bit-gamer.net

Dead Space 2 Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 55

Reply
scott_chegg 1st February 2011, 08:34 Quote
Sounds great. Just need to finish Dead Space 1 now.
chrisb2e9 1st February 2011, 08:36 Quote
Never finished the first. got bored of it. Think I will give this one a miss.
memeroot 1st February 2011, 08:37 Quote
isnt it dx9 and not getting download content on pc?

= fail
eVoPhantom 1st February 2011, 08:59 Quote
The first was excellent, not sure how someone can get bored of it. Thought it was well paced and if you allowed yourself to become immersed, it was quite scary...... if played on the harder levels.

Not played much of the second one yet but it is good so far, perhaps not as much of an impact as the first.
maximus09 1st February 2011, 09:02 Quote
I never played the first one :( But I would have probably got too scared to finish it anyway :D Maybe I will play thi sone though??
Mraedis 1st February 2011, 09:27 Quote
I really dislike third person shooters that don't do a good enough job of dealing with the third person perspective, is this one of them? Dead space 1 was.
DbD 1st February 2011, 09:29 Quote
The problem with the first one was you had limited health+low ammo and you had to buy both at great expense from shops, where if you weren't wasting money on ammo+health you could buy weapon upgrades instead.

Hence you spent a lot of the game trying to complete sections using the minimum ammo + health, then running back and forth saving. This meant a lot of restarting as every time you get jumped at some suspense moment, almost die but make it however having used up far too much ammo + in need of a large health pack you need to redo that section this time taking nearly no damage + using minimal ammo, then going back halfway across the map to save.

This isn't that much fun.

The game also forced you to shoot very accurately to win against charging/shooting enemies, while hampering you with dodgy mouse control and a 3rd person view point for aiming. This got pretty frustrating when you missed some enemy which not only meant a waste of expensive ammo but also getting hit wasting expensive health. Cue restarting that little bit again.

I did complete dead space, but I can't say I really enjoyed it. Is dead space 2 any better?
wafflesomd 1st February 2011, 09:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DbD
The problem with the first one was you had limited health+low ammo and you had to buy both at great expense from shops, where if you weren't wasting money on ammo+health you could buy weapon upgrades instead.

Hence you spent a lot of the game trying to complete sections using the minimum ammo + health, then running back and forth saving. This meant a lot of restarting as every time you get jumped at some suspense moment, almost die but make it however having used up far too much ammo + in need of a large health pack you need to redo that section this time taking nearly no damage + using minimal ammo, then going back halfway across the map to save.

This isn't that much fun.

The game also forced you to shoot very accurately to win against charging/shooting enemies, while hampering you with dodgy mouse control and a 3rd person view point for aiming. This got pretty frustrating when you missed some enemy which not only meant a waste of expensive ammo but also getting hit wasting expensive health. Cue restarting that little bit again.

I did complete dead space, but I can't say I really enjoyed it. Is dead space 2 any better?

Sounds like you weren't very good at the game.

A lot of these complaints suck so far.


"isnt it dx9 and not getting download content on pc?

= fail"

Really? Who cares whether or not it's DX9 or 10, or even 11. The game looks great graphically. Why am I even replying to your post....

"I really dislike third person shooters that don't do a good enough job of dealing with the third person perspective, is this one of them? Dead space 1 was."

The perspective is the same in DS2. I think it looks and feels great. Gives you a good level of immersion.
CardJoe 1st February 2011, 10:12 Quote
Agreed, regardless of whether it uses DX9 or DX11, the game still looks great. It shouldn't use new tech just for the sake of using new tech.

The perspective is the same as it was in the first game. If you didn't like that, then...

And, agreed, it does just sound as if you weren't very good at the game, DbD. Ammo and health weren't that rare, though it was admittedly tough to get every upgrade. Still, if you were restarting after every fight and found it difficult to shoot an arm-covered monster in the limbs...
erratum1 1st February 2011, 10:17 Quote
I recently got the original for a fiver and have completed it twice I thought it was great, really want to play DS2 but I want it to come down in price a bit.
smc8788 1st February 2011, 10:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DbD
The problem with the first one was you had limited health+low ammo and you had to buy both at great expense from shops, where if you weren't wasting money on ammo+health you could buy weapon upgrades instead.

Really? I found the game gave me far more med packs and ammo than I could ever use, so I sold them all at the store and spent all my cash on nothing but weapons and power nodes. After 1 1/2 playthroughs of the game I had bought all the suits and had fully upgraded every weapon. Granted this was on normal difficulty and I know this wasn't so much the case on the harder difficulties, but after all that is what the harder difficulties are there for, they shouldn't exactly be a cakewalk. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could have that much trouble completing the game on normal difficulty, let alone easy.

I also don't understand complaints about the third person camera angle. I like the fact it is so close to the character and doesn't let you immediately see everything around you. This is a deliberate design choice; if the camera angle was similar to the one in Batman:AA for instance, then the game wouldn't be nearly as scary/suspenseful.
Blackmoon181 1st February 2011, 10:19 Quote
This game reminds me stylistically about the transition from F.E.A.R to F.E.A.R 2 . Psychological Horror to a more action orientated experience.

Its a shame the second one was pants !
Pete J 1st February 2011, 10:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DbD
The problem with the first one was you had limited health+low ammo and you had to buy both at great expense from shops, where if you weren't wasting money on ammo+health you could buy weapon upgrades instead.

Hence you spent a lot of the game trying to complete sections using the minimum ammo + health, then running back and forth saving. This meant a lot of restarting as every time you get jumped at some suspense moment, almost die but make it however having used up far too much ammo + in need of a large health pack you need to redo that section this time taking nearly no damage + using minimal ammo, then going back halfway across the map to save.

That's what the business calls survival horror. It'd be like complaining that MS Flight simulator involves planes!
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Agreed, regardless of whether it uses DX9 or DX11, the game still looks great. It shouldn't use new tech just for the sake of using new tech.
Couldn't agree more. What's more, Dead Space 1 and 2 can run on very low hardware requirements - whoever coded the game did it bloody well.

Edit: I'm also glad to see the game awarded a high rating. Eight is spot on.
faugusztin 1st February 2011, 10:28 Quote
The real question is - are controls finally fixed ? Or it is still "roll your mouse 5 times over your mousepad and waste 30 seconds to turn around by 180 degrees" ? Dead Space 1 was unplayable exactly because of this issue (at least for me). And don't expect from me to play shooters with gamepad.
Baz 1st February 2011, 10:29 Quote
I'm really enjoying this one. The combat is very good (the 3rd person doesn't grate at all), and the game is generally scary at points, even if it's more BOOGA BOOGA BOO! scary than creeping dread scary. Joe is spot on to say it's paced very well indeed and the game dynamically adjusts drops of ammo and health to keep things tense without being frustrating, even on the normal difficulty. You might think you're flush with guns and health, but 5 mins later after a mega necro-morph fight in the dark, when you're limping and down to your last clip, is when the tension really sets it.

The only bummer for me is no MSAA support yet, even if you force it in the driver :(
Blademrk 1st February 2011, 10:29 Quote
Only just started playing the first one after the getting it in the steam sale.

Really enjoyed the hour or so that I've played so far, Think I'll complete AC:Brotherhood first though before I really get stuck into it.
Baz 1st February 2011, 10:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
The real question is - are controls finally fixed ? Or it is still "roll your mouse 5 times over your mousepad and waste 30 seconds to turn around by 180 degrees" ? Dead Space 1 was unplayable exactly because of this issue (at least for me). And don't expect from me to play shooters with gamepad.

Mouse cotrolls working fine for me, with or without v-sync, which IIRC was the cause of the DS1 issues.
Hamfunk 1st February 2011, 10:42 Quote
I would never play FPS on a gamepad, but feel 3rd person games such as dead space are well suited to it.

I completed DS1 a few weeks ago with a 360 controller hooked up to the PC! Thought it was a great game!
Pete J 1st February 2011, 10:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baz
The only bummer for me is no MSAA support yet, even if you force it in the driver :(
Yup, the only real problem I have with both games :( .
uz1_l0v3r 1st February 2011, 11:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamfunk
I would never play FPS on a gamepad, but feel 3rd person games such as dead space are well suited to it.

I completed DS1 a few weeks ago with a 360 controller hooked up to the PC! Thought it was a great game!

I agree. I spit on gamepads when it comes to FPS, RTS etc, but they work fine for third person games like this. Having said that, I could have done with my mouse for beating the final monster on DS1 (I played on the xbox).
Mraedis 1st February 2011, 11:33 Quote
Sounds like my PC had some issues? I too had the mouse react very slow, in spite of a high-DPI mouse and sensitivity cranked up to maximum. This might've been the cause of my wrong perception of 3dPS, seeing how I only really disliked the looking back and taking turns. ( I quit about 15 minutes in the game)
tozsam 1st February 2011, 12:04 Quote
Seems like comparing the Alien film with aliens 2. The first was die-hard horror, the second was more action oriented.
lacuna 1st February 2011, 12:22 Quote
Quote:
Doom 3 was terrible.

Although apparently better than HL2, as per your article last year: http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2010/02/18/your-favourite-game-was-rubbish/3

:p
kosch 1st February 2011, 13:00 Quote
I enjoyed watched the animated story of dead space 2 much like I did for dead space 1 before playing :)
Pete J 1st February 2011, 13:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mraedis
Sounds like my PC had some issues? I too had the mouse react very slow, in spite of a high-DPI mouse and sensitivity cranked up to maximum. This might've been the cause of my wrong perception of 3dPS, seeing how I only really disliked the looking back and taking turns. ( I quit about 15 minutes in the game)
Heh, last time I say this I swear:

FORCE VSYNC THROUGH THE DRIVERS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by tozsam
Seems like comparing the Alien film with aliens 2. The first was die-hard horror, the second was more action oriented.
That is a perfect analogy.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums