Dead Space 3: Where It All Went Wrong For The Franchise?

An eGamer journalist looks at Dead Space 3's marketing, fan reception, his own opinion of the game, the micro-transactions, critical performance and, most importantly, the actual sales of the game to deduce that Dead Space 3 is where it went, or is going, wrong for the franchise.

[JW1080]

I still liked Dead Space 3. There I said it. With that said it was the worst of the 3. The first one will always hold a special place in my heart. If they ever make another one lets hope they go back to their roots and bring the scares back. Because the first Dead Space kicked ass.

[knowyourstuff]

I know right? The problem came with diluting the franchise and alienating the old fan base. EA got greedy, wanted to expand the fanbase by making it like every other game that just happened to be selling well at the time, like Gears of War. So they included human enemies that shoot back, and zero horror elements.

Instead, they made a watered down action game. But they didn't market the game as an action game, they marketed it as "The new face of horror". Instead, they should've marketed it as an action game, for what it really was, that would've attracted all of the action game fans and EA would've made its money. Instead they marketed a non-horror game to horror fans, and so no one bought it. Too bad EA, you're all incompetent greedy bastards anyway.

[Monstar]

play the game first...lol. Just cause he talks more now and has cinematic moments DOESN'T make it an ACTION game. Much of the enviroments, atmosphere and survival elements remain intact if not better. (play pure survival mode)

If DS were to remain like the first, NO ONE would play it and would score incredibly LOW, times have changed so some variety is needed. Dead Space 3 is a damn good game...very engaging and thrilling, IMO.

[Bimkoblerutso]

^The game gets hate for all the wrong reasons, as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, there is a greater emphasis on action and the general atmosphere doesn't feel nearly as isolated and desperate, but that's not BAD. Something is not bad simply because it is not something else. That's retarded.

The game has problems (mostly with pacing and the story/characters), but I actually really liked the action bits.

At the same time, though, I would probably be happier if they kept what was good about 3 and went back to horror through and through.

[Azfargh]

Got it yesterday... played for 1h. I´m just having a blast! Of course, I´ve got the same opinion: not better than 2 and 1.

Great game until now! Even enjoyed the human enemies... it´s good to have more "basic" enemies... and just because it´s "basic", doesn´t mean it´s bad. I´m a little tired from the old set of necromorphs from the last two games... pretty much the same! Gets old eventually, you know...

[Canary]

I thought the general consensus was that the franchise started to "go wrong" with the second game, where it abandoned the whole "horror game" aspect that made the first game such a success in favor of more generic action combat aesthetics.

[da_2pacalypse]

Second game was an action game... but it was still scary to some extent. I liked DS2, not as much as DS1, but I still liked it. DS3 is just not dead space....

[Brucis]

Microtransactions, a single ammo type, far too many human enemies, less emphasis on being alone (partly in thanks to the co-op), more focused on action instead of atmosphere and survival, etc. etc.

[DeadSpaced]

Far too many human enemies? Now granted, it shouldn't have had any, but an extremely small fraction of the game was human enemies.

[IK IR Y IP T]

i loved dead space 3 so did all my friends so take ur article and shove it

[SleazyChimp]

Agreed. I love the coop, even if you didn't, at least you wasn't stuck with a stupid AI character that you had to micromanage.

[Tody_ZA]

That's a bit of a childish response. Nothing stops you or your friends from loving the game, and the article says that there's no problem with loving it.

But surely if you look at the sales figures, and the game's marketing and critical and fan reception, it clearly isn't doing too well, and these are issues we've got to address and talk about in games journalism. Would you rather want issues to be avoided, problems to be sugarcoated and publishers and developers to be praised at every turn?

There's no need to get sensitive or defensive, because if you like the game there's no force on the planet that has the right to take that away from you. But there's a lot more to Dead Space 3's issues than whether people like it or not.

[Dms2012]

I am at about 75%, for the most part I love it about as much as 2. I do not like the inclusion of human enemies, but its a minor annoyance. As for coop, I am not forced to play it, therefore it doesn't diminish the game in that sense. One big complaint I have is the save system, oh my god I have had to go way back a few times and replay alot of the game due to it not saving my progress correctly.

[GribbleGrunger]

Co-op.

[XIIIWARRIOR41]

I love the game. Happy I freakin plat it finally!

[Gamer-Z]

I think micro transactions are OK as long as it doesn't interfere with the flow of game and its F2P

[colonel179]

Micro transactions are a very dangerous trend for the industry. It may start as a good idea but it will only take one game who implements it in a abusive way and be successful to ruin it. Just look at DLC. It started as a way to expand games and deliver more content to players without the need for a sequel. Yet, it became a way to milk gamers from all the money they could by cutting content from the game to sell it separately. DLC became the reason unlockables are now a thing of the past.

Micro transactions can be "good" (will never be good) if they only offer it as an alternative for stupid gamers who want to unlock things faster without enjoying the game itself, and only by not affecting gameplay and be completely optional.

If they start to mess with online gameplay, making gamers pay money, or worse cutting content by many bits to be unlocked just by paying, then the industry will just burn itself to the ground. This is something that shouldn't have become a trend in the first place. I just don't understand why many people agree to pay for stuff that used to be a complete package when buying a game in the past.

[MaleManSam]

It honestly wasn't that bad. People will take one thing wrong with a AAA game and run with it till the cows come home, just like with Assassins creed 3 and Mass effect 3.

What people are failing to see is that it was pretty much just like the first 2 games, its just we have become desensitised to the style and horror. Yes, it has human enemies, yes it has more human interactions, but Issac is alone for 90% of the game.

Tbh, it is the weakest of the 4 (Including DS: Extraction) I personally was not expecting such a weak story, undeveloped characters and a total change in Issac (Seriously he acted like stoned tween). The story was what brought this game down, DS has never been good at developing villians (You probably forgot there was one in 2 right?) but the one in this one was a joke e.g.

Main villian "I'm going to kill you Issac, and the marker will free us all!"
Issac: "NO! I'm going to kill you!, you're doing the wrong thing!"
Main villain: "No, YOU WILL DIE!"
Issac: "NO YOU" etc. etc.

Eh... its still a 7/10 in my books which isn't bad. But not what the series deserved. It was totally different to what I expected.

Just make a sequel to DS: Extraction please, I honeslty thought that was the best one, and had the best character developments.