Dead Space Comments by Dan Whitehead

Paradox.

Strategy.

This is a disappointing review. Everything I've seen on Dead Space to date seems to suggest at the minimum a score of 8, but EG's 7 seems 'off' and I suspect there is more at play here than meets the eye. Did EA cancel some much-needed advertising, EG? Is that it? Are you lot feeling a bit miffed?

This review makes no sense in the context of what looks to most like an exceptional title (on any format).

The only thing I'd say in the review's favour is that the dreaded 'Doom 3' reference was at last made. I believe that's the first time I've seen D3 mentioned in the same breath as Dead Space - EA's unofficial 'embargo' on writers mentioning id's SF horror game has been the elephant in the room ever since Dead Space first came to everyone's attention. But now I just think this reviewer made the reference to add spite to an already wilfully negative review.

i see some people say

'its only a score ffs'

the point being, that MANY people will simply look at the score and judge the game solely on that

if the final score wasnt important, why does EG continue to use it? They use it, because they KNOW it has a powerful effect

its human nature to break something down to its most simplest part, to better understand it.

for better or worse, 7/10 is not considered a great score in this industry. Shit, there will be people who will be angry that LBP got 9 and not 10

if EG want to use scores, then they should expect harsh criticism over their scoring policy.

again, i refer to the utter TRAVESTY that was the too human review. There was a review that was clearly meant only to generate hits, and get a review out there as fast as possible

eg, to me, is compromising review integrity for hits quantity

"Alone in the dark and Dead Space is within the same genre and received the same score on this site. Thats very odd imo. I prefer Metacritic when comparing scores to avoid really bad games having the same score as good ones."

Games can have the same score for very different reasons. A slightly uninspired, but very solid game can have the same score as a flawed game with tons of great ideas. Which is why you should always read the review, and not just look at the score. (And scores should stay, they complement a review).

"It's not always successful though, since when you're backed up against a wall by gibbering space mutants it can be impossible to see how close you are to death."

I'd say you were pretty close...

@ anomagnus

"again, i refer to the utter TRAVESTY that was the too human review. "

I think dan's review was pretty fair to the utter TRAVESTY that was too human ;)

@muscleblade "Alone in the dark and Dead Space is within the same genre and received the same score on this site. Thats very odd imo."

Too right. A game that's a bit samey but otherwise fun to play scores the same as a broken piece of crap? I know you can't be 100% objective when reviewing games but come on.

It would be nice if there was a bit of information about the PC version.

I'm pretty sure if EG could rereview AITD it would get a lower score. Everyone makes mistakes. No biggie.

i'm beginning to despair of gamers...

spudbuckley:Non-quirky/non-leftfield game gets less than 9/10 on EG shocker!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any time i see a 'regular' game reviewed on EG i usually add one or two to the review score to compensate for the Edge-style eliteism on this site.

so EG mark down the big 'non-quirky' titles due to 'elitism' do they? so i guess you think the latest games in the halo + gta series (probably the 2 biggest titles in gaming) were scored unfairly then? did they deserve a 12 each?


dogstar060763: This is a disappointing review. Everything I've seen on Dead Space to date seems to suggest at the minimum a score of 8, but EG's 7 seems 'off' and I suspect there is more at play here than meets the eye. Did EA cancel some-needed advertising, EG? Is that it? Are you lot feeling a bit miffed?

so you've seen a few videos, and decided the game's worth 'at the minimum' an 8. EG reviewer (who has played the game extensively) scores the game a 7, and because of that you've decided they marked the game down cos of lost advertising?!

fuck's sake, do you people not realise that different people might have different opinions from you without it all being down to corruption??

Really looking forward to this! Good review!

not as good as Jericho then

;-)

@Dan

Just in case I get misinterpreted. No beef at all from me. You seem like you found the game pretty good, pretty good = 7 quite rightly. Its just that some are interpreting things like 7 as terrible, whereas you really should have to work it for the high marks.

I'm not moaning about reviews more at those interpreting reviews. You know "omg! this is a good game and it only gets a 7" etc...

"Oh Jesus. Can we please stop splitting hairs over the cocking score. Its frankly the very least important part of the review (as always)."

+1

But we all know the answer (despite the '?' missing is a big fat 'no'). While it is the least important part, it's the only part idiots can comprehend.

As for the game, I think they should have fixed the camera... :p

in fact the above is played out by Dogstar060763's comments! Dead Space = pretty good game yet the bottom line score is being translated like its some sort of failure... which I don't think is right.

DanWhitehead: "So just to recap, Eurogamer only gives top marks to big budget mainstream blockbuster games because of the big sacks of money the publishers send"

I knew it! This would make a great quote for a news aggregation site... :p

"whereas you really should have to work it for the high marks."

If you ever played Oblivion or BioShock, you know that's not true. Some people just have terrible taste... ;)

I have no problem with the score itself. I do have a problem with the fact that it got the same score as Jericho and Aitd. Two games in the same genre. Dead Space most definantly looks to be a better game than those two considering the review text and other reviews.

Sounds better than I was expecting.

I think 7/10 is perfectly justified from the points the review made.

I only started taking notice of this about 2 months ago so missed alot of the hype, and it was on my "Wait until December/ January to see if the price drops" list due mostly to the fact that it's got a lot of competition on its release date. This review only confirms the suspicions I had that this would be Resi 4 meets Metroid Prime but not quite as good as either.

IGN Gave Aitd 3.5 and Dead Space 8.7. On here they both get a 7. I know reviews are nothing but personal opinions but this just seems way off.

/Kindly reminds everybody that there is a link to EGs scoring policy at the end of every review...

Read it people!

I have no problem with the score itself. I do have a problem with the fact that it got the same score as Jericho and Aitd. Two games in the same genre. Dead Space most definantly looks to be a better game than those two considering the review text and other reviews.

But a review isn't just about placing a game in a slot on some imaginary linear scale of goodness. Do you really think that Empire considers every film that gets 3 stars to be identical in quality to every other 3 star movie? Of course not. The score is a guideline, a summation of the review text, not some mathematically airtight value that places the game in some fixed position in relation to every other game in existence.

I, personally, wouldn't have given Alone in the Dark or Jericho a 7/10. I wouldn't have given Halo 3 a 10/10 either. But I can understand why they got those marks, because I read the reviews and the writers justified their opinion. But that doesn't mean that I should be obliged give a game a score I don't think it deserves, just to put it in the "proper" place on some imaginary ladder of quality, because then you just end up with escalating scores that are increasingly meaningless. Games can get the same score for different reasons, be better in some regards, worse in others.

From the Eurogamer scoring system (http://www.eurogamer.net/scoring_policy....

"A seven in Eurogamer speak is something we greatly recommend you have a good look at before you buy, because you can bet many highly regarded games over the years have been awarded a seven. If you're a fan of the genre in question then there's a very good chance you'll get a lot out of it, and often you'll hear a game's vocal following doing their best to boost its chances. Conversely, many detractors will seek to kick it down even further. A seven suggests you're into the idea of the game you should still try and check it out - you might like it more than you think, or be able to forgive its less than brilliant visuals. Or maybe it looks good, but the camera issues were just unforgiving, or maybe the AI wasn't up to much.

Over the years, in gaming parlance, seven has become almost the real 'average' score, but this is nonsense that we wish was flushed out of the scoring system with many publications terrified of giving certain games - particularly those of a great significance backed by big ad campaigns - less than this mark. Often giving less than seven is deemed to be the point of no return, with this considered to be the psychological barrier at which point people decide to buy at or not. But we're resistant to the idea and believe seven equates to being a very good score, and one that should be given more credit. In Eurogamer's eyes, it's still a great game, but one that is likely to sport a few areas where the game is blatantly let down - to the detriment of its overall quality and enjoyment."

I'm still really excited about playing this game despite EG's it's-a-good-rather-than-great-game review. The various gameplay videos I've seen look really good and somewhat reminiscent of Doom 3 only in third-person and with zero-gravity bits. Certainly looks a lot of fun to me so I'm sticking with my pre-order. And that it mirrors Resident Evil 4's control scheme is a plus point since that game never appeared on the PS3 or 360. Roll on... when it this game out again? LOL

Oh and it's nice to see EG give credit for the game's solid framerate and lack of screen tearing... IMO too many reviewers overlook these issues like with the *cough*Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise*cough* review, a game which has some of the worst tearing I've seen in a 360 game since the unpatched Saints Row!!!

Somebody mentioned Alone in the Dark!

(turns into hulk and smashes up house)

Still....so....aaaangry!

:-()

Maybe EG should disguise the score in some sort of sum to stop every review comments section being filled with absolute morons.

Dead Space = 3+4/5*2

Have you tried a harder difficulty setting? Since the game seems to be less than challenging, maybe that would solve that issue...

On the other hand, it looks like all survival horror games share the same flaw: they simply are too repetitive. Silent hill, project zero, condemned, even RE, and dead space according to the review: very repetitive games, all of them. I still think that call of cthulhu dark corners of the earth is the best survival horror ever, simply because it manages to avoid that issue - and it's VERY scary, too.

@anomagnus

"i see some people say
'its only a score ffs'
the point being, that MANY people will simply look at the score and judge the game solely on that "

Those many people are f*cking idiots.

So, glad we could clear that one up so easily.


"if EG want to use scores, then they should expect lunatic criticism over their scoring policy by idiots"

FIXED


I can't believe Dan still feels the need to try and stem the flow of stupidity. Anyone who would take two entirely different games, and compare them directly based only on their score, is clearly beyond help.

A modicum of intelligence and a light sprinking of common sense is all anyone needs to see how ridiculous this score based argument is, yet it keeps surfacing time after time.

We could argue about review policy, and we could argue about the scores that other sites give games, but what we should do is read the words and form our own opinions. That is it. Its that simple.

I personally would be delighted if EG were to drop scores completely, it might mean more discussion threads had discussion in them instead of the same thinly disguised IQ test submissions. But I realise this will never happen as their readership would drop due to the almost religious following that a pointless digit has garnered.

I swear its like a version of Planet of Apes, but where the apes are just normal... ONLY STUPIDER! ;)

neilka: Thanks for clearing that up, DrunkenKillfish.

LOL!

@kangarootoo: you could basically copy/paste your post into every comments threads you could find.... Why bother? People who complain about the score - before they even played the game, of course - won't read your answer, or won't understand it, or will reply with an insult... it's a waste of time. And what i just wrote is kinda pointless too, BTW. Could we please talk about the game, now, please?

"Have you tried a harder difficulty setting? Since the game seems to be less than challenging, maybe that would solve that issue... "

My full playthrough was on Normal, I also started new games on both 360 and PS3 on the tougher difficulty levels. Like most horror games, it gives you less ammo to tackle more resilient monsters, but that doesn't really solve the problem. It's not that the game isn't challenging, more that it's so predictable in the ways it uses the same survival horror elements as every other game in the genre that it's all too easy to get through a lot of it on autopilot.

On the other hand, it looks like all survival horror games share the same flaw: they simply are too repetitive. Silent hill, project zero, condemned, even RE, and dead space according to the review: very repetitive games, all of them.

Repetition is kind of inherent in any action adventure game, really, since they all rely on a mixture of shooting, following linear paths and solving rudimentary puzzles. The thing that left me underwhelmed with Dead Space is that there's no sense of escalation throughout the eleven or twelve hours you'll be playing it for. The story treads water for 80% of the game, while you face broadly the same enemies from beginning to end. It never feels like your predicament is getting worse, or that you're in an increasing amount of danger. If you plotted the highs and lows of the game, you'd get a pretty straight horizontal line, straight down the middle.

@DanWhitehead
"The score is a guideline, a summation of the review text, not some mathematically airtight value that places the game in some fixed position in relation to every other game in existence."

Mind if we use that quote next time someone goes for apoplectic rage because you gave a game one point less or more than they think it should have got? Actually, given the righteous fervour shown that should really be "one point less or more than they know it should have got"?

Peoples opinions on various games will always differ; one man's meat is another man's poisonous, gas-spewing, monstrous mutation, as they say.

@ParanoidZombie

Oh I know. I have my own issues I guess. I shout loadly about how some people are too stupid to hear sense. And its madness, 'cos they just don't want to be saved :)

So I'll stop it.

"Over the years, in gaming parlance, seven has become almost the real 'average' score, but this is nonsense"

this is where I was driving at!

Anyone who needs it explained why the LBP review is above the Dead Space one should not be allowed near the internet. It's dangerous.

This is the first i've heard of this game, somehow! Sounds pretty good though, gonna pick it up when it's cheaper!

@ HairyCrack - welcome to my Ignore list. It's an exclusive little club featuring people like Apologie, NickJC1 and now yourself. You're in appropriate company, moron.

@Dan: oh, I see, a bit like Jericho or the Suffering, then. Peaks too early. Thanks for your answer, BTW :)

"@ HairyCrack - welcome to my Ignore list. It's an exclusive little club featuring people like Apologie, NickJC1 and now yourself. You're in appropriate company, moron. "

I personally leave all the idiots off ignore - serves to both give me a chuckle, and remind me that not everybody can be coherent and rational on the internet :D

Surprised, thought it would get more. Still getting it though.

@bad09

how many hours have you put into too human bad?

i'm over 150 hours now since release, i think i know this game better than dan, and i suspect better than you

the fact is, too human made you work. but the pay off was somethings special

Saw some vids on G4 for this and it all looked a bit disorientating. Is that a word? lol
Anyway, I couldn't tell which way was up and which was down and which was front ways and which was back ways. I'd end up throwing a controller through the wall for sure.

pathetic review tbh 7/10 what a joke, u gave lbp 9/10 now that is a joke, u gave alone in the dark 7/10 when its so obviously horrible i & i cnt c dead space being any where near that bad

Definitely getting this. I like the look of it and the gameplay. I just played through Fracture (trading it in asap) and the end boss cheats by having his little minions kill you from behind while you try to fight him. I hate cheap shite like that. Sounds like dead space isn't a cheap trick kind of game.

mikeck - "I personally leave all the idiots off ignore - serves to both give me a chuckle, and remind me that not everybody can be coherent and rational on the internet :D"

Yeah, it does give a few laughs sometimes, doesn't it? However, I'd rather just bypass their bullshit and spend my limited time on the internet reading sensible and coherant posts.

@ triggerhappytel

I see your point, raise a few smiles or have a coherent stream of comments without interruption? Yeah, that's a no-brainer :)

@ anomagus

"@bad09

how many hours have you put into too human bad?

i'm over 150 hours now since release, i think i know this game better than dan, and i suspect better than you

the fact is, too human made you work. but the pay off was somethings special"

Just to jump into your conversation here :) I've played it through once completely, and have tinkered with it ever since - even talked my buddy who disliked the demo into buying it so we could play together. I love the grind of this game, and really like the combat - for me it was something new and worked. I can certainly appreciate why others would not like the combat, but once I got used to it, it felt really fluid.

The only thing stopping me play this at present is WAR, and then there is the deluge of games coming in the next few weeks...so whilst I'm certainly going to keep this game to come back to at some point, it'll be off the playlist for a while - but not because it's not good, as I think it's really good fun.

7/10 is probably a fair score, its just that after GTA IV and Halo 3 (two solid 8/10 games) recieving 10/10, it seems a bit unjust

EG really just needs to admit that it scored those 2 way too high

7 is a little harsh, it's a personal 8 for me (on the half that I've played anyway). The story isn't the most comelling, it's true, but the design and combat are great. Very exciting.

Nice work Dan. How does it compare to The Suffering, if you don't mind my asking? An imperfect game if ever there was one, that, but somehow I couldn't put it down...