the argument between fans and haters is kind of lame. all I know is bioshock is entertaining as hell for me and that's all I care about. for every reason people say it sucks, others can come up with reasons why they love it so let's stop now before we derail the thread.

remember, we are talking about how bad ass dead space 2 is going to be.

And it will be awesome.

Just to explain, That's becuase the people that made System Shock (Looking Glass studios) went on to other companies and some of those people helped make Bioshock. Bioshock, compared to System Shock is a big fat turd. On it's own it's an average game at best, but you get people that make it out to be one of the greatest games ever made. Those are just incredibly inexperienced gamers that haven't seen anything like it before (it's sad, if that pile of mediocrity sets the standard). Anyone that has played System Shock knows that they're capable of a MUCH better game, and are disappointed by the lack of creativity in Bioshock. Basically, the guys from Looking Glass said let's make System Shock, put it underwater, and make it shittier so mainstream gamers can appreciate it.

Now, I know I'm coming off as a snob, but just imagine, you play a game and it completely BLOWS YOUR MIND (I beat that game at least 6 times, then a few more times after the graphics pack and the co-op mod came out). Then there's rumors of another game by the same people and you wait in anticipation for over 8 YEARS. Finally the game comes out and you're treated to a mediocre pile of shit compared to the game you played a decade ago and everyone raves about it like it's the second coming of jesus. It's really frustrating.

Anyways, I'm confident that Dead Space 2 will be very good, and from what I've seen in the gameplay demos I can't see how I could be mistaken.

To join in on the whole Bioshock tangent:



You're absolutely right in the way the way you feel, but I think where the whole split comes is really a pc gamer/console gamer thing. For as good as a game System Shock 1 & 2 may have been (never played either personally) they were pretty obscure to the general public because they were only available on pc; and I'd say pc gaming, even at it height (mid 90's- the early 2000's) only made up about 25% of the gaming community. The only way anyone really got any news about pc games was through gaming magazines, and even then they're pc gaming sections were pretty small.

Now I can only speak for myself here but I used to read a ton of gaming magazines growing up and the only pc games I remember getting any real coverage were games made by id, Lucas Arts, Blizzard, Sierra (to an extent) Maxis, Epic Games and Valve. Only in the past couple of years have I started finding out about all of the games I missed out on: System Shock, King's Quest, XCOM, Gabriel Knight etc. I only heard about these through watching videos like Spoony, Angry Joe and Jason from Until We Win; and I'd imagine that's the case with most others.

Long story short: consider yourself lucky to have actually played System Shock when it first came out. From everything I've heard they were excellent games, but its not our fault we missed out and enjoyed its successor.

And here, I shift the train of derailment.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=9894

Say chaps, how about that Dead Space 2?

when I played dead space, I was on the edge of my seat when things got very suspenseful like when that giant necromorph was chasing me around a room and I was very low on health but that still wasn't scary. no one wants to admit that they cried like a baby and honestly i don't think many people actually even got startled at times. that's not to say that I would be fine if they were to abandon the "survival horror" element from the game and go for a resident evil 5 clone, because even if it's not scary, it still adds a lot of personality to the game and it wouldn't be the same if they weren't trying to be scary.

Well, Deadspace had a lot of startling moments, I'll have to say, and overall had a creepy atmosphere. So it was scary to me, just not as scary as everyone is making it out to be. Really, I was hoping that the second game would be even scarier, rather than focused on more action. Still, we don't know for sure, it might be scarier, and more action oriented at the same time. I'm not going to make any judgements until I get my hands on a demo, or actually play the game, but from what I've seen so far, it definitely looks good enough to buy just to continue the story. I might still rent it, but we'll see how poor I am when it comes out.

THIS!

Seriously, in a game that's single-player driven, a game where you're one man just trying to survive how does deathmatch, team deathmatch etc. not sound tacked on? Maybe it's because I'm extremely picky about what multiplayer games I play, or the fact I like to play solo a lot more but yes I would rather they spend the man power they're using for the multiplayer and put it into making a fantastic single-player experience.

Once again I would like to state that I could be completely wrong and the multiplayer could be awesome. Hell, I didn't expect it to be good in Uncharted and it's actually one of my favorite games to play online on a console. I just don't have a lot of faith in Dead Space's multiplayer having that much lasting appeal beyond maybe playing it once or twice and I think everyone will be playing the game solo more so than online. I don't think I'm the only person here that thinks so as well.

There comes a point where the single player just isn't going to get any better, so adding more manpower to it won't make a huge difference. Also, adding multiplayer to games today is pretty important. Games that come out at $50-$60 without multiplayer are a joke, not many people will pay that much for 8 hours of gameplay to never play it again. Multiplayer makes the difference for me, it adds replay value, it adds more modes of play, it allows you to play it with friends, and thus is always an important aspect of any game.

A lot of people bring up that there already are well-established multiplayer games to play out there. So what? Maybe I want something new? Perhaps they'll have a unique game mode? Maybe the game modes will be the same, but for some reason the mechanic in this game plays better than the stuff that's already out there. My point is, why not try new things? The multiplayer in DeadSpace could be amazing, you don't know. Everyone is jumping to conclusions here with hardly any real information at all. It's one thing to speculate theorize about how the game is going to be, but a lot of people seem to already have their minds made, and it just makes them look arrogant.

Well I know this is partially directed towards me but:



Like I said, it could be great like they did with Uncharted 2, but based on the track record of most games it doesn't look good for the multiplayer. Also, from what I read the one mode they revealed was humans vs necromorphs which to me doesn't sound too appealing. For myself I rarely touch the multiplayer in a game unless it really is something special but single player is what I'm most concerned about. IF the multiplayer is just a skinned version of deathmatch, team deathmatch, capture the flag etc. then I simply wish they would have used those resources to make the single player that much better than to see a rehash of the same multiplayer modes we've been playing for the last 10 or so years.

But, like I said earlier in the thread, I agree with Max that a hoard-type of survival mode could work in Dead Space. It fits quite well and you could use it as a multiplayer sort of prequel to the single player.

team death match or capture the flag with one team being engineers and one team being necromorphs?

objective based mode where you and some other engineers have to navigate through a series of obstacles?

a dead space equivalent to horde mode?

I can see all of these things working very well with dead space as long as the developers put a lot of care into making them. man if it's not gamers getting worried that dead space 2 will be like gears of war, it's gamers getting worried that the multiplayer will be tacked on.

1. If it is tacked on, big deal. anyone who buys this game will be buying it for the single player anyways.

2. If it is actually pretty good, then it's a win/win situation.

3. There are a butt load of online games out there so what's the big deal. go play some modern warfare 2!

fuck the reviewers.

What I'm basically doing is nitpicking issues in games today. Just because multiplayer is "cool" right now not every game needs to have it. Survival horror games, for example don't really work with multiplayer as it doesn't flow with the formula. But maybe they can develop something special and very unique to make it work. We'll see in the coming months but I won't hold my breath.

what I'm basically saying is that it's not a big deal. people that buy this game will be buying it for the single player and it's not like the inclusion of a multiplayer is going to ruin the single player.

as i said before:

1. The multiplayer sucks? big deal, that's not why you bought dead space 2

2. The multiplayer is actually pretty decent? looks like it's a win/win situation then

Yeah I know, just I'm old and like to complain about shit... it'll happen to you!

I have faith in the single player being great and will most likely be getting it day 1 or very soon after but just the only thing that bothers me a little is that if the multiplayer is meh that all the manpower could have been used to make the single player that much better but like I said we'll find out at the end of January.

Anyways, just wondering about the original Dead Space: I know it's primary system is the PS3, is there any exclusive content for that version of the game? It's dirt cheap at EB ($15) and I may pick it up to play on PS3.

yea, I like to think capcom fired everyone they hired to work on RE5s story line to include multiplayer, and just hired 1 guy whos only experience with resident evil was watching the movie with the sound turned off to do the story, and thats why its so god awful.