Dead Rising 3 as a "Next Gen" game showing potential...

[DudeistBelieve]

So I picked up Apocalypse Edition. Now reading the reviews, the two things they say show this as a "next gen" (well at the time of the release they were called that) game is the number of zombies on the screen and the way the map works.

Now right away, the sheer amount of Zombies is impressive. Almost suffocatingly so. That first open area you see is just swarming with the little buggers.

However, the other thing they talk about is the lack of load times and how all the buildings are more or less open to walk into. This appealed to me because I've been wanting such freedom in an open world game. I mean just imagine a game like GTAV with interiors in every building and how awesome that would be to explore. Right?

But I'm slowly finding, the entire map feels very small. Like Grand Theft Auto 3 small, the majority of it feels like highway. Also the interiors they trumpet? Maybe I haven't explored enough (I've spent the last few hours simply reaching the level cap.) but they're basically large empty rooms for the most part.

Suffice to say, I'm kinda disappointed with the setting. GTAV managed to capture the spirit of California better than this.... It's generic looking, where as the previous games really embraced their setting.

What do you guys think about Dead Rising 3?

 

[Ambient_Malice]

I think it's a genuinely good game. Technologically impressive. Decent PC port post-patches. Some decent writing. Good music.

 

[Brain Tumor]

Its a Dead Rising game, not a GTA game. If you were expecting GTA V level of detail, well you didn't do much research then. Dead Rising is just about surviving and killing Zombies. The setting is generic and really doesn't matter IMO. They trumpet those qualities compared to the previous games, not games in other genres.

 

[josemlopes]

It's generic looking, where as the previous games really embraced their setting.

I think they did a wrong move making the action take place in a city rather then in a special small place that was full of detail like the other games, they still felt big because they let you roam around the places that are usually closed.

 

[Evonisia]

Played the game at launch, for the record. Then it got like a month's worth of on-and-off again play from myself.

I thought Dead Rising 3 was a great game. Certainly not as good as the excellent Dead Rising 2, but it definitely stood on its own merits. And I'll be honest and say I was impressed by the game's details and what not. The amount of Zombies it has would probably cause my Xbox 360 to vomit and cry. The decision to make Dead Rising more AssCreedy in its exploration was a step in the right direction given the new setting: imagine trying to escort survivors across such a large city. As for the interiors, well it's still a Dead Rising game: the only buildings with interiors are the ones which matter (generally).

And while Dead Rising 3 doesn't have the really interesting plot twist from Dead Rising 2, it did provide just the right amount of fan service for fangirls like myself to get high off of. The little details to flesh out the world were really well done as well, such as the dead couple sitting at the concert together.

I am highly anticipating Dead Rising 4, 'cos they knocked this one out of the park.

 

[Benpasko]

Dead Rising 3 was disappointing, I thought. My issue wasn't the world, it was the non-existent balance/challenge. Your bare fists were WAY too good, better than any melee weapon in the game. You can hit level 50+ in a half an hour just spamming the grab and spin barehanded finisher. It pays for itself, and you can just chain them and hit a 500+ kill combo with it, where zombies are dropping 20k pp apiece. You can also just seriously walk up and punch the psychopaths to death with your bare hands once you have the first unarmed damage perk. In fact, not a single one of DR3's psychopaths ever killed me. Anyone who's played Dead Rising knows why that's absurd.

Dead Rising 1 and 2 are hard games to actually finish 100%, but 3 is just absurdly easy. I was able to save all survivors available to the point I stopped playing, beat all psychopaths available to that day, and hit (Well past, actually, but the display stops at) level 50, all in my first playthrough (I didn't actually finish the game, I was at 6/7 psychopaths defeated on night 3 or 4). I'm not even getting into the weapons locker, just because weapons aren't even necessary to make a mockery of the game's difficulty. I had SPARE TIME on a run where I was actually saving everyone.

On a more positive note, the co-op is further improved past 2's, there's a great variety of weapons and costumes, and the new skill and crafting systems are pretty strong. (Barring severe balance issues. The final intelligence perk lets you have every book effect at the same time, all the time ffs!) I take issue with a lot of the game's design choices, but I got 20 good hours out of it. Just not the hundreds I got from 1 & 2.

Its a Dead Rising game, not a GTA game. If you were expecting GTA V level of detail, well you didn't do much research then. Dead Rising is just about surviving and killing Zombies. The setting is generic and really doesn't matter IMO. They trumpet those qualities compared to the previous games, not games in other genres.

I disagree. Dead Rising 1 was pretty all-in on its setting in the mall. You're not wrong that the setting has gotten less important as the series has gone on, but one was all about the mall theme. It was the main justification for the series' now central "use/wear anything" gimmick.

And I dunno, the Dead Rising games have way more secrets (Or at least MUCH more densely packed) than GTA V, which I think makes them more detailed in a way. GTA definitely has more atmosphere and small visual details, but I think Dead Rising games have more detailed environments in terms of things that actually affect gameplay.

 

[laggyteabag]

I have never been a big fan of the Dead Rising series, so I don't own it, but seeing the sheer amount of zombies is certainly impressive.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Its a decent game but it was a nexgen console release game for XB1... so you're not going to get a whole lot of performance or value out of it. Its more just going to push the boundaries of how many enemies you're going to see onscreen more than anything else is all.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Its a Dead Rising game, not a GTA game. If you were expecting GTA V level of detail, well you didn't do much research then. Dead Rising is just about surviving and killing Zombies. The setting is generic and really doesn't matter IMO. They trumpet those qualities compared to the previous games, not games in other genres.

I was expecting at least more than Dead Rising 1. I don't feel like I was walking around a living... well, Undead city.

Dead Rising 3 was disappointing, I thought. My issue wasn't the world, it was the non-existent balance/challenge. Your bare fists were WAY too good, better than any melee weapon in the game. You can hit level 50+ in a half an hour just spamming the grab and spin barehanded finisher. It pays for itself, and you can just chain them and hit a 500+ kill combo with it, where zombies are dropping 20k pp apiece. You can also just seriously walk up and punch the psychopaths to death with your bare hands once you have the first unarmed damage perk. In fact, not a single one of DR3's psychopaths ever killed me. Anyone who's played Dead Rising knows why that's absurd.

Dead Rising 1 and 2 are hard games to actually finish 100%, but 3 is just absurdly easy. I was able to save all survivors available to the point I stopped playing, beat all psychopaths available to that day, and hit (Well past, actually, but the display stops at) level 50, all in my first playthrough (I didn't actually finish the game, I was at 6/7 psychopaths defeated on night 3 or 4). I'm not even getting into the weapons locker, just because weapons aren't even necessary to make a mockery of the game's difficulty. I had SPARE TIME on a run where I was actually saving everyone.

On a more positive note, the co-op is further improved past 2's, there's a great variety of weapons and costumes, and the new skill and crafting systems are pretty strong. (Barring severe balance issues. The final intelligence perk lets you have every book effect at the same time, all the time ffs!) I take issue with a lot of the game's design choices, but I got 20 good hours out of it. Just not the hundreds I got from 1 & 2.

Its a Dead Rising game, not a GTA game. If you were expecting GTA V level of detail, well you didn't do much research then. Dead Rising is just about surviving and killing Zombies. The setting is generic and really doesn't matter IMO. They trumpet those qualities compared to the previous games, not games in other genres.

I disagree. Dead Rising 1 was pretty all-in on its setting in the mall. You're not wrong that the setting has gotten less important as the series has gone on, but one was all about the mall theme. It was the main justification for the series' now central "use/wear anything" gimmick.

And I dunno, the Dead Rising games have way more secrets (Or at least MUCH more densely packed) than GTA V, which I think makes them more detailed in a way. GTA definitely has more atmosphere and small visual details, but I think Dead Rising games have more detailed environments in terms of things that actually affect gameplay.

Wish I had known that way before doing it for 3 hours with the Ultimate Grim Reaper...

 

[Sassafrass]

Here's what I thought about it. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.860985-Dead-Rising-3-PC-Contender-for-zombie-game-of-the-year] /shamelessplug

I will say however this review was written shortly after the PC launch and the stability problems I mentioned have all been fixed. But yeah, it was a very fun game. One of a few games I've sat down over a week and played to death.