I find it hard to believe that all of this experimentation isn't just EA trying to turn DS into something much larger than it is. Maybe it'll work out this time around, and considering how much money they've said the co-op ran (expensive was the word), I hope it does.
Both series has not been scary for a while but the gameplay in Dead Space makes up for it along with the story which I actually enjoy and the addition of Co-op is about the greatest thing I can think of.
HAHAHAHAHAH OH FUCK AHAHAHAHAHHA DAMN THAT'S SOME LOLZ
I still have no problem with coop inherently. If it was ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OPTIONAL then that's great, everyone wins. coop exclusive "dungeons" though... that's disappointing and definitely not "Dead Spacey"
Overall, I'm really liking what I'm seeing with DS3. So many sequels just stay true to form and barely introduce anything new beyond new areas, enemies, powers, etc. Basic shit.
Visceral looks like it's really trying to evolve the Dead Space formula and it's very refreshing to see that in an industry that is scared to try anything new. (Despite the features being aped from other genres)
Do you even know what you're asking for? Split-screen isn't as simple as just splitting the screen, you have to re-optimize the entire game for it.
The game's visuals need to be downscaled so the console can handle two screens at once. It cuts into development time and cost. It's NOT an easy thing to do and it's actually far easier to do online multiplayer. All things considered, it's an under utilized feature anyway. Not many people actually use it, despite some loud proponents for the feature.
Split screen sucks anyway. If you want a friend to play in the same room as you, tell him to bring his Xbox over and hook it up to your computer monitor. I've been doing that for years and it's way better than sharing half a screen.
I mean, DS2 added in a crap, phoned-in MP mode, but the single player still felt incredibly meaty so I had zero problem with it. And while the E3 showing of this literally could NOT have been worse, the more and more I see the more I like/love. There's actually incentive to play co-op rather than it just being there.
Split screen cuts into development time and costs... that's pretty much the argument people have been using against shoehorned multiplayer for years, and they get called entitled whiners when they say it...
Anyways, I really think you need to try putting yourself in other people's shoes a little more. I love split screen, sorry that you don't like it. It also isn't practical to expect people to have friends bring over a computer moniter (I don't have one) a second xbox, a second copy of the game (which like I said, my friends are just casuals who only play Call of Duty, I couldn't convince them to buy this entire game just to maybe play coop with me). I'm tired of being collateral damage for their stupid decisions. The simplest solution would be easily to make everyone happy by not having coop exclusive sections in the first place.
Oh well, that means the population will still be intact
Lol how does cutting out the co-op exclusive stuff make "everyone happy"?
At this stage in development they'd have to shoehorn in the forced co-op of RE5 to give single player those co-op sections. The co-op exclusive content revolves around Carver afterall. I don't know about you, but I hated RE5 and it was because of the forced partner.
A key argument people have against this game is that the partner ruins immersion, yet those same people want the co-op content in the single-player mode. The argument is self defeating.
I'm sorry that having more options to play a $59.99 game longer upsets you. I just have a hard time sympathizing with people who argue against replay value.
I'm not arguing against replay value, and neither is anybody else, stop jumping to the conclusion that all criticisms are completely irrational.
I'm also not saying they should cut out the coop exclusive stuff, I'm saying they should have made the coop exclusive stuff playable in single player THAT would have made everyone happy (and no, not with an AI partner, you have a point that that would be even worse than making coop exclusive content). I know that it's too late now and it's not going to change at this point so I'm not advocating that they start cutting content pointlessly, I'm just saying that it was stupid to design parts of the game like that in the first place, and they should have had a little more foresight than that.
Exactly, if it has local co-op fine, if it's only only, fuck EA.
In some ways though, I'd rather them waste time and money on a mode that has *absolutely nothing* to do with the single player than build that single player around co-op, which always degrades the quality of said single player experience to some degree.

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow













follow


