Phatose on 28/1/2011 at 18:47
AFAIK, gamepad input work fine under all settings.
Bjossi on 28/1/2011 at 20:04
Of course it does, it's a fucking gamepad.
Volitions Advocate on 28/1/2011 at 23:08
I just finished it.
I definitely surpasses the first game in every way. Some things I thought would not work ended up working beautifully. They took a few pointers from SS2 I think and added in a few things that die hard fans will go crazy over. (yeah.. and I got sucked in)
Overall... This game would've been GOTY last year if it had come out a month ago. I'll be replaying it a few times for sure. We'll see how the rest of the year adds up, but if its anything like this... It'll be a great year in gaming.
Here's the reward I get for beating the game on "survivalist"
Inline Image:
http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/628/ds2hardcore.jpgI don't know if I'm willing to deal with that kind of frustration.
Your saves aren't difficulty locked, which somebody else mentioned. But you can't start a Hardcore game from a "cleared" savegame of any other difficulty. Which makes sense.
I'll do a full write up/review thing when I feel like I have the time. School is pressing and now that I've spent 10 hours of my hectic life on this thing I have to get back to reality for awhile.
This is something I didn't expect: thought I'd share with anybody who doesn't mind a very mild spoiler (it may seem big but really it isn't)
(
http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/5320/ds2ish.jpg) click if you dare
Phatose on 28/1/2011 at 23:37
You get hardcore mode unlocked on normal as well. Don't know about easy.
Also, you can apparently change the difficulty to hard-core from another mode via the options menu while playing.
As for game of the year....I don't think there's enough content to merit that. It's a fun little romp, but I beat it in 8 hours.
Volitions Advocate on 29/1/2011 at 00:33
I say quality over quantity.
Bjossi on 29/1/2011 at 00:50
They had 2 more chapters in the pipeline but decided to release them as a separate purchase to steal make extra money, instead of releasing a bigger game.
Volitions Advocate on 29/1/2011 at 01:03
None of these points make it a bad game.
Corporate douchebaggery doesn't make the content of the game bad.
and its a helluva lot longer than any call of duty game that has been released in the last few years.
Phatose on 29/1/2011 at 01:46
The quality ain't bad, but it's hardly "OMG stellar". And there were a fair number of games last year that get you 80 hours of "pretty good" versus the 8 here.
As for Call of Duty, I was under the distinct impression that multiplayer was a pretty big part of why those do well. I realize DS2 has multiplayer - but the fact that no one's even talking about it is a pretty clear sign it ain't stellar.
Edit: Well, in yet another example of the immaculate quality control in the PC versions of Dead Space, the elite suits which unlock on round 2 and after apparently aren't actually there.
(
http://twitter.com/deadspace/status/31160071966687232)
Sulphur on 29/1/2011 at 07:46
The only games that give you 80+ hours of gaming these days and in those long gone days of yore, are and were RPGs.
Shooters, not so much. Anyway, even without MP in the equation, this entire generation of video games has had 6-10 hours as standard. The Call of Duty games are notable in that they give you even less than expected.
EvaUnit02 on 29/1/2011 at 08:20
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Shooters, not so much. Anyway, even without MP in the equation, this entire generation of video games has had 6-10 hours as standard. The Call of Duty games are notable in that they give you even less than expected.
FPSes were pretty damn long back in the day, but more often than not it was due to artificial difficulty or poor level design. Getting lost in labyrinth-like levels was business as usual throughout shooters of the '90s.
I was playing AvP1 recently and in one level of the Marine campaign to progress you have to make a platform collapse, by shooting its supports. There was a complete lack of visual cues to tell the player this.
