So...Dead Space 2, am I the only one who thought this deserved least a GotY nom?

This game was if not the best, one of the best action horror romps I have ever played. Insanely fun combat and insane and rewarding challenge with satisfying upgrades to help along the journey made this game. It had it all, epic moments on par with Uncharted, great graphics, excellent varied AI depending on the enemy (the stalker fights are simply put, some of the best fights in any game ever), excellent sound design and a fun, niche multiplayer that still holds a community today. Maybe it's the fact that it came out nearly a year ago that most sites and gamers in general have forgotten about it, but I have not. I loved this game, it was freaking insane, in all the best ways. Sure it wasn't as scary as the first, but unless you're constantly innovating the creature design I think it's next to impossible to keep a horror game scary as the monotony of fighting similar necromorphs sets in, just as I felt it did in the first as well. Visceral understood that the second time around so they made the game one hell of an action/horror romp. The game left more of an impact on me than Uncharted 3 to be honest.

I know the feeling. Red Dead Redemption and Bioshock did nothing for me. What didn't you like about Dead Space 2?

Dead Space 2 was a great game, and a perfect sequel to DS1. It would have made my top 10 GOTY submittions.

Dead Space 2 was one of the better games from this year, but I'm okay with it being under the radar.

Dead Space 2 didn't have the same wow factor as the original. It had it's moments, certainly, but I was a little disappointed to be honest, considering how much I loved the first.

8/10 for me, it lacked punch but was a solid title nonetheless.

While it wasn't as good as Dead Space I in some aspects such as story, it was definitely a high quality title. I don't care about dumb titles such as G.O.T.Y. nor do I know about most games that were nominated for it but it should definitely be mentioned as a top game of 2011.FlamesOfGrey

I agree. Bought the game on a whim and ws extremely surprised at the quality on display. The story was more of a fetch quest than anything, much like the first and most games in general, but I thought it had some interesting if underutilized aspects. Isaac's dementia could have been used to far greater effect, but I can't criticize the game for missed opportunites when it was already more than I had hoped it would be.

Dead Space 2 was a great game, and a perfect sequel to DS1. It would have made my top 10 GOTY submittions.

Phazevariance

Great game, but they toned done the horror way too much.

It's kind of sad that the tensest moment of the game for me was when you briefly revisit the Ishimura.

I know the feeling. Red Dead Redemption and Bioshock did nothing for me. What didn't you like about Dead Space 2?

jamejame

Encounter design was lazy (endless Leaper spam) which made most of the combat needlessly frustrating and not fun, as opposed to the well-balanced challenge of DS1. Story was mediocre. Isaac's character was generic and completely unconvincing as someone with mental problems. Nicole was straight up goofy. Bad ending.

I'm with you on Bioshock, though.

Great game, but they toned done the horror way too much.

It's kind of sad that the tensest moment of the game for me was when you briefly revisit the Ishimura.

topgunmv

I loved it. It wasn't really scary but the first Dead Space wasn't scary either.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

I know the feeling. Red Dead Redemption and Bioshock did nothing for me. What didn't you like about Dead Space 2?

Cherokee_Jack

Encounter design was lazy (endless Leaper spam) which made most of the combat needlessly frustrating and not fun, as opposed to the well-balanced challenge of DS1. Story was mediocre. Isaac's character was generic and completely unconvincing as someone with mental problems. Nicole was straight up goofy. Bad ending.

I'm with you on Bioshock, though.

It's kind of sad that the tensest moment of the game for me was when you briefly revisit the Ishimura.

topgunmv

Yeah, same here.

I also think they should have left Issac as a silent protagonist.

His voice actor did a great job but his actual character was a bit bland and unremarkable.

And I loved the whole dementia business but they didn't really capitalise on it too often.

It was good but it didn't improve much upon Dead Space 1. I was expecting some more open areas rather than trekking through the industry standard 8x10 foot corridors

DS1 was way better.

DS2 dragged on and on and on.

It was good but it didn't improve much upon Dead Space 1. I was expecting some more open areas rather than trekking through the industry standard 8x10 foot corridors

BPoole96

I enjoyed it a lot. I don't really take GOTY awards too seriously, though. Its personal preference at the end of the day.

dead space 2 was a big letdown for me after the fantastic dead space 1. (seriously check it out it is still an amazing game today) I think that reviewers are out of touch when they scored DS2 as high as they did. The pacing was non existent, just one long snaking corridor, and the game became all about jump scares and abandoned real horror. I liked the zero gravity parts of DS2 thoughGunSmith1_basic

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

It was good but it didn't improve much upon Dead Space 1. I was expecting some more open areas rather than trekking through the industry standard 8x10 foot corridors

jamejame

There is the whole section where Isaac looks out a window and sees a huge city

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

It was good but it didn't improve much upon Dead Space 1. I was expecting some more open areas rather than trekking through the industry standard 8x10 foot corridors

BPoole96

There is the whole section where Isaac looks out a window and sees a huge city

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]dead space 2 was a big letdown for me after the fantastic dead space 1. (seriously check it out it is still an amazing game today) I think that reviewers are out of touch when they scored DS2 as high as they did. The pacing was non existent, just one long snaking corridor, and the game became all about jump scares and abandoned real horror. I liked the zero gravity parts of DS2 thoughjamejame

Dead Space hadsuperior pacing- take tram to new area, carry out your mission, return to tram, repeat. This gave the game a great structure and sense of progress. Chapter separations were meaningful. With DS2 it just refused to end. Every mission seemed to be making excuses to delay your objective

You are not the first one on this board I have heard say that DS2 had fewer jump scares. I don't know what to say. I played both games and they both did too many jump scares but jump scares is almost all that DS2 ever did. Everything is putting on a little show for you.

DS1 did have at least one effective horror creature in it. The invincible zombie that stalked you in a couple areas. I also liked that open part, and the part in every stage where you have to back track to the tram provided genuine horror because you were actually anticipating something. As in, actually using your brain

playing it right now and i hate it way less than i expected ofc i only spent 5 bucks on it, soJandurin

Wow, that's a great price. If I had to guess, I'd say Steam?

I paid the full $60 for the 360 version and release and I can't say I regret it. Make you sure you check out the mulitplayer, I had a lot of fun with it. It's kind kind of like a Left 4 Dead lite. Hope you enjoy the game as much as I did.

I think it deserved one but the competition this year was too thick. Some great games were inevitably going to be left out. Maybe if it was released later in the year it would have gotten more attention.

Just gotta add that the final level of that game was one of the most intense I've experienced in quite a long time.[spoiler] having to scramble to open locked doors and fighting your way through necromorphs while at the same time running from and trying to slow down the Regenerator, OMFG [/spoiler]

s*** was insane.

[QUOTE="topgunmv"]

It's kind of sad that the tensest moment of the game for me was when you briefly revisit the Ishimura.

balfe1990

Yeah, same here.

I also think they should have left Issac as a silent protagonist.

His voice actor did a great job but his actual character was a bit bland and unremarkable.

And I loved the whole dementia business but they didn't really capitalise on it too often.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]playing it right now and i hate it way less than i expected ofc i only spent 5 bucks on it, sojamejame

Wow, that's a great price. If I had to guess, I'd say Steam?

I paid the full $60 for the 360 version and release and I can't say I regret it. Make you sure you check out the mulitplayer, I had a lot of fun with it. It's kind kind of like a Left 4 Dead lite. Hope you enjoy the game as much as I did.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]playing it right now and i hate it way less than i expected ofc i only spent 5 bucks on it, sojamejame

Yeah, I bought it for $5 on Steam too, couple months ago. I already played the PS3 version, but I intend to run through it on PC just to give it a second chance.

I played DS1 on PC, so maybe switching to console jynxed it or something...

[That's not Dementia lol... jwsoul

Yes. Yes, it is.

A forgotten and under rated game like many others in the first half of 2011.

Everyones just talking about skyrim, skyward, uncharted 3 and gears of war 3.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]playing it right now and i hate it way less than i expected ofc i only spent 5 bucks on it, soJandurin

Wow, that's a great price. If I had to guess, I'd say Steam?

I paid the full $60 for the 360 version and release and I can't say I regret it. Make you sure you check out the mulitplayer, I had a lot of fun with it. It's kind kind of like a Left 4 Dead lite. Hope you enjoy the game as much as I did.

A forgotten and under rated game like many others in the first half of 2011.

Everyones just talking about skyrim, skyward, uncharted 3 and gears of war 3.

g0ddyX

I feel as though if it were published by EA instead of Valve, it wouldn't have received the sameamount of GotY noms and awards.jamejame

It atleast deserves sound design. Nothing, not even BF3 deserved it more than Dead Space 2

Because it's good in it's own right? It doesn't have the same length of multiplayer matches as L4D does becasue they're only about 5-10 minutes instead of full campaigns, but other than that it's essentially a third-person L4D that provides a lot of fun.

jamejame

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

Because it's good in it's own right? It doesn't have the same length of multiplayer matches as L4D does becasue they're only about 5-10 minutes instead of full campaigns, but other than that it's essentially a third-person L4D that provides a lot of fun.

Jandurin

I thought the constat threat and non stopping enemies was marvelous.

And the audio tapes from the cleaning guy on the original ship was great and really frightening :)

It wasn't the game of the year (to me) but a GOTY nom for sure.

I never got to play it. Dead Space 1 was a great game though. Frankly though Dead Space 1 was not atmospheric, scary or tense so if DS2 said screw it to that stuff I don't really mind.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]dead space 2 was a big letdown for me after the fantastic dead space 1. (seriously check it out it is still an amazing game today) I think that reviewers are out of touch when they scored DS2 as high as they did. The pacing was non existent, just one long snaking corridor, and the game became all about jump scares and abandoned real horror. I liked the zero gravity parts of DS2 thoughGunSmith1_basic

Dead Space hadsuperior pacing- take tram to new area, carry out your mission, return to tram, repeat. This gave the game a great structure and sense of progress. Chapter separations were meaningful. With DS2 it just refused to end. Every mission seemed to be making excuses to delay your objective

You are not the first one on this board I have heard say that DS2 had fewer jump scares. I don't know what to say. I played both games and they both did too many jump scares but jump scares is almost all that DS2 ever did. Everything is putting on a little show for you.

DS1 did have at least one effective horror creature in it. The invincible zombie that stalked you in a couple areas. I also liked that open part, and the part in every stage where you have to back track to the tram provided genuine horror because you were actually anticipating something. As in, actually using your brain

I felt that the mission structure that you're praising was Dead Space's biggest fault. It felt too disjointed every time you got on and off the tram. The passive chapter titles that were in Dead Space 2 felt much more organic and fixed something I felt was an actual detractor of the first. Honestly I can't think of a single thing from the first that the second doesn't do better. More variety in enemies, weapons, set pieces, zero g sequences, and they added in some excellent voice work for Isaac.

Dead Space 1 was not atmosphericActicEdge

Serious? The atmosphere is like half of that game's appeal.

I agree that it's not scary, but it is very good at creating a sense of place. Mostly thanks to the sound design, e.g. the part where you start the ship's engines.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]dead space 2 was a big letdown for me after the fantastic dead space 1. (seriously check it out it is still an amazing game today) I think that reviewers are out of touch when they scored DS2 as high as they did. The pacing was non existent, just one long snaking corridor, and the game became all about jump scares and abandoned real horror. I liked the zero gravity parts of DS2 thoughGunSmith1_basic

Dead Space hadsuperior pacing- take tram to new area, carry out your mission, return to tram, repeat. This gave the game a great structure and sense of progress. Chapter separations were meaningful. With DS2 it just refused to end. Every mission seemed to be making excuses to delay your objective

You are not the first one on this board I have heard say that DS2 had fewer jump scares. I don't know what to say. I played both games and they both did too many jump scares but jump scares is almost all that DS2 ever did. Everything is putting on a little show for you.

DS1 did have at least one effective horror creature in it. The invincible zombie that stalked you in a couple areas. I also liked that open part, and the part in every stage where you have to back track to the tram provided genuine horror because you were actually anticipating something. As in, actually using your brain

The invinsible enemy that stalked you in DS1 was not scary, it was annoying. I feel like trying to argue Dead Space was at all horror is just non sense, that game is not scary, the jump scares are not scary, the atmosphere is not tense, the backtracking is nothing great. DS1 was an 8.5 to me, it had great graphics, great combat, a decent story, cool creature design and good pacing. It is not a horror game in any sense of the word though. Its an action game in space.

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]

[QUOTE="jamejame"]I thought there were way fewer jump scares in DS2 than in one. In fact, other than the excellent enviornment, the only scares DS1 provided were jump scares. There were no incredibly morbid scenes or distant, freakish new creatures that the player caught only a glimpse ofthat madeyou ponder whether or you wanted to enter that next room. DS2 didn't have any of this either, but it had fewer jump scares which I consider a good thing as they were numbing in the first. I think the first had excellent environment, and because you weren't almost constantly fighting something as you are in the second, it camse off scarier, but I don't it did anything exceptionally better than two in the scare department.

ActicEdge

Dead Space hadsuperior pacing- take tram to new area, carry out your mission, return to tram, repeat. This gave the game a great structure and sense of progress. Chapter separations were meaningful. With DS2 it just refused to end. Every mission seemed to be making excuses to delay your objective

You are not the first one on this board I have heard say that DS2 had fewer jump scares. I don't know what to say. I played both games and they both did too many jump scares but jump scares is almost all that DS2 ever did. Everything is putting on a little show for you.

DS1 did have at least one effective horror creature in it. The invincible zombie that stalked you in a couple areas. I also liked that open part, and the part in every stage where you have to back track to the tram provided genuine horror because you were actually anticipating something. As in, actually using your brain

The invinsible enemy that stalked you in DS1 was not scary, it was annoying. I feel like trying to argue Dead Space was at all horror is just non sense, that game is not scary, the jump scares are not scary, the atmosphere is not tense, the backtracking is nothing great. DS1 was an 8.5 to me, it had great graphics, great combat, a decent story, cool creature design and good pacing. It is not a horror game in any sense of the word though. Its an action game in space.

Well that's just like, your opinion man.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]Dead Space 1 was not atmosphericCherokee_Jack

Serious? The atmosphere is like half of that game's appeal.

I agree that it's not scary, but it is very good at creating a sense of place. Mostly thanks to the sound design, e.g. the part where you start the ship's engines.

What was so atmospheric about this game? I played this game maxed out, at midnight in complete darkness with headphones. Was I suppose to be absorbed? Because I definitely wasn't. Everything is realized well (sound design was excellent) but man its just not scary or gripping. Perhaps sterile steel just doesn't do it for me.