Dead Space - A new System Shock?

swaaye on 16/11/2008 at 03:22

Quote Posted by Dario

I also thought Doom3 was a poor version of this game, in comparison. Imo, Doom3 wishes its monsters, weapons, and portrayal of a space-station-like facility was this cool.

I am amused with how Doom3 looks about as good as this game, even being 4 years old now. Oh how we've progressed. Oh and anti-aliasing actually works with Doom3. And Doom3's controls are tight and responsive. AND it's first person which I definitely prefer.

I kinda liked Doom3 really... Sure it was monster closet-ridden. It was repetitive. But it was interesting and I enjoyed what it did. I always enjoy seeing id Software's take on evil things.

Dead Space definitely has nothing amazing going for it. It's an average mixture of average gameplay ideas and average graphics. It's safe, simple and rather easy. It's the embodiment of EA on many levels. If it was named "System Shock 3" it would be getting torn a new one, but we're all being nicer since they smartly named it something "new".

EvaUnit02 on 16/11/2008 at 07:28

Quote Posted by swaaye

I am amused with how Doom3 looks about as good as this game, even being 4 years old now. Oh how we've progressed.

A console game designed for static hardware specifications that were set in 2005, that looks like a PC game from the same era, who'da thunk'it?!

june gloom on 16/11/2008 at 07:36

Eva wins.

EvaUnit02 on 16/11/2008 at 08:32

Quote Posted by swaaye

Oh and anti-aliasing actually works with Doom3.

Couldn't you force AA from your GPU's control panel?
Although with a lot of modern engines, AA can be incompatible with post-processing implementations (eg HDR, bloom). Eg AA is reportedly not possible with UE3.0 games, when using DX10. STALKER's X-Ray Engine uses "fake AA"

Quote:

And Doom3's controls are tight and responsive. AND it's first person which I definitely prefer.

A badly optimised console port having sub-par mouse controls when compared to native PC game? No way dude!

242 on 16/11/2008 at 09:36

Quote Posted by swaaye

I am amused with how Doom3 looks about as good as this game, even being 4 years old now. Oh how we've progressed.

I don't know what setup you're playing it on, but with good monitor and highest settings DS looks much much better than D3 (ok, I agree to remove one "much" if you'll insist), more realistic too.

Quote:

I kinda liked Doom3 really...
Sure it was monster closet-ridden. It was repetitive. But it was interesting and I enjoyed what it did.

Quote:

Dead Space definitely has nothing amazing going for it. It's an average mixture of average gameplay ideas and average graphics. It's safe, simple and rather easy.

:erm: Something must be wrong with you ;)

Aja on 16/11/2008 at 10:18

Quote Posted by EvaUnit02

A console game designed for static hardware specifications that were set in 2005,

Yeah but they were way ahead of '05 PC specs. Only now have PCs surpassed the Xbox hardware (at least from a visual standpoint), and games like Gears 2 and even Banjo Kazooie still look better than most PC games. The problem with Deadspace is not the age of the hardware it was designed on. The fact that it looks like Doom 3 (apparently) is not excusable in that way.

june gloom on 16/11/2008 at 10:38

Wow, I finally feel like I understand you.

EvaUnit02 on 16/11/2008 at 11:51

Quote Posted by Aja

Way to miss the point entirely, we're talking about SOFTWARE here. Hardware is irrelevant to the argument. Every modern console game looks graphically on par with games from 2004/2005 either A. developed exclusively for PC or B. with the PC as the lead platform.

Half-Life 2, FEAR, Doom 3, Far Cry... all of these games supported features that the average PC rig may've not been optimally supported/cope with performance-wise at the time, but the features were there nonetheless.
Common features in current generation console games such as post-processing effects like bloom, HDR; soft shadows; per-pixel lighting; etc... one or more of those four aforementioned games supported those features.

Jason Moyer on 16/11/2008 at 11:54

Quote Posted by swaaye

I kinda liked Doom3 really... Sure it was monster closet-ridden. It was repetitive. But it was interesting and I enjoyed what it did. I always enjoy seeing id Software's take on evil things.

If Doom 3 had audio logs and messages to read, it would have been a new system shock for sure.

I enjoyed Doom 3, it was basically what I expected (monster-closet hell) and not being able to use the flashlight with a weapon drawn, which most people apparently found annoying, made the game much scarier to me. Really, I dunno how people can't see that Dead Space is almost exactly the same game with a different camera angle and all of the scary parts removed. FFS, they even do the "run from an airlock to another airlock while your oxygen counter depletes" shit over and over.

242 on 16/11/2008 at 13:08

Quote Posted by Jason Moyer

If Doom 3 had audio logs and messages to read, it would have been a new system shock for sure.

But, AFAIR, it had.

Quote:

Really, I dunno how people can't see that Dead Space is almost exactly the same game with a different camera angle and all of the scary parts removed.

You completely missed the main feature of this game. Did you play RE4? It's the combat mechanics that drastically separates DS and D3, and makes this game 10 times more enjoyable and satisfactory for me. Also, I don't know how anyone can consider Doom3 scarier than Dead Space - DS is obviously considerably less predictable, more diversified, and generally more maturely designed in terms of frightening than D3.