I guess there is no DS thread or the thread did not crossover to 2K forums.
DS3 Squee!
I guess there is no DS thread or the thread did not crossover to 2K forums.
DS3 Squee!
One of my favourite series, more screens below, little worried they'll stray too far from the first game with the pacing, it was lumbering but all the better for it.Originally Posted by Durandal
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...reenshots-leak
Looks like co-op as well
those screen captions are funny. I did not like the second as much as the first. It was very action oriented and the story was kinda weak. But, co-op would be fun as long as it does have a single player mode somewhere.
what are your thoughts Fugue?
Also preffered the first, sound, lighting and atmosphere of the game were all amazing, loved the hud built into the suit so you had something very cinematic, many didn't like the crawling pace and if it wasnt for the asteroid bit
Second game was very good, great enemies but it was a little too easy compared to the first and EA's trick of releasing DLC that made it easier to complete on the hardest setting ****** me offstill really enjoyed it though.
Is inevitable the game will become more action focused imo, it's pretty much the industry standard now but sales of action games make it hard to argue with the strategy, as long as it stays close to its roots I don't mind. co-op could be very special but that's all down to pacing and it could lose some of the clostrophopic atmos because its going to move away from a corridor shooter.
Can't wait to see more
That E3 game demo was ☺☺☺☺☺in! However it is now more like Mass Effect 3. Duck and cover shooting, action galore and bromance.
Yeah, the banter between the two (Isaac and John) was worthy of more than a few eyerolls, as is most combat banter in games.
might not be popular but the tension, lighting and sound were all better for being a linear corridor shooter, co-op is great but think making it more open for the sake of that will be a mistake.
I played Dead Space 1 and didn't finish it. I normally play games on the hardest difficulty and games very rarely beat me. However I was particularly annoyed with one bit on Dead Space that made me give up before the vein in my head burst.
I entered a room where the door behind me locked and then creatures came at me. One of the creatures is one of the ones that regenerates or whatever. Basically you have to survive and kill enough of the enemies before the door on the other side of the room opens. I had so little ammo at this point that it was pointless trying to survive because I don't believe it was just a survive a certain length of time for the door to open, it was actually kill a certain number of enemies before the door opens. Well the ammo supply I had was nowhere near enough, and when I restarted at checkpoint and went back to the ammo supply station or whatever I didn't have enough to buy anything.
I felt it was pointless and I wasn't prepared to start again. It was in fact one of the hardest games i've ever played.
it was very difficult in parts, there are some cheats you can use to get extra stasis which helps in the trickier parts, worst bit for me was the asteroid cannon section, just frustrating.
I was just reading the Game Informer article about DS3. Sounds like they are putting a lot of effort into the co-op. The developer was making all sorts of assurances about how the solo play will still be creepy and lonely, while the co-op will be more like a standard shooter and will include some shared moments between the two guys (cue the violins, LOL). But not having a co-op partner won't mean you'll miss out on anything or be excluded from any endings. Etc. Part of me felt like he was trying to cover himself from any criticisms rather than explain how they are adding new features. I guess that is par for the course these days. Any time you try anything new, you have to predict the litany of complaints and defend against them pre-emptively. Like it would be a major crime if solo or co-op play actually let you experience something entirely unique from the other mode.
Pretty much all my online gaming is co-op so it's good news about the new feature but I'm not sure it's going to translate well into the DS gameplay. Both games, particularly the first created the tension and atmos by keeping you playing in enclosed spaces, I can understand why it would need to open up for co-op but it seems inevitable that the creepy/jumpy stuff will be toned down to enable two players to work.
If they can do both then i will be very impressed but making the game more open was probably the last thing i wanted to read.
Really disappointed in the direction this has gone
Ok it's a 3rd game and they probably saw the need to bring something new to the table but it looks like they've taken it too far and tried to turn the game into a n other TPS, the moment the character rolled I knew it was bad news.
New location looks interesting but I'll miss the really claustrophobic and slow pace of the other games, they did make 2 a little more action orientated but managed to maintain the core mechanics, this just looks wrong for a DS game.
Massive fan of 1& 2, survival horror at its best.
FYI, not all environments will be open. I believe they confirmed interiors and space sections, just like the first two.
Am sure there'll still be enclosed bits, but rolling
Ok it's a small thing but a big deal to me, just shows the pace of the game has changed, again. For me it's the slow lumbering pace of the first game that gives it the edge over the second. I'll take co op over any form of multi but I just don't see DS lending itself to that at all, just looks like Army of Gears
I get what you're saying. At the same time, they did two great games already with the feeling you're describing. And I think it was a tremendous feat to make the second seem fresh, but still true to the original. Trying to do it a third time, without adding in some new elements, might have been really tough.
I'm just sayin'...
I might be a bit negative...
Playing through the original again on PC at the mo, it's an amazing game with superb lighting, sound and genuinely creepy/jumpy atmos, some criticised it for being too slow which they kind of addressed in 2 without really changing too much, 3 looks like a very different animal to me and a lot of that seems to be to incorporate 2 players, which inevitably means opening up gameplay.
There are many games I've played that are crying out for a co op mode, DS really isn't one of them IMO.
Edit- preview here
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...l-freezes-over
Pretty much confirms my fears, and co op partner banter replaced by voices in your headif the anything the original was all the better for Isaac being silent.
Doesn't matter how much they try and push the SP experience will be the same I just don't believe it.
Last edited by Fugue; 06-20-2012 at 04:15 AM.
I'd single player this and then co-op if I felt like it. So you can't talk to you co-op partner? Is it just scripted dialog from the characters?
It reads like you get scripted banter, but guess you'll be able to use mics as normal.
Should have done the separate co op mission thing instead of this.
release date n' stuff Don't make me get the limited edition!
So the demo is out. I'm skipping the demo it bcuz I didn't realize I was in the weapon bench part the whole time. I keep pressing the monster button and went okay, this is boring. Plus I'm not into spoilers. I don't really have high hopes for this one. The second seemed incoherent but I think that was the point. limited edition looks crappy. However, I'd co-op for the demo to get some shiny thingy. Anyone want to co-op? I'm xbox only.
Last edited by Durandal; 01-22-2013 at 03:11 PM.
Won't be buying it, as I feared the addition of drop in co-op has changed the core game (claustrophobic corridor shooter) too much, now feels like a generic TPS but when an EA exec said they changed it because some found the previous games too scary
And yes new workbench system is terrible, has been one my favourite series
lol enjoy your microtransactions.
What do you mean?
http://www.bluesnews.com/s/138334/de...ansactions-yes
BS.
The microtransactions thing is hilariously awful, but it's an entirely optional aspect of the game and it won't affect you unless you want to basically "Pay for" cheats. That's pretty much how I view it anyway.
I find the trend towards microtransactions to be the unruly guest at the party. To myself, this seems to be a step towards "normalizing" the situation. Get players "used to it" and as time goes on later products will have them as well and they will be a necessary part of the experience. My concern is limited to paid-for products. If I buy a game full-price then I expect no microtransactions - build the gameplay with an alternate and actual-money-free system. If there are to be microtransactions in a game then the entire base game should be free to play. Either extreme satisfies me, but not the middle.
Yeah I can understand that, but it should be noted you could already do this in both Dead Space and Dead Space 2. Both games have extensive DLC packs, which right from the get go allow you to get much better weapons and armor out of the usual order in the game. For example Dead Space Severed gives you access upon completing it to both the Military Seeker Rifle (A beefed up version of the standard Seeker) and the Military Patrol Suit (which is an improved security suit). The original had similar weapons packs and they were frequently better than the default versions in some way.
Dead Space 3 is continuing doing the same thing, just far more blatantly in that it's directly in game instead of hidden in the games DLC files on Xbox Live (or whatever your choice of service is). You could already "Pay to win" in Dead Space or Dead Space 2.
My stance on DLC is that it should offer new content as its primary addition. Bethesda does DLC right: Fallout 3 and New Vegas being the best examples of "doing it right" and I believe that they learned to do it the right way by taking to heart their previous "horse DLC" from Oblivion which was, understating, poorly received. DLC that gives a player an advantage instead of extending the game is what I frown upon. I must admit that I've not played Dead Space 1 or 2 so I wasn't aware of how the DLC worked in those. However it doesn't change my stance for my opinion.
True, I didn't buy any suit/weapon DLC for either game and enjoyed them both although in 2 it seemed to me it was designed to sell to those who wanted to complete the game on the highest difficulty, which was made a lot harder with such limited saves, am sure that was a business decision.Yeah I can understand that, but it should be noted you could already do this in both Dead Space and Dead Space 2.
Would anyone like to play co-op?
In an era where Survival Horror seems to have become a bit niche, Dead Space was one of the few games that provided genuine scares and breathed some new life into the genre. This is why many of us are worried about the new direction DS3 seems to be going.
Don't get me wrong i think some new ideas are essential as ther's only so many times you can use the same scare tactics (oh look, ther's an air vent. I wonder if somethings going to jump out of it?) but turning it into a faster paced shooter with a cheesy script is clearly a sell out. Please, please don't let the series go the same direction as Resident Evil has gone as it will be another nail in Survival Horrors coffin.
Sure, bearing in mind that I am Australian time zone wise, but if you are buying the game on 360 feel free to add me. Gamertag is Aegeri.
Edit: That post funky reminds me of what everyone said about DS2, but the game still turned out to be excellent.
True, and the same could be said of many horror films which I'm happy to sit through, for me it's more to do with the pacing, addition of human enemies, open areas to accommodate co-op, and just a lack of atmos and tension that both DS1 & 2 had in spades, I understand the need for change but for me the demo gameplay was just a step too far.
Having said that I've read articles saying that DS3 isn't such a great leap from its predecessors but I'm waiting for fans feedback
Well, judging by the initial reviews it seems that most of what we feared is true. This excerpt from the CVG review tells you all you need to know.............
"Dead Space had real personality. Its combat mechanics and enemy types were genuinely different from everybody else's. Its puzzles were smart. It had plenty of scares. And even though it was primarily set on one ship, every level had a unique flavour, whether it was the bio-infested Hydroponics Deck with its giant space ☺☺☺☺ boss battle, or the Medical Deck and its unsettling remodelling later in the game - complete with its regenerating stalking patient.
Dead Space 3's personality, by comparison, feels whitewashed. A bombardment of semi-epic set-pieces set on a world with such a cohesive artistic overlay that it's hard to look back and differentiate between one level and the next. As a pure action fest there's boatloads of polished blasting to plough through - but that simply isn't good enough when set against Dead Space's unique exospheric standards."
Oh, and that is by no means the worst review btw. It makes me so angry. Ther's so much i want to say about games companies selling out and how certain game genres seem to be dying because of it. DS3 had every opportunity to finish the triogy with a bang and cement the series legacy as this generations best survival horror but no, its another Gears of War/Call of Duty action fest and not a particualry great one by the sounds of it. DS was my favourite game this generation and i got so excited about DS2 that i even took a day off work to play it. I certainly won't be buying this. RIP DS.
Not sure what sales of the series have been like, would imagine pretty good so it's bizarre they thought that's what fans wanted from another game, will wait for a quick price drop.
The introduction was good. It's starting to blend in and as a review said it's good to have a buddy to make sense of the Necromorph mosh pit. I'm going to co-op an optional co-op only mission. Perhaps we will carry on from there. To early to comment on the game.
I haven't even begun playing the game yet due to my SCIENCE! Hopefully get to do so tonight once I get home. Then I can judge how it is for myself.
Picking up Aliens CM next week instead, neither game looks like its going to amaze but there hasn't been an Aliens game for a while, I've seen many comments about DS3 not really feeling like a DS game, more action, less tension and scares, which is what I thought survival horror was all about
Will probably rent/buy cheap at some point just to see what they've done with the story.
That's the point though; They're not catering for the fans. DS games sold well but survival horror is currently a niche genre so it was never going to be a mega selling blockbuster like Call of Duty or Uncharted. So publishers look at this, make it more like COD and take away most of what fans loved about the first 2 games because they think it will appeal to a new audience and turn the series into a massive selling franchise.
I'll admit, as a fan, ther's part of me that wants to play it, if only to find out how the trilogy ends but i feel i have to make a stand on this one. If enough people don't buy it maybe publishers will get the message; that you can sell out if you want, ruin our favourite game series and kill genres but it doesn't gurantee great sales figures.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote