Co-op horror

[Bridge]

It's not a paradox. Being alone is only scary because we are so accustomed to not being alone. It's this inherent ambiguity between the two concepts (which are really one and the same, in different manifestations) that makes it so terrifying to have nobody else to help you. The co-op design the article proposes is far more powerful than starting out the game alone (if done correctly), because while the concept of having people to rely on is something everyone can relate to, it loses its impact somewhat because it is the default state.

Think of someone suddenly becoming blind or deaf well into their 30s. Can you imagine the despair and physical withdrawal of not having one of your basic senses anymore? People that are born blind don't go through that because they don't understand what sight is. It's the same deal with co-op horror although to a much lesser extent. This concept of giving the player a feeling of safety only to cruelly and very abruptly take it away is something that's incredibly prevalent in all of Frictional's games, most notably in the form of light and sound. Why is the co-op any different, just because it has a tendency not to work? If the players are mature, and the game is designed correctly, it has immense potential.

What's cooperation but working together in order to progress? Loneliness and helplessness is tossed out the window wherever cooperation is found. "Co-op horror", therefore, is an oxymoron and are mutually exclusive concepts. In order to have one you have to cease with the other. How would you balance these two things out, especially to the point of still being able to call it a "co-op horror" game? I would not be surprised to see either concept redefined to where it contradicts expectations. "If done correctly"--good luck with that.

This is leading into a semantic debate that I don't want to partake in. The point is: co-op - two or more persons playing the game simultaneously. Separating the players close to the beginning of the game is by no means the only way for this to work. With some clever design, you can even pull it off without separating the players at all. My entire point is that there is nothing wrong with the idea and it is dismissed for bullshit reasons.

Also, it seems like you did not read my last post or are taking a conscious stand against the ambivalence of light thing I was talking about. I just said that it cannot possibly be a contradiction because both concepts rely on each other to be effective. For example: Do you agree that a horror game that takes place entirely in well-lit areas has a fairly small chance of working? How about a game like Penumbra and Amnesia that balances light and darkness in an almost poetic way?

So - let me ask you: Are those games "kidding" themselves because they include light even though much of the scariness comes from being in the dark? If you honestly believe that, why are you even on this board? Instead of thinking in absolutes - either completely light or completely dark, think about the subtle interplay between the two concepts, which are essentially poles of one mutual concept. Co-op doesn't need to be an artificial game mode where two players are just progressing side-by-side, it is an excellent opportunity to tell a horror story in an unprecedented way. If you guys would abandon your prejudices for a minute, perhaps you'd see that.