The Dead Space franchise has done a Resident Evil on us, and while it may still be filled with tension, it’d be hard to convince anybody that the game still falls under the “survival horror” banner. The chap who wrote the first game and much of the story arc for its sequel describes the change in focus as ”a necessary evil.”
Antony Johnston says the action-bent in the game’s sequels are “not really for” him, preferring survival horror – but understands that the changes were “a necessary evil in order to broaden the fan base”.
“I’m personally a big fan of old-school survival horror, and that was one of the main reasons I wanted to work on Dead Space. So the greater emphasis on big action in the sequels means they’re not really for me,” Johnson told NowGamer.
“It’s a very difficult balancing act to pull off. So far, I think Visceral has done an admirable job of maintaining that balance,” he said.
For the larger story to be told, the change had to happen.
“To get that story told, to round out the universe, it was inevitable the settings and environments would open out a bit, become a bit more epic in scale,” he explained.
“Otherwise you’d just have the same game on a different ship each time, and that’s pretty dull.”
Reviews for Dead Space 3 have been mixed, tilting towards being favourable. Now that you’ve had a weekend of playing it for yourselves, what do you think?
In this article
I'm old, grumpy and more than just a little cynical. One day, I found myself in possession of a NES, and a copy of Super Mario Bros 3. It was that game that made me realise that games were more than just toys to idly while away time - they were capable of being masterpieces. I'm here now, looking for more of those masterpieces. I am also the emperor of the backend