Dead Space - Devolutionized - Gaming Thoughts

Just to kick this off - yes, I was making up a word there in the title. However, Devolution is a word, so I took some creative liberties with it. I feel that it is only fair, since I really did not care for the changes I saw in the latest release of Dead Space, either. I originally posted this over at Digitally Downloaded.

I really enjoyed the original Dead Space a great deal. The graphics were excellent, the sound design was appropriately creepy, it told an excellent story and gave you a reason to care about what happened to the lead character, Isaac. I am a huge fan of horror games, having thoroughly enjoyed older titles like Silent Hill, Resident Evil and Fatal Frame, despite their somewhat clunky controls. Newer titles like Amnesia: The Dark Descent also gave me a few good scares. Some spoilers to the series will follow, so proceed at your own risk.

Dead Space did several things very well though, that these other games did not. For starters, the overall theme was that of a sci-fi adventure, getting the player out of haunted mansions or foggy roads and putting you in space, much like the Alien movies. It is a different kind of horror, but it worked because you often felt alone and isolated, despite occasional communication with other characters throughout the story. Isaac still plods fairly slowly, though not anywhere near as tank-like as some of the older games I mentioned above. He cannot jump and his run is only a marginal increase in speed, but he is armed and dangerous.

Excellent puzzle solving was built into the game, using new abilities like stasis and telekinesis. The environment is important, and Isaac is forced to be resourceful. Excellent lighting and use of sound really help to ratchet up the tensions throughout the first game. So what about Dead Space 2? More of the same - except even better. The voice acting is excellent, the storyline engaging and the added element of Isaac's dementia keeps everything even more tense throughout.

By now, Dead Space was an established franchise. What seemed like a healthy risk with the release of the first spawned a spinoff (Dead Space Extraction) and a sequel, both of which were well-received by fans. That is where I think things started to go wrong, and while I use the term devolution here. The word means the reverse evolution of a species, and here I felt as though Dead Space took several steps back in the third game.

At first blush, all seems well. The graphics and music are better than ever, and the voice acting is excellent. However, the game's prequel, which set things up nicely, loses almost all momentum the moment the story shifts back to Isaac. In the first two games, and even Extraction, there is this element of isolation and hopelessness instilled almost from the beginning. Here, Isaac is living in an apartment, having had a relationship go bad, before he is confronted not with horrifying aliens, but soldiers. In fact, that early level is spent fighting almost nothing but human soldiers. Not only has the threat changed, but also the way it is dealt with, because the key word from before is 'fighting'.

The first couple of games were all about 'survival'. Dead Space 3 is all about combat. The weapon customization is undeniably cool, and playing the game with my son in co-op mode was entertaining enough, but it was lacking. You no longer felt isolated. I no longer felt afraid to walk around. There were a couple of shock scare tactics, like opening up an elevator and having a necromorph dart through at me. Everything is faster, and I suppose it is the same approach found in movies such as 28 Day Later where faster enemies means greater danger.

However, something gets lost in translation. You do not get much time to take in those creepy sounds. You do not often worry what might be around the corner, because odds are it and a dozen friends are ready to barrel at you. Instead of clipping a leg to slow a single frightening enemy down, you are using a rocket launcher to do splash damage to three full sized opponents and a bunch of little bug creatures. Instead of chillingly possessed necromorph infants, you are blowing up bugs. Instead of being teased with dementia-induced panic attacks which may or may not be followed up by a monster's attack, if you hear sounds down the hall, you are about to get rushed by a horde.

My son really liked the first two games, but as a fourteen year old boy, he thought the storyline to the third game was ridiculous. Another friend online said he gave up on the Dead Space 3 around chapter six, because despite the fact he was a huge fan of the first two games, he just got tired of mowing down waves of enemies. Another friend of mine at work said that the experience felt wrong, even if he could not put a finger to it.

It all reminded me of when Resident Evil shifted from horror to shooter. Adding a co-op element to the proceedings only further enforced that notion. That is not to say Dead Space 3 was a bad game - I had some fun with it, but it was a hollow sort of immediately forgettable fun. The first two games stuck with me, while the third - the one I most recently played - will probably fade sooner than later.

I was concerned back in June of 2012 when I read a quote from Fank Gibeau of EA's quote that "In general we're thinking about how we make this a more broadly appealing franchise, because ultimately you need to get to audience sizes of around five million to really continue to invest in an IP like Dead Space. Anything less than that and it becomes quite difficult financially given how expensive it is to make games and market them."

I had several concerns about this. For starters this was more than what Dead Space 1 or 2 moved in retail early on. To my mind, if this is what you need to be successful, then perhaps there is a need to examine how the game is being made. Is it being pushed out too quickly, with too many people thrown at it? I know I would have been fine waiting an extra six or twelve months if it meant the game would be better. Also, how much marketing budget do you really need, if it is now an established franchise?

I realize that Extraction already took Dead Space in a new direction, creating an on-rails shooter based on the game's world. However, Extraction went out to purposely do something different. This is a core entry to the franchise. This unfortunately has all of the markings of why people are upset with EA as a company. Worst company outright? No, of course not. However, a cliffhanger ending set up for DLC, day one DLC, trying to broaden the game's appeal to harness a larger audience while losing much of what made the original games great? Unfortunately the only 'scare' tactic produced from this was trying to let customers know that the game had to reach incredible sales or it would be put on hold.

Do you feel Dead Space 3 was a step forward for the series - or a step back? Maybe it was simply treading water in your opinion? Do the practices shown with Dead Space 3 concern you? I had one buddy who specifically said: Dead Space has lots its soul. Would you agree? Sound off with your thoughts!


  1. "Dead Space has lots its soul."

    Here, let me fix that for you...

    "EA has lost its soul."

    "Microsoft has lost its soul."

    "Nintendo has one, it's just crushed under the piles of cash they made from the Wii apparently."

    "Sony...the verdict is still out."

  2. ROFL - there is that, and I thought about a direct EA barb, but frankly I took a few of those anyway in the article. I think Sony might have lost its way a bit last generation, at least early on - but hopefully not its soul. Oddly enough, I still have some faith for Nintendo, but it'll have to come from a successful lineup of 1st party titles - sooner than later, and a handful of awesome 3rd party titles. Looking back at the 360, MIcrosoft didn't land a ton of exclusives for their system. Nintendo doesn't need a ton, but they need a few that resonate like Halo or Gear of War (not that they have to be shooters, just solid offerings).

    I found it interesting to see an article on IGN last night that claims EA is making content for the Wii U now.

    Thanks for dropping by!

  3. "I found it interesting to see an article on IGN last night that claims EA is making content for the Wii U now."

    They are now making Wii U games again, reportedly, after that failtastic Xbox One reveal. I actually think it was all terrible communication to begin with, but if I were EA, I would start making games for the has a larger install base than the Xbox One, and at least it doesn't require me to pay $500 BILLION dollars for a subscription. You know what else? The Ouya doesn't allow the use of USED games! It's already a step ahead of of the Xbox One.

  4. ROFL.

    I was completely unimpressed with the Xbox One reveal personally. I was going to try and throw some thoughts together on it this week, but just didn't have time. I may do a quick bit next week, we'll see. My time's going to be slightly limited next week or two though, while my dad's up visiting. :)


Random posts

Our Streamers

Susan "Jagtress" N.

S.M. Carrière

Louis aka Esefine



JenEricDesigns – Coffee that ships to the US and Canada

JenEricDesigns – Coffee that ships to the US and Canada
Light, Medium and Dark Roast Coffee available.

Blog Archive