EA Aims to "Broaden" Dead Space Audience

[Rad Party God]

So, EA already turned what was essentially Resident Evil 4 in space into Resident Evil 5 in space and now they're trying to turn it into Gears of War/Lost Planet... in space... and expect to sell 5 million units from it.

I can't say how damned insane this is.

I liked the first game a lot, but I wasn't interested on the second game and I'm definitely not interested in the third game.

I'm already calling it. RIP Dead Space. We hardly knew ye.

 

[Bazaalmon]

"broaden" = dumb down, right?
Have you noticed how many games published, directly or indirectly, by EA fail because they do "good, but not spectacular"?
They're adding co-op (online only, no locals allowed, you filthy peasants!), you're gonna be fighting humans, and...oh yes...cover-based shooting.
And they have the sheer audacity to just assume a sales figure of 5 million at the bare minimum.
When they realize that there aren't 5 million people willing to shovel out fistfuls of money to EA for a sub-par, 6-hour long campaign (plus multiplayer, because that's what REALLY matters, right?) They're going to blame pirates, used games, and steam sales instead of blaming themselves for turning a good, but not spectacular (see what I did there?) game into a mediocre-at-best shootyfest.
I wouldn't be surprised if they removed the limb-cutting mechanic entirely, and just made it into "shoot everything forever until it stops moving"

TL;DR: Dead Space 3: The death of a franchise

 

[RA92]

Broadening DS3's audience, EA? Does that include my mom?

 

[Nuttydwarf]

well, there goes deadspace.

 

[teebeeohh]

i kinda noticed this with the E3 trailer, they set up the necromorphs so that issac has an advantage with his mining equipment since necromorphs need to be dismembered but in DS3 they give you a straight up marine as a partner who will most likely use normal guns.
well, at least we know what happens to the EA marketing department after the revolution

 

[5-0]

Jesus Christ. I used to think EA were deliberately being evil, but now...it seems they actually can't help it. They're just that stupid. As much as I don't want to see a well-loved franchise sink (although I'm not a fan myself), I kind of hope it does, just to teach those greedy bastards a lesson.

 

[shintakie10]

Five million?

Five million? FIVE MILLION!??!?!?!

...What? Where the fuck is all this money going? How do you even spend 5 million on a game that has all the basics already set up, thanks to previous entries in the series? (By that I mean the engine, style, gameplay feel, whatever.) I realize game development costs a lot but it's not like they're building a completely new engine and rolling 5 Elder Scrolls games worth of content into one game.

Of course, I already know the answer to my question; that imaginary money (because DS3 will NOT sell 5 million new copies in the first year, I reckon) is going to go toward advertising. Ugh.

EA historically spends far more on advertisement than they actually do on game development except in cases where they don't even bother to advertise for a game. I get that they need to advertise somehow, but spendin double the budget for the game on ads is just idiotic.

Edit - Whelp Dead Space. We enjoyed our time together while we had it (except your fuck awful pc port). May you find some sort of peace in whatever dark pit EA leaves you in when you inevitably don't reach their completely arbitrary sales requirement.

 

[Strain42]

Come on guys, remember those whole "Your Mom Will Hate It" commercials for Dead Space 2. That was GENIUS EA can only go up up up and Dead Space WILL sell those 5 million units it apparently so desperately needs

...I'm not gonna lie, my brain snapped halfway through that speech. I'm being sarcastic, right?

 

[RN7]

I'm so glad the games I like haven't been stained with EA's filth. Why, I'm so elated that I won't be buying Dead Space 3/Gears of Lost Planet: The Reckoning, I just might throw some money at Blizzard. But probably not!

 

[Voltano]

Well, I can sympathize with EA here in wanting a bigger community of players attached to an IP. Having a bigger community means there are potential sales of the game attached to that IP and, if the game is good, word of mouth could help make the game sell even more.

That said--the approach of getting a bigger community involves *sticking* to an IP and *reducing* the price of these games to make more people consider picking it up. I'm not a fan of the "Dead Space" series but when you start adapting elements of "Gears of War" or "Army of Two" in your game, you tend to discriminate what the IP originally was. Its like if the developers of "Amnesia: The Dark Descent" decided to make the sequel an MMORPG where you can grind on monsters by hiding at obvious shadows to level up your "sanity" so you can hide from bigger monsters at more narrow shadows. Top that off with a $60+ price tag, and extra considering the price of DLC, and you still have people like me that would pass it over.

 

[TheBelgianGuy]

How many copies did DS1 and 2 sell?

By August 2010, DS1 sold 2 million copies; DS2 sold 2 million copies in the first week of release, so probably 3~ million by now?

 

[JasonKaotic]

Well, so much for horror.
I don't like Dead Space at all, but this is piss. Nice damage control EA.

 

[Amaror]

Oh, Ea when will you learn.
This is like Dragon Age all over again. The First game sold very well and you wanted to make it more accessible and your marketing "geniuses" announced that the game will sale double the amount of Origins.
And it sold HALF.
So learn from your mistakes damnit!

 

[jollybarracuda]

Why do companies do this? Really. When was the last time that watering down any video game was popular? Has there really ever been profit increases from doing this? I assume there must have been somewhere if companies keep doing this, but it only ever seems to gather hate for it.

And on top of it, really? 5 Million units to sell? It seems like post-funding EA predicted the franchise was no longer going to make money, so they're just shutting it down with a ridiculous sales standard.

 

[Landrius]

So, above all things I know I must remain objective. This stuff about it needing to sell five million copies just to be profitable sounds crazy, but it's being done for some... reason. Maybe it's a moronic reason, but it's got to be there. EA does... things like this, as far as I have been led to understand. I can accept that and move on, even if I have to clench my teeth. I don't care about EA, I care about Dead Space (somewhat).

It is entirely possible that Dead Space 3 will still be good, despite what I have been seeing/hearing and the impressions these things have made on me. How likely that is I can't say, but the possibility is still out there somewhere.

Okay. Now that I have been sufficiently neutral and logical:

*headdesk* God bleeping damnit, EA. "Broaden the audience" is the phrase I associate with "Let's order the coffin and get that gravedigger a-diggin'". Rightly or wrongly, that's what it looks like to me. And I don't doubt that's what it looks like to a lot of people.

I enjoyed Dead Space 1 and 2, not because they were the epitome of "survival horror" but because they were great at something I like to refer to as "action horror". They were good in their own ways. If they take the "horror" part (the wonderful atmosphere, the story, the hallucinations) and dampen it until what we're left with is the "shoot dudes with a gun" aspect to make it more "appealing", I know it will achieve the opposite effect for me and likely for many others. It will be extremely unappealing.

There. Glad to get that out of my system. Now to move on with life.

captcha: "freezing temperatures". That seems rather relevant to Dead Space 3. Is this thing sentient or something?

 

[Viper114]

I think people are rushing to judgement way too quickly. Yes, the idea to "broaden" the fanbase is dumb, and making DS3 even more "action-y" is a bad idea, but to cry foul so soon is a bit premature, even if you do you have natural predisposition of HATE to EA in general. I don't think the goal of 5 million units is going to happen, and it's dumb to think that in order to sustain an IP you need to sell that many (there are other IPs that don't need that kind of selling power), but I'm not going to give up on DS3 just yet. Yes, I have my gripes based on that video, but I'll save my judgement for a while longer.

 

[404notfound]

I like how EA "need to sell 5 million units" to make a game viable to produce when smaller companies, such as Egosoft with their X game series, can make awesome games and expect to ship a much smaller number than 5 million units and still make it profitable enough to continue the series in the same way as they started it.

 

[shrekfan246]

Just replace Bioware with "Visceral". Depending on your views, add Bioware to the pile in the second image, too.

No, EA, you don't need 5 million copies to sell to keep the franchise profitable. If you want to actually end a franchise for once, just say it, we'll probably applaud you for it. If you want an excuse to axe Visceral Games in the near future, well, your track history is already working against you.

 

[xPixelatedx]

It will remain a horror game

Will attempt to broaden its audience

Pick one.

Welcome to this gaming gen, where corporations are so cartoonishly greedy, it's not enough to pull sales from any one crowd; they must pull sales from EVERY CROWD, at once! Can't be done, sorry EA. The more action-game you make it, the less horror it will be. This isn't opinion, it is indisputable fact. Pro tip:you cannot make the best romance movie if it is also trying to be a blockbuster horror movie. You cannot make the world's best pepperoni pizza if you keep adding all the other toppings. Etc. Etc. Etc.

You NEED to sell 5 million copies? No you don't. You created an unnecessary situation that demands you do. If making these games has gotten so ludicrously expensive, it's because you made them ludicrously expensive. I would be willing to bet money that the team making this 3rd game is what.. 2x.. 3x larger then the team who made the first Dead Space game? Maybe bigger? And why do you have to pay so many more people? To do all those crazy cinematics and make the game more actiony/Gears, right? Here's a thought, instead of changing the game in a way that would make it so much more expensive to produce and then telling us we have to buy this new lackluster version because it's more expensive, why not make it the way it was before? You know, the way you could afford to make it? Clearly that pulled in enough of a profit to spawn two sequels, so you should get just enough of an audience to more then pay for the production costs. Don't fumble the ball then ask us to pay for your mistakes, especially when you fumbled from getting too greedy.

But perhaps I am the fool. I am the one trying to talk reason to the worst company in America. I wish I could say that explains everything, but the 'graveyard of titans' from this gen is one that spans every walk of life. This is not how a Console generation should end.

 

[koroem]

Well, say goodbye to Dead Space after this, guys.

Should have said good bye to dead space already. From the sounds of this, it isn't Dead Space, its a co-op/multiplayer 3rd person shooter using the Dead Space license. Dead Space is solo survival horror, not co-op/multiplayer shoot-em-up.

I'm not an EA hater, but I really hate them right now for killing this franchise.