Ok, I can see what you're saying with Silent Hill, only becuase Silent Hill doesn't really focus on anything other than story, plot, and the horror aspect. There usually is a shooting/melee mechanic, but it's really simple. That game wouldn't have a good multiplayer for that reason only. Deadspace on the other hand has multiple weapons with upgrades and secondary attacks, different types of armor, a lot of different types of enemies, and skills (slow-mo, telekenisis etc.) Becuase of that, Deadspace could totally work as a multiplayer game, it has enough elements to support good depth of gameplay. So while the survival horror argument is good, it doesn't apply to Dead Space as much in my opinion.

meh, at this point I'm saying the same shit over and over but at this point, apparently it might be the end of the dead space franchise. I mean I still don't get why people are worried about the inclusion of a multiplayer. it's not like the inclusion of multiplayer is going to fuck up the single player, the single player will still be there for those who want to play it. but, I guess we need something to argue about in here otherwise it would be a pretty stale forum topic so cheers! here is to arguing dead space's multiplayer!

thats what you dont seem to understand, it CAN fuck up the single player.

I am going to pull a number out of my ass, lets say a game gets a budget of 1 million dollars, if game A spends the full one million dollars on the single player game, and game B spends 700,000 on the single player game and 300,000 developing the multi player game, which game would have a better single player game?

does game B not seriously run the risk of its single player game not being as good as it could have been would the full resources have been put behind it instead of splitting them to shoe horn in multi player?

now this is JUST money, what about all the extra people that will no longer be working on single player that have been put on making the multi player.

so IMO it can very easily effect the single player game when they tack on unwarranted multi player to a game that has absolutely no need of it.

dead space is a single player experience and I am 100% positive that Visceral games understands that. I mean after all it is their game they are developing. so they decided to throw in multiplayer to broaden the targeted audience, that still doesn't mean that they are going to half ass the single player. what baffles me is the idea that multiplayer will take away money and manpower that could be better spent on single player. Like, as if there aren't any good games with both single player and multiplayer like red dead redemption.

my point is it's silly to get worried about this. visceral games knows they did an amazing job with the first dead space and they completely understand that it's the isolated claustrophobic feeling that only the single player mode can bring that makes dead space what it is and I seriously doubt that they will mess that up. dead space 2 will either have an awesome multiplayer or a shitty multiplayer, but one thing I know people can count on is that it will have an amazing single player. get over it guys, it's gonna be awesome.

While I will agree that focusing on multiplayer can effect single player in a way, I'm gonna have to agree with Max on this one. Visceral knows what they're doing, and just because they're adding multiplayer, doesn't mean the game is going to be RE5 in space.

Multiplayer will not take away from the single player in Dead Space. Maybe for small time games with small budgets this would be the case, but Dead Space will have (or has) a huge budget, more than enough for the single player and multiplayer. It won tons of awards, got very high reviews and sold a TON. It was a huge success, so they aren't going to choke back on the budget with this. Those of you worried that there won't be enough funds or manpower on the singleplayer can rest easy.

while this seems like it would be this simple, how come call of duty 2, a game with a HUGE budget and is a sequel to one of the best selling games of all time has a 4 hour single player campaign?

correct me if I'm wrong but don't most call of duty games have a short single player campaign, like around 4 hours?... I know modern warfare has a short campaign. sorry, but there really is no argument here. Dead Space 2 is mainly being advertised as having a deep single player so it wouldn't make sense for it to have a shitty single player, and the opposite can be said about games that are mainly advertised as being a multiplayer game with a tacked on single player mode. developers will advertise whatever part of their game they think is the best.

what sugar gene said.

On average it takes a user about 6-8 hours to beat that campaign, and while that may be short to some, is it not still a pretty enjoyable campaign? To me, yes. I loved it, the multiplayer on the other hand I could have done without, while fun, I still prefer Counter-Strike :/ .

Yeah except you could create a multiplayer Silent Hill experience where one person is in the narrative survival horror situation and another person(s) control creatures in an RTS/Civ kinda interface. (The person playing the protagonist's experience of "survival horror" would stay intact.)

It's not traditional team vs or something as such, but flat out saying "it's not possible in any way shape or form without modifying the game" is nonsense.

I'm not sure what they have planned (if anything) for Dead Space multiplayer. But, I will say, if it is team based, having an ensemble team where at any moment various members on the team can go batshit insane from artifacts would be a very good horror MP experience.

Maybe this is another example of people not being able to think outside of existing confines? I don't know, but it seems pretty obvious to me you could create SOMETHING that works in the framework they've created and doesn't ruin it.

The introduction of other real people could really enrich some of these games and make them completely unexpected every time you play ... which would amplify the "horror" experience.

That sounds like a great game mode.... to me and maybe a handful of gamers out there. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see something like that, but even if it was done most people wouldn't get on board, and it would still require modification in the sense of making a user interface to control the RTS aspect of the game. I'm just saying it's less likely that a game like Silent Hill would ever have multiplayer becuase the game doesn't focus on that sort of thing. There's been what, 6 games now and none of them ever had multiplayer? Deadspace on the other hand has only had 1 game so far, ant it's easier to convert that type of game into multiplayer than it is for Silent Hill.

Though I am excited to see what they do with the multiplayer with you, becuase they could really do some unique stuff with deadspace, instead of the standard FFA/deathmatch that you see everywhere else. Perhaps some objective oriented game play, people have already mentioned survival mode and horde mode just in this thread. If the development team is spending enough time with the game, they should be able to make something unique.

developers need to think out side of the box. Like I think I had a pretty kick ass idea for a game mode that would work PERFECTLY for Dead Space 2 multiplayer. Just hear me out. People are worried that multiplayer will get rid of the feeling of isolation that the single player campaign gives you so why not have like a "zombie tag" type of mode where maybe 8 or 16 people all hide in a big level and one person is it. and for those of you who never played zombie tag as a 4th, or 5th grader, you missed out 9it's similar to manhunt, one person is "it" and they look for other people to be "it" with them until there is one last person and they choose who is "it" for the next game).



I remember going to the park near my house with like 20-30 kids from my elementary school and playing zombie tag late at night. anyways, the idea is to still achieve the feeling of isolation but with other people there. I don't how visceral could do this but it could be the best idea ever, I'm just sayin.

The new Silent Hills are being built from the ground up by that american studio ... And they claim they're on #8 ... that doesn't make sense, but whatever. (Why would you not count origins before 5 then count it and a retelling of part 1 as part of the cannon AFTER? That doesn't make any sense dammit!) Considering how many times they've rebuilt Silent Hill from the ground up, I don't think making a new class for a secondary UI is really a big deal.

Well gametrailers has videos of the multiplayer now. But here's a quick break down:

A team of 4 members of the Sprawl security force against necromorphs. Each "map" is object based, with the one shown being the humans have to collect components to build a shock bomb to breach an exit from the area. There are several parts scattered through out the map that you have to collect and then it looked like you had to protect the bomb while its being set. From the description they gave it seems like there's going to be a simple narrative to the multiplayer (much like L4D).

You can play as either the humans or the necromorphs. On the necromorph side there's the lurker, the pack, the puker and one other (the name escapes me right now sorry). Each seem to have their own play style. It comes off pretty much like Left 4 Dead, which I could see people either liking or hating. Personally it sounds like a cool idea, but they didn't divulge how many necromorphs can be on each map or if there are going to be other types.




I donno, Dead Rising 2 is looking like a good improvement from the original and that's an American team. It just comes down to putting the property in the hands of a capable development team. In Silent Hill's case though that series hasn't been the same since the release of The Room. I'm pretty sure the original team from the first 3 split up and only Yamaoka stayed for a little bit. Not to go off on too much of a tangent but Konami has really fallen off in the past few years. Outside of Metal Gear I can't think of anything they've put out that's anywhere near as good as their older stuff.

A year ago I'd be worried for tacked on multiplayer fucking up single player, but Uncharted 2 not only had good multiplayer its single player still managed to be a lot better than it's predecessor. A number of people also groaned when Assassin's Creed Brotherhood MP was announced but many journalists are raving about how good it is. It gives me hope that the developers are catching on to what will work and what won't.

Anyway, here's the trailer for the multiplayer.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/exclu ... e-2/704323
It looks fine. Reminds me of Left 4 dead versus.