I liked the idea of the asteroid shooting minigame, it just was a tad too difficult and tactilely felt off, like I could never quite judge it properly. So having to redo it really killed the momentum.
I didnt like the original because I felt it lacked momentum, a kind of reason to keep going, the pacing was off in almost everyway for me, sometimes I would load it up and not know where I was or why. So many areas were just such abstract 'industrial' puzzle boxes. The second one was goddamn perfect.
Prohass on
0
Options
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
So this is on sale today on Steam for 5 dollars. I got it for my friend, it makes an excellent gift.
-There needs to be an option to buy Ellie a suit of armor at the store.
-The game lacks a sense of place to the level that DS1 did, and I think I know why- I have no idea where I am in Titan Station, or how the location I'm in relates to the function of the place as a whole. DS1 had the world map when you loaded between levels, letting you know where on the ship you were and why that place existed. I'd have liked something like that.
What, all I knew was I was in Industrial area number 3 instead of number 5 in DS1. In DS2 the sense of place is obvious visually and inferred clearly through the story and dialogue, not on a map, the way it should be. Besides its a linear game, you're not really back-tracking often like Metroid so theres no reason for you to have an overlay of the whole station. At least that was my experience. Why the hell would you buy Ellie a suit of armour?
I mean you have apartments, churches, shopping centres in 2. In 1 I struggle to think of one place that I could recognise as something other than generic industrial machinery.
Funny, I somehow never mistook medlab, crew quarters, the agricultural areas, the bridge, and the handful of cargo and docking areas for industrial zones. Or needed anyone to spell out for me the purpose of the next area of the Ishimura, as it was all self-evident from the outstanding art design.
I'm not very far into DS2 yet, so I don't know how it compares. But DS1 made that ship look and feel like a real place, one that I wanted to keep exploring. Also loved the visual nods to the style of the films Alien and Outland.
"Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are." - Bertolt Brecht
0
Options
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
DS1 probably has better atmosphere if you're going for creepy/isolated. Gameplay wise DS2 is better by a decent margin due to tweaks to the formula. Story wise, well, they're average (but not bad) level sci-fi/horror.
Both are really awesome games, regardless. I'd love a 'backport' of DS1 that included the run/attack speed 'buffs' to Isaac and included the TK Impale ability and possibly the regenerating Stasis.
What, all I knew was I was in Industrial area number 3 instead of number 5 in DS1. In DS2 the sense of place is obvious visually and inferred clearly through the story and dialogue, not on a map, the way it should be. Besides its a linear game, you're not really back-tracking often like Metroid so theres no reason for you to have an overlay of the whole station. At least that was my experience.
I dislike the greater linearity, and the sense of place is sapped by the places, however clearly articulated they are individually, by lacking context. I also don't like how the chapter breaks aren't explicit with a big "Chapter Complete!" screen. DS2 feels very...samey, from place to place.
Why the hell would you buy Ellie a suit of armour?
There are monsters everywhere and all she has is a tank-top.
I mean you have apartments, churches, shopping centres in 2. In 1 I struggle to think of one place that I could recognise as something other than generic industrial machinery.
Yeah, but there are no real...neighborhoods. I have no idea how those places fit into the overall context of Titan Station.
I recognize this is a mostly irrational complaint, but there are some things I preferred about DS1 over DS2.
I bought Dead Space a couple of days ago when it was in the Steam sale. I don't usually like "scary", but I can't stop playing this. I'm not sure what the attraction really is gameplay-wise. I'm not sure I'd say I was "enjoying" it. While I'm playing I just have a constant sense of dread, punctuated by relief whenever I finish a chapter or complete an objective without everything going to shit.
There is still dread underneath the relief though, I'm only on chapter 4 but at the moment the tram cars feel like a very "safe" place. I can only imagine this trust is abused later on, like it has been with the save/shop hubs.
It's annoying that the power nodes, which already seem scarce, have to be wasted on upgrade slots that don't do anything. Seems a bit like bad design to me.
Same. Disclaimer: Many of you will dislike my opinions as follows:
Phobos already elucidated on the "sense of place" and "context" thing, honestly the station in DS2 didn't feel like an actual location to me the same way that the Ishimura did. And yes, I will also say that having a map also helped that for me. It didn't just tell me where I was and where I was going, it gave me context for my whole location. Without it, DS2 went from the more "hub" based feel of DS1 to feeling pretty much like a linear collection of corridors. In DS1 I would constantly be backtracking to the hub areas to change out inventory and upgrade equipment and such, and even on the backtracks I would often be worried about something in the return path (almost never happened, but the concern was still there). In DS2 I'd never really do that because I would never have any idea how far it was to the nearest shop or bench and whether back-tracking or going forward would get me to a health pack sooner.
I mean DS2 had a shopping district and a kindergarden. And I'm pretty much "well, so what?". They didn't feel like well thought out locations, they just felt like palette swaps still. You can complain about DS1 having a constant industrial vibe to its visuals, but just because they added in children's drawings didn't make it feel any different to me in terms of atmosphere. Even then, DS1 still managed some pretty good variation even with its consistent visual design, with places like the hanger bays, medical deck, engineering and bridge looking and feeling very different not just in their textures so much but in their usage of space. I guess you could say the Ishimura, in its utilitarian industrial design, felt like it could have plausibly been an industrial engineering vessel, and even if they maintained a constant visual design it was worth it for that. The Sprawl, to me, just didn't feel like it could have plausible been a home colony to millions, and the attempts to "change it up" visually with new settings didn't really work out. Neither did trying to show a more "living" station with the early sections where people are panicking and running away, it all just felt too railroaded and obvious for me to see it as anything other than a cutscene (ironic, because rail-shooter Dead Space extraction, I felt, handled this aspect much better. In fact I'd say it's an extremely well designed rail-shooter and fits in surprisingly well with the Dead Space universe).
I guess in a way DS1 felt more like a spiritual successor to System Shock 2 for me, whereas DS2 trucked too far along the linear action game route for me to find it interesting. Atmosphere was a huge part of why I enjoyed DS1, and in DS2 I just felt that was lacking.
As for combat mechanics, I don't feel there's all that much difference between the two. One or two new weapons, but the weapons in DS1 were already really well balanced so I never had an issue there (apart from the flamer, which funnily enough, I still felt was bad in DS2). I enjoyed the enemy encounters more in DS1 as well because they didn't depend as much on sudden jump ins to try and tackle the player, something which they needed to resort to more in DS2 because they upped the enemy speed (which in itself I'm not sure had the positive effect they were hoping for). The change to the Stasis system was beneficial, and it was necessary with the faster enemies. That's about all I can think of.
Other aspects, the zero-G navigation was OK, but being able to move freely in zero-G, again, felt like a gameplay change but not necessarily an improvement in itself. Especially since more enemy types were restricted in those because they couldn't navigate free space like you now could. Ditto with the greater emphasis on the "character" of Isaac Clarke. It would have been good if I thought the character of Isaac Clarke was good, but I didn't think it was. For the boss encounters there just wasn't anything as memorable in DS2 as the Leviathan, or even the ending boss, in DS2. I don't really remember anything as memorable as the Hunter, or the opening area of chapter 10 (which was awesomely creepy, liked the use of music there as well).
This is another note that will probably be controversial (as most of this post is already), but I also felt having Isaac as the silent protagonist worked better in the first game. He was a faceless cipher for the player, an ordinary guy fighting desperately to escape a waking nightmare. DS1's plot wasn't complex, and the plot twist was obvious right from the freaking start, but it felt consistent with the setting. DS2's storyline just felt kind of disjointed. I never really knew why I was going anywhere or doing anything, I was just following the pointers. You get to the final mission and you finally find out why . It also seemed to flat out countermand a large chunk of the plot in DS1 (basically the nature of the Marker and how it works). It was obvious to me that there were problems with implementing the plot (or maybe even that they hadn't thought it all through enough) when I got to the final map of the final section, and THEN you finally find out why the space station manager was doing what he was doing. In a dropped text message by the final lift. And then you get the final final twist which just seemed like an excuse for a trippy boss fight that wasn't that fun either.
It's ironic, because having finished DS1, I felt so sorry for Isaac, this ordinary guy who fought to survive and ultimately didn't (at least if you take the ending at face value, and even if you don't if you consider the way the game ended). I felt sad and a bit depressed as the ending music rolled, but also that it had been an epic experience. By the end of DS2, I was just "meh", and kind of glad it was over. I cared less about the fate of the newly improved protagonist than I did when they hadn't tried to force it.
So yeah, overall, I enjoyed DS1 a lot more than I did DS2. To me DS1 feels like a self-contained whole, whilst I would happily re-play DS1 again even now, I just can't say the same about DS2. DS1 felt like a game where all the different aspects, the setting, the atmosphere, the movement and combat control, all worked in concert with each other to create a cohesive whole. DS2 I felt they tried to expand on the concept but individual elements were a bit less well designed. If I were to make a comparison with a different game, it gives me a similar feeling to when they went from Jedi Outcast to Jedi Academy. Technically there's "more" there but it's not necessarily as well implemented. That's a harsh way of putting it, because in reality I still feel that DS2 was a good game. Just that DS1 was better.
The early part at least. I really thought they were going to end it there when the credits started playing. I think I might have actually preferred it, or at least something a little less upbeat.
The early part at least. I really thought they were going to end it there when the credits started playing. I think I might have actually preferred it, or at least something a little less upbeat.
That's kind of the problem, I was waiting for it to happen as soon as the credits rolled and he was just sitting there. Heck I was half-expecting it would happen as she took off, she took off in the one viable space craft and if the point comes where the station's going to explode then, well... Checkov's gun and all that.
I didn't really mind that part though, I mean the whole "Nicole is dead" thing was foreshadowed way more obviously than that and I didn't really mind (except for most of the game I actually thought it was a given of the plot and didn't actually expect that the writers felt this was something we weren't supposed to know about). I was talking mainly about the "and now TIME TO DIE" stuff which is just dumped on at the very end with very little reason, much like the exposition about why they were building it in the first place.
And all that still has another issue. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but in the first DS game, the whole "make us whole again" thing was driving Isaac to bring the Marker back to the podium amplifier so that the outbreak could be contained. Now it seems like the Marker is trying to achieve the exact opposite? The marker itself doesn't cause the virus (or whatever) to go inert as they said in the first game, but instead draws the Necromorphs to it to cause some kind of singularity?
No matter how I looked at it, either the plot of DS2 goes flat against the plot of DS1, or they simply didn't explain much of anything of what was actually happening.
I agree with you on ending on a less upbeat note. For me, that felt really fitting for the end of Dead Space 1.
subedii on
0
Options
GreenStick around.I'm full of bad ideas.Registered Userregular
And all that still has another issue. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but in the first DS game, the whole "make us whole again" thing was driving Isaac to bring the Marker back to the podium amplifier so that the outbreak could be contained. Now it seems like the Marker is trying to achieve the exact opposite? The marker itself doesn't cause the virus (or whatever) to go inert as they said in the first game, but instead draws the Necromorphs to it to cause some kind of singularity?
No matter how I looked at it, either the plot of DS2 goes flat against the plot of DS1, or they simply didn't explain much of anything of what was actually happening.
The Markers are semi-sentient and have different goals, possibly due to errors during their construction (i.e. the Aegis 7 Marker being red instead of black)
And all that still has another issue. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but in the first DS game, the whole "make us whole again" thing was driving Isaac to bring the Marker back to the podium amplifier so that the outbreak could be contained. Now it seems like the Marker is trying to achieve the exact opposite? The marker itself doesn't cause the virus (or whatever) to go inert as they said in the first game, but instead draws the Necromorphs to it to cause some kind of singularity?
No matter how I looked at it, either the plot of DS2 goes flat against the plot of DS1, or they simply didn't explain much of anything of what was actually happening.
The Markers are semi-sentient and have different goals, possibly due to errors during their construction (i.e. the Aegis 7 Marker being red instead of black)
It's been a while but IIRC they said the Aegis marker was read instead of black purely for differentiation. In all other aspects it was supposed to be the same.
Also, where is it actually said that the different Markers have different objectives? I don't remember seeing that in either game, I must have missed that one.
I'm currently carrying the Plasma Cutter, Line Cutter, Ripper and Contact Beam. I just picked up the schematic for the Force Gun, which sounds exciting. I'm considering ditching the Plasma Cutter - is that a crazy thing to do? Am I going to face things where I need to have a Plasma Cutter?
If I sell a Plasma Cutter with upgrades on it and then buy another later will it have the same upgrades?
My standards were the Plasma Cutter, Ripper, Pulse Rifle, and Line Gun. I mostly used and upgraded the Plasma Cutter and Ripper. I didn't care much for the Contact Beam or Force Gun. Out of all that, I wouldn't drop the Plasma Cutter, it's the most well-rounded gun in the game.
Remember you can bank guns too, just store it instead of selling it, if you want to give the Force gun a try.
Most of the weapons are well balanced enough for their roles, although I'd recommend keeping at least one weapon that can deal with enemies consistently at range. Personally if I were to drop the plasma cutter, it would be for the pulse rifle. The Force Gun is a short range weapon, like a shotgun, and also fires grenades which can help against groups but isn't good against individual enemies. Since the Ripper is already a short range weapon you'd be sacrificing a bit of versatility (although I suppose that role could be filled by the line cutter if you've got enough ammo, however I suspect you would have ammo issues). Still, the Ripper is probably going to be your main weapon anyway, and I suppose if you get good with the alt-fire you won't miss the plasma cutter.
I'm not sure but I don't believe you can buy it back with the same upgrades, but you do sell it for more cash. You'd still be selling it at a loss though.
One final suggestion though: role with 3 weapons instead of 4. Upgrade nodes and ammo are scarce in the game, and trying to upgrade 4 guns is going to be difficult, I'd say you can "effectively" upgrade 2-3 weapons over the course of the game. Ammo drops also largely depend on what weapons you're currently carrying, so if you're carrying two weapons, you get a bit more of each. Then again, the ripper (especially when fully upgraded) is pretty ammo efficient so that may not be an issue. Just be wary when using it because enemies can sometimes slip behind the disk to start causing damage when things get hectic, and you need to aim it low to bring it closer to you.
Personally I used to use the Pulse Rifle as my main, with Force gun and contact beam as my other two. Force gun for the "panic" weapon and to deal with mobs (and it's actually really good against Guardians), and the contact beam for really heavy enemies. And also to sell off the spare contact beam ammo for cash, it's actually pretty valuable.
I beat DS1 a few days ago and I'm a little confused about the ending and what was happening behind the scenes.
So, the beacon on this planet was a government plant, right? Intended as an experiment to see if their replicated one worked? The whole mission seemed to be orchestrated by Kendra to recover the beacon and end the experiment. Instead, Issac goes off the rails and starts unknowingly helping the beacon, thanks to his dead(?) girlfriend. What do the Unitarians have to do with the whole thing?
I beat DS1 a few days ago and I'm a little confused about the ending and what was happening behind the scenes.
So, the beacon on this planet was a government plant, right? Intended as an experiment to see if their replicated one worked? The whole mission seemed to be orchestrated by Kendra to recover the beacon and end the experiment. Instead, Issac goes off the rails and starts unknowingly helping the beacon, thanks to his dead(?) girlfriend. What do the Unitarians have to do with the whole thing?
A lot of this is actually explained in the logs you get in your new game + after you beat the game, but the basic idea of it is largely there.
Basically the marker was the cause of the outbreak on Aegis 7, but only once it had been removed. Isaac and the others were getting hallucinations to try and return the marker back to its proper place to stop the outbreak.
The marker was replicated off of an original they discovered back on Earth. They took it to Aegis 7 and "tested" it, with the obvious results. Experiment was then scrapped, and the marker left to keep things contained. When the Ishimura arrived illegally and removed it, things went haywire. Kendra was sent in to retrieve it. Isaac and other people like Kyne were just trying to (unknowingly) return it, the marker was manipulating them to try and restore it back to the pedestal it was remove from.
The Unitarians are basically a cult based around the guy who discovered the original marker and was subsequently assassinated (it was formed after he died). Going by the in-game logs they believe the marker is the core to their beliefs and may hold the key to eternal life. Which is why they were so desperate to grab the marker and take it off-world.
The logs you start the game with in New Game + are basically logs that detail that original science expedition and what happened, what they discovered with the marker and then subsequently left it there.
The beacon works, though if the whole necromorph thing is an intended effect or some sort of malfunction due to the human construction of the marker is unknown. The marker sending out signals/"hallucinations" to humans at least hints at some sort of functioning damage control-protocol on the marker's part. My impression, and general interpretation it seems, is that the marker in DS1, and it's extraterrestial origin, isn't really malicious: It's just fucking dangerous due to being technologically advanced to the point of "things man wasn't meant to know".
Earthgov planted the marker on the planet as a test site/safekeeping ~200 years ago, and abandoned it/forgot about it; can't remember if that part's been elaborated on. The mining mission was more or less just an illegal business enterprise stumbling upon shit important to space scientologists and them expanding the whole operation covertly from there. I don't think they had any prior knowledge about the marker, haven't checked the wiki in a while though it's hypothetically possible someone got hold of old secret records describing the marker site.
Edit: Ah yes, Subedii is right about shit not hitting the fan until the expedition broke off a piece of the original marker structure. Forgot about that.
Though aren't things going downhill even before that, in the first prequel comic (which is pretty awesome btw)?
I beat DS1 a few days ago and I'm a little confused about the ending and what was happening behind the scenes.
So, the beacon on this planet was a government plant, right? Intended as an experiment to see if their replicated one worked? The whole mission seemed to be orchestrated by Kendra to recover the beacon and end the experiment. Instead, Issac goes off the rails and starts unknowingly helping the beacon, thanks to his dead(?) girlfriend. What do the Unitarians have to do with the whole thing?
A lot of this is actually explained in the logs you get in your new game + after you beat the game, but the basic idea of it is largely there.
Basically the marker was the cause of the outbreak on Aegis 7, but only once it had been removed. Isaac and the others were getting hallucinations to try and return the marker back to its proper place to stop the outbreak.
The marker was replicated off of an original they discovered back on Earth. They took it to Aegis 7 and "tested" it, with the obvious results. Experiment was then scrapped, and the marker left to keep things contained. When the Ishimura arrived illegally and removed it, things went haywire. Kendra was sent in to retrieve it. Isaac and other people like Kyne were just trying to (unknowingly) return it, the marker was manipulating them to try and restore it back to the pedestal it was remove from.
The Unitarians are basically a cult based around the guy who discovered the original marker and was subsequently assassinated (it was formed after he died). Going by the in-game logs they believe the marker is the core to their beliefs and may hold the key to eternal life. Which is why they were so desperate to grab the marker and take it off-world.
The logs you start the game with in New Game + are basically logs that detail that original science expedition and what happened, what they discovered with the marker and then subsequently left it there.
Okay, thanks. One more question:
What was Kendra wanting to do with it then? It seems like returning it is the right and safe thing to do. Was she intending to take it away and do another experiment, or did she just not understand how to render it 'safe'?
It also seems a bit odd that the beacon tries to get people to return it, when that's also apparently the safe thing to do. Doesn't this beacon want to get out and fuck shit up? Spread the plague, take control of more people, etc. Seems like that would be the more standard sci-fi/horror story.
What was Kendra wanting to do with it then? It seems like returning it is the right and safe thing to do. Was she intending to take it away and do another experiment, or did she just not understand how to render it 'safe'?
It also seems a bit odd that the beacon tries to get people to return it, when that's also apparently the safe thing to do. Doesn't this beacon want to get out and fuck shit up? Spread the plague, take control of more people, etc. Seems like that would be the more standard sci-fi/horror story.
Kendra just acted on orders from the top, Earthgov, wich has been sort of an ominous gray Eminence throughout the series, responsible for all this shit to begin with. Assumingly they wanted to check it out since it had gone active and been involved in an utbreak scenario.
I beat DS1 a few days ago and I'm a little confused about the ending and what was happening behind the scenes.
So, the beacon on this planet was a government plant, right? Intended as an experiment to see if their replicated one worked? The whole mission seemed to be orchestrated by Kendra to recover the beacon and end the experiment. Instead, Issac goes off the rails and starts unknowingly helping the beacon, thanks to his dead(?) girlfriend. What do the Unitarians have to do with the whole thing?
A lot of this is actually explained in the logs you get in your new game + after you beat the game, but the basic idea of it is largely there.
Basically the marker was the cause of the outbreak on Aegis 7, but only once it had been removed. Isaac and the others were getting hallucinations to try and return the marker back to its proper place to stop the outbreak.
The marker was replicated off of an original they discovered back on Earth. They took it to Aegis 7 and "tested" it, with the obvious results. Experiment was then scrapped, and the marker left to keep things contained. When the Ishimura arrived illegally and removed it, things went haywire. Kendra was sent in to retrieve it. Isaac and other people like Kyne were just trying to (unknowingly) return it, the marker was manipulating them to try and restore it back to the pedestal it was remove from.
The Unitarians are basically a cult based around the guy who discovered the original marker and was subsequently assassinated (it was formed after he died). Going by the in-game logs they believe the marker is the core to their beliefs and may hold the key to eternal life. Which is why they were so desperate to grab the marker and take it off-world.
The logs you start the game with in New Game + are basically logs that detail that original science expedition and what happened, what they discovered with the marker and then subsequently left it there.
Okay, thanks. One more question:
What was Kendra wanting to do with it then? It seems like returning it is the right and safe thing to do. Was she intending to take it away and do another experiment, or did she just not understand how to render it 'safe'?
It also seems a bit odd that the beacon tries to get people to return it, when that's also apparently the safe thing to do. Doesn't this beacon want to get out and fuck shit up? Spread the plague, take control of more people, etc. Seems like that would be the more standard sci-fi/horror story.
Kendra was sent to retrieve the marker, I'm guessing because the site had been compromised (the Ishimura was never supposed to go there, neither was anyone else for that matter, that sector was supposed to be officially quarantined)
For the second question, various aspects about the marker are unclear, but the marker in itself appears to be sentient or at least possessing of some kind of intelligence and may not be malevolent, the marker itself acting as a kind of seal against the infection that was there.
If you watch the short animated comics set before the game (you can find them on gametrailers), you see how things went down on Aegis VII when they discovered the marker, subsequently removed it, and caused the outbreak that leads to the start of DS1. One aspect of that is the marker trying to influence people to "protect" it and prevent it from being removed from the pedestal, as well as causing all the mass psychological effects that people start suffering from.
This next bit comes across more in those log notes I was mentioning than in the actual game, but the actual oubreak on Aegis VII wasn't caused by the marker itself, it was caused by whatever virus the scientists reverse-engineered from it after studying it. They also discovered that the presense of the marker itself creates a field around it which prevents the virus from going active. After things went bad, they constructed (apparently under the influence of the marker) a sort of pedestal to amplify its signal, which stopped the outbreak. After that they scrapped the whole experiment, quarantined the system, and left with the marker still there to contain things.
My standards were the Plasma Cutter, Ripper, Pulse Rifle, and Line Gun. I mostly used and upgraded the Plasma Cutter and Ripper. I didn't care much for the Contact Beam or Force Gun. Out of all that, I wouldn't drop the Plasma Cutter, it's the most well-rounded gun in the game.
I can't think of any time that I've used the Plasma Cutter when I couldn't have got the job done quicker with the Line Gun, I was just using it for the sake of conserving ammo.
Most of the weapons are well balanced enough for their roles, although I'd recommend keeping at least one weapon that can deal with enemies consistently at range. Personally if I were to drop the plasma cutter, it would be for the pulse rifle. The Force Gun is a short range weapon, like a shotgun, and also fires grenades which can help against groups but isn't good against individual enemies. Since the Ripper is already a short range weapon you'd be sacrificing a bit of versatility (although I suppose that role could be filled by the line cutter if you've got enough ammo, however I suspect you would have ammo issues). Still, the Ripper is probably going to be your main weapon anyway, and I suppose if you get good with the alt-fire you won't miss the plasma cutter.
The Force Gun seems to be excellent for killing those little swarms. I think it might be a good thing to use against the special Chapter 5 monster (Force Gun to the floor, Stasis, then dismember with Ripper), but I'm finding that when I want to kill other necromorphs it doesn't get the job done.
One final suggestion though: role with 3 weapons instead of 4. Upgrade nodes and ammo are scarce in the game, and trying to upgrade 4 guns is going to be difficult, I'd say you can "effectively" upgrade 2-3 weapons over the course of the game. Ammo drops also largely depend on what weapons you're currently carrying, so if you're carrying two weapons, you get a bit more of each.
My upgrades are a bit haphazard at the moment. My nodes are spread out between four weapons now (PC, LG, Ripper & FG). I mentioned before that I don't like using nodes on upgrades that don't do anything, so I've been just putting them into the initial slots that do something (so, nothing in CB). I barely use the CB, so I could see myself dropping it, but I imagine it might come in handy for a boss fight or selling the ammo.
Then again, the ripper (especially when fully upgraded) is pretty ammo efficient so that may not be an issue. Just be wary when using it because enemies can sometimes slip behind the disk to start causing damage when things get hectic, and you need to aim it low to bring it closer to you.
I hate it when that happens, I also didn't know that you could aim low to get the disk to come closer. I assumed letting it touch the floor or scenery would destroy it. I'm pretty good with the Ripper except when I'm panicking (so, occasionally).
Personally I used to use the Pulse Rifle as my main, with Force gun and contact beam as my other two. Force gun for the "panic" weapon and to deal with mobs (and it's actually really good against Guardians), and the contact beam for really heavy enemies. And also to sell off the spare contact beam ammo for cash, it's actually pretty valuable.
I never bought the Pulse Rifle. I like the "repurposed tools" idea that Dead Space has. I also hate the idea of shooting loads of rounds into something that continues charging at you, which I assumed the Pulse Rifle would lead to (though I imagine this would be worse with the Flamethrower, which I also didn't buy). I like the way that the Ripper and Force Gun have knockback, and the Line Gun usually WILL dismember.
Personally I used to use the Pulse Rifle as my main, with Force gun and contact beam as my other two. Force gun for the "panic" weapon and to deal with mobs (and it's actually really good against Guardians), and the contact beam for really heavy enemies. And also to sell off the spare contact beam ammo for cash, it's actually pretty valuable.
I never bought the Pulse Rifle. I like the "repurposed tools" idea that Dead Space has. I also hate the idea of shooting loads of rounds into something that continues charging at you, which I assumed the Pulse Rifle would lead to (though I imagine this would be worse with the Flamethrower, which I also didn't buy). I like the way that the Ripper and Force Gun have knockback, and the Line Gun usually WILL dismember.
You don't need to shoot loads of rounds, basically you target and shoot limbs, same as before. The good thing about the pulse rifle is that it's a rapid-fire hit-stun weapon on most enemies, which means if you're fast and effective with it you can even keep multiple enemies at bay as every shot basically stumbles them a little. The downside is that you do need to be more accurate with the PR than with the plasma cutter if you're going for dismemberment. PC-side with a mouse I didn't really have much problem doing that.
And yeah, the flamer isn't really worth it, it's pretty much the only weapon in the game I'd say is poorly balanced for effect. Sucks up tonnes of ammo but doesn't damage nearly fast enough, that's supposed to be made up for by the damage over time, but really, you won't have the time to wait.
I beat DS1 a few days ago and I'm a little confused about the ending and what was happening behind the scenes.
So, the beacon on this planet was a government plant, right? Intended as an experiment to see if their replicated one worked? The whole mission seemed to be orchestrated by Kendra to recover the beacon and end the experiment. Instead, Issac goes off the rails and starts unknowingly helping the beacon, thanks to his dead(?) girlfriend. What do the Unitarians have to do with the whole thing?
A lot of this is actually explained in the logs you get in your new game + after you beat the game, but the basic idea of it is largely there.
Basically the marker was the cause of the outbreak on Aegis 7, but only once it had been removed. Isaac and the others were getting hallucinations to try and return the marker back to its proper place to stop the outbreak.
The marker was replicated off of an original they discovered back on Earth. They took it to Aegis 7 and "tested" it, with the obvious results. Experiment was then scrapped, and the marker left to keep things contained. When the Ishimura arrived illegally and removed it, things went haywire. Kendra was sent in to retrieve it. Isaac and other people like Kyne were just trying to (unknowingly) return it, the marker was manipulating them to try and restore it back to the pedestal it was remove from.
The Unitarians are basically a cult based around the guy who discovered the original marker and was subsequently assassinated (it was formed after he died). Going by the in-game logs they believe the marker is the core to their beliefs and may hold the key to eternal life. Which is why they were so desperate to grab the marker and take it off-world.
The logs you start the game with in New Game + are basically logs that detail that original science expedition and what happened, what they discovered with the marker and then subsequently left it there.
Minor correction on Unitology (Dead Space Martyr spoilers):
Altman was murdered by the REAL founders of Unitology to make him a martyr. The actual Altman (as opposed to the Unitology story) thought they were all nuts and is the one disabled the original marker on Earth.
Also, I agree with most of your analysis on DS2, especially the contradiction regarding the behavior of the markers. DS2 was a great game, but DS1 is one of my favorite games I've ever played.
And all that still has another issue. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but in the first DS game, the whole "make us whole again" thing was driving Isaac to bring the Marker back to the podium amplifier so that the outbreak could be contained. Now it seems like the Marker is trying to achieve the exact opposite? The marker itself doesn't cause the virus (or whatever) to go inert as they said in the first game, but instead draws the Necromorphs to it to cause some kind of singularity?
No matter how I looked at it, either the plot of DS2 goes flat against the plot of DS1, or they simply didn't explain much of anything of what was actually happening.
The Markers are semi-sentient and have different goals, possibly due to errors during their construction (i.e. the Aegis 7 Marker being red instead of black)
It's been a while but IIRC they said the Aegis marker was read instead of black purely for differentiation. In all other aspects it was supposed to be the same.
Also, where is it actually said that the different Markers have different objectives? I don't remember seeing that in either game, I must have missed that one.
It's never explicitly stated but the 2 Markers so far definitely have their own plans for Isaac: the Red Marker wanted to be returned to its pedestal and the Yellow (I think?) Marker in DS wanted to absorb his mind, though now that I think about it it may just be both markers trying to "make us whole" through different means
Or it might just have been shitty writing in the sequel...
I'm not having the greatest hopes for the plot in the eventual third installment. I'll play it, but I'm bracing for Alien: Resurrection-levels of dumb.
Posts
i think i was the only one
and i doubt the FPS is going to be in the horror genre - for one, dead space's no-HUD approach goes out the window if you can't see your RIG.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
I didnt like the original because I felt it lacked momentum, a kind of reason to keep going, the pacing was off in almost everyway for me, sometimes I would load it up and not know where I was or why. So many areas were just such abstract 'industrial' puzzle boxes. The second one was goddamn perfect.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
I feel that DS1 is better compared to DS2.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
-There needs to be an option to buy Ellie a suit of armor at the store.
-The game lacks a sense of place to the level that DS1 did, and I think I know why- I have no idea where I am in Titan Station, or how the location I'm in relates to the function of the place as a whole. DS1 had the world map when you loaded between levels, letting you know where on the ship you were and why that place existed. I'd have liked something like that.
I mean you have apartments, churches, shopping centres in 2. In 1 I struggle to think of one place that I could recognise as something other than generic industrial machinery.
I'm not very far into DS2 yet, so I don't know how it compares. But DS1 made that ship look and feel like a real place, one that I wanted to keep exploring. Also loved the visual nods to the style of the films Alien and Outland.
Both are really awesome games, regardless. I'd love a 'backport' of DS1 that included the run/attack speed 'buffs' to Isaac and included the TK Impale ability and possibly the regenerating Stasis.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
I dislike the greater linearity, and the sense of place is sapped by the places, however clearly articulated they are individually, by lacking context. I also don't like how the chapter breaks aren't explicit with a big "Chapter Complete!" screen. DS2 feels very...samey, from place to place.
There are monsters everywhere and all she has is a tank-top.
Yeah, but there are no real...neighborhoods. I have no idea how those places fit into the overall context of Titan Station.
I recognize this is a mostly irrational complaint, but there are some things I preferred about DS1 over DS2.
There is still dread underneath the relief though, I'm only on chapter 4 but at the moment the tram cars feel like a very "safe" place. I can only imagine this trust is abused later on, like it has been with the save/shop hubs.
It's annoying that the power nodes, which already seem scarce, have to be wasted on upgrade slots that don't do anything. Seems a bit like bad design to me.
Same. Disclaimer: Many of you will dislike my opinions as follows:
Phobos already elucidated on the "sense of place" and "context" thing, honestly the station in DS2 didn't feel like an actual location to me the same way that the Ishimura did. And yes, I will also say that having a map also helped that for me. It didn't just tell me where I was and where I was going, it gave me context for my whole location. Without it, DS2 went from the more "hub" based feel of DS1 to feeling pretty much like a linear collection of corridors. In DS1 I would constantly be backtracking to the hub areas to change out inventory and upgrade equipment and such, and even on the backtracks I would often be worried about something in the return path (almost never happened, but the concern was still there). In DS2 I'd never really do that because I would never have any idea how far it was to the nearest shop or bench and whether back-tracking or going forward would get me to a health pack sooner.
I mean DS2 had a shopping district and a kindergarden. And I'm pretty much "well, so what?". They didn't feel like well thought out locations, they just felt like palette swaps still. You can complain about DS1 having a constant industrial vibe to its visuals, but just because they added in children's drawings didn't make it feel any different to me in terms of atmosphere. Even then, DS1 still managed some pretty good variation even with its consistent visual design, with places like the hanger bays, medical deck, engineering and bridge looking and feeling very different not just in their textures so much but in their usage of space. I guess you could say the Ishimura, in its utilitarian industrial design, felt like it could have plausibly been an industrial engineering vessel, and even if they maintained a constant visual design it was worth it for that. The Sprawl, to me, just didn't feel like it could have plausible been a home colony to millions, and the attempts to "change it up" visually with new settings didn't really work out. Neither did trying to show a more "living" station with the early sections where people are panicking and running away, it all just felt too railroaded and obvious for me to see it as anything other than a cutscene (ironic, because rail-shooter Dead Space extraction, I felt, handled this aspect much better. In fact I'd say it's an extremely well designed rail-shooter and fits in surprisingly well with the Dead Space universe).
I guess in a way DS1 felt more like a spiritual successor to System Shock 2 for me, whereas DS2 trucked too far along the linear action game route for me to find it interesting. Atmosphere was a huge part of why I enjoyed DS1, and in DS2 I just felt that was lacking.
As for combat mechanics, I don't feel there's all that much difference between the two. One or two new weapons, but the weapons in DS1 were already really well balanced so I never had an issue there (apart from the flamer, which funnily enough, I still felt was bad in DS2). I enjoyed the enemy encounters more in DS1 as well because they didn't depend as much on sudden jump ins to try and tackle the player, something which they needed to resort to more in DS2 because they upped the enemy speed (which in itself I'm not sure had the positive effect they were hoping for). The change to the Stasis system was beneficial, and it was necessary with the faster enemies. That's about all I can think of.
Other aspects, the zero-G navigation was OK, but being able to move freely in zero-G, again, felt like a gameplay change but not necessarily an improvement in itself. Especially since more enemy types were restricted in those because they couldn't navigate free space like you now could. Ditto with the greater emphasis on the "character" of Isaac Clarke. It would have been good if I thought the character of Isaac Clarke was good, but I didn't think it was. For the boss encounters there just wasn't anything as memorable in DS2 as the Leviathan, or even the ending boss, in DS2. I don't really remember anything as memorable as the Hunter, or the opening area of chapter 10 (which was awesomely creepy, liked the use of music there as well).
It's ironic, because having finished DS1, I felt so sorry for Isaac, this ordinary guy who fought to survive and ultimately didn't (at least if you take the ending at face value, and even if you don't if you consider the way the game ended). I felt sad and a bit depressed as the ending music rolled, but also that it had been an epic experience. By the end of DS2, I was just "meh", and kind of glad it was over. I cared less about the fate of the newly improved protagonist than I did when they hadn't tried to force it.
So yeah, overall, I enjoyed DS1 a lot more than I did DS2. To me DS1 feels like a self-contained whole, whilst I would happily re-play DS1 again even now, I just can't say the same about DS2. DS1 felt like a game where all the different aspects, the setting, the atmosphere, the movement and combat control, all worked in concert with each other to create a cohesive whole. DS2 I felt they tried to expand on the concept but individual elements were a bit less well designed. If I were to make a comparison with a different game, it gives me a similar feeling to when they went from Jedi Outcast to Jedi Academy. Technically there's "more" there but it's not necessarily as well implemented. That's a harsh way of putting it, because in reality I still feel that DS2 was a good game. Just that DS1 was better.
dead space 2 is probably the best possible sequel to it, but they are very different beasts.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
The early part at least. I really thought they were going to end it there when the credits started playing. I think I might have actually preferred it, or at least something a little less upbeat.
I didn't really mind that part though, I mean the whole "Nicole is dead" thing was foreshadowed way more obviously than that and I didn't really mind (except for most of the game I actually thought it was a given of the plot and didn't actually expect that the writers felt this was something we weren't supposed to know about). I was talking mainly about the "and now TIME TO DIE" stuff which is just dumped on at the very end with very little reason, much like the exposition about why they were building it in the first place.
And all that still has another issue. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but in the first DS game, the whole "make us whole again" thing was driving Isaac to bring the Marker back to the podium amplifier so that the outbreak could be contained. Now it seems like the Marker is trying to achieve the exact opposite? The marker itself doesn't cause the virus (or whatever) to go inert as they said in the first game, but instead draws the Necromorphs to it to cause some kind of singularity?
No matter how I looked at it, either the plot of DS2 goes flat against the plot of DS1, or they simply didn't explain much of anything of what was actually happening.
I agree with you on ending on a less upbeat note. For me, that felt really fitting for the end of Dead Space 1.
Also, where is it actually said that the different Markers have different objectives? I don't remember seeing that in either game, I must have missed that one.
I'm currently carrying the Plasma Cutter, Line Cutter, Ripper and Contact Beam. I just picked up the schematic for the Force Gun, which sounds exciting. I'm considering ditching the Plasma Cutter - is that a crazy thing to do? Am I going to face things where I need to have a Plasma Cutter?
If I sell a Plasma Cutter with upgrades on it and then buy another later will it have the same upgrades?
Also you're doing yourself a disservice not having the Line Gun. It's ludicrously powerful.
Remember you can bank guns too, just store it instead of selling it, if you want to give the Force gun a try.
Most of the weapons are well balanced enough for their roles, although I'd recommend keeping at least one weapon that can deal with enemies consistently at range. Personally if I were to drop the plasma cutter, it would be for the pulse rifle. The Force Gun is a short range weapon, like a shotgun, and also fires grenades which can help against groups but isn't good against individual enemies. Since the Ripper is already a short range weapon you'd be sacrificing a bit of versatility (although I suppose that role could be filled by the line cutter if you've got enough ammo, however I suspect you would have ammo issues). Still, the Ripper is probably going to be your main weapon anyway, and I suppose if you get good with the alt-fire you won't miss the plasma cutter.
I'm not sure but I don't believe you can buy it back with the same upgrades, but you do sell it for more cash. You'd still be selling it at a loss though.
One final suggestion though: role with 3 weapons instead of 4. Upgrade nodes and ammo are scarce in the game, and trying to upgrade 4 guns is going to be difficult, I'd say you can "effectively" upgrade 2-3 weapons over the course of the game. Ammo drops also largely depend on what weapons you're currently carrying, so if you're carrying two weapons, you get a bit more of each. Then again, the ripper (especially when fully upgraded) is pretty ammo efficient so that may not be an issue. Just be wary when using it because enemies can sometimes slip behind the disk to start causing damage when things get hectic, and you need to aim it low to bring it closer to you.
Personally I used to use the Pulse Rifle as my main, with Force gun and contact beam as my other two. Force gun for the "panic" weapon and to deal with mobs (and it's actually really good against Guardians), and the contact beam for really heavy enemies. And also to sell off the spare contact beam ammo for cash, it's actually pretty valuable.
A lot of this is actually explained in the logs you get in your new game + after you beat the game, but the basic idea of it is largely there.
The marker was replicated off of an original they discovered back on Earth. They took it to Aegis 7 and "tested" it, with the obvious results. Experiment was then scrapped, and the marker left to keep things contained. When the Ishimura arrived illegally and removed it, things went haywire. Kendra was sent in to retrieve it. Isaac and other people like Kyne were just trying to (unknowingly) return it, the marker was manipulating them to try and restore it back to the pedestal it was remove from.
The Unitarians are basically a cult based around the guy who discovered the original marker and was subsequently assassinated (it was formed after he died). Going by the in-game logs they believe the marker is the core to their beliefs and may hold the key to eternal life. Which is why they were so desperate to grab the marker and take it off-world.
The logs you start the game with in New Game + are basically logs that detail that original science expedition and what happened, what they discovered with the marker and then subsequently left it there.
Earthgov planted the marker on the planet as a test site/safekeeping ~200 years ago, and abandoned it/forgot about it; can't remember if that part's been elaborated on. The mining mission was more or less just an illegal business enterprise stumbling upon shit important to space scientologists and them expanding the whole operation covertly from there. I don't think they had any prior knowledge about the marker, haven't checked the wiki in a while though it's hypothetically possible someone got hold of old secret records describing the marker site.
Edit: Ah yes, Subedii is right about shit not hitting the fan until the expedition broke off a piece of the original marker structure. Forgot about that.
Though aren't things going downhill even before that, in the first prequel comic (which is pretty awesome btw)?
Okay, thanks. One more question:
It also seems a bit odd that the beacon tries to get people to return it, when that's also apparently the safe thing to do. Doesn't this beacon want to get out and fuck shit up? Spread the plague, take control of more people, etc. Seems like that would be the more standard sci-fi/horror story.
For the second question, various aspects about the marker are unclear, but the marker in itself appears to be sentient or at least possessing of some kind of intelligence and may not be malevolent, the marker itself acting as a kind of seal against the infection that was there.
If you watch the short animated comics set before the game (you can find them on gametrailers), you see how things went down on Aegis VII when they discovered the marker, subsequently removed it, and caused the outbreak that leads to the start of DS1. One aspect of that is the marker trying to influence people to "protect" it and prevent it from being removed from the pedestal, as well as causing all the mass psychological effects that people start suffering from.
This next bit comes across more in those log notes I was mentioning than in the actual game, but the actual oubreak on Aegis VII wasn't caused by the marker itself, it was caused by whatever virus the scientists reverse-engineered from it after studying it. They also discovered that the presense of the marker itself creates a field around it which prevents the virus from going active. After things went bad, they constructed (apparently under the influence of the marker) a sort of pedestal to amplify its signal, which stopped the outbreak. After that they scrapped the whole experiment, quarantined the system, and left with the marker still there to contain things.
Sorry, I meant Line Gun, not Line Cutter. I have a few upgrades slotted into it and it is very good when I have the ammo for it.
I can't think of any time that I've used the Plasma Cutter when I couldn't have got the job done quicker with the Line Gun, I was just using it for the sake of conserving ammo.
Normal, it's my first run through (currently at Chapter 5).
The Force Gun seems to be excellent for killing those little swarms. I think it might be a good thing to use against the special Chapter 5 monster (Force Gun to the floor, Stasis, then dismember with Ripper), but I'm finding that when I want to kill other necromorphs it doesn't get the job done.
My upgrades are a bit haphazard at the moment. My nodes are spread out between four weapons now (PC, LG, Ripper & FG). I mentioned before that I don't like using nodes on upgrades that don't do anything, so I've been just putting them into the initial slots that do something (so, nothing in CB). I barely use the CB, so I could see myself dropping it, but I imagine it might come in handy for a boss fight or selling the ammo.
I hate it when that happens, I also didn't know that you could aim low to get the disk to come closer. I assumed letting it touch the floor or scenery would destroy it. I'm pretty good with the Ripper except when I'm panicking (so, occasionally).
I never bought the Pulse Rifle. I like the "repurposed tools" idea that Dead Space has. I also hate the idea of shooting loads of rounds into something that continues charging at you, which I assumed the Pulse Rifle would lead to (though I imagine this would be worse with the Flamethrower, which I also didn't buy). I like the way that the Ripper and Force Gun have knockback, and the Line Gun usually WILL dismember.
that WAS the fix. i'd rather have the DLC in the store for free than no DLC at all. if you don't want it, don't "buy" it. :P
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
You don't need to shoot loads of rounds, basically you target and shoot limbs, same as before. The good thing about the pulse rifle is that it's a rapid-fire hit-stun weapon on most enemies, which means if you're fast and effective with it you can even keep multiple enemies at bay as every shot basically stumbles them a little. The downside is that you do need to be more accurate with the PR than with the plasma cutter if you're going for dismemberment. PC-side with a mouse I didn't really have much problem doing that.
And yeah, the flamer isn't really worth it, it's pretty much the only weapon in the game I'd say is poorly balanced for effect. Sucks up tonnes of ammo but doesn't damage nearly fast enough, that's supposed to be made up for by the damage over time, but really, you won't have the time to wait.
I meant a fix for that fix. :P
So I guess the answer is no. Oh well.
Minor correction on Unitology (Dead Space Martyr spoilers):
Also, I agree with most of your analysis on DS2, especially the contradiction regarding the behavior of the markers. DS2 was a great game, but DS1 is one of my favorite games I've ever played.
Ah, so they just gave everyone with the PC version all the DLC? I was wondering why I had it all.