As some of you know, I am currently working on Survival 2 (a sequel to Ix's game). I have just asked him if he would let me do Survival 3 when the time comes. If he allows me to, then I would use this to make it.

Survival Horror Maker (yes, like RPG Maker). It is supposedly made with DarkBasic, which is the same engine used in FPS Creator, though SHM looks to be better than that wretched mess (don't buy FPS Creator... not worth it. Everything that make DB a good tool is locked out in FPSC).

So, this may be worth getting. I'd wait until reviews are in on it first though.

I have been dying for a survival horror maker since I first heard of RPGM1 and now that I see it I don't seem to want it.

Cool. This could be very nifty.

The faux pre-rendered camera angles make me feel claustraphobic.

It might be interesting though as a maker if you can control those angles like in RPGM2. Personally I think one of the worst thing for survival horror was giving the player 3D control instead of reserving it as the designer. As to pre-rendered, if it makes the graphics better than I am for it (like RE remake which looked like a movie compared to RE4 where it was clear you were looking at annoying recurring 3D objects...boring). But in this case these graphics look really bad. They are probably more like an RPGM3 dungeon from fixed angles than prerendered graphics...right?

Yeah, a movie where the camera never moves.

I'll take repetitive 3D objects over static screens any day. (And you clearly must not like most 3D games.)

Seriously, think about it. A 3D shooter can get away with it because it doesn't require a deep object set. I love Halo, even more than survival horror and that is 3D. But the whole point of survival horror (at least originally) is EXPLORING the environments. A diversity of environments. The repetitive object sets completely take you out of the immersion. Also, the fixed angles are cinematic. Let me guess you probably also want to control your own musical score too? Survival horror (at least orignally and as I prefer) is meant to be an immersion into a cinematic adventure, where the director controls the angels, the music, the story, etc. Sure it has taken on more action for the sake of "survival" but due to the current games being little more than third-person shooters now, inferior to actual shooter genre shooters, they have lost the "horror" and that is unfortunate.

How in the world is that relevant? I just want a camera angle that doesn't force me to reorientate myself at every little turn.

I'm not sure, but I believe the creator has the option on the camera. Anyway, another video of it. SHM also seems to be open source. Oh, and it is not made with DarkBasic, but Darkplaces (the Quake engine).

Well this video is a little more reasurring, especially with the weapons inventory but it still doesn't quite do it for me yet.

@Draygone,
Originally you led me to believe that it was the static screens that bothered you (i.e. not being able to look around), not the reorienting in particular. Yeah, sometimes reorienting can be annyoing, especially in games like Fatal Frame where you hold the controller in one direction and the second the screen changes you start moving backwards if the screen is now facing the opposite direction. But in games where it is relatively smooth, like many RE games, the reorienting is not an issue to me. Even though it would be nice to look around like in a 3D game, the static screens fixed angle (as long as the reorienting is smooth) to me is not a bad thing as it is the director's fixed angle...it is cinematic. I mean you have to admit the new 3D survival horror games have simply lost something now that you can control the angle of presentation. That is also what I meant about the music. I am basically saying I like when the director has full control over the cinematic presentation of the horror, camera angles, music, scripting, etc. I used to be scared playing survival horror...not really anymore. Now it all feels like an action video game with monsters whereas it used to feel like a fully immersive "playable" horror film, thanks largely to the static diverse pre-rendered backgrounds.

I see headcrabs... someone get Mr. Gordon.

A little of both. The orientation problem would occur like in that last video, from 35-40 seconds in. All of a sudden, I'm going from moving up to moving upper-right. Either that or I continually go up, but a different up as a result of the changed camera angle.

But here's the problem with the static screens, once again pointing to the same section of video. Suppose a zombie is coming after me in that room at 35 seconds (where she's changing guns for the second time). The zombie is coming from the direction of the camera. Nevermind the fact that I have to aim in some weird direction. But if I have to back up, I wind up in the claustraphobic screen with the alternate camera angle at 40 seconds. I can no longer see the zombie until it reaches that screen, too, and I'm going to have to refigure the awkward angle that I'm supposed to aim to hit it. It would've been much easier had it all been one one screen, whith the camera behind me (like, say, in Resident Evil 4), or even with the camera consistantly at the same direction on every screen. I only have to worry about shooting the thing in front of me, and I don't have to worry about figuring out where to aim again just because I stepped away from it a little.

And the music has nothing to do with better/consistant camera angles. I can see where you're coming from, but your gameplay is not affected by what song is playing in the background, and that's what I'm complaining about is how the gameplay is affected.

Oh, and by the way, the camera angles in these videos don't seem to be pre-rendered.

You'll have to name some examples of games that lost the horror aspect by getting rid of the static screens. 'Cause the only horror game I've played that did was Resident Evil 4, and the game wasn't really a survival horror so much as a survival action. Older games wouldn't have benefited with a 3D camera, this I'll admit. The textures would've been muddy and everything would've been so polygonal. But in this day in age, with today's modern consoles, if one of the older RE games were remade with a 3D camera angle, I think the immersion would've still been there.

PS. This seems relevant.

Well see that is the thing, RE4 was survival horror, but it has lost the "horror" aspect so much that you were led to believe it was "survival action" instead. In other words they added more "action" to the survival part but felt that they kept the horror when in fact they lost much of it. As far as RE5 goes, I've only played the demo and it seems more of the same. All the earlier RE's I felt like I was in a movie (same for Silent Hills) but the new RE COMPLETELY feel like games. The 3D is usually good in gaming if you "know" you are in a game but they break the mood for the immersive movie feel. Actually I have been getting sick of how much every game seems to put you in 3D at the center of the screen these days. They all feel like slight variations on the same old theme. I envision a time where survival horror can be in 3D and still be terrifying but that is when first person survival horror is so well done that you have seemless co-op and a world of memory and physics for your environments where you literally begin to believe you are actually in the environment of that world. In other words, the great old survival horror was like you were in a horror film, the future great survival horror will be like you are actually in a terrifying horror real world, and the present day mediocre survival horror is like you are in a suspensful video game that has horror monsters.

Another example is Left 4 Dead. It's environments were superb and its gameplay fun. It was also scary at times, but it still felt like a game because of the way that it had random scripted encounters, with the same enemies over and over. I'll take Left 4 Dead environments over the current RE environments any day, but it too still lacked what you had of old, including crucially important cut-scenes (!). I only remember one. As a matter of fact, the scariest, eeriest part of that game in a sense was the still camera "live" image of the title menu. It was suspensful looking at those buildings from that single angle. It reminded me of the good old days.

Your "P.S." was funny.

I've always wanted to make a nice survival horror game, so that engine might just be a good way to make it.

LOL @ Dray's image.

I have to admit.. at the very basic.. this maker seems extremely good for the genre.

The lighting in particular. Based on the fact the majority of you are still working with RM1 which is.. uhh.. pretty oldskool(tm) graphics.. this is definitely nice.

The inventory system is pretty standard for horror genre and I could definitely see some RPG elements.. the basic vids really reminded me a lot of parasite eve..

*dry-washes hands together* Mmmmmmm

Well, if you want to use a RPGM for survival horror, it really has to be RPGM3. I created "Who did this!?", and just being honest, I am very happy with the success of its horrific presentation. There is also Vonwert's "Whispers in the Woods" which has excellent eerie environments. And the early pictures of Ixzion's Survival sequel originally got me excited. It is too bad he put that on hold or cancelled it. I've also seen some cool darker environments in other games that were not horror games per se. What the Survival Horror maker does seem to have I agree (other than real time shooting) is a pretty cool looking inventory system and hopefully a decent selection of survival horror weapons (...guns!). I just think it looks comparable moreso to a RPGM3 dungeon, which is texture repetitive, instead of pre-existing buildings or castles, like in the towns of RPGM3. I hope there is such a diversity of environments available.

It doesn't have to be RPG Maker 3... I've gotten a pretty well off SH in Mencara Revelle (RPGM1).

Truthfully, the best use of Horror I've gotten is in RPGM2. Though to be fair, it was a first person game that didn't have any enemies (when I sorrowfully decided to not use RPGM2, due to time constraints, I had yet to make the monsters), so there were no chibi characters in sight.

Almost makes me want to use RPGM2 again.

RPGM1 monsters look scary I admit, but the characters and environments do not, to the point that I myself cannot really think of it as "horror".

Nothing about RPGM2 looks scary. I can see RPGM2 being good for a "survival" game but not a "horror" game.

This discussion reminds me of when they were trying to port Resident Evil to the Game Boy Color.

Well, creepy more than horror, but with the game I had (Mencara Revelle 2) certainly proved to me that I could get a satisfactory SH from RPGM2.

That said, there were no character models in the game which would definitely have ruined the game's creep factor. Which is why I ditched the game.