Hopefully this'll calm your qualm's.

#1 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

I wanted to post this, because I think Steve answers a lot of the questions people are being somewhat apprehensive over. Personally, I love the idea that they're taking out multiplayer and focusing solely on the story. Now, that's not to say from what I've played in two, it was bad, I actually quite liked it, but I still don't believe it's why I love to play a Dead Space game, so this is refreshing. The one thing I am a little surprised by is that there won't be split-screen co-op, so you better have a sibling or friend that'll want to play Dead Space with you. I'm really excited for this game, and am happy with the way they're doing it. The story was always one of the biggest things in Dead Space for me, and I'm glad they're focusing on it.

Also, I wasn't expecting it, but I do think people worried that they'd be taking a more Resident Evil 5-like approach, not only with the action, but the co-op. This won't be like that, Carver isn't like Sheva where he follows you through the entire game, if you play single player campaign, it's only Isaac, just like the first two, but it is jump in and jump out. The co-op is one of the many challenges Visceral had with the game, but I think they'll pull it off. Anyways, here you go. After, discuss. Are you less worried, or are you going to be just as pessimistic about it as you were when you saw the E3 trailer and game play? Or were you excited about it regardless of that stuff, and this helps even more?

#2 Posted by big_jon (5734 posts) -

This makes me happy, I will S rank this game too.

#3 Edited by believer258 (11949 posts) -

My birthday is now April 3, 1905.

Are there any of these age checkers that let us claim we were born in 0001?

EDIT:

The one thing I am a little surprised by is that there won't be split-screen co-op, so you better have a sibling or friend that'll want to play Dead Space with you

This is bullshit. I don't want to focus on the negative first, and I don't want to bring up the RE5 comparisons, but a good bit of what makes co-op so much fun to me is split screen. Playing with a buddy. I have a brother who I play a lot of co-op games with, several playthroughs of RE5 included, and not being able to play split screen with him is a huge bummer.

Also, buying two Xboxes and two copies of the game is a real bummer. That's nice if you're rich but I ain't - no game is worth it. Split screen doesn't seem like something that you can just patch in because of extreme backlash, either, so I don't think I'll be seeing it. The fact that I have no other friends that are fans of Dead Space also hurts my chances of playing this co-op.

For the positive, I like the rest of what he says. That Carver isn't going to be a Sheva-like AI "partner" is the biggest relief I have out of the whole thing.

#4 Posted by Sackmanjones (4711 posts) -
@NTM: Where does gamespot post these. I know they have the 5 hour show but is there anywhere where they cut it out by game?
#5 Posted by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

I'm just as pessimistic, the co-op stuff was far from what bothered me the most about that demo. But hopefully it'll be good!

#6 Edited by JeanLuc (3587 posts) -

Yes I'm less worried after I saw this but I'm still keeping my guard up. I find the universal ammo is crap and as Jeff said on the podcast, the levels have to be designed with co-op in mind which could affect singleplayer. I still think it was stupid of them to show an action sequence as the first thing ever to the public. It was like how Mass Effect 3 showed a turret sequence at E3 last year. It really wasn't a big deal in the final game but it sure made us think it was.

I'll simply have to wait and see more before I make judgement.

#7 Edited by xyzygy (10008 posts) -

You'd think that these geeks and developers would know how to use a microphone and make it not so awkward when signalling that it doesn't work.

"Well, Steve, I'll just take this and cloak it over me Game of Thrones style, and I don't think your microphone's working you might wanna check that but nice sweater huh!"

On topic, Dead Space is all about feeling alone. That is where the first two games thrived. You are constantly cut off from others and it's what makes things tense - this is counteracting that. Not excited for co-op, but really excited for single player.

#8 Edited by NTM (7411 posts) -

@believer258 said:

My birthday is now April 3, 1905.

Are there any of these age checkers that let us claim we were born in 0001?

EDIT:

The one thing I am a little surprised by is that there won't be split-screen co-op, so you better have a sibling or friend that'll want to play Dead Space with you

This is bullshit. I don't want to focus on the negative first, and I don't want to bring up the RE5 comparisons, but a good bit of what makes co-op so much fun to me is split screen. Playing with a buddy. I have a brother who I play a lot of co-op games with, several playthroughs of RE5 included, and not being able to play split screen with him is a huge bummer.

Also, buying two Xboxes and two copies of the game is a real bummer. That's nice if you're rich but I ain't - no game is worth it. Split screen doesn't seem like something that you can just patch in because of extreme backlash, either, so I don't think I'll be seeing it. The fact that I have no other friends that are fans of Dead Space also hurts my chances of playing this co-op.

For the positive, I like the rest of what he says. That Carver isn't going to be a Sheva-like AI "partner" is the biggest relief I have out of the whole thing.

I fully agree.

#9 Edited by NTM (7411 posts) -

@Cloudenvy: It's probably the whole thing about atmosphere right? If so, I don't think you should be as worried about it.

@JeanLuc: He was talking about that when it came to Mass Effect, it can't be the same for Dead Space 3 because there is no multiplayer in Dead Space. It doesn't make sense.

#10 Posted by TentPole (1858 posts) -

That video does not reassure me at all. If you have to spend half of your presentation explaining why your game isn't really what you are making it look like then you have fucked up.

#11 Posted by believer258 (11949 posts) -

@NTM said:

@believer258 said:

My birthday is now April 3, 1905.

I fully agree.

Your birthday is also on April 3, 1905?

#12 Posted by Rohok (554 posts) -

Wait, what? Universal ammo? Please explain.

#13 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

#14 Posted by TentPole (1858 posts) -

@NTM said:

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

Brilliant rebuttal.

#15 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

@TentPole said:

@NTM said:

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

Brilliant rebuttal.

Wrong. Surrrre.

#16 Posted by jillsandwich (762 posts) -

@TentPole said:

@NTM said:

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

Brilliant rebuttal.

Everything about this is reminding me about Mass Effect 3 last year. All the demos are just dumb action shit with developers swearing the game is more than that.

I hope I'm wrong, I really hope I do.

#17 Posted by wemibelec90 (1700 posts) -

Not really worried about the co-op, especially if it isn't required for the campaign. More worried about EA being pissed at how few copies this franchise sells and changing it to be more action-oriented instead of taking away one of the few "horror" games we have left.

#18 Posted by snowninja845 (43 posts) -
@Rohok said:

Wait, what? Universal ammo? Please explain.

I was not aware either that ammo was universal, I really liked playing through 2 with no plasma cutter ammo and being to cheap to buy it.
#19 Posted by TentPole (1858 posts) -

@NTM said:

@TentPole said:

@NTM said:

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

Brilliant rebuttal.

Wrong. Surrrre.

I am just going to assume you don't have anything intelligent to say.

#20 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

@TentPole said:

@NTM said:

@TentPole said:

@NTM said:

@TentPole: Surrrre. Wrong.

Brilliant rebuttal.

Wrong. Surrrre.

I am just going to assume you don't have anything intelligent to say.

I have nothing to say other than that I disagree with you. In the end, it doesn't really matter, as long as this game is high quality like the first two, I'm not going to complain. I love the first two, and this from the get-go didn't disappoint me surprisingly.

#21 Edited by TentPole (1858 posts) -

@NTM: To be clear the game could still be really good, but nothing they have shown leads me to believe they are crafting a better Dead Space experience. Maybe they are in fact making the experience we all want. In which case they have fucked up in how they have shown the game. Or the game is going to be as awful as it looks and they have fucked up the entire game. The only thing I know is that one way or another they have fucked up.

#22 Posted by blake_brown (117 posts) -

Sigh, people's memories are so short.

Everyone had the exact same gripes when gameplay was first revealed for Dead Space 2... and by most accounts that game turned out pretty fucking awesome.

#23 Posted by TentPole (1858 posts) -

@blake_brown: No they didn't because Dead Space 2 never had co-op, universal ammo, and cover based shootouts with guys with guns.

And in my opinion 2 was already a significant step down from Dead Space 1.

#24 Edited by blake_brown (117 posts) -

@TentPole:

people bitched about the following - more action, less horror and multiplayer. exact same issues. they switched the type of multiplayer this time to something that honestly makes more sense and is just as optional as it was the last time around. the fact that it adds to the story and creates a different experience is a very cool twist, and will add quite a bit of replay value. it is also very likely that it will result in an even longer campaign than that of Dead Space 2 (which was ample to begin with) which is a great thing. i cannot fathom why people care about universal ammo - it seems that most people play Dead Space by choosing one or two guns (most of the time, just one: plasma cutter) and having to mess around with ammo types is an unnecessary nuisance.

#25 Edited by TentPole (1858 posts) -

@blake_brown said:

@TentPole:

people bitched about the following - more action, less horror and multiplayer. exact same issues.

Sure, if you want to be as reductive as fuck. But of course people are going to complain when they take the direction they didn't like about 2 and turn it up to 11 in significantly worse ways.

#26 Posted by Arker101 (1474 posts) -

I'll play Dead Space 3, but it will in no way be scary. Universal Ammo and Co-Op just don't work with survival horror. It's become more of a bro 3rd person shooter which is fine by me, but I think I'd be really disappointed with this game if I went in with the mindset I had for the first two.

#27 Posted by JasonR86 (9715 posts) -

Nope, my qualms aren't calmed at all.

#28 Posted by bybeach (4848 posts) -

Universal ammo doesn't bother me if they have a good basis to explain it. They sort of did in ME And I understand the developing convenience, but I am not sure... I too do not want this as a mainly action game, I was happy to accept it wasn't pure horror/survival. I do like guns but I want more than that. And that was what Dead Space 1 did and Dead Space 2 did enough (admittedly luved DS2). Co-op to me would be a later play through..a what if. Like another poster said, I hope they are not compromising planning it in.

#29 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

One of the worst things about 2 was Isaac suddenly turning into a chatterbox.

and yeah this looks stupid, that demo was bad and hearing it was the campaign with drop-in coop enabled just makes me scratch my head.

#30 Posted by Dad_Is_A_Zombie (1225 posts) -

I'm still not sold on the co-op but damn it looks good! Regardless, it's a Day 1 buy for me.

#31 Edited by Quarters (1721 posts) -

Unbelievably bummed about lack of split screen. I absolutely hate that element of modern gaming. Guess I won't be playing it coop.

#32 Edited by Rohok (554 posts) -

Ammo management is a part of the game. I'm so tired of gamers being okay with developers simplifying and dumbing games down, to the point where they're almost asking for it. Ammo management was necessary, not unnecessary. That's the whole fucking point of a survival horror game. If not, you're just playing Left 4 Dead, and that's not survival horror.

Anyone who thinks otherwise just needs to fucking quit, lol, because you're obviously just an idiot.

#33 Posted by Jimbo (9820 posts) -

Instead of split screen co-op, how about one person controls the movement and one controls the shooting. Or P2 just jumps in as a second gun in his other hand... but you each have to reload for the other person.  Man, I love stupid lopsided co-op.

#34 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

@Quarters: Yeah, and when I hear some journalists talk about how it shouldn't exist I kind of think they sound dumb. What other way would there be to easily play with a friend or sibling by your side than split-screen co-op? I sure as heck don't want to buy two copies of the same game, use another console, and put another TV in the room to do it. Oh well though, although I do think it's dumb they're not putting it in here, it still has little affect on my excitement for the game.

#35 Posted by FateOfNever (1845 posts) -

Universal ammo, cover, dudes with guns.. Yeah, I'm checked out. If I want to play generic military space shooter I have other, better options. The co-op is already uninteresting enough to me (if you tie story to it, it's no longer "optional" it's "mandatory for the full play experience" and I'm not interested in multiplayer like this.)

This is no longer a survival horror and is another casualty to "people like them their gears of wars right? let's just make that game."

The co-op does nothing new, original, unique, or, hell, even interesting as far as I can tell. "Oh it's co-op so here's a door that requires TWO people to open." EXCITING!

I don't want universal ammo. I want to be able to choose which weapons I want to use and then stick to them and have to actually worry about whether or not I have enough ammo to keep using them. I want to worry about survival. Now there will never be any need to worry about ammo ever again. And all weapons will be merged into every other weapon. Because that's "interesting" apparently.

DS3 is taking the route of the RE series and that is a terrible, uninteresting path. For the people that don't care about survival horror, that don't even care about horror, and just want a generic sci-fi 3rd person shooter, good for you, I bet you'll thoroughly enjoy this. That's not what I want and it's not what a lot of other people want either.

#36 Posted by phantomzxro (1578 posts) -

Yeah don't think that video helped much it just seems their doing the same as mass effect 3. Building the game as close to a gear of war/call of duty like experience as they can without completely killing their fan base. Some games can survive this process and still be awesome so only time will tell.

#37 Edited by Quarters (1721 posts) -

@NTM: Ugh, I hate when the GB crew say that. Look, not everyone has the friend group that has enough money to buy all this crap. And personally, I don't know anyone who actually has a PS3, so if I were to get that version(wouldn't be surprised if it has exclusives like DS2 did), I couldn't even do system link. I get that games are getting more powerful and need more resources, but playing coop with strangers online is the worst. Soulless, joyless, and just totally cold. It's no fun. I mean, I'm really looking forward to DS3, as it's one of my favorite series this gen, but I just hate that I can't see the full story now because they couldn't implement split screen. It's just totally constricting.

Psi-Ops. One of the strangest, yet also still fun coop experiences I've ever had. One player on movement, the other on shooting and powers. It was so weird.

#38 Posted by KillyDarko (1888 posts) -

I'm not worried about the co-op itself, I'm worried about the full-on action stuff... that's not what I want from Dead Space. It's as simple as that.

#39 Posted by ShaggE (6479 posts) -

Ow, right in the qualms!

Still not reassured, though. Won't pass judgment yet, but I'm prepared for the worst.

#40 Posted by NTM (7411 posts) -

@KillyDarko: Agreed, I mean, if it's done well, then that's great, but one of the worst parts of Dead Space 2 was near the end where a bunch of guys just kept coming out. Personally, as I have said before, I don't really play it for its horror either though. I just want the great story, great characters, and great setting that were in the first two. Also, I'm happy they're bring back the big bosses like we saw in the first (Hive Mind), but hopefully the encounters won't be all around and they'll be interesting. One of my favorite parts when I had first beat the original Dead Space was leaving the Ishimura and stepping onto Aegis VII. The sound, and the scope of it was just amazing to me. I've beaten the first Dead Space about eight times, and I thought that was a lot 'cause I feel like I played it on and off quite often until the sequel, but I've beaten two about ten times now. I hope the third will make me want to play it that much.

#41 Posted by WarlordPayne (700 posts) -

The co-op isn't what worries me. It's the cover, gunfights with other humans, consolidated weapons, and universal ammo.

I loved that, as Brad said in the Bombcast, different people would play through the game and swear by completely different loadouts. They may manage to balance it out well enough but I'm very worried that they won't, and I also don't like that you're stripped down to just two guns now.

If they do the universal ammo the way that Mass Effect did then it will be bad for the game but not terrible. If they do it the way that Deus Ex: Invisible War did it, then it will be a fucking disaster.

#42 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

Hopefully they can pull this off. I loved that Dead Space 2 had more action as it really worked for the game. It had killer pacing, so I hope they do the same with this game.

#43 Edited by Brodehouse (9975 posts) -

I play most horror games with my roommate watching and talking with me. I think that's also how the Penny Arcade guys played every Resident Evil.

Steve and Kessler played through Condemned together. Was it less scary for them? "GODDAMMIT STEVE STOP JUMPING AT EVERYTHING YOU'RE MAKING ME JUMP!"

@WarlordPayne: I'd like to keep the variety of weapons, but universal ammo sounds good. Futzing about with "oh well I have 17 ripper blades and 25 seeker shots" was the worst part of Dead Space 2. "I can't pick up this plasma cutter ammo because I'm loaded up with flame fuel". Brad is right that the different loadouts are what make that game interesting, but not "oh well this is a close quarters fight but I'm all out of the force gun so now I have to use the fucking javelin at melee range what the fuck". I wouldn't be put out if they just did away with the inventory and said "You can carry X amount of medpacs, you can carry X amount of ammo" and then use money to level it up higher. Bastion was an action RPG that did away with inventory and replaced it with that exact mechanic. The best part of Dead Space is shooting horrible monsters, not micromanaging stock like I'm a night supervisor at Kinko's.

From what the PA Report was asking, it seems it might end up that you can take the guns 'as is' like the plasma cutter has both options... or you can mod it so the alt-fire is replaced by ripper blades, or flamethrower or however you want to customize it. That would work for something like... I don't use the alt-fire on the line gun (the mine layer) so instead I'm going to take the seeker rifle so I have a combination of mid-range spread damage and a long range sniper.

#44 Posted by DeF (4904 posts) -

@Sackmanjones said:

@NTM: Where does gamespot post these. I know they have the 5 hour show but is there anywhere where they cut it out by game?

just check gamespot's E3 site. the videos probably go up a day after they aired live

#45 Edited by Rohok (554 posts) -

Yeah honestly universal ammo has me turned off already. Part of survival horror is having to manage your inventory. People who don't want it are just lazy and idiotic honestly. We already have plenty of games that chop out ammo systems, why does EVERY game need to follow that trend? In real life, the "ammo" for a blow torch wouldn't work for an M16, so why would the ammo for a plasma cutter work with a pulse rifle? Seriously, it's just downright moronic and is there to cater to lazy casual gamers like every other developer out there.

That being said, I'm not surprised Dead Space 3 was taken in this direction, it's EA. They're known for this. If you can wander around the world not worrying about using your weapons strategically and wisely for the various situations because you'll get ammo no matter, for every gun you have, what's the point of even making a survival horror game to begin with? In real life, what's the main thing you need to worry about even if you're a highly trained Johnny Highspeed badass soldier? You need to worry about ammunition. That would be the number one cause of death for soldiers, engineers, and bank tellers in a zombie/necromorph outbreak- Not enough ammunition or means to take down your opponent. Take the risk of running out of ammo for your plasma cutter away and you'll be able to take 4 weapons and fuck around all you want with zero issues.

Honestly it's probably not even worth arguing this because anyone who disagrees and thinks universal ammo is a welcome addition to a survival horror game is just dumb, or probably should be playing other games to blow off stress on.

#46 Posted by RHYMESCHEME23 (64 posts) -

I don't really care about the co-op. The single player is there. That's all I need.

Can't wait for this game. Big Dead Space fan, here.

#47 Posted by Deusoma (3013 posts) -
@believer258 said:

This is bullshit. I don't want to focus on the negative first, and I don't want to bring up the RE5 comparisons, but a good bit of what makes co-op so much fun to me is split screen. Playing with a buddy. I have a brother who I play a lot of co-op games with, several playthroughs of RE5 included, and not being able to play split screen with him is a huge bummer.

Also, buying two Xboxes and two copies of the game is a real bummer. That's nice if you're rich but I ain't - no game is worth it. Split screen doesn't seem like something that you can just patch in because of extreme backlash, either, so I don't think I'll be seeing it. The fact that I have no other friends that are fans of Dead Space also hurts my chances of playing this co-op.

For the positive, I like the rest of what he says. That Carver isn't going to be a Sheva-like AI "partner" is the biggest relief I have out of the whole thing.

Amen to that, brother. I'm still a huge believer in split-screen, and am always mystified when a game does not have it. Come to think of it, I haven't heard whether or not Halo 4 will still have it, after the franchise changed hands. Better start digging...
#48 Posted by EthanielRain (854 posts) -

Visceral earned my trust with the first two; I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until I play it for myself.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.