Inafune discusses Dead Rising 2

By Robert Purchese Published 18 February, 2009

Reckons Western touch will improve it.

Capcom power-player Keiji Inafune has said collaborating with a western developer will make Dead Rising 2 a better game than the first.

Inafune explained there are limitations to developing from a single Japanese perspective. He reckons new collaborator Blue Castle understands the style and can offer an invaluable second opinion on the IP.

"When we started developing Dead Rising 2 with Blue Castle, one of the first things that Blue Castle did for us was to list all of the good and bad things about the game," said Inafune on the Bionic Commando podcast.

"Working with Blue Castle has really shown us how we can not only fix the problems with the original game, but also extend and expand upon the really fun parts as well.

"[Blue Castle] really understood the Japanese flavour that made Dead Rising so unique, they show me that they are serious about creating a game that keeps that Capcom spice intact," he added.

Inafune said Capcom is working closely with Blue Castle on Dead Rising 2. The director, leading planner and other "key staff" from Dead Rising 1 are said to be in contact with Blue Castle at least once a week via video conference.

And this sort of relationship, explained Inafune, will set the tone for Capcom's future global plans.

"We really want to create a game that has Western sensibilities mixed in with our Japanese design ideas. That's the next step in our global design in which Dead Rising 2 plays a very significant role," he said.

Inafune cleverly skirted around giving any specific details for Dead Rising 2, but did suggest that the save system, along with other irritating points, will be ironed out.

"I can't promise that we'll address every player's gripes, but we are planning on fixing problems that we think should be fixed," he said, as coyly as a coil.

He also wouldn't specify whether the casino setting was Reno or Vegas, but did confirm that the clock-mechanic will return. However, this time there will be more goals than time-limited escapes or waiting for rescue.

Dead Rising 2 is in development for PC, Xbox 360 and PS3. Those platforms aren't selling as well as hoped across Japan, but Inafune said he thinks Japanese and Western tastes will eventually merge as the markets become more global.

"As more shooters come into the Japanese market, as Japanese publishers like Capcom focus on sandbox games, I think you will start to see a change in Japanese gaming taste," concluded Inafune, pointing at Dead Rising 2 as a frontrunner.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (40) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • drumbaby #1 3 years ago

    Dead Rising 1 PSN please.

  • kangarootoo #2 3 years ago

    Oh praise baby Jesus!! This is the single best bit of news I could have heard about Dead Rising 2. Everything that was wrong with DR1 just had "Capcom" stamped all over it.

    "We really want to create a game that has Western sensibilities mixed in with our Japanese design ideas"

    Well that is one way of putting it. Another might be,

    "Giving a shit about the player instead of just making them dance to our tune like they are some kind of freeloader who should be punished"

    On the face of it, this sounds like a guaranteed sale for me. All I ever wanted from DR2 was the sublime core zombie bashing experience of DR1, with all of the annoying periphery functions and game structure sorted out.

  • penhalion #3 3 years ago

    This is either great or really really bad.....

    Silent Hills western makeover immediately springs to mind. One thing CapCom should have taken into account was that they needed to keep what was right about dead rising 1.

    Already they have ditched Frank, so we never get to continue his story. They've most likely lost the save in certain places thing in favour of the atmostphere killing save anywhwre, anytime nonsense. One of the challenges of the game was finding a save point when there were hundreds of zombies after you. The only thing that needed fixing about it was that there needed to be more than one save slot.

    The weapons and health, stat bonuses were fine using the mix your own powerup method. So nothing broken there.

    The missions were fine too, rewarding those who played well, while not adversely punishing those that didn't.

    More locations would have been good too, maybe moving the action to a new location partway through the game (adding vehicle sections).

    Yep I'm not holding out much hope for a westernised version of this game at all.

  • smernicki #4 3 years ago

    i want to love the first game but just can't. i'm still on my first play through. i enjoy it, but the frustration gets too much. the save system doesn't annoy me too much, i find the terrible shooting/aiming mechanic more annoying- having to be glued to the spot and slowly aim while your getting shot to pieces by a psycho isn't very fun.

    i understand your not meant to do everything on the first play through and that the idea was to play through again with a levelled up character, but perhaps if this was the goal then clearing the game in the first place should be less of a chore. going by people who have played this from my friends list i'm not the only one who hasn't got through this on one play never mind multiple plays

    rant rant rant...

  • DoctorZoidberg #5 3 years ago

    Personally, I don't think anything needed fixing in the first place.

    I liked the idea of the save system. You actually had to think about things like the route you took, and the risks involved.

    Nothing wrong with the missions either, I found it refreshing that you couldn't do everything in one play through. Plus the level up system worked great, and made replays very enjoyable.

    I would have liked to see a follow up to the story though, I kind of grew a fondness to Frank.

  • SixFootHalfling #6 3 years ago

    I don't understand everyone's problem with the missions on DR1, is it the time limits? Because most of the missions have so much time allotted to them that you could go for an hours dinner, come back and still have enough time to complete the mission.
    And as far as I can see their was plenty of variety with the missions, even the rescue and escort people missions, because their was always a different boss, and always something different happened on the return journey.

    Same with the save system, I never had a problem where the save I wanted was too late with any of the marked missions, and I needed an older one.
    The only problem I had was at the end of the game, when you have to return to Isabella, but she never called me, so my last save was about 20 in game mins before the chopper arrived, in the safe room, leaving me with the glitch of the game saying I wasn't on the pad at the end.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/09 @ 11:49

  • Pastici #7 3 years ago

    Yeah, the aiming was the most annoying thing about it. Aiming with the movement stick? Goldeneye?

  • mrmonkey1980 #8 3 years ago

    They shouldn't change the mission structure and they shouldn't change the save point - I found it annoying at times but it was essential to the experience. However if they must change it to a save anywhere option I relaly hope the make you stick to one save slot. If not, then people will just keep reloading old save points to complete the preferential missions and beat the game in one play through, ruining it. One of the main points about Dead Rising was the time restriction and making choices to see different results - not doing EVERYTHING like most games.

    Anyway, until I hear solid confirmation they have my full support.

  • kangarootoo #9 3 years ago

    "They've most likely lost the save in certain places thing in favour of the atmostphere killing save anywhwre, anytime nonsense"

    Thats a bit of a leap there. The issue with the save system in DR1 was never the use of fixed save locations. There is plenty they could do before getting as far as a quicksave system. Methinks you are just assuming the worst based on the way Silent Hill went (which I can identify with, as SH went downhill after 2 imo).

  • stepneg #10 3 years ago

    The one thing that annoyed me more than anything was the laborious boss fights, annoying and pointless.

  • GreyBeard #11 3 years ago

    Am I alone in being increasingly dismayed by the horrible attitude of defeatism coming from Japanese developers? Its like all sense of self-belief has been sucked out of them.

    I feel like grabbing them and giving them a slap. There's nothing intrinsically "western" about good game design, and a key USP of Japanese software was always its ethnicity and cultural baggage.

  • doragor #12 3 years ago

    I gave up on this game. The save system and the shooting controls irritated me beyond belief.

    @smernicki
    +1

    Edited by 1 at 18/02/09 @ 12:14

  • MrScruffier #13 3 years ago

    "Am I alone in being increasingly dismayed by the horrible attitude of defeatism coming from Japanese developers? Its like all sense of self-belief has been sucked out of them."

    We're just the same though, we spend all our time going on and on about how much better the Japanese are than us and that we're all a bunch of cynical hollywood inspired hacks, whereas they make Warioware and all kinds of crazy, original shit. I'm sure it works both ways though, they must look at our stuff and think "man, I'd never have thought of that" the same as we do when we look at theirs - So I'm interested to see what they come up with.

  • smernicki #14 3 years ago

    i reckon that if they improved the shooting/escort mechanics the improvements would mean people would be less pissed off about the save system (which i had no quibbles with, there were plenty of places to save)

  • Mooglepies #15 3 years ago

    It's an interesting point; Japanese deevlopers see games developed in the West like Gears of War and Fallout 3 sell mahoosive amounts (by their standards) and would obviously want in on that, but culturally they're also afraid to change what they know works and is successful in their home country. I think a project like this will give the best of both worlds; a Japanese developed game tempered by a Western influence to ensure that some of the truly odd quirks native to the Japanese get a decent western spin.

    On a side note, I enjoyed Dead Rising 1, I thought it did have its flaws though.

    I for one am most happy to hear that it's coming out on PC. GET IN.

  • miiiguel #16 3 years ago

    My problem with the save system wasn't for the lack of place to do it. The problem is that the one save slot + the strict timed structure could mess a +15 hour game and make one start allover. Fail!

    That said, I did complete the game, and managed to save 30 dudes.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/09 @ 12:39

  • rhubarbandcustard #17 3 years ago

    I have seen, bought and clutched to my chest with joy (almost) every zombie movie ever made..

    The same feeling of joy I get from the Walking Dead comic books...

    So, why have I hated every zombie game I've ever played? Dead Rising 1, for example, was atrocious.

    (Have not yet played Left 4 Dead on account of being a tightwad)

  • Xerx3s #18 3 years ago

    As long as they fix the incredibly tarded 80's save system game design, it's a buy for me. If they don't do that, I've got better things to spend money on.

  • YoshiMcTaggis #19 3 years ago

    If the devs are reading this (they're not), please ignore everyone who wants the save system changed. It was perfect. I'm not going to argue about this, I know I'm right.

    I HAVE SPOKEN

  • glaeken #20 3 years ago

    If the devs are reading this please ignore YoshiMcTaggis as I personally think developing a game with a save system and mission structure that means most people will hate your game is a bad move.

  • angerisagift #21 3 years ago

    YoshiMcTaggis
    18-Feb-09 12:56:03

    If the devs are reading this (they're not), please ignore everyone who wants the save system changed. It was perfect. I'm not going to argue about this, I know I'm right.

    glaeken
    18-Feb-09 12:58:14

    If the devs are reading this please ignore YoshiMcTaggis as I personally think developing a game with a save system and mission structure that means most people will hate your game is a bad move.

    And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why there will never ever be such a thing as the 'perfect game'.

  • Uncle_Fishboy #22 3 years ago

    @ rhubarbandcustard

    The answer to your question is: Because you are a bell end and have no taste. Cheers.

  • theindustrialone #23 3 years ago

    My main gripe with the first game was the survivor A.I. Thought the save system was fine (well, perhaps could've done with a coupe more save locations).

    I have a worrying feeling that the new devs are going to cock this one up. I pray they won't.

  • muscleblade #24 3 years ago

    Dead Rising is in my all time favourite top 10 games. If they drop the two things that made the game long lived and exciting in the first place just too please casual western gamers i wont support them this time. Dissapointing.

  • smernicki #25 3 years ago

    My main gripe with the first game was the survivor A.I.

    +1

    i know they were meant to be a bit helpless but even once i'd given them a weapon they were totally crap

  • rhubarbandcustard #26 3 years ago

    urban dictionary - Bell end

    1.The glans of the penis. So called because of it's similarity in shape to that of a bell. See also helmet.

    2.A foolish person. A plank.



    Yeah, probably.

  • muscleblade #27 3 years ago

    "the strict timed structure could mess a +15 hour game and make one start allover"

    If you actually completed the missions in time the game only last 7,2 hours. The multiple playthroughs is part of the game. I played the game for a good 15 hours+ but i restarted 3-4 times.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/09 @ 14:48

  • Hobbs #28 3 years ago

    The only thing that kept me from playing were the respawning convicts. It was completely out of character and simply ruined the game for me. I didn't mind the save game system, I could live with that. But tose three morons in their jeep were just too annoying. What I'd like is a mode without the psychopaths, without having to succesfully finish the game (I believe the survival mode lets you do this? I just don't have the time/patience to get that).

    A 'keys of the city' download, like Crackdown has, would be a blessing.

  • SixFootHalfling #29 3 years ago

    "the strict timed structure could mess a +15 hour game and make one start allover"

    The game ran at 10x real time, so to get to the 72hour ending took 7.2hours, so a 15 hour game would be 6.25 days in game. Which unless you are playing infinity mode is impossible, and infinity mode has no missions...

  • stodgypudding #30 3 years ago

    The first game had a sense of urgency and consequence that wouldn't be there without the rigid save game structure. It was this feeling and general atmosphere of the game that papered over some very poor A.I of fellow survivors and some broken gameplay. Please fix the later.

  • kinky_mong #31 3 years ago

    I'm sorry but the Dead Rising save system was a terrible relic from old computer games and just served to alienate a large proportion of people who would have otherwise enjoyed the game. If they allowed multiple save slots so you didn't end up saving yourself into a corner it would have been greatly improved.

    I did like the game but the fact that I had to restart four times before I could even hope to make any decent progress in the main storyline soured my appreciation of the game.

  • stodgypudding #32 3 years ago

    I suppose a banana would taste nicer to some people if it tasted more like a apple.

  • metalangel #33 3 years ago

    The most urgent things they need to fix are the controls, and the transceiver. Everything else is more or less down to the utterly gimped character you have when you first start playing. I swore and shouted and hated the game at first until I accepted that I just couldn't save everyone on my first playthrough, and just got on with it. It was later when I had a higher level character that I was able to come back and save every single survivor, answer every Otis call, etc etc.

  • brappbrap #34 3 years ago

    My biggest beef with Dead Rising 1 was those fucking convicts in the jeep.
    No idea how many times I got killed trying to cross that park in the middle.

    Read also: those fucking cultists.

    And finally: the tiny little text that meant I couldn't read a fucking word.

    Oh no, wait, there's more. The survivor ai, the save system, the psychos, Otis, that Genocide achievement.

    I've still not completed this game and I've had it since February 2007. HOWEVER.... I do plan on going back to it, walkthrough in hand, on my shiny HDTV (so i can actually read what is being said)

  • Razorus #35 3 years ago

    I like this guy and I can understand where he's coming from, with the whole Western POV idea. But I really hope it lives up to, and improves on the first game.

  • metalangel #36 3 years ago

    The genocide achievement is nothing... 3 or so hours. In fact, I would be tempted to recommend that people starting out ignore the story initially and do it first as it will net them some serious character levels and a very useful weapon (just don't forget to let the 3 days run out after you're done or it won't be saved). Now, 7 day survivor, THAT was hellish. I started at 8 in the morning and finished at quarter to midnight, with Frank needing to be fed every 20 mins (thankfully, an untouched controller powers down and pauses the game after 15). It was mostly just standing around, but I did manage to get the shopping done, get a haircut and build one hell of a rail network in Transport Tycoon while Frank stood in the security room examining his camera lens every 10 seconds.

  • miiiguel #37 3 years ago

    "If you actually completed the missions in time the game only last 7,2 hours. The multiple playthroughs is part of the game. I played the game for a good 15 hours+ but i restarted 3-4 times. "
    It's not that linear. One can have plenty more than the 7,247 hours in just one playthrough, by loading a previous save. The problem is that one might save a game and realise he's already not able to finish it no matter how well he performs, after plenty of tries, hence the not that linear stuff.

    Either way, not all have us have your l33t skilz... .

    edit: about eh clain that if I completed the game or not, that can be checked in my GT, it's public.
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/09 @ 16:25

  • Skooch #38 3 years ago

    "Personally, I don't think anything needed fixing in the first place."

    @ Dr Zoidberg - really? Did you like the fact that when you answered your mobile phone you couldn't run, swing a weapon or lead someone to safety? Did you enjoy the feather like contact you had when rescuing people such that a turn of the breeze would break you apart? Did you find it fun to replay the first 6 hours because you took one wrong turn and didn't get back in time? Did you like not being able to move and shoot at the same time? Did you revel in those particularly tough boss battles that were rock-solid? Did you like aiming your gun with the LEFT, yes LEFT, thumbstick?

    DR was a FANTASTIC game and in my top 5 on the Xbox 360 but to say nothing needed fixing is ludicrous my friend.

  • kangarootoo #39 3 years ago

    +1

  • metalangel #40 3 years ago

    The only time that... er... TIME is really tight is when you are trying to rescue the couple in the sporting goods store and also have to worry about getting the medikit. Apart from that you generally have a lot of time to get stuff done. ProTip: Carry a lot of handguns to give to your survivors as they will hold the zombies off if you order them to stay in one place.