October
14
Dead Space: Solid scares we've seen before
"Dead Space" is one of those games that make me glad we don't score our reviews at Variety (for those who want to skip ahead, my review is here). On the one hand, it's remarkably well made: There are no poorly designed levels or technical glitches; the combat is solid; the audio design is brilliant; the graphics are good; the zero-g sequences are spectacular. On the other hand, the game is frustratingly unoriginal, drawing so heavily on other sci-fi/horror/action influences (especially, of course, "Aliens") and repeating itself over and over through busywork tasks that there's just not much there there. From the story to the characters to the action to the creatures, you've seen almost all of it before or in the first hour of the game.
It's an admirable attempt by EA to start a new franchise and enter a new genre, but it's a somewhat disappointingly conservative attempt. There's very little in the way of a bold creative vision from developer EA Redwood Shores. It feels more like... well, a big publisher that's trying to move into a new genre and boot up fresh IP while taking as few risks as possible.
Of course, ripping off "Aliens" and sprinkling in everything from "Half-Life 2" to "Bioshock" to "Metroid" is hardly a bad thing. Those are great sources to draw on. "Dead Space" does it well, which is why I can hardly say it's a bad game.
The problem is that it's a horror game and I was scared very infrequently, especially after I played for a couple of hours and figured out the obvious pattern for exactly when an enemy would show up (when you enter a big open room, turn a corner, or solve a puzzle and can see an exit in the distance, for instance).
To the extent I was scared, it was more because of the excellent audio design than the dimly lit corridors and the dozen or so H.R. Giger-esque creature designs that repeat over and over.
There's also something weirdly contradictory about a protagonist whose face you never see and who
never talks in a carefully written story (imagine "Aliens" if Ripley was a bland nobody). Good drama starts with good characters and Isaac Clarke is, essentially, a cipher. It may help immerse players in the horror, but it's bizarre and sometimes flatly ridiculous in moments that are supposed to be terrifying or emotional when Isaac just stands there, silent, as if he's a robot.
So, if you're looking for an easy answer as to whether you should buy it, I'm not your guy (and Variety, in general, is probably not your publication). But if you're looking for a good analysis of the game and an argument for what works and what doesn't, hopefully my review provides some value. Here's an excerpt:
If James Cameron had a dollar for every "Aliens" reference in a videogame over the past 20 years, he could have bought a new Prius. Now, after "Dead Space," he'll be able to cover the budget of "Avatar." Electronic Arts' new sci-fi/horror/action game mixes huge helpings of the genre-defining 1986 movie with ingredients from games like "Bioshock," "Half-Life 2" and "Metroid" into a mix that often impresses but rarely surprises. More gory than frightening, more technically adept than substantive, "Dead Space" will find a healthy crossover aud between gamers and horror fans, but won't leave them with a single new idea to ponder besides the release date of the inevitable sequel.
And you can read the whole thing here.
Also of interest to Dead Space fans: Here's Variety's review of "Dead Space: Downfall," the tie-in animated DVD movie.
Update: Win a copy of "Dead Space: Downfall." Info here.
Chris Morris reports on the business and culture of video games and offers analysis of recent events and industry trends.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
I am so happy to get some kal geons and the kal gold is given by my close friend who tells me that the kal online geons is the basis to enter into the game. Therefore, I should kal online gold with the spare money and I gain some kalonline Geons from other players.
Posted by: kalonline Geons | March 11, 2009 at 08:50 PM
First of all I don't see the Aliens, Metroid, Half-Life 2, or Bioshock references. If you were to compare this game I would say firstly gameplay wise it resembles Resident Evil 4 and System Shock 2.
If by chance you connect the telekinesis to the grav gun for your Half-Life 2 reference don't forgot that System Shock 2 allowed you to pull things to you using PSI abilities, the grav gun is not original the reason it was so great was the physics engine.
As for story content, this games aesthetics seemed like they came straight out of Event Horizon, very dirty rough design that seemed like it would be more at home in a torture chamber. Resembles System Shock 2's story very closely with the mutant bacteria that is infecting the crew while at the same time gives a very familiar setting to the not so distant Doom3.
As far as busy work tasks I just don't see what your talking about. Starting the engines so you don't fall out of orbit and burn up is not busy work, that is some pretty relevant shit that needs taking care of. Sending a homing beacon out to get the F*** off that ship, hell yeah i would too. Everything you are sent to do makes sense and not only does it make sense but it makes sense in the order that it all goes down.
As far as sending the same monster at you, well you mentioned Aliens, a movie where all you pretty much see is one monster type so obviously not having a wide variety of alien shredding machines isn't a bad thing, but this game delivers a wider variety of organic horror than i have seen in a long time. Every game has the grunt of the workforce and yes you see a similar monster type quiet often but that is to be expected you have to kill the pawns to get to the bigger pieces on the board.
The only credible argument that you make in your review is the fact that your character feels like a robot. You see some pretty F***ed up shit in this game and maybe you were in galactic vietnam and have the whole thousand yard stare going on, but you are a F***ing rock. But really i label that as a minor thing cause I really feel like I am supposed to be isaac. The game tries really hard to keep YOU paying attention and Staying IN the game. Like when im shopping in the game i don't grab a soda im listening for someone sneaking up behind me and it has happened the game keeps you on your toes. Im not a big EA fan i think they come out with a lot of crap that they just throw out there to look pretty with nothing under the hood. THIS IS NOT THAT GAME. It is disgusting how good this game looks and if you like System Shock 2, doom3, resident evil, event horizon, Gore, uncalled for violence, or kicking babies (cause YES kicking babies is in this game) then you should pick this game up. Don't be upset when you buy it though that you realize you have spent your entire day sitting in front of your tv.
Posted by: MrMelons | October 17, 2008 at 03:26 AM
I think everyone can agree that whether in the specific or in the general, the story, the milieu, even the underlying motives to get you from one place to the next feel as if you've seen or played them before. Saying the game is a reference to Alien/s/III/VS-Tie-Fighter is accurate only in that they both take place in space, with aliens, are scary, and people die with bloody squirts, or in other words are as much examples of "Horror in SPACE..." as Jason X. (Actually Jason X didn't really have aliens....hmph)
I think it's perhaps more accurate to say that what was accomplished in Dead Space was creating a great deal of unique innovation and ultimately satisfying gameplay packaged into an arguably conventional container that is nonetheless entertaining and will still manage to frighten the excrement of your choice (or not, as the case may be) into suddenly exiting your body.
The comparisons to System Shock, Resident Evil, and Silent Hill are all more apropos comparisons, but the Variety review is at least correct in saying that much of the game's atmosphere feels reused or disappointingly familiar. For instance, why do all people dying of severe blood loss suddenly feel the urge to pen cryptic graffiti on the nearest wall with their few remaining pints of hemoglobin?
Either way the game is still fun, and the Variety review does acknowledges that much. At least he refrained from "Game over man, Game over!" references.
Posted by: Dustin | October 17, 2008 at 02:23 AM
(I'm a gamer myself.) What about the Thing? Event HOrizon? Resident Evil? Silent Hill? Alien? What about David Fincher? Half LIfe 2? Thats just a few that also inspired some of their scares. And those who are judging this game by lack of variety obvioiusly never worked as a game developer. It's hard. VERY HARD TO DO. Movies already took all the good ideas. Reinforcing those different scares in differnt places in the game to make it flow so that it's SCARY is hard freikin work. they did a good job. Don't you cry about how the scares lacked variety. It'll only get better. EA will read reviews like these and then they'll say, next time we will do much better. Dead Space 2 may come out. and guess what? Theyve learned from before. It's a process of learning and it's all done by the state of heart. Your heart only beats so many times before you die. When you die your heart will decay and become part of the earth. Just as that happens a new piece of life is born b/c of your fertile. Newer, prettier, and better things will grow. Just as the human brain grew from so small to how it is now. EA didn't screw up. They started something new. A new idea. Taking scare tactics form different sources and putting them into a VIDEO game is just insane. No one has ever thought of that idea before. Dead Space, It's not a movie. EA didn't take scare tactics and put it into a movie, they put it into a GAME. A GAME folks. THat's hard. A game is different. In a movie you will be more critical of such scare tactics being stolen from movies you've seen. But in a GAME your living it. It's scary, you feel the pressure, Its like your there. A game is diferent. You are actively moving your character and actively deciding what to do in different situations. In a movie you are passively watching it and being forced to watch certain scenes while your decisions of what you would do in the situation remain silent. MOVIES, guys, are easy. Alot less trial and error is involved in movies (just alot more cut scenes). THese guys made a GAME from 50 different MOVIES. Now that's an accomplishment. How many games out there have you seen that have done this? How many? I've seen none. This is the first. So yes, ea HAS started something new. It's called source variety. IT's called not having a hub but holograms, it's called not knowing who's behind that helmit and keeping the character descrete to keep your mind as mystery and question. It's called beatifully enhancing such simple environments that are as dull as a broken down goddamn blasted piece of shit crap shack ship. Making variety enhancements in such a dull; color lacking setting is HARD work. THAT is called variety. HOW many games do you see that can do just that? Use the same environemtns OVER and OVER and OVER again but treat each area with such diference and such different design and architecture; how many have done such VARIETY? None. Exactly. This is the start of something new. Now atleast respect them of that.
Posted by: andrew | October 16, 2008 at 07:59 PM
Seriously, the review is just fine. Except for missing the obvious three sources for inspiration: Alien, Event Horizon, and john carpenter's the Thing. (game wise, yeah: Bioshock, Silent Hill, and RE4)
other than that, this is a fine counterpoint review to all the gushing going on. I love this game deeply and wish it were recognized for what it really is; not ground breaking in terms of theme, but definitely in terms of execution.
give the guy a break.
-A
Posted by: Aciel | October 16, 2008 at 04:53 PM
This man deserves to be reviewing games, and deserves to be writing in Variety. I would much rather read 1000 reviews telling me a game lacked originality than one that lies to me about it being a remarkable new concept.
Posted by: Laguna | October 16, 2008 at 03:23 PM
There is no originality anymore and to expect it from a video game, especially in the horror genre, is asking too much. Everything has already been done before. If the game borrows from alien or any other space horror, it's because there isnt much else out there to borrow from. The purpose is to be scary and and action filled and it accomplishes that. This isn't some work of art trying to break the mold and make a statement and it shouldn't be regarded as such. Its objective was to add some new elements, with the help of new technology, to the third-person horror and quite frankly I find it refreshing in a genre dominated by games like resident evil and silent hill and their countless sequels.
Posted by: Matt | October 16, 2008 at 12:04 PM
What a tripe review, comparing this game to Bioshock and Metroid (seriously? Metroid?) while forgetting to mention Doom or Event Horizon shows a overall lack of insight and experience with the game industry.
Where as Deadspace may not break any new barriers, it is a well polished example of what the survival-horror genre can be.
Sorry Ben, but maybe its time you stop trying to sound "professional" by being a poorly-stated voice of opposition and retire to reviewing pop-cap games.
Posted by: Joe | October 16, 2008 at 08:56 AM
I personally disregard what people try and portray the game to be, be it the devs, media, etc, and take it in for what it is:
A really good horror shooter.
That it borrows influence from various outlets is beyond my interest other than that it had the sense to borrow from damn good outlets which lends credit to its success at being what I found it to be.
The higher one sets their expectations, the likelier they are to be let down. It won't be to everybody's taste but if you
just play the game as a game and enjoy it as you would
then your view will be what it should be:
Simple, without distraction and true.
Posted by: Lynx Syntac | October 16, 2008 at 08:09 AM
Oh Lord, we've crucified another reviewer not yet purchased by industry giants. Perhaps he failed to mention System Shock 2 because the game is over a decade old and mentioning Bioshock registers for people who long ago traded their Pentium II for a Xbox 360.
However, I thought most you who mentioned System Shock II, and assumedly played System Shock II, would gush at review that is not afraid to fault this game for a lack of originality. If this game is nothing but a fresh coat of paint on the survival horror genre, but its sold and reviewed as something contrary to those facts, then the game's chief fault needs to be noted rather than obscured by false praise. I'm sorry if Deadspace's potential triteness forced some of you to undergo stress by questioning the wisdom of your pre-order.
To the reviewer, never apologize to these mongrels who use game reviews as ego boosters for their "consumer savvy."
Posted by: Tom | October 16, 2008 at 07:14 AM
To clearify, I never said that "gamers" were being insulted, only that this really wasn't a review of this game. It's more of a commentary on the genre in general. I'm not a big fan of the genre myself, but you have to take it for what it is. If it were radically different from the other games of this type it would be in another category.
Agreed you don't need a score, or a thumbs up/down style verdict to be a review. However, games should, I believe, be reviewed on their own merits. Not on how well or poorly they trump their predessesors.
It is a good game. Forget gamespy network and all those other bought off hacks. It's just a good solid game.
Posted by: Kasey | October 16, 2008 at 02:03 AM
"There's also something weirdly contradictory about a protagonist whose face you never see and who never talks in a carefully written story."
Halo, Half-Life, Doom, BioShock, F.E.A.R. are all AAA titles that feature a main character who is either faceless, voiceless, or both. Obviously they've got something right.
To be fair though, it's not as common in third-person shooters.
Posted by: wiredknight | October 15, 2008 at 07:07 PM
A refreshingly honest perspective while the rest of the gaming community goes ga ga over this game. It's nice to have someone point out that it doesn't really break new ground.
I'm particularly surprised none of the other reviews I've read mention that Isaac never speaks, the mute cipher game character has always driven me crazy in games like Half Life and Bioshock. I've always felt MORE attachment to the characters with a personality of their own. They feel more like a person we are guiding while playing them rather than a marionette we can point in the right direction.
As for talking down to gamers, what rubbish. If anything Ben is showing us some more respect by calling a spade a spade. Feel free to fawn all over Gamespot's 9/10 glowing review, we all know how honest they are after Kane and Lynch.
Posted by: Aaron | October 15, 2008 at 06:57 PM
Just to make myself clear, I wasn't saying that Variety is too good for videogame review (we run a lot of them!) or even that we don't have a heavy focus on games (they're important to us, though not our primary focus). My only point in the sentence you're all referring is that our reviews are not really "thumbs up/down" or score 1-10 affairs. So we don't give as clear a buying recommendation as many other gaming publications, for better or for worse.
Posted by: Ben Fritz | October 15, 2008 at 04:42 PM
How many of you actually read this article? He never puts down gamers, he says the magazine doesn't have a heavy focus on games. He also repeatedly says this isn't the review, and has links to the full review. You guys mentioned him saying gamers were to dumb for variety, but the only ones demonstrating that are some of you.
Posted by: Nick | October 15, 2008 at 03:30 PM
How many of you actually read this article? He never puts down gamers, he says the magazine doesn't have a heavy focus on games. He also repeatedly says this isn't the review, and has links to the full review. You guys mentioned him saying gamers were to dumb for variety, but the only ones demonstrating that are some of you.
Posted by: Nick | October 15, 2008 at 03:28 PM
What about Danny Boyle's Sunshine. Did you realize it was a big influence?
This game only really has so much in common with System Shock 2, as far as setting goes. Bioshock is that game's spiritual successor because the gameplay is basically transplanted from System Shock.
Sorry to sound like Alanis Morrisette, but it's really ironic when the least informed review is printed in the most read magazine.
Posted by: Jonathan McCoy | October 15, 2008 at 03:00 PM
I believe that people like you should not review games. This isn't a game review, it's a puff piece for your own ego. Your writing isn't fantastic. I'm sorry.
Posted by: Kasey | October 15, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Stop killing the guy for technicalities (Aliens vs Alien. His point is still made). This game combines all the best that is around in it's genre, and throws in a few improvements of its own (in game HUD, etc.). Some of the scares are predictable, but they are well executed that even if you didn't throw your hands off the keyboard and knock your mouse off the table, you've got to admit that they did take serious time and consideration to put together this game. Its well made (it is made by EA, after all, a financial giant) and although it may not have the most original story possible, it is still better then most of the games I have played all year. "Something with aliens happens in space" has been done, but this is the one of the best efforts made to represent that genre.
Also when I heard about the game I thought of Event Horizon first.
Also thought of Doom (spider babies) when I saw the "lurker" baby things in Dead Space.
So yeah, It isn't original but it sure does what it does well, and with plenty of style. For a dude who hungers for narratives built around "Things that happens in space with aliens", this sated that hunger
Posted by: Chris | October 15, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Yeah, a lot closer in spirit to the original "Alien," in that your main protagonist is just a normal schlub tossed into a crazy, life-or-death situation.
Stuff like "Gears of War" and basically every other sci-fi action game ever created borrows heavily from the whole "space marine" template James Cameron's movie set up.
Posted by: Jeremy | October 15, 2008 at 02:46 PM
I like how you said you reviewed games for Variety but then said that Variety was too good a magazine for video game reviews, and if one read it for that purpose, then one was too dumb to read Variety. That was a classy touch.
Posted by: C A Monteath-Carr | October 15, 2008 at 02:29 PM
Nothing original or substantive? How about a completely integrated HUD? The inherent bias in video game reviewing today aggravates me. Why can't reviewers/critics understand the concept of a kitsch vs. quality. A criticism of the game is that it recreates the best aspects of the other games in the genre and is able to immerse the player without drastic deviations? That's called perfecting an art form. Building upon existing ideas is the very idea of innovation, it doesn't have to be radical to be great.
In films the attention to detail and appreciation to the art is admired. No Country For Old Men isn't new or different... it's just better.
Stop screaming 'innovation' and start paying attention to quality. A game shouldn't be rated lower because it doesn't introduce a new paradigm but delivers a solid and enjoyable end product. A game should be praised for not cramming in a glitchy and imperfect mechanic, not chastised.
Posted by: Adam | October 15, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Aliens? I must not have gotten to the part that has the squad of heavily armed marines. Maybe there is a shred of comparison to ALIEN. Well, except there are more than one of them. Bioshock? Perhaps. Dead Space is more like System Shock than Bioshock ever was the System Shock team developed Bioshock as a spiritual successor). It might be what Bioshock should have been.
Finally, Metroid. You actually compared it to Metroid. Thats... special. A strange comparison to be sure but then a review is of course an opinion piece.
"H.R. Giger-like monstrosities".
They aren't anything even remotely similar. If you were to compare it to anything else in the entertainment industry you missed the obvious one. John Carpenter's The Thing. Of course the developers actually said this particular movie did provide a significant amount of direction to their game.
Posted by: Jeff | October 15, 2008 at 12:31 PM
How could there be no reference to Event Horizon? Seriously.
Posted by: Pat | October 15, 2008 at 12:12 PM