too. And, yes, I seem to have a weird “love-hate” relationship with this game…

I got very lucky with this game! If I wasn’t at least very mildly geeky or if I didn’t have the sheer bloody-minded determination of “I spent twelve quid on this! I will get it to run, even if it takes me all night!“, then I’d have had to ditch the game entirely. Maybe I would have gone through the hassle of getting a refund, but that would have just added to the stress.

But, because there wasn’t a demo, I had to grapple with all of these problems after I bought the game. Not a very customer-friendly approach! Seriously, it was like what 1990s players notoriously had to go through whenever they installed a PC game (and probably why I usually asked my Dad to install games back then...).

So, yes, I’d argue that game demos are an essential thing because they are a compatibility and functionality test. Not just for whether you can play a game despite its system requirements, but also for a litany of other issues, such as: default resolutions, any accessibility features (eg: rebindable keys), other default settings, the general stability of the game etc….

———————

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

A Fan In Theory Only (Two Games From 1998…) – A Ramble

Well, I want to talk briefly about fandom today and how it is possible to be a fan of something in theory… but not in practice. This was something I ended up thinking about in early November last year when, whilst bored one evening, I finally tried to play the copy of “HeXen II” (1998) which, if I remember rightly, I got from a game site giveaway in late 2020.

In principle, I should absolutely love this game. Not only does it use the original “Quake” engine, but it also has the same kind of cool dark fantasy style as the original “HeXen” (1995), with fully 3D graphics which still keep a lot of the cool details and items from the original game. You can also play as a necromancer who wields a cool-looking kopesh/scythe-type thing and a spell-book too. For the first five or ten minutes, my reaction was “This game is so cool!”

This is a screenshot from “HeXen II” (1998), showing the very beginning of the game from the perspective of a “Necromancer” character. In the early parts, it genuinely feels like a really good “Quake clone”, with more prominent dark fantasy elements, some horror elements and stuff like that too.

However, in practice, it wasn’t long before I was reminded of why I didn’t ever complete the original “HeXen” (1995) back in the day, or even during more recent attempts. Despite the ridiculously cool dark fantasy atmosphere of both “HeXen” games, the level design and puzzle design can best be described as frustrating.

You have to solve puzzles… across several levels (eg: some parts are in one, other parts are in another. Expect a lot of “back and forth”...). In “HeXen II” (1998), some areas and switches that you need to find in order to progress through the first part of the game are the sort of things which would have been considered well-hidden “secret areas” in other games of the time. How I got through the first group of three levels without using a walkthrough, I’ll never know! Luck, I think.

This reminded me of the “Tomb Raider” games. Another series which I’m a fan of in theory, but not so much in practice. Being born in the late 1980s, I grew up when this series of games was becoming popular during the mid-late 1990s. Everything about this series was really cool and quintessentially 1990s too. I mean, I still use an old Tomb Raider-themed mouse mat from the 1990s with my current computer.

Yet, although I have nostalgic memories of… trying… to complete the first two games in the series on my Dad’s P166 computer back in the day, I never got round to playing anything more than a demo of “Tomb Raider III” (1998) until about halfway through last year. Needless to say, I was eager to play this cool game which I still remembered reading about in game magazines. And, like with “HeXen II” (1998), the first part of the game was really fun and brilliantly cool. And then….

I reached this part! This is a screenshot from “Tomb Raider III” (1998) showing where I got completely “stuck” with the game. If you try to swim across this pool of water, you’ll get attacked by a swarm of piranhas. Yes, I could probably have just checked a walkthrough like a sensible person, but I wanted to work it out for myself… and abandoned the game in frustration.

I got completely stuck on one of the game’s puzzles. I then remembered why I didn’t complete either of the first two games back in the day. In fact, I also found myself holding off from playing more of “Tomb Raider: Anniversary” (2007) last September for pretty much the same reason. I barely figured out the amazing optional tutorial level , so I dreaded to think how I’d handle the main game.

Both “HeXen II” (1998) and “Tomb Raider III” (1998) are interesting because they are games where it is possible to really love the atmosphere, visual design, style etc… of the game but end up completely frustrated with the gameplay. As well as being interesting relics of a time when game design was a bit more unforgiving – walkthroughs were more difficult to find back then – they are also a testament to how it is possible to be a fan of something in theory, but not in practice.

————————-

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Why Did Horror Games Evolve Differently On Home Computers ?

Well, for this article in the second season of my “Horror Videogames Series“, I thought that I’d talk about how horror games on home computers evolved slightly differently to those released on consoles.

Yes, one of the most important precursors to the classic-style “fixed camera and tank controls” survival horror games that would become popular on consoles between about 1996-2004 was actually a computer game. In particular, the 1992 game “Alone In The Dark“. However, this style of horror game found much more of a home on consoles – thanks to the popularity of “Resident Evil” (1996).

This is a screenshot from “Alone In The Dark” (1992). A computer game with fixed camera angles, tank controls, “stand still and aim” combat, pre-rendered backgrounds, limited inventory (albeit calculated by weight), puzzles and two selectable characters. It was perhaps the very first “classic-style” survival horror game, appearing four years before “Resident Evil” (1996), and it was a computer game.

This deeply nostalgic and extremely famous style of horror game worked so well on consoles because it was designed so well for their limitations. Everything from using 2D pre-rendered backgrounds to allow for “good graphics” on limited console hardware to using the kind of control schemes that could work easily on a typical console controller meant that classic-style survival horror games thrived on consoles. Yes, some of them got PC ports too – but this was very much an afterthought.

On the other hand, the classic era of horror games on computers happened slightly earlier and these games evolved in a fairly different direction. From text-based horror adventure games in the 1980s to “point and click” horror games from the early-mid 1990s, horror games designed for home computers adapted to the control devices and hardware available to players. These were games built for keyboard and/or mouse controls, and are therefore often different in style from horror games primarily built for consoles.

Yes, like with “Alone In The Dark” (1992), there were exceptions to this. A notable computer game here is Malcolm Evans’ 1982 Sinclair ZX81 computer game “3D Monster Maze”. From all the footage I’ve seen of it, this was a very early precursor to the first-person perspective “run and hide” horror games that would become popular during the 2010s. It used primitive wire-frame “3D” graphics, with a very low frame-rate, and focused on exploring a maze whilst trying to avoid a hungry T-Rex. In a suspenseful touch, the game appears to give you text warnings whenever the T-Rex is nearby.

Even so, “classic” horror games on the PC were often adventure games – whether text-based or “point and click” – because this type of game allows for both the slow pacing and atmosphere that makes horror games creepy. The increased upgradeability of the PC and the then-new CD-ROM format also allowed for full-motion video elements in some of these games, most famously in “The 7th Guest” (1993).

Other horror “point and click” adventure games, like “Phantasmagoria” (1995) and “Shivers” (1995), also made use of full-motion video elements too. And, again, things like having a mouse and/or a full keyboard also allowed for game types that would be awkward to play using a console controller.

This is a screenshot from “Shivers” (1995), a first-person perspective “point and click” horror adventure game which also included occasional full-motion video elements. It was the sort of game that was primarily designed for home computer hardware of the time.

Still, on a side-note, this didn’t stop console games from trying occasionally. Although I unfortunately haven’t played it, the 1995 Japan-only SNES game “Clock Tower” famously used “point and click” style controls. Yes, this seems to have involved awkwardly moving a cursor using a D-pad but, given that it also included faster-paced elements, this would have probably added an extra note of frantic suspense to the game.

Another notable PC game of the era is “The Legacy: Realm Of Terror” (1993) which – like “Alone In The Dark” (1992) – was a precursor to survival horror. This game took inspiration from computer-based role-playing games of the time, with mouse-only controls and a first-person perspective. Even so, the “creepy old mansion” setting, the puzzles/inventory management and the fact that the player is encouraged to run instead of fight are all very reminiscent of a survival horror game.

This is a screenshot from “The Legacy: Realm Of Terror” (1993), showing the game’s mouse-based user interface and setting.

Another notable proto-survival horror computer game from this era is “System Shock” (1994), a sci-fi horror game that was played from a first-person perspective and had a heavy emphasis on narrative and complex gameplay. Its 1999 sequel “System Shock 2” (I plan to post a full review of this game in late May) refined everything a bit more and is a masterpiece of first-person perspective survival horror (which also features highly complex gameplay mechanics too).

This is a screenshot from “System Shock” (1994), showing a detailed tutorial of how the user interface works.

Even so, the focus on “point and click” adventure games also meant that horror games on computers had much more of an emphasis on narrative than earlier console-based horror games did. Yes, the console-based survival horror game “Silent Hill 2” (2001) is – quite rightly – lauded for its well-written and expertly-told story, but part of why it was so famous was because it was one of the first major console-based horror games to do this. On the other hand, horror adventure games on home computers had been doing this sort of thing since at least the 1980s or early-mid 1990s.

Another difference between the evolution of PC and console horror games can be traced back to just one games company – ID Software. They were an absolutely pivotal company in refining and popularising the first-person shooter genre. Whilst it certainly wasn’t the very first FPS game – their legendary 1993 game “Doom” was massively influential. And, even though it is no longer really considered much of a “horror game” due to the genre becoming more of a well-defined thing in the years that followed, “Doom” (1993) was very much a horror-themed game.

This is a screenshot from the third episode of “Doom” (1993), played using a modern “source port” (GZDoom 4.4.2). As you can see, some locations in the game clearly take influence from the horror genre.

Yes, the streamlined controls that allowed “Doom” (1993) to be played with just a keyboard also meant that it was well-suited to console ports. Still, it gained its initial popularity on computers and helped to shape the development of PC games in the years and decades since. And, more importantly, ID Software leaned more heavily into the horror genre in 1996 when they released a first-person shooter game called “Quake”. This was also one of the first FPS games to include full vertical mouse-aiming too, and this had an effect on how the game was designed.

These days, “Quake” (1996) is seen as a classic of the action genre rather than the horror genre, but it took a lot of influence from the horror genre. Not only does the game’s sci-fi horror story borrow heavily from the fiction of H.P.Lovecraft, but everything from the oppressively gloomy gothic atmosphere, to the visual design of the monsters and the tough difficulty of some parts aren’t a million miles away from a typical horror game.

This is a screenshot from the very beginning of “Quake” (1996), showing off the gloomier fully-3D locations that awaited new players…

Whether it was horror-themed first-person perspective action games like “Blood” (1997), “Clive Barker’s Undying” (2001) or “Painkiller” (2004), or whether it was detailed role-playing games like “Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines” (2004) – which was primarily first-person but included an optional third-person mode – PC games at the time focused much more heavily on first-person perspective gameplay because not only could the relatively powerful computer hardware of the time handle it better, but it was very well suited to mouse & keyboard controls too.

This is a screenshot from the gothic horror role-playing game “Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines” (2004), showing the game being played from a first-person perspective (though third-person was also an option too). This game was only released on PC. Yes, this was partially because of its troubled development history, but also probably because of its graphics, complex controls and length being unsuited to console hardware of the time.

Of course, in the years since, console and PC horror games have converged quite a bit. PC still has more of an indie scene, but indie games now also appear more regularly on modern consoles too. People sometimes play PC games with console-like controllers these days, and control schemes for games are often designed to work as well with controllers as they are with mice and keyboards. There isn’t really quite the difference or distinction that there once was.

Still, I’d argue that the difference in control methods had a surprisingly large impact on the evolution of horror games on consoles and computers. Horror games on computers often focused more on things like narrative and/or first-person perspective elements because these things were much more well-suited to keyboard and/or mouse controls.

————

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂