On the Exclusion of the Original Silent Hill

[NarooN]

It's because it's an *HD* Collection, not a collection overall. That, and the fact that pretty much all of SH1's story is wrapped up in the middle of SH3 in the car ride to Silent Hill anyway. Besides, if you're playing this on PS3 and you wanna play SH1, you can either play it with the disc or buy it off the PS Store.

Them stretching out the original game, which had a native res of 320x240, wouldn't do anything to clean up the game. They'd have to basically remake the entire game from scratch for it to be acceptable by today's standards, which would be the same amount of work of doing a new game in today's time, besides coming up with the story and environments and such since that's obviously done already. That's a lot of work which I'm sure Konami wouldn't wanna spend resources on, resources that could be used on other new IP's and games. SH2 & 3 still hold up well by today's standards, as did a lot of PS2/Xbox/GC games, so an HD remaster for those isn't far-fetched.

[Augophthalmoses]

It's on PSN in North America and Japan anyway. Can't speak for Europe. There was some rumor a while back of it coming to PSN for Europe but I haven't checked up on it. Probably wasn't true anyway.

[NarooN]

It came to the PSN Store in Europe some months ago actually. Around October I believe.

[Terramax]

It's because it's an *HD* Collection, not a collection overall.

You're missing the point. I'm not concerned for the HD. We all know 'HD' is added to the title as a lazy, gimmicky excuse to repackage two PS2 games at a rip off price. I'm saying that, from a perspective of someone new to the series, and if Konami had any greater reason to want to release a collection other than to milk ignorant people's wallets, it would be imperative to have the original game included, even if only for the novalty value.

Not including an essential part of a series simply because they can't make it look a tad more detailed and shiny sounds like the most arbitrary and lame excuse ever.

That, and the fact that pretty much all of SH1's story is wrapped up in the middle of SH3 in the car ride to Silent Hill anyway.

SH3 merely bullet pointed some key plot elements which related the two games, but in no way explained the whole story nor showed what captivated so many gamers in the first place.

Besides, if you're playing this on PS3 and you wanna play SH1, you can either play it with the disc or buy it off the PS Store.

Couldn't you do the former with SH2 & 3 too?

Them stretching out the original game, which had a native res of 320x240, wouldn't do anything to clean up the game. They'd have to basically remake the entire game from scratch for it to be acceptable by today's standards, which would be the same amount of work of doing a new game in today's time, besides coming up with the story and environments and such since that's obviously done already.

I'm going to copy and paste what I said on my first post.

And why would people have a problem playing a PSX game on their PS3 if many are downloading PSX games already? Most people have no problem playing the Sega Ultimate collection on their new gen consoles. Or watching Charlie Chaplin films on blueray? Or listening to The Beatles on MP3? Why should playing a cleaned up version of Silent Hill be viewed any different?

To say it in the most literal way I can think of, if people are happy to buy and play games from the Amiga, Spectrum, NES, master system, etc, on their latest games consoles, why would people have a problem playing Silent Hill 1?

Sure, the game wouldn't look as pretty as 2 and 3, but in no way is it an unplayable game.

That's a lot of work which I'm sure Konami wouldn't wanna spend resources on, resources that could be used on other new IP's and games.

Surely, if they were that proud of their games, cared that much about their fans, or thought the series was that commercially viable, they would? Of course, this is a rhetoric question, as we know the answer to this [no].

[Bulbatron]

It still would've been nice to have the first game included for players of The Silent Hill HD Collection on the Xbox 360, who have neither the option of playing it from disc nor downloading it. I'd be more than happy to play a completely untouched version of the game. As I've said before, they could have included it as a hidden extra so as to make sure the HD'd games were front and centre.

[devil hunter]

@Terramax and Bulbatron, they're re touching the textures of SH 2 and 3, making them look better and other stuff. They can't do the same with a PS1 game, that's why it's the HD collection.

[The Gentleman]

I'm just wondering. If they did a REmake style version of Silent Hill 1, would it be called SHiney edition?

[NarooN]

It's because it's an *HD* Collection, not a collection overall.

You're missing the point. I'm not concerned for the HD. We all know 'HD' is added to the title as a lazy, gimmicky excuse to repackage two PS2 games at a rip off price. I'm saying that, from a perspective of someone new to the series, and if Konami had any greater reason to want to release a collection other than to milk ignorant people's wallets, it would be imperative to have the original game included, even if only for the novalty value.

Not including an essential part of a series simply because they can't make it look a tad more detailed and shiny sounds like the most arbitrary and lame excuse ever.

I'm not missing any point. It doesn't matter if you're concerned about the "HD-ness" of this or not, it's an HD Collection with HD remastered games in it, that's all there is to it. And anyone who buys this is ignorant? What's cheaper, someone going out and buying a $100 PS2 and then getting both these games new, which would be like $20+ for new copies of these anyway, or getting a $40 collection on the PS3/360?

SH3 merely bullet pointed some key plot elements which related the two games, but in no way explained the whole story nor showed what captivated so many gamers in the first place.

Of course you're not getting 100% of the story, but you get all the main bits. Anyone who'd be remotely interested would go back and get the first game somehow.

Couldn't you do the former with SH2 & 3 too?

No, because SH2 & 3 aren't on the PS Store nor XBL Marketplace, and not all PS3 or 360 models can play the original games.

I'm going to copy and paste what I said on my first post.

And why would people have a problem playing a PSX game on their PS3 if many are downloading PSX games already? Most people have no problem playing the Sega Ultimate collection on their new gen consoles. Or watching Charlie Chaplin films on blueray? Or listening to The Beatles on MP3? Why should playing a cleaned up version of Silent Hill be viewed any different?

To say it in the most literal way I can think of, if people are happy to buy and play games from the Amiga, Spectrum, NES, master system, etc, on their latest games consoles, why would people have a problem playing Silent Hill 1?

Sure, the game wouldn't look as pretty as 2 and 3, but in no way is it an unplayable game.

No one said it'd be unplayable. Just that they'd be lying if they put in a low-res PS1 game into an HD Collection. Also inb4MG1&2inMGSHDCollection since that doesn't count, because those two games were in one of the original releases anyway. Them "cleaning it up" would be pointless unless they did the full job, which wouldn't happen for the reasons I've already stated.

Surely, if they were that proud of their games, cared that much about their fans, or thought the series was that commercially viable, they would? Of course, this is a rhetoric question, as we know the answer to this [no].

It's pretty obvious they don't really care about the fans, they care about the money, but the same is true for pretty much every company out there. It's just business.