Dead Space 3 Catch-All

Well. If Dead Space 3 really steps significantly away from the formula but sells the most copies of the 3 would EA be vindicated in their decision?

Not saying it will...since it could very well blow up in their faces

Well if that's their objective and the metric they use for 'good', then sure. Doesn't mean it's everyone's measure though. It's an established pattern now to start a series and then do everything they can to bring in more and more players, which makes sense for EA, but I guess what I wonder is "Is nothing sacred?".

Scratched wrote:

One thing I'll say regarding Lobster's comments in the other (EA E3 show?) thread about the lack of limb shooting is that it is a very fast cut trailer showing action all the time. I don't think I'll be paying anything close to full price for this one though.

The other thing watching that is I can't help reminding myself of Lost Planet.

For the sake of accuracy, that wasn't me. I've been firmly in the, "judgment reserved pending more information" camp.

Scratched wrote:

Well if that's their objective and the metric they use for 'good', then sure. Doesn't mean it's everyone's measure though. It's an established pattern now to start a series and then do everything they can to bring in more and more players, which makes sense for EA, but I guess what I wonder is "Is nothing sacred?".

In which case, I am now uncertain if I really want a sequel to Mirror's Edge.

ccesarano wrote:

In which case, I am now uncertain if I really want a sequel to Mirror's Edge.

Yes, the 'be careful what you wish for' scenario.

LobsterMobster wrote:
Scratched wrote:

One thing I'll say regarding Lobster's comments in the other (EA E3 show?) thread about the lack of limb shooting is that it is a very fast cut trailer showing action all the time. I don't think I'll be paying anything close to full price for this one though.

The other thing watching that is I can't help reminding myself of Lost Planet.

For the sake of accuracy, that wasn't me. I've been firmly in the, "judgment reserved pending more information" camp.

That's where I'm sitting as well. What have we seen so far? A 2 minute trailer that seems to have been cut mostly from the 7 minute on-stage demo. 7 minutes out of a game that will probably be - based on the first two installments - around 16 hours. And why would they show us more of the same mechanics that we've already experienced for 30+ hours? They aren't going to use the E3 platform to show us stuff that we already know about, and is more than likely in the game already. They are going to use it to show us the new stuff they are adding to the formula.

What I find interesting is that there will be no competitive multiplayer in DS3, only the campaign co-op, which is totally optional, by the way, so if you want that solo Dead Space experience, you can have it.

Actually, to add: look at Assassin's Creed 3 versus 1 and 2. It's the same game with the same signature gameplay, but there's a lot different there. Instead of focusing on huge cities, you're mostly navigating the wilderness. You got ship battles. Basically, they're trying to change things around while keeping the spirit.

That's what we want in Dead Space 3...and for all intents and purposes, it doesn't look like they're keeping true.

Scratched wrote:

Well if that's their objective and the metric they use for 'good', then sure. Doesn't mean it's everyone's measure though. It's an established pattern now to start a series and then do everything they can to bring in more and more players, which makes sense for EA, but I guess what I wonder is "Is nothing sacred?".

If everything were sacred, the industry would have gone bankrupt a long time ago. Either that, or we'd still be playing 16 bit isometric dungeon crawlers or FPS corridor shooters without the ability to look up and down.

I kind of agree with Game Guru's sentiment, I do see a pattern of people asking for new/better/improved experiences, and then when developers try something new, they get an avalanche of bile-filled opinions decrying them as dumbed-down/money grubbing/consumer hostile etc etc.

I was active for a bit on the official EA Dead Space forums back when DS1 was still fairly fresh, and co-op has been a big talking point/request on the part of the fans for several years now. So when I see people saying "that's not what I asked for" or "is nothing sacred" I wonder if they've been actually asking for it from the developers, or if they don't realize they might be in the minority.

ccesarano wrote:

Actually, to add: look at Assassin's Creed 3 versus 1 and 2. It's the same game with the same signature gameplay, but there's a lot different there. Instead of focusing on huge cities, you're mostly navigating the wilderness. You got ship battles. Basically, they're trying to change things around while keeping the spirit.

That's what we want in Dead Space 3...and for all intents and purposes, it doesn't look like they're keeping true.

Well, I've only seen 7 minutes of gameplay, and it was all the new mechanics they developed specifically for this installment. Visceral have done me right for the last 2 games, so I'm optimistic. The addition of co-op doesn't necessarily mean that they've removed everything that makes DS great.

And who is this 'we' everyone keeps referring to? I haven't seen any Visceral developers coming in here polling our opinions. And as I said above, the official forums have always discussed/requested co-op as a feature since DS1.

I am still excited for the franchise to continue - don't get me wrong. I love the aesthetic, the baddies, and the universe. I just hope they don't change too much to make it mass appeal.

I get that from a business standpoint, appealing to the largest amount of people = making most profit, and aside from those posting on internet boards, it really does seem like homogenization is profitable.

SallyNasty wrote:

I am still excited for the franchise to continue - don't get me wrong. I love the aesthetic, the baddies, and the universe. I just hope they don't change too much to make it mass appeal.

I get that from a business standpoint, appealing to the largest amount of people = making most profit, and aside from those posting on internet boards, it really does seem like homogenization is profitable.

I definitely agree, and I will admit that I'm slightly less excited for DS3 than I was for 2, but I'm still in the 'wait and see camp'.

But based on the trailer, it looks like we might have yet another epic opening sequence.

nel e nel wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I am still excited for the franchise to continue - don't get me wrong. I love the aesthetic, the baddies, and the universe. I just hope they don't change too much to make it mass appeal.

I get that from a business standpoint, appealing to the largest amount of people = making most profit, and aside from those posting on internet boards, it really does seem like homogenization is profitable.

I definitely agree, and I will admit that I'm slightly less excited for DS3 than I was for 2, but I'm still in the 'wait and see camp'.

But based on the trailer, it looks like we might have yet another epic opening sequence.

It is still looking like a day 1 purchase, if you are looking for a wingman:)

My problem isn't the co-op. I'm willing to give that a chance, and I don't think that demo really did a good job of showing off whether it is good or bad. I would have been curious how things looked in single player, however, where you evidently don't always have a partner.

SallyNasty wrote:

It is still looking like a day 1 purchase, if you are looking for a wingman:)

Hells yes!

Based on the leaked info before E3, this sounds like it will have some interesting replayability if the co-op and solo campaigns offer unique experiences. From what has been posted on neogaf and some of the media sites, it suggests that when playing solo, John Carver won't even be in the game.

nel e nel wrote:

They are going to use it to show us the new stuff they are adding to the formula.

The "new stuff" they showed us is much of the same sh*t from every other Gears clone, and a lot of that new stuff is directly at odds with that stuff you say is probably already in the game. That's not the good kind of new stuff, and it's tough for me to get even cautiously optimistic about it.

I really hope I'm wrong.

Edit: and I really don't have an issue with the co-op stuff, just the mechanical changes shown.

Dyni wrote:
nel e nel wrote:

They are going to use it to show us the new stuff they are adding to the formula.

The "new stuff" they showed us is much of the same sh*t from every other Gears clone, and a lot of that new stuff is directly at odds with that stuff you say is probably already in the game. That's not the good kind of new stuff, and it's tough for me to get even cautiously optimistic about it.

I really hope I'm wrong.

ccesarano wrote:

My problem isn't the co-op. I'm willing to give that a chance, and I don't think that demo really did a good job of showing off whether it is good or bad. I would have been curious how things looked in single player, however, where you evidently don't always have a partner.

Those are both reasonable assumptions/opinions. I am also curious how the co-op/solo experiences will differ, and I also hope Dyni is wrong.

I wonder how they incorporate "drop-in/drop-out" with a character that "just isn't there." It'd be funny if your partner would scream and run away if the other player disconnected, then maybe fall out of a duct when they joined.

LobsterMobster wrote:

I wonder how they incorporate "drop-in/drop-out" with a character that "just isn't there." It'd be funny if your partner would scream and run away if the other player disconnected, then maybe fall out of a duct when they joined.

IMAGE(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19832728/deadspace3.png)

more info in the neogaf thread regarding co-op

The posters 'Monkey Pants' and 'codecow' work for Visceral, so their info can be considered 'official'. Of note:

Monkey Pants wrote:

First: "Drop-In Drop Out" Co-Op:

We're doing this differently than its ever been done before, to my knowledge, so it's easy to understand why there'd be confusion.

What it usually means is that when your friend isn't playing, the other character is taken over by a dumb AI that gets in your way all the time or you have to babysit or doesn't revive you when he's supposed to.

In DS3 HE'S JUST NOT THERE. It's just like the classic DS you know and love. There's no banter. This has been extremely tricky (and expensive!) to figure out, but we didn't want to mess up a good thing. Cutscenes and gameplay are different depending if you're playing co-op or not.

We did this because a lot of people said "I think I'd love your game, but it's too intense for me, man!" Instead of making the game less intense, we added this. Think of it like going to a horror movie with your friends instead of alone.

While I do LOVE and appreciate the fact that they went above and beyond to help preserve that scary, isolated single player experience. The fact that you fight other humans and have cover does concern me. But like most people have said, I haven't really seen enough to make an accurate assumption on what the story experience will be like. I'm sure the game will be fun either way, I just have a feeling I'll miss the creepy style of DS1.

The Conformist wrote:

While I do LOVE and appreciate the fact that they went above and beyond to help preserve that scary, isolated single player experience. The fact that you fight other humans and have cover does concern me. But like most people have said, I haven't really seen enough to make an accurate assumption on what the story experience will be like. I'm sure the game will be fun either way, I just have a feeling I'll miss the creepy style of DS1.

In fairness, the scientologists were up to whacky stuff in the last game, and it isn't unreasonable to expect that they would be taking a more active hand in opposing Isaac in this game.

Yeah, people seem to be forgetting the gunship chasing you through parts of 2.

I'm completely okay with them making drastic changes. I don't expect to like the game all that much, but I am by no means craving a spiritual successor to Dead Space 1 & 2. Both those games completely satisfied me. Another one right now would just be boring to me.

Ideally, I would rather they wait 5 years and then make a spiritual Dead Space 3 in a new, purdy engine. That'd be sweet. I always enjoy coop stuff, however, so I may just dig this next installment. I'll have to set my mic to "heavy breathing" and "scream like a little girl" mode, though.

Actually, it would be cool to use a filter on both mics where it had a more dirty CB noise quality. I think that would help with the mood a HUGE amount. I'm sure there's some sort of add on filter to do that in vent.

Please, please let heat managment be a feature. Having to escape crippling cold that makes your joints freeze up sounds like an awesome new twist on the spacewalk segments.

I have this twisted hope that if you drop out of co-op, your character is covered by a blast of frost and sticks in place. Drop in and drop out will probably shoot immersion right in the kneecaps with a line gun. Oh well.

The balance of tension caused by a limited ammunition resource was important in the first game. Universal ammo means that issues of scarcity and having to have the right tool for the right task are minimized. Gone will be the days of "Oh crap! I've only got one javelin left to stop this charging emu looking fleshpile!"

So, it will be a spookhouse shooter ala FEAR 3, not a survival horror game like, oh, I don't know, Dead Space?

Yep. Angry. Angry because I'm still going to pay for it and, love it or hate it, I will have no choice but to obey the psionic influence of The Marker and play it end to end.

Twice.

At least.

gains wrote:

Please, please let heat managment be a feature. Having to escape crippling cold that makes your joints freeze up sounds like an awesome new twist on the spacewalk segments.

I have this twisted hope that if you drop out of co-op, your character is covered by a blast of frost and sticks in place. Drop in and drop out will probably shoot immersion right in the kneecaps with a line gun. Oh well.

The balance of tension caused by a limited ammunition resource was important in the first game. Universal ammo means that issues of scarcity and having to have the right tool for the right task are minimized. Gone will be the days of "Oh crap! I've only got one javelin left to stop this charging emu looking fleshpile!"

So, it will be a spookhouse shooter ala FEAR 3, not a survival horror game like, oh, I don't know, Dead Space?

Yep. Angry. Angry because I'm still going to pay for it and, love it or hate it, I will have no choice but to obey the psionic influence of The Marker and play it end to end.

Twice.

At least.

If your suit can withstand the cold of space - an ice planet shouldn't be a problem.

tuffalobuffalo wrote:

Actually, it would be cool to use a filter on both mics where it had a more dirty CB noise quality. I think that would help with the mood a HUGE amount. I'm sure there's some sort of add on filter to do that in vent.

I remember they had this on the first Xbox too. My neighbors got selected to be beta testers for the first Xbox Live tests, and we had a blast making all the little kids in Canada think we were babies, robots and babes.

Wasn't the girl supposed to be a cyclops?

mooosicle wrote:

Wasn't the girl supposed to be a cyclops?

I think there was some discussion on this back in the DS2 thread, namely about how Isaac can take a needle to the eye and just sort of walk it off. The conclusion was that medical technology is such that losing an eye isn't that big a deal, which is why Ellie sounds more annoyed than angry when she tells Isaac he owes her a new one.

mooosicle wrote:

Wasn't the girl supposed to be a cyclops?

That's what makes playing as the co-op character so awesome. The game is much more difficult for you because your screen has no depth perception.

Ha! This will be the 2nd time this week I've answered the "What about Ellie's eye?" question.

They established way back in '08 during the viral marketing of DS1 that they have the technology to grow limbs for injured miners.

http://deadspace.wikia.com/wiki/No_K...

Users take on the perspective of a psychologically deteriorating George Greggs, an organ replacement technician in his lab on the USG Ishimura's medical bay, where body parts are grown for injured crew members.