Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cooking mama is terrifying.

I wasn't talking about the PETA version

Though that isn't so much horrifying as being in bad taste.

 Soladrin wrote:
Cooking mama is terrifying.

Babysitting Mama. Now THAT'S terrifying.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
one of the things I liked about DS3 was weapon crafting.

It was fun to mess around with, yeah, but flawed in my opinion. After some trial and error I found that the chain gun / force gun combo is amazing. It was great fun to start with. Up until that point I'd been struggling (on hard) , but the chain gun ripped stuff to pieces, and if they got into melee I could knock em back with the force gun. I also had tons of ammo. I had no problems for the rest of the game. After a while though I got abit tired of how good it was. It spoiled me for everything else. I didn't want to try anything else because nothing was as effective. So I actually prefer having set guns to choose from, and mixing and matching them.

Oh yeah, the balancing is messed up, and can make the game way too easy (chaingun + rocket launcher + stasis coating + damage mods = instant win) but goddamn is it fun xD

I am honestly surprised. I love the series and though DS3 was the best one. Micro transactions were not an issue (or even necessary). I got everything I needed through my bots picking up ration seals. Heck you didn't even have to play the game like that either. There was a classic mode where the guns were like they were in Dead Space 1 & 2.

Man I was really looking forward to another game. The DLC set the game up for a sequel. If I had known they were going to cancel the series I would have just finished with the ending of DS3 without the DLC, since it ended on a rather good note.

I guess I am just becoming an old timer. Some much BS with video games theses days. It just isn't worth it anymore.

EA drove another mediocre game franchise into the ground, somehow I'm not surprised. I never understood the appeal of DS anyway, it's so confused about what it wants to be it's just irritating.

Lord-Loss wrote:
EA drove another mediocre game franchise into the ground, somehow I'm not surprised. I never understood the appeal of DS anyway, it's so confused about what it wants to be it's just irritating.

EA didn't "drive another mediocre game franchise into the ground".

Dead Space would not have happened had it not been for EA (or more specifically: John Riccitiello being a driving force behind getting it funded).

And then they drove it into the ground.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And then they drove it into the ground.

This. DS1 was really good third-person horror game. DS2 already went a lot more in the shooter corner and that corpse stomping was just catering to youngsters and really threw me off. And with DS3, they completely dropped the ball and went Call of Doooody in space. They drove the serious in the ground while hammering on.

It went from 3rd person survival horror, to 3rd person survival horror/shooter hybrid, to dime-a-dozen cover-based shooter with horror elements (I mean, come on, if it's got co-op it is no longer a survival horror game). Plus EA had to go and get their own heads stuck up their collective asses with the emphasis on weapon modding and more fething micro-transactions. I mean, can you imagine if another big survival horror brand tried to turn their game into a generic shooter with co-op... oh wait... yes I can. Didn't that turn out well...

Dead Space was survival horror? I never noticed

It was never much of a horror game in that it wasn't particularly scary, but in terms of mechanics, tone, and theme, it was definitely in the horror genre and I think most people who played DS1 could agree that the franchise had a lot of potential. But rather than build up that potential to improve the series... EA did what EA does.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And then they drove it into the ground.

This. DS1 was really good third-person horror game.

No it wasn't. It was a third person shooter with horror pretensions. IT was not, however, a horror game.

Resident Evil is more of a horror series than DS is. And RE is... ugh.

 Melissia wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And then they drove it into the ground.

This. DS1 was really good third-person horror game.

No it wasn't. It was a third person shooter with horror pretensions. IT was not, however, a horror game.

Resident Evil is more of a horror series than DS is.

By which standard?

For one, at least there's some VARIETY in how the aliens jump out and yell at you.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It went from 3rd person survival horror, to 3rd person survival horror/shooter hybrid, to dime-a-dozen cover-based shooter with horror elements (I mean, come on, if it's got co-op it is no longer a survival horror game).

Who decides what "survival horror" is?
None of the Resident Evil games were particularly "horror" filmy. They had a "jump" factor to them, but no real "horror".

Honestly though, I did not consider Dead Space "survival horror" either. I think the term gets bandied around quite a bit to try to delineate between "games I like" and "games I do not like".

Plus EA had to go and get their own heads stuck up their collective asses with the emphasis on weapon modding and more fething micro-transactions.

Yeah...
You can get all the parts you need for quality weapons by simply playing the campaign. There's only one "set" of things you cannot get solo, and that is by completing the cooperative missions.

Anyone who used the microtransactions for anything beyond the unique armor skins (which give you nothing beyond a unique skin and some weapon parts that you do not get the basic variations of until later on in the game) was silly.
Ration Seals are everywhere and utilizing the Scavenger Bot will have your inventory overflowing with the damn things for the "random loot boxes" that you get. Even buying the Scavenger Bot upgrades is a silly thing for someone to do.

I mean, can you imagine if another big survival horror brand tried to turn their game into a generic shooter with co-op... oh wait... yes I can. Didn't that turn out well...

Yeah, Operation Raccoon City probably was not hindered by the fact that the game was a horrible disjointed mess by the developers behind pretty much the worst SOCOM game. Or that it tried to be like the Gears of War games which are best experienced as part of a group of players doing the campaign rather than by yourself.

None of those things could be part of the reason why ORC was rather lackluster.

While I still enjoyed all three Dead Space games, I can definitely feel the cold, life-draining grasp of EA on the third game. I don't mind microtransactions for alternative weapon/armor skins (cosmetic stuff), but paying money for extra stuff you can already get ingame? Back in my day, we didn't have to PAY for that kind of stuff, we just used CHEAT CODES.

And then there's the coop crap. This game at tries to pretend to still be a survival horror game, but coop just throws that out the window. I have to agree with Yahtzee's review in that, every time I wandered by one of the "coop only" mission doors, I wondered "where are my singles only doors?"

Dead Space 1 was by far the scariest game I played on the PC thus far - and I played a LOT of games.

Dead Space 2 was ok, they gave Isak what he needed the most - character. There was less horror but over all it was ok.

Dead Space 3 had amazing story but game was not horror anymore. The ending was a bit... over the top....
I think Dead Space 3 was fail because of co-op ( you could still play alone if you wanted ), a chance to create uber powerful weapon and use it for the rest of the game and the most insulting thing was DLC and the fact that you could buy more resources by using real money ( totally unnecessary and stupid ).

They pretty much finished the franchise because But it would be awesome to do a live action movie featuring SCAF and their expedition to Tau Volantis before events of DS3. Now that is the movie I would pay to see.

I'm guessing you didn't play Penumbra or Amnesia.

 Brother Captain Alexander wrote:
Dead Space 1 was by far the scariest game I played on the PC thus far - and I played a LOT of games.

You haven't played enough it seems.

Silent Hill 2, System Shock 2 and UFO: Enemy Unknown (fething chryssalids man!) were all released on the PC, and they are much scarier than dead space.

But it would be awesome to do a live action movie featuring SCAF and their expedition to Tau Volantis before events of DS3. Now that is the movie I would pay to see.

No, no no no no no. Just no.

We already had a spell of video game - movie adaptions in the 90s and early 2000s. And they were all very horrible.

I almost fell asleep in SH2. It appeared to be scary at first, but when you realize that the AI can be avoided so easily, the game loses much of its scary atmosphere.

I played enough of horror games in my time, including all that you numbered and more, I love good horror games.
But DS 1 scare me the most, I don't know why. I was scared in other games too but in the first part of the series I was literally walking with me back against walls because I was scared of Necromorphs jumping out of the walls and killing me from behind.
But like I said, the game lost it's horror touch with each next sequel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

No, no no no no no. Just no.

We already had a spell of video game - movie adaptions in the 90s and early 2000s. And they were all very horrible.

I disagree, the setting for hat is great. But I agree that they need to execute it right.
SCAF story is great setting for a movie, if just someone capable would take it to make it it would be as great as Aliens back in the 1986.

 Sigvatr wrote:
I almost fell asleep in SH2. It appeared to be scary at first, but when you realize that the AI can be avoided so easily, the game loses much of its scary atmosphere.

I have played games since the Atari period. Dead Space, played as a horror game, was the most predictably boring game I've ever played. Nothing in it was scary or even surprising-- I predicted everything that would happen in the game before it did. It was so bland that the only way it could even approach being fun was if you played it like the third person shooter it was instead of the horror game it pretended to be.

Bit like DOOM 3 really, which relied entirely on a gakky flashlight mechanic and oh look, another jump scare because the lights went out for a second and oh noooooo, a zambie.

There were zombified bambies in Doom 3?!

 BrookM wrote:
Bit like DOOM 3 really, which relied entirely on a gakky flashlight mechanic and oh look, another jump scare because the lights went out for a second and oh noooooo, a zambie.

Haha, Doom 3 was hilarious. HOW DO I PUT ZE FLASHLIGHT ON GUN DERP DERP. Awesome.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
There were zombified bambies in Doom 3?!

Zombies, not undead Cervidae.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Bit like DOOM 3 really, which relied entirely on a gakky flashlight mechanic and oh look, another jump scare because the lights went out for a second and oh noooooo, a zambie.

Haha, Doom 3 was hilarious. HOW DO I PUT ZE FLASHLIGHT ON GUN DERP DERP. Awesome.

Because duct tape is inefficient in John's eyes. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

If he doesn't like duct tape, he's obviously an alien.

It's Carmack, if you read Masters of DOOM you'd have an inkling of what goes on in that mind of his.