Alas, Silent Hill fans, I come bearing tragic news, for the highly anticipated , we've decided to put aside the Silent Hill that could have been to think about those that could still totally be.

Here we've listed the developers who could create chapters in a Silent Hill anthology, whose unique talents could play to what makes Silent Hill so beloved and unforgettable. If we say it loud and long enough, it's entirely possible that this could exist. Just keep running toward the light in the gloom.

Alan Wake is a perfect template for a bite-sized Silent Hill experience. Remedy intimately understands how geography can impact mood, turning the pine forests of the US northwest into an oppressive landscape for Alan’s nightmares. They also understand how to adapt horror to an episodic format, sustaining tension throughout short levels, bringing the unease to a creepy crest at the very end. And in both Alan Wake and American Nightmare, Remedy showed they can blur the line between realities, twisting our perceptions and short-circuiting our expectations.

All of that experience is reason enough to wish they’d take a crack at a Silent Hill experience, but it’s the terrifying Mr. Scratch that seals it. Most of Silent Hill’s enemies are creeping, unknowable things, but Mr. Scratch, the dark embodiment of Alan’s ego, is all the more terrifying because he’s so recognizable. He simply gives into the impulses that we all have - to take what we want, shove others out of our way, and shape the world to our own specific liking. It would be intriguing to explore a relationship with a denizen of Silent Hill that’s as charming as he is disturbing.

Here's the thing with Silent Hill, it needs to be really freaking weird. That's what I adored about the series' early entries: each one took something familiar - a hospital or a shopping mall - and made it hostile and alien. These games didn't feel like anything else out there, and that unfamiliarity is what made them so scary. When thinking about who could do the bizarre atmosphere of Silent Hill justice, one name jumps to the top of the list: Grasshopper Manufacture.

With a track record that includes Lollipop Chainsaw and No More Heroes, Grasshopper Manufacture and Goichi Suda have a special brand of strange that permeates everything they touch. They've dipped their toe in the horror genre before with Fatal Frame IV. This would be their opportunity to dive headlong into the dark side and make it their own. It would be crass, it would be stylish, and it sure as hell wouldn't feel like any other Silent Hill game - and that's the point. If there's one thing PT demonstrated, it's that you can break the Silent Hill mold and still have a horror game that captures our imaginations.

The Evil Within was easily one of the most contentious games of 2014, and even now the gaming world is divided on whether it's the second-coming of Resident Evil or destined for the bin. But if developer Tango Gameworks did one thing right with this grotesque action-horror, it was coming up with an exceedingly scary concept and pushing it to the limit. If that passion could be redirected into a subtler narrative that's just as frightening, a Tango-directed Silent Hill could be the unsettling child of the horror genre's two greatest rivals.

While The Evil Within (Tango's only gaming endeavor thus far) focused heavily on action sequences, it was arguably at its best when you were simply walking around a house, poking at fresh brains and trying to discover the mystery behind the specter that's relentlessly hunting you. It also knows how to make the immortal stalker concept work, with Boxman exhibiting all the terrifying immortality of Pyramid Head with an extra helping of gore. Perhaps most importantly, Shinji Mikami and his team are adept at realizing their vision with grace and focus, so a Silent Hill game from them would almost assuredly strike at the heart of what makes the series tick.

You might've heard of a PS1 rarity by the name of LSD: Dream Emulator. It's not so much a game as it is a first-person simulation of an acid trip that oscillates between surreal weirdness and full-on terror. Without any goals or direction, you simply wander through 32-bit renditions of disconnected dream sequences, completely unsure of how your surroundings will react to your presence. Ask anyone who's plunged headfirst into this madness (or ), and you'll see just how often things take a turn into deeply disturbing territory. It gets to the point that the player feels like they're being strangled by paranoia and disorientation.

Don't be deceived by the crude graphics; LSD is capable of some truly skin-crawling stuff, like walls inexplicably plastered with creepy face textures, or is still up, so anything's possible.

People often (incorrectly) reduce Gone Home as to nothing more than a "walking simulator", but you know what? There's nowhere that Fullbright's brand of environmental design and exploration would be more at home than the sleepy burg of Silent Hill. Gone Home already toyed with player expectations, building up suspense and horror through simple audio cues, deft storytelling, and a crushing sense of loneliness - a Fullbright Silent Hill game would simply ratchet up those feelings tenfold.

If you're playing Silent Hill for the combat, you're playing the wrong game. Instead, a Fullbright-developed Silent Hill would drop the player into the derelict city long after the horror has since passed - though the evidence of the atrocities committed by its inhabitants still lingers. You'd explore abandoned buildings, reading notes and taking in clues, piecing the story together as you wander through the city's haunting streets. And then… the fog rolls in, and the real terror begins.

Between working on Danganronpa and the Zero Escape series, developer Spike Chunsoft knows how to inject a poignant sense of despair, dread, and (most of all) helplessness in their games. Silent Hill thrives on these emotions. It wants to instill them deep within your psyche, often without you even realizing it. The thematic harmony at work between game and developer makes Spike Chunsoft a natural fit for this long-running horror franchise.

And on a more pragmatic note, what's the one thing people complain about when they complain about Silent Hill? The gameplay. By design, Silent Hill games feel clunky, which is sort of the point but people still don't like it. If Spike Chunsoft were to transform Silent Hill into a visual novel, that awkwardness would be eliminated and you'd be free to focus on all the creepy environments and brain-teasing puzzles. It also allows for a greater focus on narrative, which is important when your backdrop literally runs on the inner turmoil of its characters.

Though From Software is best known for making you want to throw your game system out the window when you lose to that one boss for the tenth freaking time, the company is equally versed at building a living story from vague whispers and hints. Though you could charge through Dark Souls or Bloodborne without ever learning their lore, players that pay close attention can discover frightening and fascinating worlds hidden just out of sight. Silent Hill is all about the horror of what could be lurking beyond that impenetrable fog, so From Software's unique brand of subtle dread would be perfect for low-visibility terror.

Much like other Silent Hill games are built upon subtle clues that can go ignored if you don't pay attention (heck, P.T. has a full story to it that some players never notice), From Software is adept at hiding hints of story in every facet of a game, from to item descriptions to the structure of the world itself. While the company has never done a psychological horror game the likes of Silent Hill, it wouldn't be too tricky to scale back its action-focused elements to hone in on atmosphere. After that it's familiar, lamp-lit territory. The true question is whether From Software could scale back its desire to make you suffer under crushing difficulty instead of just deep-seated fear, but I bet it could pull that off. Just this once.

'Batman V Superman' - it doesn't get much more obvious than that. One brooding dude versus an all-powerful alien…in tights! What's not to love? Truly, this is a golden age for humanity, one in which even the grittiest of actioners bears a name as blatant, as unabashedly comic book-esque as Batman V Superman and yet barely raises a titter. It's a title that tells you everything you need to know, right there on the tin. One man with a thing for bats going up against another with severe ego issues, apparently. Game on.

There's something almost tangibly visceral about a good Vs. title. It's the ultimate, fan-baiting elevator pitch. Video games, for their part, are chock full of such epic confrontations, battles so potentially seismic in scope they practically demand to be made the part of the title, even if not all of them turn fulfill their promise. So, in recognition of the new , here are some of the very best and worst of gaming's 'Vs' collection. Whoever wins, we lose. Sometimes. Depending on quality.

Why fight? Capcom must've made some serious drunken indiscretions over the years to procure this many enemies. There's X-Men, then Marvel, then Tatsunoko and SNK. Hell they've even snuck Tekken in there under the new fangled 'X' moniker. At this point Cappy could well be fighting it out with the principality of Monaco and no one would bat an eyelid. Maybe they talk trash them all behind their backs, like a gormless gossip of the gaming world?

Any good? Indubitably. Capcom's fighting family all share a single common ancestry - the ever-reliable Street Fighter franchise. You really couldn't go wrong with a lineage like that. Right?

Why fight? Perhaps Mr. Phoenix is a nasty minded xenophobe, and can't quite stand to look at a man with soulless black circles where his eyes ought to be. Perhaps Prof Layton was given bad legal advice and spent 6 whole weeks in the slammer. Who knows? The simple fact remains that, on the surface of it, these two heroes aren't even close to being enemies. If anything they're allies, forced together by fate and generally collaborative from the off. I guess 'Professor Layton and Phoenix Wright have a bloody amicable chit-chat' didn't have quite the same ring to it.

Any good? Yes, actually. Layton Vs. Wright meshes the best bits of both franchises - along with some of the more minor niggles - to create an effective entree for both series.

Why fight? For all of its tactical nous I'm afraid that the basic concept of 'chess' doesn't really stand much of a chance up against that of 'battle'. King to Knight Four may be all well and good in isolation, but it isn't going to stop a bunch of incensed soldiers from brutally bludgeoning the bishop. And no, that's not an innuendo. To be blunt: my money's on battle. But - intentional misreadings aside, what exactly does Battle Vs. Chess mean? Is this the 'Battle Vs.' franchise taking a brief detour into chess? Will the next game be named Battle Vs. Checkers, or Battle Vs. Hungry Hungry Hippo's? It's a mystery. Still, at least they didn’t stick with the original title - 'Check Vs. Mate'. One man's painful decision between spotting his best bud the next month's rent or booting him right out the door. Probably…

Any good? Battle Vs. Chess earned a mixed reception from critics, with some praising its on-point A.I., while others poured scorn on the game's badly implemented trimmings, namely its lacklustre story mode and poorly executed animations.

Why fight? One wants to fight us, the other wants to f*** us. It's the alien equivalent of a jailbreak on the psychotic nymphomaniac's ward. Sadly for them, there are only so many of us fleshy repositories to go around, and so both sides must quickly take care of the other in order to establish dibs. It's galactic mandibles at dawn, triangular laser thingies versus a good old fashioned jaw-goring.

Any good? Initially yes, though the franchise has faltered in recent years. The first AvPs, and the arcade game remain worthwhile adventures. As for Extinction and 2010's reboot: not so much.

Why fight? You don't get a name like 'Bad Dudes' without cracking your fair share of skulls first. Either that, or by being part of a late '80s boyband. In this instance, I'm not entirely sure which description fits best. In any case, Bad Dudes tells the tale of two 'roided up street toughs named Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Shannon. No wait, scratch that. Despite visual similarities to those Hollywood greats, they're apparently called Blade and Striker. Because the '80s. With America overrun by ne'er do well Ninjas, and even the secret service unable to protect their chief, B and S are called in to retrieve said Pres from the clutches of the titular Dragon clan. What follows is several levels of largely unremarkable kicky, punchy conflict.

Any good? No, though that wasn't enough to stop the game from selling strongly on the ZX Spectrum. Plans for a crowdfunded sequel were ultimately squashed due to lack of support. I guess they really were "bad enough dudes" after all.

Why fight? An unfortunate mix up at the post office results in Raiden and Superman sending one another their dirty laundry. Said error somehow results in the merger of their respective realms, with the monstrous amalgam Dark Kahn playing both sides off against the other. Cue much pummelling. It doesn't get much more 'Vs.' than seeing two teams of muscle bound brawlers punching each other into oblivion.

Any good? Though not quite as polished as its latter-era standalone kin, i.e. MK 2011 MKX, NetherRealm's first foray into the DC mythology still manages to produce plenty of fluid action and fun fan service.

Why fight? Zoids is a popular toy line originating in Japan, based on a concept that might best be described as Beast Wars meets the Power Rangers. People - typically wide -eyed and ultra emotive teenagers - are tasked with flying these titular mechs on behalf of their nation states, two of whom are currently embroiled in an ongoing conflict. The Zoids themselves are modelled after an array of insects and animals, and are just as alive as their allotted pilots.

That's the backstory covered, but why exactly are they fighting the number three? Is it really the magic number? Have the numerical cast of Sesame Street finally had enough? Nope, as it turns out this is just the third entry in the 'Zoids Vs.' series. How very disappointing.

Any good? That all depends on who you ask. Many fans consider the game to be an enjoyable, if somewhat flawed experience, while critics proved to be far less liberal with their praise.

Why fight? When your sole business model revolves around pulling in the violence-loving punters, going to war against an entire world's worth of people just seems counterproductive. Still, I suspect the name WCW Vs. The World isn't meant to be taken literally. It's more of an 'us against them' type of thing, a glorious affirmation of sweaty machismo in the face of then wrestling rivals, the WWF. As for its sequel, WCW Vs. nWo: World Tour, that name does at least manage to make a lick more sense. After all, the company's biggest hit, the villainous nWo faction, set themselves up in direct opposition to the WCW brand, leading the two groups into a lengthy confrontation.

Any good? Both of the 'WCW Vs.' games were flawed, if enjoyable brawlers that essentially acted as dry runs for the series' best-loved outing, WCW/nWo Revenge.

Why fight? These two titans can trace their enmity back to the very earliest days of motor racing, when the Ford Model T battled it out against the Chevy 490. In the 1980s, both sides fought for domination of the pickup truck market, largely by dragging each other's vehicles around in big, cheesy commercials. Then, in 2005 both, belligerents agreed to appear in a mutually endorsed driving game. Sadly, the game sucked, though at least fans were finally able to settle their decades-long debate. Well, sort of. The whole project was essentially moot by 2005, with both sides already having appeared together in multiple superior driving games.

Any good? Not particularly. It may have included a slightly deeper roster of both Ford and Chevy vehicles, but at the cost of your actual enjoyment.

Why fight? Judge Dredd doesn't like crime. Judge Death considers all life to be a crime. With Dredd alive, and Death a criminal, both men become natural adversaries. Cue several thousand angry gurns. Interestingly, for a title that implies ol' granite chin is in the hunt for some sort of immortality potion - he is going up against 'death', after all - the game's plot does actually involve one such elixir. Unfortunately for the hapless denizens of Mega City One, this particular tonic doesn't work as specified, causing a good chunk of the population to transform into grotesque, vampire-like creatures. Death's behind the botch and Dredd's having none of it. They fight. Is that versus enough for you?

Any good? Dredd Vs. Death failed to win over many critics, who cited poor A.I., simplistic gameplay and bad graphics as responsible for its wealth of poor scores.

Why fight? Holmes is the quintessential gentleman detective. Jack, by contrast follows the rather ungentlemanly pursuit of murdering prostitutes. You might see where this is going…. Unfortunately for the real life victims of the Ripper, Sherlock never actually existed. Had he done, you can bet he'd have taken one big sniff of a cobbled Whitechapel side street before nabbing the killer in time for tea. Of course, this being a story in need of an ending, in this version of history Holmes does indeed catch his man. Though, rather like in L.A. Noire's depiction of the 'Black Dahlia' murderer, the detective is unable to publicise his discovery.

Any good? Solid, if unspectacular, though still strangely alluring given the ongoing dearth of quality detective games.

Why fight? Maximo - owner of the shoddiest set of armour ever assembled - is out to reclaim his lost love. Unfortunately for him, the evil Baron Bane - seriously devs, at this rate 'Bane' is going to make it onto the top 10 baby names - has decided to unleash the titular Army of Zin. These mechanical monstrosities just so happen to feast upon the same 'soul power' as our man Max, forcing both sides into an epic, headlong confrontation. .

Any good? Absolutely. Maximo's second outing improves on the original game in almost every respect, and remains one of the PS2's premier action titles.

Why fight? As anyone who's ever paid attention to the Peanuts comic strip can attest, Snoopy the dog fancies himself as quite the pilot. So, who better to test those skills than the greatest flying ace of WW1: Manfred von Richthofen, aka 'the Red Baron'. Of course, this being a fully priced video game, Snoopy can't just tangle with the man immediately. Instead, Richthofen only appears in 'killable' form during the game's final mission, meaning a more accurate title might've read 'Snoopy Vs. The entirety of the German air force, plus that one bloke who knew how to use cheat codes in real life'.

Any good? Unbelievably, yes. Despite being a licensed tie-in (for a an increasingly antiquated brand, no less), Snoopy Vs. The Red Baron actually manages to offer a fun flying experience. Things got even better in the game's 2010 sequel, Snoopy Flying Ace, which holds a highly respectable 82% on review accumulator GameRankings.com.

Why fight? After buying up the aforementioned WCW, WWE mogul Vince McMahon decided to create his own competition. The Raw and Smackdown! shows, being the company's two biggest draws, were subsequently divvied up and set against one another, with everyone from commentators, to wrestlers, and even technical crew belonging to one side or the other. The newly christened Smackdown! Vs. Raw video game series reflected the change, though players were still able to create 'dream match ups' between otherwise unaffiliated competitors.

Any good? Yes, though not quite as good as it should've been. Smackdown! Vs. Raw was the first title to be released after the series' high water mark - 2003's Here Comes the Pain - and represented the beginning of a slow but steady decline for the franchise.

Why fight? Hmm, tough one this. If the natural world teaches us anything, plants and zombies ought to be the best of buds. Just look at The Last of Us, for example. And even if not enjoying a happy, world-devouring symbiosis, at worst they'd be utterly indifferent towards each other. After all, zombies certainly aren't herbivores. It's fair to say that the average daffodil has more to fear from a committed vegetarian than from a shambling zed-head. Then again, I suppose Mother Nature might be a little bit pissed that all of that corpsey goodness is suddenly bursting out of the earth instead of fertilising it. Wars have been started for less.

Any good? Millions of users can't be wrong. Unless of course they're drug users, in which case it's probably best you don't take any advice from a slum-dwelling crack addict. Wait, what was I talking about?

Why fight? When Bart Simpson discovers a monstrous plot to body snatch the people of Springfield, he sets out to deprive these tentacled terrors responsible of their much-needed resources. Said resources include such vital equipment as hats, balloons and assorted purple goods. Y'know, the usual conqueror's checklist. To tell you the truth, I'm not so sure that he didn’t just drink another one of those tainted Squishies, before indulging in a surreal town-wide crime spree. Aside from completing the strangest shopping list this side of Homer's whiskey, porno and fireworks haul back in season seven, Bart must also do battle with several of the aliens themselves. One late-stage jaundice sufferer up against an entire extraterrestrial invasion. Why not?

Any good? Nope. Thankfully there's the much more enjoyable Simpsons arcade game, from the same era, to scratch your 2D brawling itch.

Why fight? One of the most successful basketball stars of the 1980s takes on the undisputed king of the 90s, as Larry Bird goes toe to toe with the one and only Michael Jordan. There isn’t much else to talk about, other than the fact that the game was widely considered to favour Bird's avatar over MJ's. Though to be fair, the game was released prior to any of Jordan's six championship wins, so err… realism?

Any good? Nope. Despite being the sequel to the highly rated One on One: Dr. J Vs. Larry Bird, Jordan's first virtual outing was widely panned.

Why fight? Ecks and Sever are two highly trained field operatives, hunting one another before eventually joining forces. The game's name is technically correct, in that they do spend a good deal of the game playing enemies, though largely under false pretenses. Ecks' employers are big dirty fibbers, you see.

Any good? Despite being a tie-in for one of the worst movies ever made, Ecks Vs. Sever still manages to be of the best action games in the entire GBA library. In hindsight, they'd have been better off broadcasting an extended Let's Play than releasing that cinematic monstrosity.

Why fight? One of the oldest rivalries in gaming reignites in this 2004 puzzler, as DK undoes years of prison rehab to return to a life of crime. In one of the stranger additions to the Mushroom Kingdom lore, it appears that Mario himself is running a toy factory, one solely dedicated to reproducing his own moustachioed likeness. Weird, but somewhat understandable, given how well the clockwork figurines are selling. He was years ahead of the amiibo curve.

They're selling too well, in fact, as Donkey Kong arrives just in time to see the final unit sold, an occurrence that gives him to pause to reflect upon his own materialistic fixation. No, not really, he just swipes a few units instead, causing Mario - the enraged owner - to hunt down his missing property. So, either DK's a giant ape with poor impulse control, or Mario's intentionally manipulating the market via the old 'out-of-stock' tactic, thereby causing the populace to rise up in violent, popular revolt. Karl Marx would have a field day with this. Also, we seem to be back to amiibo.

Any good? Harsh truths aside, Mario Vs. Donkey Kong represents yet another quality addition to the Mario franchise, blending platforming with puzzley strategy to create an absolute winner.

Why fight? Two wheels or four is a fairly common argument amongst motor fans. MX Vs. ATV simply takes the debate into muddier territory. While it's true that motocross vehicles - i.e. dirtbikes - ought to hold the edge over Tevor Phillips' favoured means of traversal, the average ATV is no slouch either. Supercross lets both off-roaders take to the track together, allowing users to decide just who deserves to win this damn dirty duel.

Any good? Much like a real life motocross track, the MX vs. ATV franchise has hit plenty of peaks and troughs. The series' latest outing - Supercross - is rather more of the latter, scoring a slew of poor reviews upon its release in October of 2014.