SilentHeaven109 at GameGrin writes: "Dead Space 3 has been the subject of extensive criticism since its release, for everything from its homogenised gameplay, to the addition of tension-killing co-op, to EA's decision to include micro-transactions in a £40 game. It's not a bad game, by any means, but it certainly isn't scary. It's easy to blame the co-op, the brighter environments, or the option to order an airstrike via credit card for this lack of genuine horror, but for me, the problem is a little closer to home. The problem is that Isaac Clarke is still alive."
If EA and Motive Studio plan on remaking all the main Dead Space entries, they have to change a lot of what made Dead Space 3 so divisive.
Simple, do not bother with a Dead Space 3 remake. Rather have a new entry for Dead Space.
Yeah I agree. Make a dead space 3, but have an original story/setting. They’ve proven they can do the game justice, and I think they could evolve 2 in a good direction, keeping a similar tone. I’d love s Dead Space 2 and 3 though. The remake was fantastic. Top tier remake, up there with RE2.
Remaking 3 would need to be a reworked and somewhat changed remake as 3 was flawed in most peoples eyes and the worst entry.
WTMG's Kyle Nicol:
"Was Dead Space 3 really that bad?
Well, it’s a complicated question. Dead Space 3 is undeniably the weakest of the trilogy. It’s a game that deviates so far from the original formula, that it throws a lot of what made Dead Space special in the first place out of the window. Although, where it does make up for it is one of the best cooperative shooters on the market, even after all this time. Do I recommend playing this game ten years later? Hell yes. But make sure your expectations are in the right place. It has a lot of problems that bring it down."
With the upcoming Dead Space Remake, we replay and rank the original three games.
Dead Space
Dead Space 2
The Callisto Protocol
...
...uhm...
...
...Lost Planet 3?
They need to seriously continue this ip with a new entry. Even if it's just another movie I don't care I love everything about this game.
Well, considering pretty much EVERYONE around him dies (and entire cities and ships burn), I've never really been all that concerned with the threat of the necromorphs. Like in most games, I just consider the protaganist to be exceedingly resourceful and well adapted to the given threat.
My real problem in DS3 was that they made Isaac about as interesting as a bag of hammers. In the second game he was a guilt-ridden mess, struggling with his sanity. In the third game, he just acts like an angsty pre-teen the whole game. Here they were trying to save all of civilization, and all he and Ellie could ever talk about was their feelings? Gimme a friggin break.
Cool story bro
simply put ds1
hes an engineer not cut out for this , this comes across as tense limites weapons and capabilitys
ds2, hes seasons he knows to aim for limbs and what works the death and loss gets to him mentally he on the verge of either going hardcore steel mind or comatose (steelmind nothing affects him as hes seen it before )
hes a survivor
ds3 hes a mess he knows whats happening he knows hes loosing it and bows out but hes now a soldier a leader in this regard he knows necromorphs and how to fight them
this comes across as him leading the charge and being resentful
additionally, no sequal set in ame time frame is as frightning as an original
ds1 was new ground
ds2 we knew what was coming and prepared for it
ds3 is we knows whats coming and where, we cover grates we set mines we dont mess around with style weapons
ive platted all 3 and i can see how it goes and whay, ds4 would be a full on battle to survive.
From the article "...it's getting quite implausible at this point."
Wait so your saying the idea of necromorphs in the first place is plausible?
well he IS dead for me