I have read the thread on it here and while it seemed overall favorable I saw no clearcut sense of “buy it” in there.
First, I am reluctant to buy $60 game.
I will but I am stuck on $50 for a new game and only then if it is truly great (and yeah…been burned a few times).
I have also seen reviews (not professional) that suggest the game is 8-10 hours long.
I despise spending $50 (much less $60) for any game that will provide me less than 30 hours of enjoyment. The occasions where a game ends after 8 hours of play pisses me off to no end.
Then add I have read that DS1 was truly scary and DS2 they puppied out. Sure there are shocks and some spookiness but the visceral feeling of DS1 is not here.
All that said people seem generally favorable of it.
So, bottom line, is Dead Space 2 worth $60 or am I better off waiting till it hits the bargain bin?
I can’t remember how much I paid for it (like £30 or something)…
… But YES… It’s definitely worth owning. You could wait for it to drop in price. It is a very good game though.
8 hours seems unlikely to me. Somebody must be rushing through.
Fallout 3 could be done in a ‘short’ time… but I probably got somewhere in the region of 200 hours out of it.
Dead Space 2 is lasting for me. I play a few hours per night and I’ve had the game since it came out. According to steam I’ve played 14 hours, and I’m not even close to finishing. I grab every bit of ammo lying around, and I ‘savour’ the game by moving through it slowly.
What are the controls like on the PC? I’ve played DS 1 on my iPad and it’s kind of cluncky. Is it similar in control to, say Fallout 3 or NV, or like Mass Effect? The iPad version was similar to ME, which I didn’t particularly like.
Also, how creepy is it? I wasn’t too impressed with the game, creepiness-wise on the iPad, but I figure it probably lost something in the translation (and, full disclosure, I have a jailbroken iPad, so this was a hacked version of DS). Is it as creepy as, say, FEAR?
I’m sort of inbetween games right now. I have several games on Steam that I’ve pre-ordered, but am not currently playing anything. DS 2 might be just the ticket, depending on if it’s going to be fun for me to play.
Obviously I have not played it but FWIW I have read, via reviews, that DS1 on the PC control scheme sucked and was a major complaint. With DS2 they apparently listened and the control scheme seems better and, at the least, passable.
Just what I read though…no personal experience to confirm or deny it. Take with a lump of salt.
Without rushing, and picking up every audio log (or at least, almost all of them) I managed to finish in just under 10 hours of “game time.” That doesnt include sections I had to repeat due to bloody dismemberments.
Play it late at night, alone, with the sound cranked up. The first time through is great and it almost demands a second play through on harder difficulty to really feel like you’re on the ragged edge.
10 hours for $60 is bullshit in my world (kinda pisses me off as I see more of this over the years…used to be a game lasted dozens of hours but now why give you 30 hours when they can sell three 10 hour games).
Last game I played was Batman: Arkham Asylum and it went for 20 hours. I was a teeny bit miffed but the game rocked (and I heard the sequel is 5x the size).
Unless there is something super-hyper-fantabulous about it then “average” fun does not do it for me at that price.
I’ll wait for a sale.
Kinda Jonesing for a new game and this looked sexy but I’m not down for a one-night stand (so to speak).
I think you’re being far too critical of the play time. Are you really going to sit there for 10 hours without a break? This ‘type’ of game is not supposed to last a very long time. It’s an FPS. If there are FPSs that have given you many many hours of play then you’ve been spoiled by them. I’d say DS2 is closer to the traditional norm for play time.
But by all means wait for it to be cheaper. It is always sensible to save money. I think you’ll be hard pressed to find somrthing this good, that’s cheap, that you perhaps didn’t already buy. In other words, You have to decide whether saving money is worth not having a nice game to play for a while.
DS2 might have been even better if it had all the kind of extra elements that Arkham does to increase play time. On the other hand it might have made it worse. Like ruining a potentially good box-office film by making it too long. People get bored.
Isn’t DS2 technically a third person shooter, not a FPS? Anyway OP…its an incredibly good game and I can only play it in small chunks due to time constraints (I have separated from my wife and I have my kids throughout the week and it is by no means a game they can watch or play) so I have to play it…late at night,down in the basement after the house is asleep.
Read the professional reviews. They pretty much all agree that its an incredible game with a high degree of re-playability.
Here’s IGN’s for starters (you didn’t say which platform you are going to get it for, I have the PS3 version and so this is the PS3 review): Dead Space 2 Review - IGN
I’d miss it if your budget’s like mine, a new game once a month kind of thing. Save your money for March; that month’s going to be insane. (Dragon Age 2, The new DOW2 expansion, the new Earth Defence Force, Shogun 2, Homefront, Crysis 2 and The Witcher 2)
Would you pay $100 for a bowl of soup? Most people wouldn’t but if it was an amazing soup some might.
Would you pay $30 for a 50 page book? Many would consider that to be a ripoff but some might like it.
Point being I do not need to sit for 10 hours straight (although I have been known to do that) but rather decide how much value the game provides overall.
I am an old gamer. I remember the days of 80 hour (or more) games. Steam tells me I have played Civ5 for 167 hours. Maybe it makes me old fashioned but when a game only provides 8 hours I feel a bit ripped off. Yes it is cheaper, on a per minute basis, than a movie but that said I almost never go to the theater anymore either because I find the price (ticket + travel to/from theater + concession) to be absurd when all is added up versus the pleasure I derive from it.
Actually he is not spot on anything. He diminishes his own argument by noting that the game Kane & Lynch had a pathetic 4 hours of gameplay. Clearly he is drawing a line, for him it is somewhere between 4 hours and 8 hours where a game is “too short”. On a per hour basis Kane & Lynch is still cheaper than a sporting event or hooker and about on par with a movie.
Obviously this is an assessment each person needs to make for themselves. For me I played Batman:Arkham Asylum which was a blast and I got 20 hours out of it (the sequel is said to be 5x bigger). Mass Effect I have over 100 hours playing. Fallout 3 gave me 50 hours. Civilization 5 I have over 160 hours playing. Bioshock gave me around 30 hours. All are wonderful games and have given me a lot of enjoyment.
As you can see my expectations are such that 8 hours seems a bit slim. Especially when they are charging a $10 premium over those other games.
If you follow the linked article’s logic it’d be like saying most hamburgers cost you $10. For that you get a burger and fries and fixings. This burger however is $12 and 1/4 the size and no fixings or fries. You should be ok with that though because it is a good burger and compared to lobster it is still a good deal on a cost per bite basis.
Just not buying that logic myself.
All that said I went ahead and bought the game. I am jonesing for something new and this seems pretty good. I’ll still bitch about it being only 8 hours but I’ll have fun with those 8 hours.
I’m surprised you haven’t acquired Fallout: New Vegas; that’s a 100 hour plus game “out of the box” without even really trying to go and explore things. It’s better than Fallout 3 (That’s right, I said it) and if you played and liked Fallout 3 then this would be a natural “new game” choice, IMHO.
I like Fallout 3 with the mods players have made. It makes it a remarkably better experience. I am kinda spoiled by it now and view FNV as hackneyed by comparison.
Once players expand FNV I will doubtless jump on board.
Well the actual quote is “and there are games that really are too short, without being awesome enough to back it up” So clearly he would be ok with a 4 hour game if it was good enough.
I’m not saying he is right but it is sensible to have different expectations. I’d expect a shooter to come in about 10-15 hours but would be pissed for an RPG that was that long. Since Dead Space is more in line with shooters I’d be fine with a really good 8 hours over mediocre 30 hours where it wears out it’s welcome with padded gameplay.
