Time to put the Dead Space hate to bed.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

mad825:

ThriKreen:

shrekfan246:
Generally speaking, any time a developer says "EA didn't tell us to do this" it means, "EA said this would be a good idea so we went along with it because we wanted to keep our jobs".

It really saddens me that any time a studio says the head didn't decide for them, a large majority of the audience believes they're lying. Of course, we never hear of any praise for good ideas, since it's quite easy to vilify bad decisions on the publisher, as the darling studio can't be the one to make said bad decision, but only responsible for the good decisions. Nope, never.

So who you want to blame for all this mistrust? The audience? Right now, the audience feels betrayed and exploited.

ThriKreen:

SecondPrize:

If given the option to play a game where more grind is a plus for the publishers because they get paid for "easing" it, or playing a game where developers designed the pacing with the sole variable of player enjoyment in mind, i'll pick the latter every time.
The inclusion of micro transactions in this game most definitely DOES affect the game I get, whether I partake in them or not.

Well, it's most likely already is designed for standard play without the boosters, paced out so you're relatively weak in the beginning, have to search around for money, materials, a workbench, then get tons of upgrades by the end to feel like a bad ass. And balanced so you can only upgrade a handful of weapons, not all of them.

You know, much like the difficulty design for Dead Space 1, 2, or any other game out there.

Again, the boosters are like cheats, but in this case it's pay. Or unlocking New Game+ mode with a L30 guy right off the bat. Just because it's available, whether in-game, pay, trainers, whatever, it is optional, and the game is not designed to forced you to.

Or should I bring up games with intentional grindy aspects WITHOUT any sort of boost option? Any RPG: western, Japanese, or MMO? Diablo, Dungeon Defenders are also good examples, as are many Rogue-likes. Disgaea comes to mind for a strategy game. Borderlands. You can still play the game without grinding, but admittedly beating the last boss at L50 instead of L30 does make things easier, if you want to grind for the XP and equipment.

So I still fail to see why people are complaining that it affects your game since it doesn't - YOU are the one letting it affect you, not the game's design.

As we seem to be starting with conjecture, I feel it is far more likely that the addition of a way to pay money to increase your power level will indeed have an effect on the their spacing of money and materials.
What you describe certainly was the difficulty design for Dead Space 1 & 2, two games which lacked the ability to purchase these cheats. Thinking that the addition of another variable will have no effect at all on their design is not a good assumption, in my book.

We already know that Visceral and EA are aware of the effects of adding early power to their games because of the deal with the free DLC on Dead Space 2 for the PC. People complained they weren't getting it, so they dumped all the high-powered DLC suits into the store, allowing them as purchasable items from the very start. They then had to go and patch this out because it trivialized the difficulty of the game to have such early access to these things.
I sincerely doubt they will have approached their current attempt at giving the players access micro transaction stuff without either making sure players felt they needed it to avoid grinding the gear, or by keeping the power levels low so as to not flatten the difficulty curve, which probably wouldn't be as good for sales.

Yes, grindy games are gindy. Why are we discussing them in a thread about Dead Space 3? Funny you mentioned Diablo, though, as I feel it to be a good example of how the mere addition of an optional auction house tweaked the loot drop and designs and most certainly affected the experience of everyone who played Diablo 3, whether they used the auction house or not.

If it turns out that the micro transactions don't affect my game play at all, I wouldn't give two shits about them. However, saying it won't affect me doesn't make it so, and until we know either way, it's perfectly acceptable to discuss them in this thread.

mad825:
So who you want to blame for all this mistrust? The audience? Right now, the audience feels betrayed and exploited.

Yes.

Because the player base are the ones putting the studio on a pedestal.

And lack being objective and doing any sort of research for the actual reasons. There's a huge disconnect between what you see and what goes on behind the scenes during development.

I mean, how would you view a studio if you found out all the bad design decisions for a game, ideally a sequel since you'd be comparing that to the first one, were not forced by the publisher at all?

Ideas the studio was not able to implement due to time or budget constraints for the first game. And now that the publisher with their funding stepped in, has allowed them to incorporate all these extra elements, that end up turning the game into crap?

Or the dev team changed internally? People join, leave or move to other projects all the time for a variety of reasons. I loved StarControl 2, but StarControl 3 was made by a different team. While I can still point a finger at the publisher for wanting a sequel and not getting the original devs on board, the bulk of the game design still lies on the SC3 dev team - not the publisher.

And ultimately thinking the game is designed for YOU specifically in mind.

They will take feedback from the forums, but you'll always get people saying the game should be more of X instead of Y, but you prefer Y over X. Do you blame the studio for listening to that one group, or to you? What if they made it more like Y like you wanted, and others complained it's not good? Who should they listen to? You? Them? Ignore everyone?

Obviously it's a mix, with the main decisions still on the studio to balance what they think would be fun.

The game will be what it is.

Judge it based on that, not what you think it should be.

Players need to learn to temper their expectations, it'll never be exactly like what they want. And that's where the problem lies, they create this image of the perfect game in their mind, and when the game doesn't live up to that image, they feel they were lied to*. But the studio is their darling, so it must be that evil publisher doing market research and forcing the studio to do these things and designing it by committee!

* ME3 Ending aside - I just started playing it so I'll eventually see what the hoopla is about. But the thing is, I'm going into this with low expectations. And it's not because I already knowing what the endings are, it's how I view and play every game - hence why I can still enjoy a great many EA published games, and really looking forward to SimCity and Dead Space 3 - cuz hey, I actually enjoyed them, without ever spending anything on DLC! *gasp*

IamLEAM1983:
4. The Co-Op segment comes with a few cute effects in which the guy playing Carver is still being messed up by the raw effects of the Marker. If you're playing Isaac, who's grown more used to the hallucinations, you'll get to see your partner shooting at nothing every so often.

OK, I have to admit that's awesome and a really good effect for coop - making things subjective based on who's playing who.

I agree, I must say.

I loved Dead Space 1 & 2, and also feel that the direction that #3 seems to be heading in isn't what I'd prefer.

But I really don't let it bother me too much; the atmosphere still be brilliant, the gameplay will still be enjoyable.

Why? People are perfectly allowed to hate a game if they want to, for a clear reason. Don't get me wrong, if they were saying they hated a game "Just because it's different" or "EA made it" they're talking out of their arse... but if they change a game from the way it used to be, they're still allowed to not like it.
Although going on the internet and whining like a bitch is annoying, so try and make it an actual valid complaint, rather than the kind of stuff I just said.

But EA are bad though. Don't buy from them kids!
(/Sarcasm)

ThriKreen:

Ed130:
Its the Microtransactions in singleplayer, the co-op (becuase it worked in RE5! /sarcasm), the various PR statements form Visceral, the whole 5 million copies or it gets shafted deal...

So the microtransactions are optional, like boosters in LoL, to ease and speed up the grindy aspects of the game. Or enable New Game+ mode off the bat with an existing finished game save slot or something, for what seems like retaining extra resources and such for the upgrades and all that.

And playing in coop is optional as well, if you play in single player you don't get an AI partner like in Gears of War, so you retain the solo feel.

I seem to have missed the memo where "optional" means "forced".

Its the fact that it even exists, not weather you have to use it or not that people are pissed at.

Ed130:

ThriKreen:

Ed130:
Its the Microtransactions in singleplayer, the co-op (becuase it worked in RE5! /sarcasm), the various PR statements form Visceral, the whole 5 million copies or it gets shafted deal...

So the microtransactions are optional, like boosters in LoL, to ease and speed up the grindy aspects of the game. Or enable New Game+ mode off the bat with an existing finished game save slot or something, for what seems like retaining extra resources and such for the upgrades and all that.

And playing in coop is optional as well, if you play in single player you don't get an AI partner like in Gears of War, so you retain the solo feel.

I seem to have missed the memo where "optional" means "forced".

Its the fact that it even exists, not weather you have to use it or not that people are pissed at.

But the guns packs and suit packs which were basically exactly the same thing from Dead Space 1 and 2 are just fine and dandy right? Or where was the rage for that DLC?

FoolKiller:

Actually many people did enjoy the co-op of Resident Evil 5. The problem with Dead Space is that its eliminated the bro-friendly split screen option. Now to play it co-op you have to go online (online pass). I've played through RE5 and Gears with a teammate and I like it much better when I have a friend in the room. I like having the person right there.

I'm a couple of hours in. I haven't found any gamebreaking need to buy stuff but haven't gone that far either. They did minimize the harassment to do the microtransactions but its still there and annoying that it exists. There are other stupid parts to the game. You start in a blizzard limping but if you hold down the aim button, you stop limping. What the hell is up with that?

Its okay but it does seem less horrorish and more actiony than the others.

More actiony than 2? That isn't very reassuring.

Maeshone:

Ed130:

Its the fact that it even exists, not weather you have to use it or not that people are pissed at.

But the guns packs and suit packs which were basically exactly the same thing from Dead Space 1 and 2 are just fine and dandy right? Or where was the rage for that DLC?

There is a small difference between what are basically skins and what could be construed as cheat codes, namely cheat codes used to be free.

Ed130:

Maeshone:

Ed130:

Its the fact that it even exists, not weather you have to use it or not that people are pissed at.

But the guns packs and suit packs which were basically exactly the same thing from Dead Space 1 and 2 are just fine and dandy right? Or where was the rage for that DLC?

There is a small difference between what are basically skins and what could be construed as cheat codes, namely cheat codes used to be free.

Except all those "skins" had maxed out stats from the start, essentially making them cheats by that reasoning as well. The only difference really is that now you're just getting parts so you can build your own guns rather than get premade ones.

I didn't realise people were complaining about that. Dead Space was never scary to me so I don't really care all that much if they took the horror out. The reason I'm pissed about DS3 is all EA's DLC stuff.

Maeshone:

Except all those "skins" had maxed out stats from the start, essentially making them cheats by that reasoning as well. The only difference really is that now you're just getting parts so you can build your own guns rather than get premade ones.

Really? I got all the extra suits in Dead Space 2 (the PC version had them pre-installed and someone found them) and I still had to upgrade to a vanilla suit before the end.

Ed130:

Maeshone:

Except all those "skins" had maxed out stats from the start, essentially making them cheats by that reasoning as well. The only difference really is that now you're just getting parts so you can build your own guns rather than get premade ones.

Really? I got all the extra suits in Dead Space 2 (the PC version had them pre-installed and someone found them) and I still had to upgrade to a vanilla suit before the end.

To be totally honest I don't know about Dead Space 2. I play the xbox version, and on Dead Space 1 there where packs that had armor with increased damage resistance or weapons with increased damage (Above the default max that is). After finding this out I didn't even bother looking at the DLC for 2 except for Severed, since I just automatically assumed it was the same. I might be wrong, and if someone can verify this I'll happily correct my stance :)

ThriKreen:

Ed130:
Its the Microtransactions in singleplayer, the co-op (becuase it worked in RE5! /sarcasm), the various PR statements form Visceral, the whole 5 million copies or it gets shafted deal...

So the microtransactions are optional, like boosters in LoL, to ease and speed up the grindy aspects of the game. Or enable New Game+ mode off the bat with an existing finished game save slot or something, for what seems like retaining extra resources and such for the upgrades and all that.

And playing in coop is optional as well, if you play in single player you don't get an AI partner like in Gears of War, so you retain the solo feel.

I seem to have missed the memo where "optional" means "forced".

are you really comparing a 60 dollar game to a free to play game? really? because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game. hell most people tell you its a fucking bad idea to buy level boosters in lol so i have no idea where you got the idea that was comparable.
remember this is ea, the guys who have made at least 2 pay to win games already, they are going to shove this thing so far down your throat you'll gag your gut out

anyway on topic, dear god there is a lot of threads about this whole dead space debate, which is funny to me because these threads just give people more place to criticise the game which is exactly what the op told us not to, well no op, we aren't just going to shut up just because you don't like the criticism, that's not how freedom of speech works.

Johnny Novgorod:
I didn't realize people were complaining about Dead Space. These days people mostly seem to be angry about DmC and My Little Pony, believe it or not.

As much as the Season 3 finale has me worried, I do apologize about how widespread the panic's gotten. Most of us who don't like what's happening aren't insane illogical assholes, but the minority are indeed a very loud bunch.

On Topic: I don't care for DS either, but EA's terrible handling and overly high expectations of DS3 are set to kill a rare AAA horror franchise. Maybe DS3 going actiony will make it a better game, but all the nickel and diming that EA's trying to pull combined with the 5-million-sales crap and the alienating of players looking for a AAA horror game will see to the end of the series, which will put yet another notch into EA's massive "studios / franchises killed" belt. That's where most people's issues lie.

felbot:

ThriKreen:

Ed130:
Its the Microtransactions in singleplayer, the co-op (becuase it worked in RE5! /sarcasm), the various PR statements form Visceral, the whole 5 million copies or it gets shafted deal...

So the microtransactions are optional, like boosters in LoL, to ease and speed up the grindy aspects of the game. Or enable New Game+ mode off the bat with an existing finished game save slot or something, for what seems like retaining extra resources and such for the upgrades and all that.

And playing in coop is optional as well, if you play in single player you don't get an AI partner like in Gears of War, so you retain the solo feel.

I seem to have missed the memo where "optional" means "forced".

are you really comparing a 60 dollar game to a free to play game? really? because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game. hell most people tell you its a fucking bad idea to buy level boosters in lol so i have no idea where you got the idea that was comparable.
remember this is ea, the guys who have made at least 2 pay to win games already, they are going to shove this thing so far down your throat you'll gag your gut out

anyway on topic, dear god there is a lot of threads about this whole dead space debate, which is funny to me because these threads just give people more place to criticise the game which is exactly what the op told us not to, well no op, we aren't just going to shut up just because you don't like the criticism, that's not how freedom of speech works.

How about World of Warcraft then? full price to buy during launch, monthly subscription fee, and it still has microtransactions. Why is this ok, but everyone starts raging when it's EA?

Secondly, Pay to Win is when the most powerful items in a game are ONLY availible to buy with real money, and not availible by just playing the game. Common misconception, but a misconception non the less. What titles are you referring to here?

Thirdly, you don't actually have freedom of speech here, forums are private property subject to what the mods deem acceptable. That doesn't mean you're not allowed to complain, just figured I'd point that out :)

Maeshone:

Ed130:

Maeshone:

Except all those "skins" had maxed out stats from the start, essentially making them cheats by that reasoning as well. The only difference really is that now you're just getting parts so you can build your own guns rather than get premade ones.

Really? I got all the extra suits in Dead Space 2 (the PC version had them pre-installed and someone found them) and I still had to upgrade to a vanilla suit before the end.

To be totally honest I don't know about Dead Space 2. I play the xbox version, and on Dead Space 1 there where packs that had armor with increased damage resistance or weapons with increased damage (Above the default max that is). After finding this out I didn't even bother looking at the DLC for 2 except for Severed, since I just automatically assumed it was the same. I might be wrong, and if someone can verify this I'll happily correct my stance :)

I don't know about Dead Space or the Severed DLC, but the armour pack items would be better than Tier 1 (Mechanic suit) probably better than the Tier 2 (Security) but I think I switched to the Tier 3 Vanilla.

Edit: I did switch to the Vanilla Tier 3 RIG due to it's bonus (price drop at stores) beating the DLC RIG's when I picked it up.

(All Suits in Dead Space 2 had a bonus like enhanced damage for a weapon, both DLC and vanilla)

IDGAF what any of the EA haters, or Dead Space nay-sayers say. I have this pre-ordered and am absolutely pumped for Tuesday.

Oh, and I probably WILL shell out at least a couple bucks on microtransactions. As a supporting games/studios thing, and I also don't give a damn if EA puts it in all their games as long as its optional, which in this case, and every case before it, has been just that... optional.

Maeshone:

felbot:

ThriKreen:

So the microtransactions are optional, like boosters in LoL, to ease and speed up the grindy aspects of the game. Or enable New Game+ mode off the bat with an existing finished game save slot or something, for what seems like retaining extra resources and such for the upgrades and all that.

And playing in coop is optional as well, if you play in single player you don't get an AI partner like in Gears of War, so you retain the solo feel.

I seem to have missed the memo where "optional" means "forced".

are you really comparing a 60 dollar game to a free to play game? really? because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game. hell most people tell you its a fucking bad idea to buy level boosters in lol so i have no idea where you got the idea that was comparable.
remember this is ea, the guys who have made at least 2 pay to win games already, they are going to shove this thing so far down your throat you'll gag your gut out

anyway on topic, dear god there is a lot of threads about this whole dead space debate, which is funny to me because these threads just give people more place to criticise the game which is exactly what the op told us not to, well no op, we aren't just going to shut up just because you don't like the criticism, that's not how freedom of speech works.

How about World of Warcraft then? full price to buy during launch, monthly subscription fee, and it still has microtransactions. Why is this ok, but everyone starts raging when it's EA?

Secondly, Pay to Win is when the most powerful items in a game are ONLY availible to buy with real money, and not availible by just playing the game. Common misconception, but a misconception non the less. What titles are you referring to here?

Thirdly, you don't actually have freedom of speech here, forums are private property subject to what the mods deem acceptable. That doesn't mean you're not allowed to complain, just figured I'd point that out :)

you have seriously never seen anyone complain against actibliss? i stopped playing wow the instant i noticed those awful micro transactions, the monthly paying is to pay for the servers i assume, they just added the micro stuff on top of it.
bastards.

the titles I am referring to is battle field heroes and battlefield free2play, both of them are such blatant cash grabs im surprised people are actually playing them, you cant even get any weapons permanently, the only way you can get any weapons permanently is to use real money, and yes certain weapons can only be bought with money, hell i wouldn't be surprised if this game invented the term pay to win.

and yeah i know, the mods still rule here.

felbot:

you have seriously never seen anyone complain against actibliss? i stopped playing wow the instant i noticed those awful micro transactions, the monthly paying is to pay for the servers i assume, they just added the micro stuff on top of it.
bastards.

the titles I am referring to is battle field heroes and battlefield free2play, both of them are such blatant cash grabs im surprised people are actually playing them, you cant even get any weapons permanently, the only way you can get any weapons permanently is to use real money, and yes certain weapons can only be bought with money, hell i wouldn't be surprised if this game invented the term pay to win.

and yeah i know, the mods still rule here.

Ok, yeah, fair enough. I've seen plenty of bitching aobut actiblizz, but never on the same level as the bitching against EA despite the fact that, IMO, actiblizz are often worse.

I actually never tried those two games, so I'll take your word for it. Not that it's very hard to believe. Thank you for clarifying though :)

ThriKreen:
snip

Probably the first post I've read on this website in a long, long time that is has the voice of reason. Thank you for saying what needed to be said forever ago.

felbot:
because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game.

Stuff, which like in LoL or DS3, you can still achieve without paying for. Again, it's optional, not forced. So why are you complaining?

It's as bad as the complaints about including homosexual relationships in various RPG games. They are not forcing you to engage in them, but people behave like it is.

ThriKreen:

felbot:
because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game.

Stuff, which like in LoL or DS3, you can still achieve without paying for. Again, it's optional, not forced. So why are you complaining?

It's as bad as the complaints about including homosexual relationships in various RPG games. They are not forcing you to engage in them, but people behave like it is.

are you seriously equating me to a homophobic person? well that's just dandy.

and as i said before, league of legends is free to play, it costs nada, none, inget, hence why they can have micro transactions.
dead space 3 is still 60 dollars up front, then it also forces you to grind tirelessly or have you spend god knows how much money just to get some materials, its outright greed.

felbot:

ThriKreen:

felbot:
because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game.

Stuff, which like in LoL or DS3, you can still achieve without paying for. Again, it's optional, not forced. So why are you complaining?

It's as bad as the complaints about including homosexual relationships in various RPG games. They are not forcing you to engage in them, but people behave like it is.

are you seriously equating me to a homophobic person? well that's just dandy.

Come now, Microtransaction are a lifestyle we should all accept and embrace to grow as people and not be somekinda-phobic!

As a fan I hate to see microtransactions being introduced into one of my favourite series. I didn't necessarily got myself into Dead Space because of the horror element that a lot of people camplain is lacking. Sure the first game was a lot more scary and claustrophobic but what to me makes dead space what it is is the story and the setting. I loved the science-fiction setting, the atmosphere and the gameplay mechanics.
It pains me to see EA make statemants like "this game needs to sell about as much as its predecessors combined". I fear that the franchise is going to walk the same road MoH Warfighter did.
Just the opinion of a worried supporter of the series.

I'm not invested in it myself so I honestly don't care what happens, but any time a franchise changes its tone deliberately, it is reasonable for fans to complain. We all know what EA does to the tone of a series and if that happened to Armored Core or Metal Gear or something, I would be complaining. Secondly, the other part of it is the unaltered initial price + microtransactions anyway, which I also find to be a reasonable thing to complain about.

If they release a new IP and you don't like it, ok, don't play it. But releasing an entry in a series means you are automatically appealing to fans of that series and those fans have expectations, and I don't like EA using a series to attract more players rather than improve the game within it's role.

It's time to put Dead Space to bed, full stop. This should apply to all series.

Once you have turned an original idea made into a game into an effort to keep the game going for the sake of keeping it going and getting more income, it's finished. Does anyone seriously think Dead Space 3 will have even an ounce of originality in the overall execution of the game? Of course not. It's going to play it safe, do what it knows people will buy and maybe throw in a few pointless novelties to avoid accusations of being stale.

This thread is an execise in futility, well-intentioned or otherwise. However, there's one thing that I feel irresistibly drawn to...

PiotrTheAdequate:
It is an unfortunate inevitability that sequels should try to up the stakes, sacrificing some of that original brooding horror atmosphere.

No, no it isn't.

I loved the first two games.

I will absolutely not be buying the third.
It honestly seems like they've gone out of their way to ruin the series.

What I don't understand above all else, is why people are so much up in arms over a game that is not out yet. Is the vast populous REALLY going to base their judgements on a small handful of reviewers who have early access? A bunch of people who's entire livelihood is based on stirring up discussion and generating hits is going to define for you how you should feel about the game?

Why don't people wait until they play it tomorrow, THEN start discussing it's faults and strengths?

also...

felbot:

ThriKreen:

felbot:
because that's the thing here, the micro transactions isn't the thing here, its the fact that you have to pay 60 dollars and then the game has the gull to demand more money for stuff in game.

Stuff, which like in LoL or DS3, you can still achieve without paying for. Again, it's optional, not forced. So why are you complaining?

It's as bad as the complaints about including homosexual relationships in various RPG games. They are not forcing you to engage in them, but people behave like it is.

are you seriously equating me to a homophobic person? well that's just dandy.

and as i said before, league of legends is free to play, it costs nada, none, inget, hence why they can have micro transactions.
dead space 3 is still 60 dollars up front, then it also forces you to grind tirelessly or have you spend god knows how much money just to get some materials, its outright greed.

I don't understand your hate either still. SO WHAT?! We're talking about OPTIONAL resources you can buy to make the game easier for the kind of person who is lazy and wants a short cut. You can enjoy EVERYTHING the gam has to offer without spending the money, OR you can buy some f these resources, and give yourself a moderate leg up in the weapon arsenal. That's it. How is that a bad thing? ITS OPTIONAL WITH NO NEGATIVE IMPACT FOR OPTING OUT.

Lastly... it is gall not gull.... that would be a bird.

Sargonas42:
What I don't understand above all else, is why people are so much up in arms over a game that is not out yet. Is the vast populous REALLY going to base their judgements on a small handful of reviewers who have early access? A bunch of people who's entire livelihood is based on stirring up discussion and generating hits is going to define for you how you should feel about the game?

Why don't people wait until they play it tomorrow, THEN start discussing it's faults and strengths?

Maybe it's because you don't need to play the game to complain about certain things like the microtransactions which, whether they are just tacked on or they were part of the design from the beginning, WILL have an effect on the game.

So I'm not supposed to get mad at Dead Space 3 because it has become an scifi action game with good shooter mechanics? But that's the problem. If I wanted to play a scifi shooter I have a lot of better choices, CoD BLOPS 2, Mass Effect, Doom 3, even Gears of War. The only thing that made Dead Space worth playing originally was the horror atmosphere. But if you take that away then why should I play Dead Space anymore? What does it have that hasn't been done better elsewhere?
They took away what made Dead Space feel any sort of fresh and interesting and replaced it with jump scares, guns, and shooting guys.

romanator0:

Sargonas42:
What I don't understand above all else, is why people are so much up in arms over a game that is not out yet. Is the vast populous REALLY going to base their judgements on a small handful of reviewers who have early access? A bunch of people who's entire livelihood is based on stirring up discussion and generating hits is going to define for you how you should feel about the game?

Why don't people wait until they play it tomorrow, THEN start discussing it's faults and strengths?

Maybe it's because you don't need to play the game to complain about certain things like the microtransactions which, whether they are just tacked on or they were part of the design from the beginning, WILL have an effect on the game.

Can I ask, in all seriousness, how does an optional component that has no detrimental impact to opt out of, negatively effect the game? You are simply being offered the OPTION to take, for all intents and purposes, shortcuts IF you want to in building up your weapon arsenal. I'm genuinely curious where this line of reasoning comes from some people. It's clear a lot of people feel this way so there MUST be something to it, but I'm not grasping the foundation on it.

Sargonas42:

romanator0:

Sargonas42:
What I don't understand above all else, is why people are so much up in arms over a game that is not out yet. Is the vast populous REALLY going to base their judgements on a small handful of reviewers who have early access? A bunch of people who's entire livelihood is based on stirring up discussion and generating hits is going to define for you how you should feel about the game?

Why don't people wait until they play it tomorrow, THEN start discussing it's faults and strengths?

Maybe it's because you don't need to play the game to complain about certain things like the microtransactions which, whether they are just tacked on or they were part of the design from the beginning, WILL have an effect on the game.

Can I ask, in all seriousness, how does an optional component that has no detrimental impact to opt out of, negatively effect the game? You are simply being offered the OPTION to take, for all intents and purposes, shortcuts IF you want to in building up your weapon arsenal. I'm genuinely curious where this line of reasoning comes from some people. It's clear a lot of people feel this way so there MUST be something to it, but I'm not grasping the foundation on it.

Where did I say it was a negative effect? The type of effect that microtransactions have doesn't even have anything to do with your original post or my response.

My point was that you telling people to quit bitching until they have played the game is stupid because things like the microtransactions wouldn't require playing the game to understand what kind of effect they will have on the game. And taking into consideration that the microtransactions are for purchasing materials to upgrade weapons it is completely understandable for people to get up in arms because EA are quite likely making a game that they are marketing as survival-horror easier just so they can make a bit more money.

It's also not even the fact that the microtransactions are most likely making the game easier, it's also the simple fact that the microtransactions exist. Do you know what the justification for these microtransactions was? The justification was that some people want instant gratification and would rather upgrade their weapons now instead of doing it at the pace the developers have designed into the game.
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/01/25/dead-space-3-microtransactions/

Several years nobody would have been up in arms over this because several years ago these microtransactions would have been cheats. You wouldn't have a little shop button lurking on the upgrade screen letting you know that you can always do more upgrades for just a few more bucks. EA are taking an option that most people never cared about or bothered with and monetizing it and trying to shove it into peoples face. That's why people are getting up in arms over this and it's extremely simple-minded to try and tell people to play the game before they complain when something like this can be easily analyzed without playing the game.

In conclusion: People are mad because EA are monetizing cheats and if people do buy this game and do buy ingame materials with real money then EA will have gotten away with it. They will then be putting microtransactions into more of their games and after that they will be going even farther in trying to milk money out of their games.

I just find it odd when people complain that Dead Space is going less horror when, 1. Dead Space shits the bed on its horror elements at the end and turns into an action game, and people seem to never mention it, 2. Dead Space 2 was an action game. People liked it. There marketing the next one as actiony probably because people liked the last one. At this point there is has been more action game in Dead Space then Horror game and people act amazed at the idea.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here