If you skip past the main menu of either of the first two Dead Space games, and you spend not too much time scrutinizing shit like tutorialization and texture quality, you probably won't stop to consider their age. The diegetic interface escapes most of the telltale signs of contemporary sensibilities, at least on the surface, and the sound and art design are strong enough to carry dated fidelity. It's not immediately clear to me that Dead Space 1 is twelve years old, which is really impressive.¹
Dead Space 2 opens in much the same way as its older sibling, carrying the interface forward, but there's no mistaking this period of games. Isaac has a voice, and he's not afraid to use it. He's here to exclaim like a big boy ("Fuck," Isaac exclaims)—he'll even employ bigger sentences as smaller parts of Cutscenes™! Isaac is a character that speaks and has something resembling a personality. That's observable fact.
Okay, the cinematic touchstones are generally fine.² Isaac being tossed around by a rampaging necromorph (read: angry space zombie) who intends him terrible, gore-fueled harm— it's exciting, right? Sure. I'm just not convinced the burgeoning Uncharted era did much good for developers who seemed pressured to prioritize 'loud' for their next project. Probably can't blame just Nathan Drake³ for that one. But what the fuck do I know, maybe this is exactly what Visceral wanted to make.
Everything is polished to a crisp sheen. Movement, gunplay, the kinesis ability, they're refined and equipped for a faster pace; the relatively linear action of a cinematic shooter. As someone who thought the shooting in Dead Space 1 was great, this is mostly improved. But it is missing something. Grit, maybe. An amiable friction that would never survive so much dedicated polish. On balance, I think both hit similar highs. On the other hand, there's no low in this quite as bad as how the first game ends, which is nice.
I've seen folks argue that Dead Space 2 moves away from horror in ways reminiscent of T1->T2, or Alien to Aliens, and while I believe that's ostensibly true, the horror in this series was always bodily, and just about every misguided step into psychological tension is clumsy at its very best. In that sense, the notion that the sequel shifts focus is largely successful, because you have less time spent showcasing trope-ridden writing somehow meant to elicit terror. Marginally. There's still a lot.
I like Dead Space 2, though. Even nine years later, games that involve guns in some form don't often attempt this level of granular interplay. It's underpinned by a morbid—and silly—premise ("[...] the limbs!!!" they scream, hoping the player will finally understand), but that's all in service of a genuinely fun game.
Except the part where it occasionally confuses pitch black darkness for 'scary'. I wish it wouldn't do that. I'm not scared, I just can't see.
Both Dead Space 1 and 2 are worth revisiting in 2020. It's a good time. Got me wondering about 3, but that shit was tired even with a two-year interval back in 2013, so I don't have much hope.
——
¹ Too Human also released in 2008. Peruse screenshots at your leisure.
² Quick-time events are not fine.
³ It's capitalism. And Nathan Drake.
——
Dead Space 2 opens in much the same way as its older sibling, carrying the interface forward, but there's no mistaking this period of games. Isaac has a voice, and he's not afraid to use it. He's here to exclaim like a big boy ("Fuck," Isaac exclaims)—he'll even employ bigger sentences as smaller parts of Cutscenes™! Isaac is a character that speaks and has something resembling a personality. That's observable fact.
Okay, the cinematic touchstones are generally fine.² Isaac being tossed around by a rampaging necromorph (read: angry space zombie) who intends him terrible, gore-fueled harm— it's exciting, right? Sure. I'm just not convinced the burgeoning Uncharted era did much good for developers who seemed pressured to prioritize 'loud' for their next project. Probably can't blame just Nathan Drake³ for that one. But what the fuck do I know, maybe this is exactly what Visceral wanted to make.
Everything is polished to a crisp sheen. Movement, gunplay, the kinesis ability, they're refined and equipped for a faster pace; the relatively linear action of a cinematic shooter. As someone who thought the shooting in Dead Space 1 was great, this is mostly improved. But it is missing something. Grit, maybe. An amiable friction that would never survive so much dedicated polish. On balance, I think both hit similar highs. On the other hand, there's no low in this quite as bad as how the first game ends, which is nice.
I've seen folks argue that Dead Space 2 moves away from horror in ways reminiscent of T1->T2, or Alien to Aliens, and while I believe that's ostensibly true, the horror in this series was always bodily, and just about every misguided step into psychological tension is clumsy at its very best. In that sense, the notion that the sequel shifts focus is largely successful, because you have less time spent showcasing trope-ridden writing somehow meant to elicit terror. Marginally. There's still a lot.
I like Dead Space 2, though. Even nine years later, games that involve guns in some form don't often attempt this level of granular interplay. It's underpinned by a morbid—and silly—premise ("[...] the limbs!!!" they scream, hoping the player will finally understand), but that's all in service of a genuinely fun game.
Except the part where it occasionally confuses pitch black darkness for 'scary'. I wish it wouldn't do that. I'm not scared, I just can't see.
Both Dead Space 1 and 2 are worth revisiting in 2020. It's a good time. Got me wondering about 3, but that shit was tired even with a two-year interval back in 2013, so I don't have much hope.
——
¹ Too Human also released in 2008. Peruse screenshots at your leisure.
² Quick-time events are not fine.
³ It's capitalism. And Nathan Drake.
——