Dead Space 3 Launch Trailer

Nice.

The ingame footage is so impressive to the devs themselves, that they think that we will be under the impression it is prerendered CGI.

PS: I love how he braces himself against the cold with his arm despite the suit.
 
I played about 5 hours of Dead Space 2 and yes it was on easy and although there was some scary parts I ended up selling it because I lost interest.

From a story perspective is this series the best survival horror story? Like better than the REs and Silent Hills?
 
I was until the developer said that they were trying to get the casual mobile gamer interested in the game by offering micro transactions. Plus it looks like it's going the way of Resident Evil. Not scary all action. :(
 
bpmurrGT said:
I was until the developer said that they were trying to get the casual mobile gamer interested in the game by offering micro transactions. Plus it looks like it's going the way of Resident Evil. Not scary all action. :(
Click to expand...

This is how I feel about it. Although Resident Evil 4 was a lot of fun, I didn't really feel the same way about this game.
 
roaf85 said:
I played about 5 hours of Dead Space 2 and yes it was on easy and although there was some scary parts I ended up selling it because I lost interest.

From a story perspective is this series the best survival horror story? Like better than the REs and Silent Hills?
Click to expand...

For story I don't know. Can you really say that RE's story is good? Dead Space definitely has a better story than RE, but not better than the best Silent Hill games.

Not really a lot of Survival Horror games have a truly great story. Although bear in mind that I'm not counting PC indie games, since I have not played the indie survival horror games myself.
 
bpmurrGT said:
I was until the developer said that they were trying to get the casual mobile gamer interested in the game by offering micro transactions. Plus it looks like it's going the way of Resident Evil. Not scary all action. :(
Click to expand...

None of the RE games have ever been scary.. They are more Texas chainsaw horror.

You want some real scary games.

Play ones that don't give you an arsenal of guns. Amnesia and Condemned come to mind.

On a side note I am looking forward to this game. The optional coop adds some nice replay value. And isn't forced on you like RE5..
 
Dion said:
On a side note I am looking forward to this game. The optional coop adds some nice replay value. And isn't forced on you like RE5..
Click to expand...

...How is this different? From what I understand, if you play it by yourself, you'll have an AI companion instead.
 
ballistic90 said:
...How is this different? From what I understand, if you play it by yourself, you'll have an AI companion instead.
Click to expand...

There won't be any AI companion when you play by yourself. Carver the AI partner will appear differently it scenes when your playing alone.

Played the demo on XBLA and its pretty fun. Wasn't big on the micro transactions either but it's cool how can build up your own weapon. You can combine two main weapons together if wanted.
 
Isn't this a direct POS console port? No graphics updates for the PC? Like DX10 or 11 even?
 
roaf85 said:
I played about 5 hours of Dead Space 2 and yes it was on easy and although there was some scary parts I ended up selling it because I lost interest.

From a story perspective is this series the best survival horror story? Like better than the REs and Silent Hills?
Click to expand...

Dead Space 1 was a masterpiece, but Dead Space 2 felt lesser. Story wise, DS1 was far more engaging then DS2. Can't remember too much about DS2, except that it felt cheesy far too often for my taste. How Isaac Clarke lives from the first game for a sequel to DS2 is beyond me. Now he's in DS3? Couldn't they find a new character by now? What sorcery is keeping him alive?

Resident Evil games went down hill after RE2 or Code Veronica. Japan has a new style of doing story, and it made it into RE games. Silent Hill unfortunately also feels to have gone the same direction. Should just be lucky at this point that RE and Silent Hill doesn't take place in a High School, and our hero isn't a 17 year old cop with huge breasts.
 
Ashbringer said:
Do you see an Xbox 720 or PS4? Then yea, this is a POS console port with no DX10 or 11 graphics.
Click to expand...

:confused: ...Where's the logic in this statement? There are plenty of cross-platform games that have enhanced graphics on the PC.

If it's a direct console port, then yeah it'll just be DX9, but I haven't seen one way or the other if that's the case yet.
 
Oh, forgot to mention, I tried the demo on the PS3 over the weekend...was pretty fun, though trying to precisely aim at flailing limbs with a controller sucks balls.
 
Spending 30 hours stepping on dead bodies is more fun when the game you're doing it in has a 3 at the end of it. Oh and the snowsuit. Can't forget about the snowsuit.
 
By far the first real horror franchise that I felt it was worth shitting my pants to play through. I love the style of combat, and no matter his weak they tried to explain Isaac to be in the first two games, once I get behind his POV at worse I feel like a borderline schizophrenia / delusional master cheif. Space Engineers Union for life! :p
 
Definitely looking forward to this. Dead Space is one of the very few horror games that I'm willing to bear playing through despite being a wuss, although DS2 wasn't quite as scary as DS1.
 
He's in an armored full body suit with helmet... Why is walking like he is trying to protect his face from the cold wind and snow? Throw a cape on him and we would see the classic vampire cape pose from old movies.
 
If Dead Space was the scariest game you guys played you never played Enemy Zero :(
 
MavericK96 said:
:confused: ...Where's the logic in this statement? There are plenty of cross-platform games that have enhanced graphics on the PC.

If it's a direct console port, then yeah it'll just be DX9, but I haven't seen one way or the other if that's the case yet.
Click to expand...

Cause any game that'll be DX9, will just have DX10/11 graphics stapled on. If the game was designed around the technology, then it would look amazing. Otherwise we're going to get a game that maybe has better looking snow or water somewhere. Hopefully someone somewhere bothered to include uncompressed textures, or at least higher quality textures.

Kinda looks like this.
dx-9-v-dx-11-wow.jpg
 
Mad props for song selection, double bonus points for the lack of Dubstep (and I like Dub).
 
Incredible trailer, good music choice

I watched a Let's Play of the demo, from start to finish, the foot prints actually leave foot prints in the snow, the demo was great.

I will personally be doing our gameplay performance and IQ article on this game, so very excited for it.
 
Ashbringer said:
Cause any game that'll be DX9, will just have DX10/11 graphics stapled on. If the game was designed around the technology, then it would look amazing. Otherwise we're going to get a game that maybe has better looking snow or water somewhere. Hopefully someone somewhere bothered to include uncompressed textures, or at least higher quality textures.
Click to expand...

WoW is a game on a DX9 engine and an old warcraft 3 engine. I still think WoW has some of the most original graphics in PC gaming and has scaled incredibly well over the years.

While a complete rebuild of WoW would be costly and I imagine it wouldn't be free I am happy with the way WoW is. A complete DX11 WoW game would alienate a huge part of that fan base that couldn't even run the game.

Furthermore its ridiculous to read some of these posts. I realize this is Hardforums, but there literally has to be the biggest double standard in PC gaming.

Its like if a game comes out for PS3 or Xbox 360 people play it and say "wow that was good game". If that same game is ported over to the PC people expect a fucking mountain of extra content. As if by having a expensive graphics card suddenly makes people entitled to having a better version.

Appreciate the game for what it is or don't buy it. Christ its like a guy who buys a Ferrari and suddenly expects roads to be gold plated for him.
 
^ but understand what they are saying, and it's a point I make often, we want games to push graphics, evolve, and give us a reason to upgrade our video cards, a lot of people here spend a lot of money on their graphics/cpu system, for the sole purpose of playing games with awesome graphics, if the game's don't evolve, don't use newer effects and techniques tapping the potential of current hardware and pushing it forward, then things become stagnant, and there becomes no reason to upgrade or want better, this really hurts the industry, both NVIDIA and AMD, and manufacturers of those cards, it all goes hand in hand with each other, these hardware manufacturers have to sell us on this hardware, and in order to do that, they need the games and apps to show us the need for it, i for one, want games to keep evolving and pushing the envelope on graphics
 
roaf85 said:
WoW is a game on a DX9 engine and an old warcraft 3 engine. I still think WoW has some of the most original graphics in PC gaming and has scaled incredibly well over the years.

While a complete rebuild of WoW would be costly and I imagine it wouldn't be free I am happy with the way WoW is. A complete DX11 WoW game would alienate a huge part of that fan base that couldn't even run the game.

Furthermore its ridiculous to read some of these posts. I realize this is Hardforums, but there literally has to be the biggest double standard in PC gaming.

Its like if a game comes out for PS3 or Xbox 360 people play it and say "wow that was good game". If that same game is ported over to the PC people expect a fucking mountain of extra content. As if by having a expensive graphics card suddenly makes people entitled to having a better version.

Appreciate the game for what it is or don't buy it. Christ its like a guy who buys a Ferrari and suddenly expects roads to be gold plated for him.
Click to expand...

I bought it when it came out and the game is a bunch of crap now. They revised the gameplay and added in new content for a while, and then a year or so ago they decided to destroy the talent system and "simplify" it to a single choice every 5 levels or something. What the hell?

The gameplay has changed drastically and in a lot of ways it's nowhere near the game it used to be. Why the hell not improve the graphics then? They might as well at this point. Can't ruin it anymore than they already have.
 
ballistic90 said:
I bought it when it came out and the game is a bunch of crap now. They revised the gameplay and added in new content for a while, and then a year or so ago they decided to destroy the talent system and "simplify" it to a single choice every 5 levels or something. What the hell?

The gameplay has changed drastically and in a lot of ways it's nowhere near the game it used to be. Why the hell not improve the graphics then? They might as well at this point. Can't ruin it anymore than they already have.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion. The talent system is far and wide better. Is it simpler? yes, but now you literally have certain talents you can spec into within the talent tree. Look on Noxxic gaming, for glyphs and talents there are certain recommendations, but literally it is a crap shoot based on play style.

All the old system did was say "if you raid you must do this spec". If you pvp 'you must use this spec" and thus the cookie cutter build was form. Going outside of the cookie cutter meant a loss in DPS etc that couldn't be overcome with play style.

That is different now. Also the LFG and LFR system is improved. You can say what you want about the game because I already cancelled this month and will be playing other stuff, but the objective opinion is that Mist of Panderia is the best xpac since TBC.

Sounds to me like you haven't played it?
 
Brent_Justice said:
^ but understand what they are saying, and it's a point I make often, we want games to push graphics, evolve, and give us a reason to upgrade our video cards, a lot of people here spend a lot of money on their graphics/cpu system, for the sole purpose of playing games with awesome graphics, if the game's don't evolve, don't use newer effects and techniques tapping the potential of current hardware and pushing it forward, then things become stagnant, and there becomes no reason to upgrade or want better, this really hurts the industry, both NVIDIA and AMD, and manufacturers of those cards, it all goes hand in hand with each other, these hardware manufacturers have to sell us on this hardware, and in order to do that, they need the games and apps to show us the need for it, i for one, want games to keep evolving and pushing the envelope on graphics
Click to expand...

People would have to buy those better games and they don't. I have seen so many A and B comparisons between BF3 on PC and Xbox 360 and between Witcher 2 and so on and so forth and literally I have to look close just to see the difference.

To say that I would have a better experience on the PC because of graphics doesn't mean as much today as it did before. I am not sure how the Witcher 2 or BF3 could be better graphically as a priority.

Meaning I don't know how better graphics would make a game like BF3 want me to buy it any more over what is on the Xbox.

Personally I would rather have better game play and even that is stretched. Games cost significantly more money today because of the immersion (voice actors, marketing costs blah blah blah) that if gamers want an evolution they better be willing to spend more than 60 on video games.
 
Kinda looking forward to this game...undecided really as the series has been a bit of a mixed bag for me.

Dead Space 1 I thought was pretty decent until I realized I was only about half way through the game and was already moments away from quitting. It had great atmosphere and some scares but the story moved WAYYY too slow and the game play became just a repetitive corridor shooter with the same lame brain scare tactics as Doom 3. Oh look, another dark room/hallway...I bet no enemies are going to pop out of no where and attack me like they have in every other dark room/hallway. Might get bashed for this, but I never beat Dead Space 1 and have ZERO desire to go back to it. Too long with too much filler and too little genuine scares due to lack of trying.

Dead Space 2 on the other hand felt nearly perfect to me. Not too long, not too repetitive, perfect mix of action with horror, good story line (learned enough to know I didn't really have to finish the first one to get what was going on), nice graphics and better over all world feeling, etc. Dead Space 2 was the complete opposite in the "fun" department from Dead Space 1. I've actually played through it twice, which is something I rarely ever do with games these days...if I can force myself to play through them the first time!

Now with Dead Space 3 I get that sense that we are getting what every other horror game eventually becomes and that's a shoot'em up. From the game play that I've seen I get the feeling that they are trying to appeal more to CoD kiddies and want to make this a full on action game...which would make sense considering it was made for co-op from day one. Sure Dead Space 2 was filled with shooting and action, but it found that balance between horror and action. Never did I feel that there was too little or too much of each...Dead Space 3 is changing that feeling. In the end though I don't know...will just have to try it on release!
 
I love the series.. I can't wait til I get my hands on DS3, but I hope this will be the last one because EA will make Visceral fuck this game up entirely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top