Log in or sign up to comment
287 Comments
Edited by apoloimagod

Playing this game right now and not liking it much. The space part on the ships is great, but once you hit the planet it starts degenerating fast. I'm right after the big reveal right now, and even so still wondering if I'll finish it...

Posted by noisyturtle

Deadspace has become absolute dreck at this point. It's almost like they are trying to get as far away from survival horror as they possibly can without adding chatterbox npc's, tons of health and ammo, and multiplayer.... oh wait.

Posted by RubberFactory

The audio in this game is so fucked up, and not in a good way. I ended up playing the whole game with everyone speaking garbled gibberish. I couldn't fix it by reloading as Brad seemed to do.

Edited by JEC03

Finished this game last week I thought it was pretty great it's funny it's better then being Aliens then the Aliens game meaning it's not shit.

Posted by CookieEpic

TL;DR version of the review: It was okay, but the story wasn't good

Posted by Arx724

WHAT? THIS GAME GETS 3.41 STARS? IT NEEDS AT LEAST 3.57 STARS. THAT'S BULLSHIT, HOW COULD IT GET A LOWER RATING THAN THAT OTHER GAME WITH 3.56 STARS?

Edited by Microshock

Beat this game today. Fuck, it gets REAL repetitive. I don't remember this much backtracking and walking through the same environment bullshit in Dead Space 2.

You go through the SAME facility 3 times, back and forth.

The optional missions just have you go through some boring facility for some boring extra backstory, and get some chest full of rewards, and then you have to go back thru the same facility.

3/5 is what this game is. It's solid but it's the Assassin's Creed 3 of Dead Space.

Also, anyone noticed how the helmet lit up dark rooms, but then it randomly went away?

Posted by Birdman_LIVE

Sorry to say this review is way off. Having played up to Chapter 15 I'm finding the game quite fun. Yes the love triangle isn't done very well and some of the twists seem arbitrary but the overall story - going to the mystery behind the origin of the Markers is the thrust of the narrative.

There were too many expectations relating to this game. The game should be reviewed not expectations as to what it should be. Even if there were more fresh enemy types, making something you've seen in two previous games is almost impossible. Unless you do a bunch of jump scares which people seem to think are 'cheap' how could it possibly be as scary as DS 1. I think the criticism of the repetitiveness of the side quests is also questionable. The side quest areas at the beginning of the game are just as same-y as the ones on the planet. Believe it or not space ships would probably look pretty same-y no matter where you go. Especially ships much, much smaller than the Ishimura. The locations on the planet would similarly look the same. Building anything on an ice planet like that would most-likely involve prefabricated facilities. What makes the games narrative much more engaging than your review suggests is how all the text and audio logs slowly developed what the Hell happened here 200 years ago.

I would agree that they lean too heavy on pumping up the numbers of enemy AI to make fights thrilling and therefore making the strategic dismemberment less important (a shotgun does a nice job blowing off the necessary limbs in one shot). Personally, can't wait to finish this game, and I'm going re-play it the moment the credits end.

Posted by jmic75

I don't want to be that guy...but guess I'm going to: Brad needs to go back and play the first 2 Dead Spaces because he seems to be judging Dead Space 3 in comparison to two rose tinted version of those games.

*light mechanical spoilers follow*

I finished playing through Dead Space 3 yesterday in single player and it is only slightly less impressive than 2 due to losing some of its novelty and is on par with Dead Space 1.

I have to agree with Brad that the opening (not the prologue) seemed to be a bit rushed, it should have eased players into the world and the plot a bit better . I also agree that the optional side missions do tend to reuse assets a bit too much (though there is story justification for why the areas look similar) that said through they are visually similar the devs did a good job of making the areas distinct through mechanical differences (one area is zero grav etc) as well as isolated sub plots that run through each mission.

"the visual design is drab" It's really not there are many more settings than the handful that are mentioned by Brad through they can't be named due to being spoilerific, the game also has some great looking vistas and lightening. Clearly the run down facilities you run through for part of the game are going to be drab, that's kind of the point.

"There aren't a lot of new enemies, and even many of the series' old enemies are barely represented"

All of the creature types from dead space 2 return, as well as 1 from Dead Space 1. On top of this human enemies are newly added and at least 4 new necromorph designs. Some older necromorphs (about 4) had their appearance altered to make sense in the new environments.

Honestly I didn't have any of the issues with the plot that Brad did, the plot was no more ridiculous than that of DS2, nor was carver's moving around any more implausible than the two other major characters in DS2. The plot kept me hooked and engaged throughout the 10-11 hour campaign which is an accomplishment. Some of the character were a bit uneven compared to the others, but the facial expressions of characters were of particular note.

Ultimately Dead Space 3 is the same great action and atmosphere with the same quality as the last 2, with added co-op, side missions and weapon crafting. It has a variety of options of game modes to cater to what you want, you just have to make sure you select the ones that deliver the experience you want. For Dead Space fans I'd start out on at least Hard, because as in DS2 normal has become easy, with far too many resources given out. 8.5/10

Posted by hellos

@MonstrousVermin said:

I am still hyped to buy this game (albeit at a lesser price in a few months) . After the highs in Dead Space 2, I was expecting a bit of a let-down. An improvement over Dead Space 2 seemed unlikely once various videos of Isaac shooting humans were released.

You only fight other people in about 3 different scenarios throughout the game. Seriously, human opponents are hardly a presence throughout the vast majority of the title and it's more or less a nuisance you can let the Necromorphs even later chow down on them for you.

@SpartanHoplite said:

DS1 was the only great one, should had ended it there, the rest is just sad milking with poor sequels.

The end of the game consists of Isaac being stuck on a small shuttle - the end game logs indicated a lot more was happening in said universe outside Ishimura mining planets.

Dead Space 3 was a hell of a lot more like Dead Space than Dead Space 2 was to boot. Back to remote area, filled with alien space zombies throughout tight halls and slaughter rooms.

Posted by Ceno

I guess I got my copy of Dead Space 3 from the same factory that Brad got his copy of Mass Effect 3 from, because I thought this was an utterly fantastic end to the trilogy. Just beat the game on hard. Yes, it was less scary and far more action-oriented than the other two games, but considering the epic scope of the story, I felt it was appropriate. I just didn't experience any tedium, while I can understand how the game may not appeal to all people. I feel Brad underrated the game, but ultimately it doesn't make much difference. Fantastic game, can't wait to go through it again.

Posted by MonstrousVermin

I am still hyped to buy this game (albeit at a lesser price in a few months) . After the highs in Dead Space 2, I was expecting a bit of a let-down. An improvement over Dead Space 2 seemed unlikely once various videos of Isaac shooting humans were released.

Posted by Supertom11

DS1 was original and something we've never really experienced before. I feel like DS3 is getting the same amount of negatively DS2 received and it all spawns from the idea that it's "not Dead Space 1".

Sequels to any horror media is always perceived as "not as scary and/or good" for the same reason replaying Dead Space 1 wouldn't be as scary. How much of those feelings come from familiarity and knowledge of the primary threat? I've only played a few hours and while intense at times, DS3 is not as scary but that's primarily because I'm aware of every vent, I immediately stomp every dead body I see, I know how to cripple most enemies and I can tell when the developer is setting up a trap. That doesn't make the game bad. That just makes it familiar.

So for the same reason Issac is less freaked (after all the crap he's been though), I feel like this is the natural progression for the series and the "feel" or scariness of the game is purely gamer perspective.

Posted by cynicalmatt

I couldn't agree more with this review. It sums up every gripe I had with the game. After Dead Space 2, there was almost nowhere to go but down, but this game fell HARD in my opinion. I made it to chapter 10, and I've just completely lost interest. It doesn't help that the series, much as I've enjoyed it, never scared me too much. It was too reliant on monster closets, and it's just reached the point where I say to myself, "OK, I completed that objective, now let me sit and wait for the necromorphs to burst out of the vents..." The plots were at least interesting in the first two, but I honestly can't tell you what the hell I'm doing in 3. It's not that it's complex; I just don't CARE.

Posted by TadThuggish

@JasonLeeson said:

Brad was a overly harsh here - The game deserves 4 stars. His decision was most likely subconsciously influenced by the backlash he received from DmC's 5 star review. A backlash, I might add, I wholeheartedly opposed.

You might posit 'Brad does not care about the reaction of the unwashed masses. He is unaffected by it in any way.' To which I would reply 'Fuck you' and then go on to point out that he actually went so far as to justify himself during the Bombcast. Which, up to that point, was completely uncharacteristic.

You are a crazy person.

Posted by NTM

@Pinmonkey: If you don't mind me being kind of lazy, and not ready to be annoyed to hear them talk about it, what was it that they said that was wrong?

Edited by NTM

I just beat the game, and I think it really deserves at least a four. Three is a bit low for it. I mean, once I beat it, I was conflicted (and still am), 'cause I didn't know whether I liked it or disliked it; it may be in the middle of that. The differences between this and the first two are so drastic, other than the camera view; controls, and the fact that you're fighting necromorphs. The game is long, and I really don't feel like jumping right back in immediately like the last two.

The thing is, I don't really love when they make aspects of the stories in the final chapter of a trilogy so large that it makes everything else that happened before seem so insignificant, and that's kind of what it did here in my opinion, and in a few respects, the story was convoluted, though only merely. I can't really say how I feel exactly on it. I certainly wasn't disappointed in the game, but I'm also not sure how much I really liked it, though I do know I liked it.

It's very weird. I am wondering though, who here that played the game on Impossible can tell me what it's like? With the amount of enemies you fight in the game it seems like it can be pretty challenging, though of course when I play on easier difficulties I don't really think as much about the battle as I do when I'm on a hard. It was especially prevalent in the interiors where things weren't as open; enemies just crowding up around you.

I don't really see how someone will make it through on the hardest unless you're able to use a memory stick to just bypass that, then again, I don't know how Hardcore is set up.

Posted by Krakn3Dfx

It's too bad he didn't even play the co-op and factor it into the review. It's actually a lot of fun with a friend, and takes away the tedium in areas where they threw co-op friendly numbers of enemies at you at once.

This game from a story perspective is probably the weakest of the series, but man, 3/5 is a harsh pill to take when I see that he didn't even bother testing out half of the game basically.

Posted by Rekt_Hed

God dammit I had a gut feeling this was gonna be the case.

Posted by Zaxex

It's funny - I had next to no interest in DmC before seeing Brad's 5 star review. It at least told me that this was something worth playing, which wasn't a given, despite my interest in the series and Ninja Theory's prior work. I played it pretty much solely based on his review and thought it was amazing. I owe him for that.

Dead Space 3 is a different beast, it's from the same developer as the rest of the established (and critically-acclaimed) series, but has seen its share of controversy; from co-op and micro-transactions, to quick-time events and more of an action focus. I loved the first two Dead Space games, different though they were. This one feels like Dead Space 2 - and not nearly the unsure premise I thought it would be. I bought it with reservations, none I should have had - having played it now.

For me, this is another great Dead Space game, with no caveats or asterisks. I played it solo and didn't so much as look at the micro-transactions; it felt pretty Dead Spacey. Basically, I thoroughly enjoyed this game and I'd recommend anyone with any interest try it for themselves. I pretty much hated the demo and still loved the game. I'm just glad I played it before seeing any reviews or post-release coverage, that would've soured the experience a little or possibly put me off playing it.

Maybe I should finally play Mass Effect 3...

Posted by seannao

So I like the game over all, but there were some cutscene ragdoll physics.

Also all the cutscenes felt like Carver was photobombing.

Posted by Ravenlight

Hey guys, maybe if we start a petition, they'll change the ending for us!

Edited by Pinmonkey

Brad and Patrick talking about this game and the past two in the series on this weeks Bombcast leads me to believe they secretly never actually played any of the Dead Space games and this is all an elaborate ruse. Like, none of the stuff they say is accurate about the games, especially the differences between the first two. Which is fine, it's just irritating when they do that then try to compare them to this game.

Edited by Pinmonkey

@InfamousBIG said:

@iAmJohn said:

@JasonLeeson said:

Brad was a overly harsh here - The game deserves 4 stars. His decision was most likely subconsciously influenced by the backlash he received from DmC's 5 star review. A backlash, I might add, I wholeheartedly opposed.

You might posit 'Brad does not care about the reaction of the unwashed masses. He is unaffected by it in any way.' To which I would reply 'Fuck you' and then go on to point out that he actually went so far as to justify himself during the Bombcast. Which, up to that point, was completely uncharacteristic.

What if I were to instead posit that you're reading way too much into things and that maybe, just maybe, Brad thinks that the game deserves 3 stars cuz it's fine but it ain't all that?

Would you posit he's posit-ive that it's worth 3 stars?!

Huh?

...nobody?

http://bleedingbrotherlylove.com/.a/6a017d3bd5738f970c017d405b29f6970c-800wi

Edited by Bourbon_Warrior

@Brad I can't really find anything in your review of the co-op system's. Just wondering how many missions you played in co-op? Can you still craft and go through the menus in co-op without the other player pausing? How do the more set piece moments like in the previous Dead Space games handle the co-op, like when you were grabbed by the vent tentacle in DS1? And did you play with a friend or just a random person online?

Edited by YukoAsho

I respect, but disagree with, this here review. I'm actually surprised the game was different at all, considering "the same but more" would have probably been easier. The game's grungy look is more in line with the original game than the schizophrenic environments of 2, and really, there's resources every friggin' where in normal mode, especially when you have more than one bot. I've not played a ton of the co-op, but the game feels distinct enough between both modes. You can buy resources and the like as DLC, but on normal, you really don't have to, unless you're blessed with more money than sense.

Really, the only complaint I have is the lack of a split-screen option for offline co-op. That and I've twice had to go checkpoint restart when the game forgot to load a door.

Posted by InfamousBIG

@iAmJohn said:

@JasonLeeson said:

Brad was a overly harsh here - The game deserves 4 stars. His decision was most likely subconsciously influenced by the backlash he received from DmC's 5 star review. A backlash, I might add, I wholeheartedly opposed.

You might posit 'Brad does not care about the reaction of the unwashed masses. He is unaffected by it in any way.' To which I would reply 'Fuck you' and then go on to point out that he actually went so far as to justify himself during the Bombcast. Which, up to that point, was completely uncharacteristic.

What if I were to instead posit that you're reading way too much into things and that maybe, just maybe, Brad thinks that the game deserves 3 stars cuz it's fine but it ain't all that?

Would you posit he's posit-ive that it's worth 3 stars?!

Huh?

...nobody?

Posted by SpartanHoplite

DS1 was the only great one, should had ended it there, the rest is just sad milking with poor sequels.

Posted by iAmJohn

@JasonLeeson said:

Brad was a overly harsh here - The game deserves 4 stars. His decision was most likely subconsciously influenced by the backlash he received from DmC's 5 star review. A backlash, I might add, I wholeheartedly opposed.

You might posit 'Brad does not care about the reaction of the unwashed masses. He is unaffected by it in any way.' To which I would reply 'Fuck you' and then go on to point out that he actually went so far as to justify himself during the Bombcast. Which, up to that point, was completely uncharacteristic.

What if I were to instead posit that you're reading way too much into things and that maybe, just maybe, Brad thinks that the game deserves 3 stars cuz it's fine but it ain't all that?

Posted by JasonLeeson

Brad was a overly harsh here - The game deserves 4 stars. His decision was most likely subconsciously influenced by the backlash he received from DmC's 5 star review. A backlash, I might add, I wholeheartedly opposed.

You might posit 'Brad does not care about the reaction of the unwashed masses. He is unaffected by it in any way.' To which I would reply 'Fuck you' and then go on to point out that he actually went so far as to justify himself during the Bombcast. Which, up to that point, was completely uncharacteristic.

Posted by Pie

@RAMBO604 said:

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.

The co-op stuff really bothers me in other games. It just takes you out of the game and reminds you that you are not getting the full experience that the devs intended

Edited by hellos

@Missacre said:

@iAmJohn said:

@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?

Well, I played this game yesterday at my cousin's house. It blows, trust me. Even he was disappointed by it.

Can't, sorry. I've been playing this on impossible since 1 in the morning till 9 - thus far getting a real kick out of it. Not to mention even the negative reviews of the title are sporting the tags; can't stop playing or fun game. Being a veteran of the franchise its hard to argue if much has changed from the previous titles - except a slight tone down of the horror (less in your face, but prevalent). Either way this one has had me nervous with each corner, despite having a good guess where necros will be.

Posted by 2kings

@AstroCow said:

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.

I hear you. This game is such a let down. Nearly all the encounters with the enemy feel like there was supposed to be 2 people shooting and to account for this they drop sooo many health packs. Also this game feels like a console port all the way. Having played the demo on the xbox and then buying it for pc there is almost no distinguishable difference between the 2.

Anyone notice how much they sexed up Elle? They gave her a noticeably larger cup size and a shirt to accentuate it. This game feels like it was developed by suits in an investors meeting, totally padded out and homogenized for the 12 and 13 year olds with a paper route.

Posted by Missacre

@iAmJohn said:

@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?

Well, I played this game yesterday at my cousin's house. It blows, trust me. Even he was disappointed by it.

Edited by darkest4

God damnit, why does every interesting series have to be turned into another "action packed!" shooter full of explosions, with story and everything else as an afterthought, and focused on DLC or even pay to win these days. We don't want every game to be Gears of War, please stop catering only to xbox kiddies, developers. All the horror and tension and soul got slowly stripped from Res Evil games and now the same for Dead Space, sad.

Posted by HerbieBug

@OllyOxenFree said:

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.

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 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 RazielCuts

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

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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.