Log in or sign up to comment
287 Comments
Posted by WolfHazard

Man I was really hoping for a 5 Star trilogy :/ majorly disappointed.

Posted by Gordo789

This is going to sound crazy, but the reason I quit deadspace starting with 2 is becasue I think they changed the aiming reticule. Allow me to explain. I distinctly remember the aiming reticule in the first game being a thing that was actually projected from your weapon into the environment, rather than just painted in a fixed position on the screen. When I played part 2, the first thing I noticed was that the reticule seemed wrong because it was just painted onto the screen. Am I nuts, or did this actually change between the first two games? I'd check, but don't have a copy of the first game anymore. Anyway, how's the reticule in this one?

Posted by Gordo789

problem solved with youtube. FUCK DEADSPACE.

Posted by revel

Wow. I'm actually going to skip this. What started as a debate if my friend and I should play co-op (like RE5, which worked out) or play SP... turned into me saying "we should play co-op" which eventually turned into me saying "i think I'm only down for co-op" which turned into my friend convincing me that he really doesn't want to taint the games with this third one.... So at best we are going to wait and see and may be play it later this year when we have more time or at worst this game just gets skipped all together and I can remember how awesome Dead Space 1 and 2 was.

Posted by Legion_

@evanbower said:

@Dezztroy said:

@AMyggen said:

@jaks said:

Brad you seemed to like it more in the Quick Look.

I am just starting Dead Space 2 now so it will be awhile before I get to this. :O

To me, a 3/5 seems perfectly in line with his comments in the Quick Look: A pretty decent game, but not even close to the two previous Dead Space titles.

That's the thing though, 3 does pretty much everything better than 1 and 2. Except for the whole fighting humans part, but you don't do that very often.

Also, Brad probably should've played some co-op before reviewing it. It adds a fair bit to the game and its story.

Edit: I feel like Brad gave the Tau Volantis sidequests too little credit as well. I really enjoyed learning how the
feeders came to be and what happened to the SCAF soldiers. That poor guy in the supply depot, getting tricked by his sergeant to be eaten by his squadmates.

I'm almost positive he did play co-op, since on I Love Mondays last night they mentioned he was going home to do just that.

He did. He mentioned he would do it during the Quick Look.

Edited by Cybexx

I love the first two games but I think I'll wait for this one to drop in price. A general lack of polish seems to be a re-occurring theme with EA lately, outside of SimCity which is one of the most polished games I've ever played and it still isn't out for a month.

And I'm already playing Fire Emblem: Awakening, which is amazing, and heavily considering buying Sly Cooper 4.

Posted by steevl

@Gordo789 said:

This is going to sound crazy, but the reason I quit deadspace starting with 2 is becasue I think they changed the aiming reticule. Allow me to explain. I distinctly remember the aiming reticule in the first game being a thing that was actually projected from your weapon into the environment, rather than just painted in a fixed position on the screen. When I played part 2, the first thing I noticed was that the reticule seemed wrong because it was just painted onto the screen. Am I nuts, or did this actually change between the first two games? I'd check, but don't have a copy of the first game anymore. Anyway, how's the reticule in this one?

You're not nuts. They did change it.

HOWEVER! You can change it back to the classic style of aiming in the menus in both DS2 and 3. I did that immediately.

Posted by McShank

Me and a buddy pre-ordered this and are playing co-op. So far everything is fun. No scary moments anymore except for the occasional Regenarator monster that happens to have buddies. The 2 things we have found we are not o so happy / sad about is its not as scary. Co-op will make it more action & shooter so I cant say how suspensful it will be on single. the second thing is the way they did weapon management. I dont like how we can upgrade weapons the way they have it now. i liked the nodes 100% better. otherwise the game is worth the money so far and I dont regret the 60$ I spent.

Posted by Gordo789

@steevl said:

@Gordo789 said:

This is going to sound crazy, but the reason I quit deadspace starting with 2 is becasue I think they changed the aiming reticule. Allow me to explain. I distinctly remember the aiming reticule in the first game being a thing that was actually projected from your weapon into the environment, rather than just painted in a fixed position on the screen. When I played part 2, the first thing I noticed was that the reticule seemed wrong because it was just painted onto the screen. Am I nuts, or did this actually change between the first two games? I'd check, but don't have a copy of the first game anymore. Anyway, how's the reticule in this one?

You're not nuts. They did change it.

HOWEVER! You can change it back to the classic style of aiming in the menus in both DS2 and 3. I did that immediately.

Oh dang, I never even thought to look. Thank you sir! You're a gentleman and a scholar. I can't even begin to say how much that wrecked the immersion for me in Dead Space 2. This is good news indeed.

Posted by NTM

@Gordo789 said:

@steevl said:

@Gordo789 said:

This is going to sound crazy, but the reason I quit deadspace starting with 2 is becasue I think they changed the aiming reticule. Allow me to explain. I distinctly remember the aiming reticule in the first game being a thing that was actually projected from your weapon into the environment, rather than just painted in a fixed position on the screen. When I played part 2, the first thing I noticed was that the reticule seemed wrong because it was just painted onto the screen. Am I nuts, or did this actually change between the first two games? I'd check, but don't have a copy of the first game anymore. Anyway, how's the reticule in this one?

You're not nuts. They did change it.

HOWEVER! You can change it back to the classic style of aiming in the menus in both DS2 and 3. I did that immediately.

Oh dang, I never even thought to look. Thank you sir! You're a gentleman and a scholar. I can't even begin to say how much that wrecked the immersion for me in Dead Space 2. This is good news indeed.

You messed up... That's a really big mistake when it could have easily been fixed by simply going into the options menu, ha ha. That's kind of depressing actually :P.

Posted by NTM

@WolfHazard: Just because he did give it a five star, doesn't mean if you were to play it and review it, you wouldn't give it a five star. There are those that gave this game in the low to very high 90's. On Game Informer, the reviewer there had a lot of optimism playing the game, and it was his highest rated game ever on the site, or in the magazine. It's different for different people, you know that. I understand why you would be disappointed though.

Posted by dr_mantas

Did this get EA'd? I guess you can't blame them, if the last few games didn't sell that well.

Posted by Gordo789

@NTM: haha, yeah. I mean, I didn't even think to look in the menus for that. I figured they decided to just wreck the game forever. It is EA after all, haha. I'm going to go back to Dead Space 2 now and play it proper.

Posted by Lord_Punch

@JTMosh said:

I'm installing this right now, and after loving the demo I can't wait to dive in despite the mixed reviews.

I'm just going to say one thing...Dead Space was NEVER EVER a "survival horror" game.

http://www.ea.com/dead-space

Posted by steevl

@Gordo789 said:

@NTM: haha, yeah. I mean, I didn't even think to look in the menus for that. I figured they decided to just wreck the game forever. It is EA after all, haha. I'm going to go back to Dead Space 2 now and play it proper.

You are making the right choice. When I first played DS2, I noticed the aiming seemed different and didn't realize exactly how it was different until someone mentioned it in one of the podcasts I was listening to at the time. That aiming style actually seemed to make it much easier too, but it felt much cooler when I switched the aim mode back to DS1's style.

Posted by fuzzypumpkin

@Arthol: Isn't annualizing a game when you make one every year? Because that isn't what happened here.

Posted by Hunter5024

I didn't even realize this was supposed to be like the conclusion to a trilogy. I thought it was just the third Dead Space game.

Posted by PillClinton

Nice, EA ruined a really solid franchise within one trilogy.

Edited by AstroCow

Sunk 5 hours into this game (playing on PC) tonight. I'm disheartened at what Dead Space has become. I can't see myself bothering to finish this title. What a disappointment.

Posted by Rox360
@tourgen said:

@Sooty said:

@MooseyMcMan said:

That's too bad! I'm going to wait a bit until it's on sale, and then pick it up.

I'm gonna buy it in a Steam sale.

And by that I mean in an Origin sale.

And by that I mean never.

yup. me too.

The EA micro transactions in-game are unfortunate. Kind of like saying to me, "hey, never buy our game. We busted weapon balance and crafting to support a business model. And added some cool down timers to artificially prop up item transactions."

This scares the hell out of me. I mean, look at it; Dead Space 3 is basically borrowing elements from FarmVille. Are we letting them get away with this? Is this where mainstream gaming is headed??
Posted by TheSouthernDandy

@Yummylee said:

@mellotronrules said:

comparison shot in case you're interested:

Huh, he actually looks much older in Dead Space 3, but that could also be because of the bits of snow in his beard and the overall bump in detail. His head shape is still completely different, though, and he also somehow miraculously managed to start growing his hair again. Dead Space 1 Isaac looks like he's about to start balding :P

Still, a clear badassiferacation was put into effect.

I like how he looks across the games. They badassed him up a little but he still looks like an average dude, just a little angrier. If i'd had to put up with as much shit as he did I'd be pretty pissed off too. There's something off about the first model...he almost looks like he could be in Fallout 3.

Posted by Yummylee

@TheSouthernDandy said:

@Yummylee said:

@mellotronrules said:

comparison shot in case you're interested:

Huh, he actually looks much older in Dead Space 3, but that could also be because of the bits of snow in his beard and the overall bump in detail. His head shape is still completely different, though, and he also somehow miraculously managed to start growing his hair again. Dead Space 1 Isaac looks like he's about to start balding :P

Still, a clear badassiferacation was put into effect.

I like how he looks across the games. They badassed him up a little but he still looks like an average dude, just a little angrier. If i'd had to put up with as much shit as he did I'd be pretty pissed off too.

But would you, though? I mean I can only speak for myself, but if it were me, I'd say they got the whole silent protagonist/talking protagonist setup the wrong way around. In the first game he should have been completely petrified, but still had a voice and would still talk to the other characters. Then after surviving that mess, in Dead Space 2 he's so completely warped from it all as a human being that he simply didn't want to talk anymore.

Posted by BawlZINmotion

That really sucks. I was hoping Dead Space would be Electronic Arts' 3rd game, behind Battlefield and Mass Effect to tent-pole their franchise rotation.

Posted by Patman99

You know, it's kinda too bad the way sequels (or whatever) are handled at EA. Granted, EA did not develop this game but I feel like most of the big EA games that have come out in the past few years have really fell flat. Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect 3, and now Dead Space 3 were all reviewed relatively (important qualifier) negatively compared to the original entry in the series. While you could chop this down to sequels being harder to develop, especially after a beloved first or second game, I would say that it comes down to the EA machine. The general structure of their games are almost all the same. Their sports games, Mass Effect 3, Dead Space 3, and The Old Republic all have their silly micro transaction hooks. Are they avoidable? Absolutely. But I would argue that the fact that a developer has to change the structure of their game in order to fit the micro transaction model really detracts from the experience. By structure, I mean that they have to incorporate the transactions some how. In Madden, NHL, and Fifa, it's purchasing stupid card packs for their Ultimate Team game mode and Mass Effect had the pointless mystery boxes you could buy. Essentially the game has to incentivize the player to actually drop a dollar or two on the purchase. As a result, we are given an RNG system that is akin to putting money into a slot machine. In the end, it just makes the game feel extremely grindy if you do not want to use real money and a scam if you do. Lose-lose. The whole "wait 10 minutes for ration seals" is the same thing. Grindy or a scam and it's up to the player to choose. Unfortunately, both choices have the same, depressing ending. This sort of stuff doesn't ruin a game but it does not make it as good as it could be.

Posted by m2cks

@dr_mantas said:

Did this get EA'd? I guess you can't blame them, if the last few games didn't sell that well.

Is this an accepted verb now? "To be EA'd"? If so, then that is the most depressing thing I've heard in a while.

Posted by Christoffer

It's times like these I'm glad Dead Space 1 didn't hook me at all. Saved me some money, time and disappointment.

Posted by Sonne

I'm about as big of a Dead Space purist/fanboy as you can get, and I just spent 2.5 playing through and I'm having a good time. Yes it is different from what I'm used to, but I can take it for what it is. I like how everyone on here sees a 3/5 and automatically says "OMG THIS GAME IS SHITE" without even playing for a minute.

It's fun, that's what games are for.

Plus nothing can be worse for the series than Dead Space: Ignition was...OR those movies...

Posted by Ryanmgraef

I like cheesy horror ,also the crafting system bothers me.

Posted by Mumrik

@jaks said:

Brad you seemed to like it more in the Quick Look.

I am just starting Dead Space 2 now so it will be awhile before I get to this. :O

I got a lot of disgust and disappointment from Brad in that QL. He seemed really down on the game.

Brad is usually mister positive when it comes to review scores. It has to be unusual to see him score below his peers like this.

Posted by Kingyo

@Carousel: AM I RIGHT?!?! HUH HUH?!

Posted by MachoFantastico

Dead Space 2 didn't do much for me so I'll probably skip this one.

Edited by geirr

@m2cks said:

@dr_mantas said:

Did this get EA'd? I guess you can't blame them, if the last few games didn't sell that well.

Is this an accepted verb now? "To be EA'd"? If so, then that is the most depressing thing I've heard in a while.

I accepted and supported it around the Dragon Age 2 era; and yes it is very sad.

Posted by Winternet

@Yummylee said:

@TheSouthernDandy said:

@Yummylee said:

@mellotronrules said:

comparison shot in case you're interested:

Huh, he actually looks much older in Dead Space 3, but that could also be because of the bits of snow in his beard and the overall bump in detail. His head shape is still completely different, though, and he also somehow miraculously managed to start growing his hair again. Dead Space 1 Isaac looks like he's about to start balding :P

Still, a clear badassiferacation was put into effect.

I like how he looks across the games. They badassed him up a little but he still looks like an average dude, just a little angrier. If i'd had to put up with as much shit as he did I'd be pretty pissed off too.

But would you, though? I mean I can only speak for myself, but if it were me, I'd say they got the whole silent protagonist/talking protagonist setup the wrong way around. In the first game he should have been completely petrified, but still had a voice and would still talk to the other characters. Then after surviving that mess, in Dead Space 2 he's so completely warped from it all as a human being that he simply didn't want to talk anymore.

The last one seems like that dude in Homeland. The main guy, the "I'm a terrorist, but I'm not, but I am, but I'm not" guy.

Posted by VintAge68

Sounds like Brad's been playing another Dead Space 3 than the Dead Space 3 I know...

Posted by mmtimmytime

I wish this review discussed the experience of playing this in co-op as well, since it is the selling point. I'd like to find out whether this would be a good game to play with my brother.

Posted by AkihikoSenpai

Loved the first two, 3 does not look as good, but hey, might be fine to play with my girlfriend.

Oh wait, there's no fucking split-screen!

Ruined

Posted by pornstorestiffi

First Dead Space was really awesome, second was okay. But i don´t see why i should play the third one.

Posted by SomeJerk

Brad gave this game time and the right treatment so I am not surprised to see him giving it a 100% reasonable, understandable review.
 
I just wonder what those 90-100/100 reviewers around the worldwere up to because it's hard to tell; One sounded like the classic "play a ltitle, watch videos, read interviews and previews, bullshit words and a score together" review.

Posted by iTWAN

I started playing this before reading the review and I have to say that I am really enjoying the game. I understand about shooting people at the beginning but I am totally having a blast!

Posted by Red_Army_1999

@familyphotoshoot said:

When will EA learn?

You cannot make a product that will please everyone. If you strive to consistently make geese that lay golden eggs you will fail. Not only this, but you destroy your existing fanbase in the process. It is an endless, destructive cycle that EA perpetuates in the name of greed.

This

Posted by Swoxx
Dead Space 3 mixes some solid new ideas in with its stock horror-action tropes, but the overall quality of the production falls short of the series' standards.

So what you're saying is that it's a "mixed bag" ?

hurr hurr

Posted by ShadowMoses900

From what I saw, the game looks a lot better than average. But reviews are just opinions and everyone has a different one.

Posted by MoonwalkSA

I could never find much to like about the first two Dead Space games (the player was way too powerful for anything in them to be scary, and they weren't particularly fun shooters either), and it doesn't sound like this one does anything new or interesting.

It's a shame, but I guess you can't really expect much better from a series EA has manufactured and marketed to be as generic and universally-appealing as possible.

Posted by phrosnite

Never really liked the Dead Space games so I guess I'll buy this during a Steam Christmas Sale for 7.5 euro. Let's hope that the franchise is dead.

Posted by skrutop

Brad's review matches up with my expectations of Dead Space 3. It's a real shame, too, because I loved the first two games. It sounds like a decent enough action game, but I can find dozens of those on the shelf already. I want Dead Space games to creep me out and scare me. My favorite moments of Dead Space 2 was my self-induced sense of dread when first walking through the corpse of the Ishimura, yet nothing happening the entire time, making me even more anxious. With a buddy by my side, I'd have just ran right through that to go kill some stuff. Oh well.

Posted by Kyoshi9

Brad, I assume you only played through one time for the previous games? Because the enemies have always been predictable. That body will come back to life when you walk by, those enemies will always be around that one corner, and they will always swarm you in that one room. I don't know what you expected...

And for the scavenger bots, I don't know when but I had two by early chapter6/7 and the fun of those is finding that one spot that is resource filled. Mostly it would lead you into an ambush of enemies which would catch you off guard because you didn't have your weapons out. And the microtransactions, for the several hours I've played and crafted I have yet to be prompted to pay for materials with real money. It tells you if you don't have enough of the materials you need to make something, why would you try to make it without them just to get prompted to pay with real money? Microtransactions need to be weeded out, they are stupid and have no reason in a game, period.

And, yes you can tell a game was built for co-op. It would have been easier if the two panels on some devices had been switched to a central panel only in single player. That is just a small issue, in my opinion. But the mechanics for all the "mini-games/puzzles" change when there are two people playing which adds to the experience. Obviously what is becoming painfully obvious lately, is that an environment in a game MUST be designed for the player. Each room must be different or only toward a certain player!

All in all Dead Space 3 is a Dead Space game. Dead Space 2 was frowned upon for having action elements, it was unlikely that people would like that even more action was slammed into it the third game. I've been enjoying the ride Dead Space has been, even through the flaws it has. The AI couldn't seem to tell which floor my friend and I were on in one room, so would spawn on the catwalk above or below us and jump in and out of the same vent. The weapon crafting can be fun and satisfying, and the co-op isn't that bad. The spacewalking segments were possibly the best parts of the game so far. But as was said there is a mode for Dead Space purists if you want to go at it that way, single player and original weapons. All-in-all this is a game you would need to experience hands on yourself before complaining about its misdeeds.

Decent review Brad, just too many shitty comments without actually playing or trying the game to justify them.

Posted by RazielCuts

Brad '5 Star' Shoemaker strikes agai- ..oh.

Posted by Snakepond

C'mon Brad. I know it's not DS1 or 2, but a 3/5 star. I just started it last night and it seems fun and those religious fuckers are nuts.

Posted by iAmJohn

@Missacre said:

Well surprise, surprise. The game blows. Who didn't see THAT one coming, given EA's current record of shitty games?

Three stars is hardly equivalent to saying the game blows, bro. But that said:

@Winternet said:

Thank god it's not the "I'm pretty disappointed with this game, but hey 4 stars" review.

This times a goddamned million. Jeff does it all the time and it drives me nuts. Listening to him rag on ME3 and Crysis 2 as much as he did during the 2012 GotYcasts was mind-boggling. It's not like I have any love for either game, but if the most response you can muster for a game after the fact is a half-hearted shrug and saying "yeah it's okay I guess," then why in god's name are you giving it a great score?

Posted by RAMBO604

I just don't understand Brad's comments on it being obvious it's supposed to be co-op while playing solo. Aside from there being two of something in an environment occasionally the game hides the fact its co-op extremely well. In terms of narrative you literally cannot tell.

Also the massive discussion on DLC, it took me 4 hours of playtime to even notice the icon in the menus for microtransactions. And even then was because I was looking for it after the Bombcast.

None of my gripes even line up at all with Brad's on any level. Its not as good as DS2 but not at all for the same reasons Brad brings up.