Dead Rising 2's Zombie Hordes Dwarf the Original

Sevre

Old Hands
Apr 6, 2009
4,886
0
0
Obviously we'll need bigger screens to sustain all this cannon fodder.
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,880
3,755
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
its nice you can have thousands at a time but do you really need to have that many? I mean even with the car in the tunnel in the first one it was pretty much packed with zombies and still took forever to kill 52000 of them
 

AfterAscon

Tilting at WHARRGARBL
Nov 29, 2007
474
0
0
I hope they don't just chuck them all at you from the beginning. The thing I quite liked about the first one was the slow build up of Zombies in the Mall, which slightly increased the difficulty in previously easy areas.

TBH the only thing I care about hearing is making a decent save system, as long as they do that they can do what they want.
 

newfoundsky

New member
Feb 9, 2010
576
0
0
They should also make the guns work. Sure, he's a sexy italian/mexican guy, but he is NOT immune to head shots dammit.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
I don't really trust this game.

The first Dead Rising was a cult classic that showed us "America" the way only the Japanese could show it. But now that it switched to an American developer, I'm not sure how much of the original satire will remain.
I'm pretty sure you're among the few who enjoyed it for the "satire."

I think everyone just liked killing zombies. : / There is such a thing as over thinking a game.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
See, great, kudos to putting so many zombies in your game, but then again, Valve managed intense zombie fun with about fifty on screen, leading me to conclude that having thousands of zombies is not the essence of the best zombie horror games.

Resident Evil made us jump out of our skin with two zombie dogs and a window, L4D gives us nightmares with tense survival action, Silent Hill manages to be bed wettingly terrifying years after its initial release with the use of barely any monsters anywhere ever.

Well done on putting so many characters on screen at once, but it won't impress me unless I find the experience actually scary.
Then go play something else. This series isn't meant to be scary.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
The only thing missing is to ditch the pre-made protaganist and let you customize the apperance of your zombie stomper as much as Saint's Row 2. :p

Well that, and I hope they got rid of the extremely tight time limit.

The only real issue I have with the idea of thousands of zombies on the screen at once is that I'm not sure how practical it is. I mean okay, the horde looks impressive, but what can I as a player really do with a horde that size aside from go "oh cool, several thousand zombies, but I can't really look at them since they are a gimmick to funnel me in this direction"?

Truthfully given that I heard the game was pretty much done as of January of this year but got pushed up to avoid competing with other big releases, I'm sort of surprised there haven't been more leaks about it as well.

We'll see what happens when it comes out, I was awful at the first one, but had fun with it.
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
I heard about this already, I'll be downloading this little gem for pc!

EDIT: That is...on steam if they have it.
 

manythings

New member
Nov 7, 2009
3,297
0
0
The Bandit said:
Casual Shinji said:
I don't really trust this game.

The first Dead Rising was a cult classic that showed us "America" the way only the Japanese could show it. But now that it switched to an American developer, I'm not sure how much of the original satire will remain.
I'm pretty sure you're among the few who enjoyed it for the "satire."

I think everyone just liked killing zombies. : / There is such a thing as over thinking a game.
They Switched developer because they realised they didn't show american culture or make they game they thought they were making. See they had the zombie idea, then filled the game with shit that Japanese gamers like (The photography crap, escort missions etc.) and left the fun stuff, like just whaling zombie hordes for the hell of it, to fall by the way side.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
manythings said:
The Bandit said:
Casual Shinji said:
I don't really trust this game.

The first Dead Rising was a cult classic that showed us "America" the way only the Japanese could show it. But now that it switched to an American developer, I'm not sure how much of the original satire will remain.
I'm pretty sure you're among the few who enjoyed it for the "satire."

I think everyone just liked killing zombies. : / There is such a thing as over thinking a game.
They Switched developer because they realised they didn't show american culture or make they game they thought they were making. See they had the zombie idea, then filled the game with shit that Japanese gamers like (The photography crap, escort missions etc.) and left the fun stuff, like just whaling zombie hordes for the hell of it, to fall by the way side.
I'm not sure how any of that's relevant, but thanks for the info.
 

manythings

New member
Nov 7, 2009
3,297
0
0
The Bandit said:
manythings said:
The Bandit said:
Casual Shinji said:
I don't really trust this game.

The first Dead Rising was a cult classic that showed us "America" the way only the Japanese could show it. But now that it switched to an American developer, I'm not sure how much of the original satire will remain.
I'm pretty sure you're among the few who enjoyed it for the "satire."

I think everyone just liked killing zombies. : / There is such a thing as over thinking a game.
They Switched developer because they realised they didn't show american culture or make they game they thought they were making. See they had the zombie idea, then filled the game with shit that Japanese gamers like (The photography crap, escort missions etc.) and left the fun stuff, like just whaling zombie hordes for the hell of it, to fall by the way side.
I'm not sure how any of that's relevant, but thanks for the info.
I was pointing out that it was exactly what they did that made the game not what it was supposed to be. They actively stopped you from doing what you bought the game to do and thusly it was a promblem. It would be like some guy in Norway trying to reinterpret a basic Namibian story concept, to be marketed in Namibia, then saying "well I guess I'll add in shit to pad out the book" but he added things that are popular in Norway and ignored the intended audience altogether.
 

Spitfire175

New member
Jul 1, 2009
1,373
0
0
John Funk said:
And we already knew that developer Blue Castle was hoping to have a whopping 6,000 on screen at once [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/90563-Dead-Rising-2-to-Have-Most-Characters-Ever], making it the game with the most entities on-screen ever.
Back up there, Mr. Funk. 6000? Most "entities" probably means individuals, but are they all individually rendered and unique? I doubt that. Does the graphical level remain the same when the zombies are far away? I don't think so, says mister filtering.

You know, I fought 12,000 man battles back in 2002. Total War has given the player the chance to have well up to 15,000 individually rendered soldiers on the battlefield, with graphics that don't burn your eyes away with sheer terribleness. So I believe "on-screen ever" is just a lie here. Well, perhaps not a lie but at least not true.

I mean in no way to understate the respectable number "6000", it's an astonishing achievement, (if it's true) in a 3rd person game with supposedly top of the line visuals. but when it comes down to it, 6000 is not a record, not by a long way.
 

ProfessorLayton

Elite Member
Nov 6, 2008
7,452
0
41
I'm probably going to be sucked into buying this. I liked the first one, but not too much, but this looks even better.
 

kahlzun

New member
Sep 9, 2009
492
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
Well done on putting so many characters on screen at once, but it won't impress me unless I find the experience actually scary.
It's not meant to be scary. It's meant to be brutal and unforgiving against a implacable foe.

It's kinda the defining genre for the 360- a game that is meant to be played around friends so they can laugh and say "OMG that's awesome' when you start killing zombies with stuffed fish or whatever.
 

lucky_sharm

New member
Aug 27, 2009
846
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
Resident Evil made us jump out of our skin with two zombie dogs and a window, L4D gives us nightmares with tense survival action, Silent Hill manages to be bed wettingly terrifying years after its initial release with the use of barely any monsters anywhere ever.

Well done on putting so many characters on screen at once, but it won't impress me unless I find the experience actually scary.
L4D definitely wasn't scary, but it sure was intense and thrilling though. Nothing in that game was scary enough to screw with your head or make it hard to sleep at night, though. You won't feel much dread or panic when there are 3 well armed mates beside you spouting humorous dialogue at every turn.
 

Julianking93

New member
May 16, 2009
14,715
0
0
Fuck yeah, I'm so excited for this.

More zombies = more fun

Hopefully, the higher number of zombies will mean this will stomp all over the first in fun value.
 

Shannon Matchett

New member
Feb 17, 2010
19
0
0
Spitfire175 said:
John Funk said:
And we already knew that developer Blue Castle was hoping to have a whopping 6,000 on screen at once [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/90563-Dead-Rising-2-to-Have-Most-Characters-Ever], making it the game with the most entities on-screen ever.
Back up there, Mr. Funk. 6000? Most "entities" probably means individuals, but are they all individually rendered and unique? I doubt that. Does the graphical level remain the same when the zombies are far away? I don't think so, says mister filtering.

You know, I fought 12,000 man battles back in 2002. Total War has given the player the chance to have well up to 15,000 individually rendered soldiers on the battlefield, with graphics that don't burn your eyes away with sheer terribleness. So I believe "on-screen ever" is just a lie here. Well, perhaps not a lie but at least not true.

I mean in no way to understate the respectable number "6000", it's an astonishing achievement, (if it's true) in a 3rd person game with supposedly top of the line visuals. but when it comes down to it, 6000 is not a record, not by a long way.
You're kidding, right? You're comparing Total War's copy pasted units to 6,000 zombies that can individually be attacked, act and move. Entity is defined as "Something that exists as a particular and discrete unit" and I'm not sure if they'll be visually unique, but when you think about it, you can set one zombie on fire and turn another zombie's head into a water blood feature.

In Total War, you select a battalion and move them -as a battalion-. They're identical and act exactly the same as the man to the left, right, front and back of him. This, by definition, is not an entity. If you looked at Total War's list of entities, there would be about 18.

Comparing an 8-year old game in a RTS genre to Dead Rising 2 and stating that they held 12,000 man battles and broke the record for on-screen entities, a statement regarding unreleased 3rd person shooter/zombiebeater/rpg is premature and, 'perhaps not a lie, but at least not true'