Dead Space remake from Motive Studios

[Dodo1610]

Still would have prefered a full reboot ... but whatever more Dead Space should be good.

 

[JDR13]

Dead Space runs (weirdly on PC) still, still looks great, and the gameplay is indistinguishable from modern-day TPS/horror games. Literally the only thing they could modernize outside of graphics is to make Isaac a black furry lesbian instead of a generic silent White dude or introduce $60 of post-release DLC. I honestly like Dead Space - it’s probably in my top 5 for that generation - and I can’t muster any interest in this.

I agree that the visuals still hold up, but the controls could use a makeover. I just recently reinstalled it and was reminded of how sluggish it feels.

 

[ultimanecat]

Dead Space runs (weirdly on PC) still, still looks great, and the gameplay is indistinguishable from modern-day TPS/horror games. Literally the only thing they could modernize outside of graphics is to make Isaac a black furry lesbian instead of a generic silent White dude or introduce $60 of post-release DLC. I honestly like Dead Space - it’s probably in my top 5 for that generation - and I can’t muster any interest in this.

I agree that the visuals still hold up, but the controls could use a makeover. I just recently reinstalled it and was reminded of how sluggish it feels.

Probably goes without saying, but Dead Space on PC is not the greatest port and does not react well to running at framerates above 60 fps (and modern hardware can easily run it above 300 fps). The worst and most obvious is the mouse polling, which just gets sluggish and unusable but can be fixed with the small patch on the PCGaming Wiki. Even with that, Isaac actually physically moves slower at high FPS and I don’t think there’s any fix for that.

Of course, if you already knew all that then, yeah, the first Dead Space was always the most deliberate of the trilogy, but honestly most of the enemies aren’t nearly as aggressive as they get later on either, so it kind of balances out.

 

[JDR13]

Dead Space runs (weirdly on PC) still, still looks great, and the gameplay is indistinguishable from modern-day TPS/horror games. Literally the only thing they could modernize outside of graphics is to make Isaac a black furry lesbian instead of a generic silent White dude or introduce $60 of post-release DLC. I honestly like Dead Space - it’s probably in my top 5 for that generation - and I can’t muster any interest in this.

I agree that the visuals still hold up, but the controls could use a makeover. I just recently reinstalled it and was reminded of how sluggish it feels.

Probably goes without saying, but Dead Space on PC is not the greatest port and does not react well to running at framerates above 60 fps (and modern hardware can easily run it above 300 fps). The worst and most obvious is the mouse polling, which just gets sluggish and unusable but can be fixed with the small patch on the PCGaming Wiki. Even with that, Isaac actually physically moves slower at high FPS and I don’t think there’s any fix for that.

Of course, if you already knew all that then, yeah, the first Dead Space was always the most deliberate of the trilogy, but honestly most of the enemies aren’t nearly as aggressive as they get later on either, so it kind of balances out.

It doesn't have anything to do with that. My monitor's refresh rate is 60hz, and I always play with vsync on. The controls are just kind of sluggish.

It never stopped me from enjoying it greatly, but it's still something I'd like to see improved.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

https://community.pcgamingwiki.com/files/file/840-dead-space-mouse-fix/

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.ign.com/articles/dead-space-remake-gameplay-story-ps5-xbox-tech-details

Dead Space Remake Devs Discuss How EA Motive Is Using Next-Gen Tech to Revive a Horror Classic
Staying true to the original game, but modernizing it with the tech of the PS5 and Xbox Series, along with input from fans.

Dead Space, the beloved modern horror franchise, is back from the dead, as EA has officially announced a remake of the 2008 classic. Originally developed by the now-shuttered Visceral Games, EA Motive, the studio behind Star Wars Squadrons, will be tackling a from-the-ground-up remake for PS5, Xbox Series X|S, and PC.

While EA has only revealed a brief teaser trailer of in-engine footage conveying the mood and tone of Motive’s remake, I spoke with Senior Producer Philippe Ducharme and Creative Director Roman Campos-Oriola about their team’s vision for the remake, including how they’re approaching staying faithful to the original while modernizing it. We also dove into the team’s approach to using some of the latest next-gen tech to bring the USG Ishimura to life like never before, the early involvement of fan feedback in the development process, and more.

Using Next-Gen Tech to Bring Dead Space to Life on PS5, Xbox Series
In speaking with the EA Motive leads, the duo made it clear that this is not just a polished up version of the original Dead Space - though they’re obviously referencing the original game, and working with a hefty amount of development data, they’re completely rebuilding and remaking the game in EA’s Frostbite engine.

But Campos-Oriola explained how the team is able to reference all the original assets of Dead Space, and not just what shipped on disc.

“We started with the original level design of the original Dead Space. What's funny is that you can see some of the iterations that were made prior to ship by the team. In the first chapter, you can see some corridors that they wanted to do first in a certain way, and then you can understand why they changed it for technical constraints or [some other reason].

“Then in terms of visuals, sound, gameplay, everything, we are rebuilding all of these assets. We are not porting them, it's not uprezzing the texture or adding more polygons to the model. It's really rebuilding all these elements, shooting all the animations, et cetera.”

And while the team is rebuilding the adventure, it’s getting to do so with specifically an eye toward PC and the latest consoles, PS5 and Xbox Series X|S. While development is still early, Motive is already thinking about the many ways it can take advantage of the latest tech to improve the Dead Space experience that was already so immersive during the Xbox 360/PS3 era.

“We want to make that immersion even deeper with a fully interactive experience, from the start screen to the end credits. We don't want anything to pull you out of the experience and we don't want any cuts,” Campos Oriola said. [The faster SSDs of new consoles mean] there's not going to be any loading. There's not going to be any moment where we're going to cut your experience, where we're going to cut your camera. You can play it from the start screen to the end credits seamlessly.”

“As an objective that we gave early on to everyone, what we're trying to achieve is an immersion where you never want to put your controller down,” Ducharme said. “Dead Space is not a 60 - 100 hour game. Ideal scenario, you don't actually want to get up to go to the bathroom because you're so immersed within the universe and you want to play it through in one sit-down.”

A key facet of Dead Space’s immersion was how in-universe it kept almost every facet of Isaac’s adventure, from his health bar to the inventory and more. EA Motive is aiming to maintain what was already there and enhance the diegetic UI and ability of Dead Space to keep you focused on its world, but couldn’t speak to any specifics just yet.

The latest technology, of course, also means enhancements to the visuals and sound, and Ducharme and Campos-Oriola explained how the trailer served as an “atmospheric benchmark” for the team to strive for, to use all this new technology while ensuring they were doing so in service of capturing the mood of Dead Space.

“What was really important was to be able to capture the unique look of Dead Space. That unique sci-fi look, but it's gritty and dirty and you feel that everything has been used for a long time,” Campos-Oriola said. “Capturing that dirty, industrial look, but with the level of detail that we can afford now, was something important during the production of that atmospheric benchmark.”

“It started off from the original game’s asset, actually,” Ducharme said, explaining how the team referenced all the concept art and original designs they could while starting the remake to build this trailer. “[We wanted to] make sure that the improvements we were making were inside the DNA of what Dead Space is, and not just, ‘Oh, we can add more texture res and more polygons, let's just throw them at it.’ We really wanted to convey that feeling of Dead Space. The addition of volumetric effects and the dynamic lighting inside these scenes add a huge element to the atmosphere that we're trying to convey.”

That methodology - not just throwing more at the remake for the sake of it, but making sure the increased fidelity authentically revived the Ishimura - applies to the audio design as well.

“We wanted to use the sounds you're used to as well and improve those sounds, and improve this immersion so the sounds of the door that you're hearing, the sound of the health bar, the sound of the creatures... we're building on top of the original and recreating it, but [we] make sure it is true to the original and that we are honoring the legacy of the original game,” Ducharme said, while also discussing how the addition of 3D audio could add to the experience.

“3D audio [will also add the] understanding of where the sound comes from, having the right propagation, in the corridors, making it come from the vents above you, or behind you. These are all things that we'll be able to expand on to increase the level of immersion.”

Spoiler

The Future Informing the Past
The two developers made it clear they’re very focused on remaking the original Dead Space. And while they’re endeavoring to lay out the story told in the original, that doesn’t mean they aren’t looking at what came after, both in terms of gameplay and story, to flesh out concepts in the first game.

“For us, the foundation is the Dead Space 1 story. So, by default, that's what is canon. But then there are some improvements that we want to make to that story,” Campos-Oriola said. “And not necessarily improvements because those things were not really working in the original, more improvements because of what came after, and we're like, ‘Aw man, that's interesting if we could reference that, or if we could make a link to that,” he continued, noting he and the team were looking at everything from what immediately happened in Dead Space 2 to ancillary media like animated films and more.

“We're doing it from a narrative standpoint, but we're also looking at it from a feature standpoint in the improvements and some of the content that evolved throughout the franchise,” Ducharme said. So we're looking at what can be taken and reinjected within the first game from a future standpoint.

“We're also learning from mistakes such as microtransactions, which we will not have, for instance, in our game,” he continued, confirming that the team “never” has plans to introduce microtransactions in any way to the remake.

This follows a bit of a recent trend of EA trying to make up for some of the controversial additions of microtransactions in its games of years’ past, like Dead Space 3’s microtransaction inclusion and, more recently, the infamous options that were in and then removed from Star Wars Battlefront II. EA Chief Studios Officer Laura Miele explained to IGN about how the company is currently aiming to offer as wide a swath of experiences as possible, and that means choosing different business models for the right games.

“We want to make games that deliver the experiences our players are looking for. Sometimes that is a single-player story-focused experience, where players can immerse themselves in another world,” Miele said. “Other players want us to show up every day with new content and events in our live services like Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes, The Sims, Apex, and FIFA to name a few. We want players to choose an EA game or experience, and that means we need to make the type of games they want to play. Focusing on just one genre or model limits the number of players we can reach. We want to meet the players where they play and commit ourselves to impressing our fans with games that continue to surprise or delight them.”

While gameplay specifics are not quite yet revealed, the duo did offer some examples of the team’s thinking in maintaining but refining the original’s gameplay. They pointed to a few examples, like looking to Dead Space 2’s advancements to zero gravity segments and how that could be applied to the first game.


Campos-Oriola also said they’re looking to evolve the famed dismemberment mechanics, which allowed Dead Space players to individually splice off the limbs of the various, gruesome enemies Isaac faced. He said they’re not just looking to make it gorier, but teased that they hope to evolve this core pillar of the combat, alongside other advancements to let more players experience the game.

“Something that is also really important for us that was not there 12 years ago... is all those options or different ways to play the game if you need it. All those elements of accessibility will definitely be something important for us in terms of opening the Dead Space experience to a broader set of people that didn't necessarily have the opportunity or could play the game when it came out,” he said.

Involving Dead Space Fans
Both Ducharme and Campos-Oriola attested to being longtime Dead Space fans, and said that sentiment was echoed throughout the team. In fact, it’s due to the passion of Motive’s Patrick Klaus that the studio is tackling the project.

“It was Motive and specifically Patrick Klaus’s passion for Dead Space. He actually began pitching us the idea on a trip to our headquarters a couple of years ago,” Miele said. “The studio had other short term priorities but it was always something we wanted to make happen. Motive did a fantastic job with Star Wars: Squadrons last year- and their general expertise in the action genre made it the right studio for this project.”

But Motive isn’t just composed of fans within its development team - it’s bringing in fans from the Dead Space community to actively help guide the development process, similarly to Command and Conquer Remastered and, as evidenced by its latest teaser, the new skate.

“We don't want to be in siloed and create our own bubble of the game we're making. So from the conception, we've reached out to members of the community to create a community council to be a sounding board for what we were making. Making sure that if we're deciding to make a change, we want to be able to explain it and get told if, ‘No, what are you doing? What were you thinking? You're actually breaking the game, why are you changing this,’” Ducharme explained.

“And we've received some extremely valid feedback from that group. We're trying to meet with them on a two, three week basis to show them content and have that ongoing discussion. And they've had access, unfiltered access, to what we're making from a very early point in production,” he continued, noting that the goal of this community council is to really stay true to the spirit of what fans have loved from the franchise since it started 13 years ago.


“Usually, when we receive feedback, the game is almost shipped or done and you're like, ‘Aw, I wish I knew that. I could have fixed this, what they're saying, that it's not good,’” Ducharme said.

“There's always that element of being a little scared of showing [your work], but like Phil said, what's really cool is you discover a thing that otherwise you might have discovered reading Reddit two weeks after launching the game,” Campos-Oriola said. “But also it's really energizing for the team… because when you show something and you get feedback and good reactions on what you're doing, it gives you that energy to go, "’Okay, that's cool. Let's keep pushing that.’"

That fan feedback is something more EA games are integrating at large, Miele explained.

“When you are talking about an IP with such a strong fanbase, it’s particularly important we incorporate their voices. The community has such a strong understanding of the story and the characters, and the experience they want to have,” Miele said. “Another great example in addition to Command and Conquer and Skate was Mass Effect Legendary Edition. We took the time to act on the community feedback. That was an investment in service of our players- making sure we were making the game they wanted to play.”

The fan feedback is designed to, well, feed back into the core spirit of the project the team is developing with - bringing forward a beloved horror experience, one that will be equally fun for returning fans and enticing for new players.

“What we are remaking is we are remaking a survival horror classic game. And that's something that is really important for us and that's also why we're working with the community on this one,” Campos-Oriola said. “I've never had before the opportunity to work on a survival horror game, and when I had a discussion with the people at Motive, they had me at two words: Dead Space.”

It's really a love letter to fans that we want to write with this game, and we're part of those fans,” Ducharme said. “So the passion that we have in making it, I hope it translates into the results of what we're seeing now and all the things that we'll be showing in the future.”

 

[rusty_shackleford]

next-gen neovaginas will revolutionize dead space
bigots won't even be able to buy the old game anymore

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Another remake?

 

[Razor]

Ellie is half way there she was missing an eye and is brown. I always thought it made more sense to have her instead of Carver as the second player in 3.

They did but since they were short on time and money they did not want to make the animations, models etc for Ellie. Carver was inserted because they could use the Isaac assets and reskin them. Originally they were also playing around with the idea of a "shadow Isaac" or something like that as the second player. Its kind of vague but it was supposed to be a manifestation of Isaacs psychosis while also both players experiencing things differently from their perspective (aka one sees something the other does not). They implemented it a little bit with the coop mission but nowhere near its full potential.

 

[gerey]

What really killed DS3 for me was how nonsensical the beginning was, and some other bits and pieces of the writing - the whole romance angle was completely unnecessary and very cringe.

All of the government just up and died without Isaac noticing? It just came across as such a stupid contrivance when they could have just as easily have government agents come to extract Isaac while civil war was breaking on the planet, instead of literally the last squad of loyalist forces around coming for the chosen one.

I also liked the Brother Moons, I thought it was a very Lovecraftian way to tie everything together - though maybe I'm just biased because the best part of the whole game was the alien planet and their attempt to stop a Brother Moon from forming. But at least the game didn't pull any punches - it makes it unequivocally clear that humanity cannot stop them, just like the aquatic aliens couldn't stop them either.

It's a pity EA are so short-sighted they didn't see the potential of the Dead Space franchise or the team behind it. They had the equivalent of a Western Resident Evil on their hands and squandered it just like they squandered all the other IPs and studios they bought up over the years.

What's really curious to me is the difference between EA and Capcom in how they handled their respective IPs. Both RE and DS followed a very similar path of development in nearly the same timeframe - one releasing Resident Evil 4, while the other published Dead Space 1 in response - and then you have a steady deterioration of both the franchise and the formula with RE5 and 6 - and DS2 and 3 respectively.

Difference is, instead of killing both the IP and the studio, Capcom took stock after the disaster that was RE6 and decided to shake things up. People might criticize RE7 for not being like the three original games, but in terms of structure and pacing it's far more similar to RE1, 2 and 3 than it is to RE4 or 6 - and more importantly, it was a good game and revitalized the franchise. They then went on to release the remake of RE2, and then RE8 - which were both very positively received and made them a shitload of money.

And now I feel like we're back to square one. EA saw what Capcom was doing, saw the potential, and they're attempting to resurrect Dead Space. I don't really have much faith though, even if the remake is successful I don't think EA has the attention span necessary to allow the IP to grow again - they're bound to repeat the same pattern of mistakes that led to the downfall of Dead Space the first time around.

 

[Child of Malkav]

I agree that the love triangle had no place in the story, period. But the rest was good. I really liked the Moons reveal. It's also nice how they revealed stuff slowly from DS1 with the convergence being mentioned but not knowing yet what it is, to DS2 the convergence starting and you have to stop it, still not knowing it's purpose or conclusion and to DS3 where we finally find out what convergence leads to. Very cool, but I'm sure it this series of revelations was not intentional. It's also nice that we find out what the title of the franchise means: dead space, literally because every alien species is dead, killed by the Moons. The DLC was cool too, with humanity being eliminated, you don't see many of these endings around. And this article sheds light on how the story of DS4 would have gone and on the origins of the necromorphs: "Visceral had a plan for how Dead Space 4 would end, although Wanat didn't want to spoil it just in case EA decides to continue with the franchise. "I don't want to give away the lore, but I will say that we spent a bit of time working out the origin of the Necromorphs and what purpose humans held in this dark universe. Would players find a way out of the Necromorph apocalypse? I'd say yes, but they might be sorry they did. Sometimes you're better off with the devil you know..." (https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-07-13-visceral-had-some-cool-ideas-for-dead-space-4)

 

[Razor]

I actually just finished a spree of playing through DS1 all the way to DS3 on a first time blind playthroughs.

When it comes to DS necro storyline I liked the core concept- the way the necromorph cycle is revealed more in each iteration. In the first it actually remains kind of unclear if the marker is bad or not, since bringing the Marker back to the planet pacified the Hive Mind, which was thought to be the instigator of the outbreak. Although small hints like some log files or the sinister chanting originating from the marker if you get close to it hint to otherwise.

In the second one it is revealed that yes, it was the markers and that its purpose is to achieve critical necromorph mass to begin a convergence event. What it exactly meant was left unexplained in the second entry.

In the third its is revealed the Convergence means the birth of a Brother Moon, a sentient planet that proceeds to harvest and absorb all organic material it can detect via the active Marker network and that the Markers themselves were conduits for the Brethren Moon to be used as bait to lure in advanced species starving for energy. I also helps the moon wipe out the entire species since the victims will have transported and built the markers all across their colonies, leading to necro outbreaks and revealing how far and where the targets have spread.

Hence the title "Dead Space". The known space is eerily dead and void (remarked several times by characters in game dialogues) because its a dead graveyard, continually harvested by a Apex predator entities for god knows how many eons.

The major story arc is actually remarkably cohesive throughout three games which leads me to believe the general arc was thought out before they started production on the first title. There are even small hints to it like the line "Make us whole" which appeared in the very first game.

If DS4 ever happened I think it was supposed to have a final good ending as burger stories typically have. Why else incorporate the concept of planet cracking? It is a remarkably stupid idea even if technically feasible since removing and destroying entire planets does god knows what to the stability of a star system. It also is really questionable when there are also shock drives that can in short times jump across entire lightyears as mining asteroids is far, far easier and way more rich in basic industrial input minerals.

But planet cracking does make sense if you take into consideration the Brethren Moons, i.e. crack the moons to kill them.

 

[gerey]

If DS4 ever happened I think it was supposed to have a final good ending as burger stories typically have. Why else incorporate the concept of planet cracking? It is a remarkably stupid idea even if technically feasible since removing and destroying entire planets does god knows what to the stability of a star system. It also is really questionable when there are also shock drives that can in short times jump across entire lightyears as mining asteroids is far, far easier and way more rich in basic industrial input minerals.

But planet cracking does make sense if you take into consideration the Brethren Moons, i.e. crack the moons to kill them.

I'd argue they are cracking planets because the needs of humanity exceed what can be harvested via asteroids.

Also, I'm not sure if the planet cracker would be feasible or effective. Side content shows that cracking planets is a fairly laborious process.

Also, there's the fact a much more advanced alien race tried to stop Convergence and fight against the Brother Moons and all they managed was a Phyrric victory of sorts, which still ended in their extinction.

Also, it's not like Dead Space is afraid to go for a bleak ending. DS2 and 3 certainly didn't feel like victories to Isaac.

 

[Van-d-all]

Scraping the barrel of creative bankruptcy with yet another remake...

 

[Razor]

I'd argue they are cracking planets because the needs of humanity exceed what can be harvested via asteroids.

Also, I'm not sure if the planet cracker would be feasible or effective. Side content shows that cracking planets is a fairly laborious process.

Also, there's the fact a much more advanced alien race tried to stop Convergence and fight against the Brother Moons and all they managed was a Phyrric victory of sorts, which still ended in their extinction.

Also, it's not like Dead Space is afraid to go for a bleak ending. DS2 and 3 certainly didn't feel like victories to Isaac.

A central piece in the planet harvesting tech is the invention and utilization of anti-gravity engines. Its displayed prominently from everything like Isaacs kinesis modules to of course, the giant lump of shit in the sky that the Ishimura pulled from the planet.

While its true that the cracking procedure as shown in DS1 saga highlighted the need for surface side installations to act as conduits for the anti-gravity tethers, keep in mind that this was a civilian commercial project and a very old method at that. I think it was explained in a article that the Ishimura was one of the very first of its kind. Nothing is really stopping from having some plausible wiggle room by explaining that the top high end planet crackers have developed more efficient methods of cutting down on the preparing stages by doing geological research and building planet side conduits. For example orbital missile tethers launched that burrow themselves into the target body and are ready to use on the spot.

I.e. launch the harpoons into the moon, activate the gravity tethers, rip the moon shell right wide open to expose its core- supposedly containing the original marker from which created it- and wipe it out with a strike. Preferably thermonuclear.

As for the deus-ex-machina on the Tau Volantis it was made clear that freezing was not even its main function- its purpose was to kill the moon by pulling it into the planet. It was foreshadowed in the squidheads city that they also had access to the same kind of anti-gravity tech that humans use but a much more powerful version of it. Thing is they built it too late and were probably getting swarmed by necros so they did not have enough time to properly finish configuring it, so they went with door number two aka freeze frame.

Now to add to the criticism of DS 3, while the machine is particularly a Mcguffin device, it still is kind of believable in the context of the world. What now is completely stupid is the aftermath of crashing the moon- a body of that size crashing into the surface with terminal velocity, even if it has low density, would have turned the entire planet into a giant molten ball. Its a shame they did not do that as it would have been perfectly symbolic- a normal water world turned into a frozen wasteland in the blink of the eye is now turned into a lava world in another instant. A chain of events that illustrate the apocalyptic nature of the entire conflict.

Finally as for the bad ending continuation I would say that DS2 ended with a high note. Aside from that I dont remember if it was here or somewhere else that I read about the old developers gaming with ideas for DS4 continuation. They did not reveal what they came up with (since maybe EA wanted to use them- lol), but they did hint rather ominously that maybe a victory over the necros would have not been such a great thing, since while they are extremely dangerous at the end of the day they are the devil you know. Maybe there is a force even beyond the necros? Perhaps some incomprehensible cosmic entities that actually created them because if you think about it the necro cycle does suspiciously look like a weapon designed by purpose. After all, you can even destroy ever single last marker you know of but all it takes is for enough victims get too close to a single one to turn the more dumber ones into scizos, creating more bodies to consume, and the smarter ones into replicators, compelled to recreate the markers.

 

[gerey]

While its true that the cracking procedure as shown in DS1 saga highlighted the need for surface side installations to act as conduits for the anti-gravity tethers, keep in mind that this was a civilian commercial project and a very old method at that. I think it was explained in a article that the Ishimura was one of the very first of its kind. Nothing is really stopping from having some plausible wiggle room by explaining that the top high end planet crackers have developed more efficient methods of cutting down on the preparing stages by doing geological research and building planet side conduits. For example orbital missile tethers launched that burrow themselves into the target body and are ready to use on the spot.

I.e. launch the harpoons into the moon, activate the gravity tethers, rip the moon shell right wide open to expose its core- supposedly containing the original marker from which created it- and wipe it out with a strike. Preferably thermonuclear.

While this is a pretty good argument, I feel that it would undermine the whole premise of the setting and the Lovecraftian nature of the Brother Moons. After all, you can't really nuke Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath, so why would the eldritch horror of Dead Space be any more susceptible to mortal weapons?

Also, I feel that if all it took to get rid of the Brother Moons was a really big gun, wouldn't some other civilization already have done it? Or, alternatively, maybe some other species out there managed to kill one Brother Moon, but they're not stupid, they would have learned from such a mistake. There's also the possibility that they are simply willing to sacrifice one of their to achieve victory. By the point of DS3 humanity is all but eradicated, it's not like they have a fleet of fully manned planet crackers around ready to stand and fight.

After all, you can even destroy ever single last marker you know of but all it takes is for enough victims get too close to a single one to turn the more dumber ones into scizos, creating more bodies to consume, and the smarter ones into replicators, compelled to recreate the markers.

That's the most likely possibility, but I always liked this idea that to defeat the Brother Moons humanity would need to change irrevocably into something monstrous.

Also, I was recently reading about what they had in store with DS4 and I really liked the sound of it - the part in DS3 where you're flying around the space debris and exploring chunks of ships for resources was really fun.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

After all, you can't really nuke Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath

 

[lightbane]

. DS2 and 3 certainly didn't feel like victories to Isaac.

DS2 ends with him getting the girl, killing all bad guys and leaving to somewhere safe. DS3 vanilla game ends with Isaac seemingly dying in a forgotten and destroyed planet after having defeated the fleshy moon, but he still won at least.
Then the expansion asspulls more Moons and a totally-not Pyramid Head rip off.

After all, you can't really nuke Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath, so why would the eldritch horror of Dead Space be any more susceptible to mortal weapons?

Cthulhu was easily weakened enough to be forced into sleep again in his first apparition by driving a ship into it. As much hype as the standard lovecraftian horrors tend to have, they were never supposed to be invincible. They can be defeated... Even if they come back at some point in the future. The Elder Gods and reality-destroying abominations though? That one is something else. The Moons were still fleshy beings that bleed, so they can be killed.

There was a change of writers after the first game and it shows.

 

[JDR13]

The plot/story in DS3 and Awakened is laughably bad. I can't believe I'm actually seeing people talk about it like it's not.

DS3 was total decline from the first two games in almost every aspect.

 

[fork]

Imagine giving a shit about story in a game like Dead Space.
Games like Dead Space would generally profit from having no story at all.

Having said that, how good is Dead Space 2 compared to the original? Worth playing?

 

[lightbane]

It's a step-down IMO, still better than DS3, but definitively weaker than the 1st one.

 

[gerey]

DS2 ends with him getting the girl, killing all bad guys and leaving to somewhere safe.

DS2 ended with Isaac having given up on life. He was pretty much ready to die then and there. I wouldn't really call it much of a positive ending, since all he managed to achieve was a Pyrrhic victory, merely delaying the inevitable at tremendous cost.

Cthulhu was easily weakened enough to be forced into sleep again in his first apparition by driving a ship into it.

Cthulhu wasn't even awakened proper - the stars weren't right. It's pretty much stated that when Cthulhu awakes he will drive the whole of humanity insane and impose eldritch "morality" upon them.

they were never supposed to be invincible

They actually were. Outside of minions like Deep Ones, Mi-Go or reanimated corpses the vast majority of Lovecraftian critters are beyond humanity's ability to harm.

The Moons were still fleshy beings that bleed, so they can be killed.

They're planet-sized, highly intelligent apex predators that consume whole species, and they've been doing what they've been doing for longer than humanity has existed as a species.

I think DS3 did a fairly good job of conveying to the audience that humanity is pretty much fucked.

 

[JDR13]

I think DS3 did a fairly good job of conveying to the audience that Visceral Games was pretty much fucked.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Razor]

While this is a pretty good argument, I feel that it would undermine the whole premise of the setting and the Lovecraftian nature of the Brother Moons. After all, you can't really nuke Cthulhu or Shub-Niggurath, so why would the eldritch horror of Dead Space be any more susceptible to mortal weapons?

Also, I feel that if all it took to get rid of the Brother Moons was a really big gun, wouldn't some other civilization already have done it? Or, alternatively, maybe some other species out there managed to kill one Brother Moon, but they're not stupid, they would have learned from such a mistake. There's also the possibility that they are simply willing to sacrifice one of their to achieve victory. By the point of DS3 humanity is all but eradicated, it's not like they have a fleet of fully manned planet crackers around ready to stand and fight.


That's the most likely possibility, but I always liked this idea that to defeat the Brother Moons humanity would need to change irrevocably into something monstrous.

Also, I was recently reading about what they had in store with DS4 and I really liked the sound of it - the part in DS3 where you're flying around the space debris and exploring chunks of ships for resources was really fun.

Fair enough, although I do point out that if they continued with the ideas they alluded for DS4 its not as much as bombing a major lovercraftian deity but more like the cockroaches following them. Yet this goes already into heavy speculation territory as they had cardinally different ideas for even DS3 (i.e. shadow isaac coop). As for the different species the necros consumed its unknown since it was never established what the others were. Only one, the squidheads on Tau Volantis were established and it was made pretty clear that they already had the means to kill one almost finished moon with a massively scaled up version of kinesis. As said before, they never got around to finish configuring it and as you travel though the machine it is also explained why through environmental scenery- the part where you reconfig it is overrun with corruption, tentacles and has heavy necro presence.

As for the flotilla part then yes, the way I understood it was basically prototyping for potential DS4 wreck salvage gameplay. Concept and space scenery is awesome although throughout DS3 there are signs everywhere that the game was stretched too wide and too thin in development- reused assets (environments) with little variation, coupled with the obviously schizo tier clashes. Like the high school love drama clashing with cosmic body horror on top all the stupid EA injected into it. At least the ex-devs admitted it themselves that they had far more interesting ideas for the different ships of the SCAF flotilla but ended up budget and time constrained to properly implement them. For DS4 the way I understood it the wanted to go back to more Ishimura style approach, ie different ships with different themes and functionalities much like the different sections of the capitol ship from DS1.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

The reason why they are remaking DS1 is because they want to correct its defects by making it more similar to DS3 that, as everyone know, was a success.

For example by toning down the horror elements (people don't like horror, but like mindless shooting a lot), by removing the non-linear levels (ok, all the levels were already completely linear, but people still lose themselves, even with the path drawn on the floor), and the best of all: microtransactions! The most loved game feature by kids and grandparents!