Let EA know your Dead Space dissapointment

[famousringo]

averyblund said:

famousringo said:
I think people are just sick of getting the bait & switch with every franchise that comes to Wii. It's a parade of genre-busting spinoffs with little in common with the parent franchise besides the IP, and low budgets in common with each other.

Hey, you're getting Dead Space, a third person horror/shooter. Just kidding, it's a rail shooter.

Hey, you're getting a new Resident Evil. A third person survival/horror game? Nope, yours is a rail shooter.

Hey, you're getting a new Soul Calibur fighter! And by fighter, we mean a cheapass hack & slash.

How about a new Castlevania game? Platforming and powerups? No, yours will be a 3D fighting game!

 

You make a good rational point but miss one glaring point. TPS/FPS's on Wii have really not been a hit yet. Sure they seem to make enough to justify it, and some are quite successfull (COD4, MoH2), but on the other hand we have the rail shooter, which has sold better on the Wii than probably even the Saturn. Companies are lazy, they will go after the proven market, which is rail over the uncertainty of TPS/FPS. Hopefully this is starting to change with people actually buying quality efforts like WaW and The Conduit, but it will take time. Lets not forget the mediocre sales of really good games like Scarface and the Godfather- those sales set the tone for a lot of narrowness 3rd parties feel. To me Madworld and the Conduit will be the proving ground. If they flop I suspect the Wii will see a lot more of the same we have been getting for years, a few nices games and a lot of crap. If they succeed they will show 3rd parties that there are Wii gamers out there who bother to pick quality. 

 

You're forgetting Resident Evil 4, the game Dead Space was obviously modeled after and which has sold more copies on the Wii than its rail shooter cousin, albeit at a budget price.

But we agree on one thing: EA chose rail shooter because it was fast and cheap.