Dead Space 2 Multiplayer

Scream Fortress.

Dead Space 2's single player campaign is an anxious creep through a string of dark corridors to a soundtrack of groaning steelwork and laboured breath. There are, of course, interruptions to the taut atmosphere: the burst of a gangly Necromorph through a dilapidated wall, or a screaming phantom that breaks through the fragile sanity of your mind. But the journey through Dead Space II is characterized primarily by its bars of rest, not by its bars of fury.

Dead Space 2's multiplayer mode, by contrast, is a cacophony of uninterrupted noise, a soundtrack of un-muffled industrial screams and the relentless, hot pitter-patter of gunfire. It's all fury, the air thick with dismemberment, the floor wet with gloop. Eight players are split into two teams. One plays the role of the Necromorphs, the other plays the role of the Humans, in one of the most frenetic tussles of survival and dominance in gaming.

By comparison to Halo or Call of Duty, play options seem limited. You cannot set options other than choosing which of the five arenas on offer you want to play in. You always play with two teams of four. After the first round, the roles of Necromorph and Human are swapped, and after the second round the game is over, with experience points doled out based on your performance in each. There are no straight Last Man Standing matches to be had, each of the six levels instead arriving with an immovable set of objectives for the Humans to complete and the Necromorphs to prevent.

It's like a stripped-down and enclosed version of Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. The mission objectives for the Humans are interesting and vary between each of the five stages.

In 'Titan Mines', for example, the Humans must gather different components for a bomb and deliver them to the centre of the map before the timer runs out. In this slow-motion Capture The Flag, whichever team member is carrying a bomb component cannot run, and must be protected by his team-mates while the Necromorphs scramble to take him down. Once the bomb is set, the Human team's role becomes one of protection, warding off the Necromorph attacks on the bomb for the 30 seconds it takes to count down to detonation. Meanwhile, in 'Escape', the Human team must evacuate the reddish insides of the Ishimura spaceship from the first game by activating switches in sequence before belting towards the escape pods.

When playing as the Necromorphs, your job is simply to prevent the human team from achieving any of their five sequential objectives in each stage. There are four different types of Necromorph: the Pack, which has a short-ranged, powerful melee attack; the Lurker, a crab-like creature that can jump on to opponents and whip out tentacles to damage Humans at range; the Puker, which has a short range, Left4Dead-style acidic projectile; and the Spitter, which enjoys long-range charged fire.

Every time you die when playing as a Necromorph you have the chance to reincarnate as a different type, but you must wait longer if you want to respawn as the more powerful creatures, an ingenious system that forces you to decide whether it's more important to rush back in as a weaker unit and overwhelm in numbers, or sit out till you can arrive in power.

The game borrows Modern Warfare's influential experience system and after each match you earn points for the number of kills made and the number of objectives you personally cleared, with bonus points if you were on the winning team. As you level up your character, you unlock various extras. Some of these are merely aesthetic, such as the different colours and styles of suits for your Human character. But most offer tangible advantages in play by unlocking new weapons and upgrades for those weapons, and increasing the abilities of your Necromorphs.

In the immediate term, the system is compelling, as you want to level up your characters, increase your options and grow more powerful, and the excitement of growth distracts from the limited number of maps and game types. But as with any competitive multiplayer game that offers advantages for players that have been playing for longer than others, the cost is imbalance. If you manage to secure a higher-level player on your team, the increased abilities and power can make victory a foregone conclusion. Once you finally reach the cap of level 60 (which will take 50-60 hours) the promise of new unlocks is gone and there's little left to sustain interest.

Necromorphs can see Humans through walls, balancing out the advantage the opposing team members have by way of health packs.

But only the most dedicated players will plough this much time into the mode in order to press their noses up against its boundaries. For the majority, who want to dip in and out for an hour or two as a break from the single-player campaign, Dead Space 2's multiplayer mode is well-constructed and satisfying. It's a game that, when played properly, demands teamwork, as a group of Humans working together against a disorganized Necromorph side will plough through the defenses, while a scattered Human side will be overwhelmed by Necromorphs that move together.

The small environments keep the tempo of play quick and exciting, and when all eight players are thrashing about in close proximity there's no sign of slow-down. It's like a hellish rendering of American Football; the thrill when you break the Necromorph defenses and make it to an unattended objective marker is addictive. Far from a dull bolt-on to the single-player campaign, Dead Space 2's multiplayer is slight but focused – Visceral Games choosing to do one thing well, rather than 10 without polish.

Comments (27) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RoaringPanda #1 1 year ago

    my console is betta den yurs deeerrrrrrrrr
  • levitate #2 1 year ago

    Reading the article I get the impression multiplayer is great. I thought it was the worst thing about the game, but now I'm actually considering buying it to try the mp out. Weird.
  • Benno #3 1 year ago

    I'm interested to hear other peoples opinions on this as well
  • Nightbite #4 1 year ago

    Had heard a lot about how poor this was, but tried it anyway as I had the game. I found it really entertaining, more manic than left 4 dead, but less twitch than COD. It's good to see games using their core mechanics to create interesting multiplayer - between this and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood I can get my multiplayer fix without suffering the FIFA playing morons on Modern Warfare or the repressed 14 year old tea-baggers on Halo.
  • mrblonde #5 1 year ago

    I think DS2 MP is more a short lived bonus than the main event , which (with some relief) hasnt taken away anything whatsoever, from the lengthy campagn. If you get it pre owned i.e. without the online pass, i wouldnt bother buying it on xboxlive, this i think was the really reason any sort of MP experience had to be added to DS2 (probably on orders from EA).
    Edited by mrblonde at 07/02/11 @ 13:22
  • Lunastra78 #6 1 year ago

    Co-op survival mode is what I really want
  • kinky_mong #7 1 year ago

    So Left 4 Dead but with perks that ruin the balance? Great.
  • geeza2020 #8 1 year ago

    I played this on release day and though it was total rubbish to be honest. A poor version of Left 4 Dead with the added inclusion of the horrible XP/Perk system of CoD, it couldnt get any worse for me. I havent bothered going back to the multiplayer since.

    The single player campaign was so good that it more than made up for this with me though.
  • richyroo #9 1 year ago

    I played multiplayer once, and havent touched it since. Perhaps I need to give it another try, but I just thought it was crap??
  • MadDave123 #10 1 year ago

    Dag nammit!

    I was all set to nab DS2 on PS3 for the superior sound and bonus Extraction content. But now that I want to play the MP mode I find myself juggling the solid 360 online experience vs. the (typically) poor PS3, into the mix. >_<

    Fellow Eurogamers, what do?

  • richyroo #11 1 year ago

    @MadDave

    Why would the PS3 online version be inferior to the 360? I have both consoles and never have a problem playing online with the PS3 (I dont own BLOPS which helps). The only thing the 360 does is party chat and Cross Game Chat. Other than that, I find no difference between the 2.

    Personally I think Party chat is a bad idea. I remember a time when you used to all communicate with your team mates, now no-one seems to talk to each other as there in their own small little parties. I hope this feature NEVER comes to the PS3.
    Edited by richyroo at 07/02/11 @ 10:29
  • bratmandu #12 1 year ago

    I tried the mp a few times, hearing it was pretty weak. I wouldn't say it was bad at all - it's a good quick blast and a nice change of pace from the excellent single player. You really have to keep lookin around for necros and watch your teammates don't get swarmed - shooting a pack baby who's grappling your team mate is a delicate task (there is team damage).

    Bein a necro is pretty cool but they're harder to play with imo, since they all control differently and have no health - but you can fly around in respawn mode to decide what vent you wanna spawn from next - I always wait for some humans to pass by a vent and come at them from behind.

    I don't see it holding my interest long past assassain's creed brotherhood or battlefield, but it's a different kind of thing and decent in it's own right.
  • barkertron #13 1 year ago

    I've had a couple of quick goes and quite enjoyed it (though I'd agree that the single player is a better experience) - problem is, both games ended in a dropped connection and zero XP. Had a quick look around the net and it seems that I'm not alone in this, which is a real shame - there are obviously some problems at EA's end, which would be a bit of a slap in the face for anyone who buys the online pass.
  • RevanNL #14 1 year ago

    Didn't even bother to enter the code for the online-pass. If I want to play a multiplayer game, I'll play BC2, keep this shit out of singleplayergames
  • FogHeart #15 1 year ago

    I guess for those with both consoles it comes down to who they know that has the game, and which platform they're on, so you can play in the same match.
  • neems #16 1 year ago

    I quite enjoyed what little I've played of it. It's a diversion basically - put together pretty well, but extremely slight ultimately.
  • Byblos1 #17 1 year ago

    Going for the L4D gameplay style was well advised but adding a CoD-style XP system was not. I must've put 2-3 hours in before I unlocked the first new gun, and by that time I was already a bit bored due to the lack of variety in the gameplay and small number of maps (which basically all look the same... dark).

    It's also completely inbalanced when you consider all the extra weapons and upgrades higher level people get.

    The SP is great but this just feels like something that was bolted on for the sake of putting an extra bullet point on the box.
  • stepneg #18 1 year ago

    I thought it was crap, a really poor rip-off of Left4Dead tacked on so EA could justify an on line pass. Where's the coop mode, add that in along with horde\firefight and I probably wouldn't be looking at trading it on now I've finished the campaign!
  • MadDave123 #19 1 year ago

    -3? Really?

    @ richyroo

    I'm not saying the PS3 content is inferior, I'm asking if the online experience is inferior and if so is it enough to warrant switching my platform choice when buying the game.
    The majority of my online gaming is done on the 360, but from my limited time online with the PS3 I've been disappointed. Games like PES (old version, not current) with it's friend codes and limited regional play, CoD (apart from BlOps) having poor servers and connection issues are a few examples. This is where I'm drawing my conclusions from and why I'm asking others for their input.
    From what you've said (and I thank you for replying rather than giving me a "-ve feedback" like the other fanboys seem to be doing) it seems the online experience isn't usually bad, and if that's the case I'll have no qualms with sticking to my original choice and getting a PS3 version.

    Personally, I love party chat. I find that the majority of my time outside of a party, the teams I'm on have too many annoying idiotic players that I just end up muting. The ability to bypass that and go into a game with a few of my friends and just co-ordinate with them provides a much more enjoyable experience.
  • SteveHolt #20 1 year ago

    I have like 10 people in my friends list who play DS2 ATM, none of them has tried MP yet, and most of them don't intend to.

    My 2 cents: less than awesome experience + shitty EA servers + no MP achievements + online pass required = Prognosis Negative.
  • MatMan562 #21 1 year ago

    Well I think that the mp is a great addition. I didn't expect to like it at all but was pleasantly surprised
  • Murton #22 1 year ago

    @MadDave

    Get the PS3 version for the sound which you will see the benefit of in the single and multiplayer sides of the game. As for the "MP experience" you'll be playing on the same EA servers regardless, so why pay for the privilege? The only different is party chat and who's on your friends list, that's about it.

    Don't forget that the PS3 version also comes with Extraction, which makes for a much better package than the 360 version. Better sound plus free game is much better than any perceived differences in the multiplayer experience.
  • MadDave123 #23 1 year ago

    @Murton

    Yup, PS3 it is. I have a great 7.1 sound system so it'd be a shame not to make the most of it. Plus I never bought Extraction on the Wii and really want to give the game some attention. As you say, these two benefits greatly outweigh whatever issues there may (or may not) be with the MP, and I'm sure I'll enjoy it just the same.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts. ;)

  • bosseye #24 1 year ago

    I thought it was mildly entertaining, fun for an hour or two before getting a bit stale. Not enough maps and not really enough variation. I did find that no one really works together if you're just with randoms, a lot of the human players just scurry off alone to get the objectives and the points as quick as possible and the necros just spawn and spam everywhere with no real cohesion. It certainly gets quite manic at times, but a lot of the time it just feels a little messy with pack running everywhere and spit all over the place - plus its really rather annoying when you get leapt on by pack trying to do an execution when you've got full health, it turns a large chunk of each map into hammering 'A' whilst watching a cutscene which gets pretty old pretty quickly.

    So yeah, entertaining but can't see me going back to this one more than a couple of times.
  • Retro_ #25 1 year ago

    I've only played the MP side for a couple of hours and it was excellent... once you work out what the hell you are doing and once you start working as a team, that is the key, without team work it is frustrating, with it, it's tight and a bit like ALIENS.
  • mukki #26 1 year ago

    a nicer review than expected...
    but hey I am buying DS2 for the single player experience
    and if MP is ok great! but it is not the reason why I bought this game...
    So lets hear it for GREAT single player games... errr wait co/op would have been nice too...
  • joelstinton #27 1 year ago

    @RevanNL

    A few months ago i would probably have agreed. And made the same argument about it on the UC3 story. But.... After indulging myself in the Assassins creed Brotherhood MP, i would have to say that i now disagree. ACBH mp is superb. really good fun, and when i get DS2 i will take a break now and again to try the MP. DS2 MP could be shite, but i am now willing to give it ago, on the basis that it could be a great alternative to FPS MP.

    i do agree though that these sp games should be made with the single player in 100% focus, and if anything a seperate team doing the MP.
    Edited by joelstinton at 08/02/11 @ 10:47