Dead Rising 1 is the most average game that I spent over 80 hours on. Technically, it has plenty of issues: long loading times, muddy textures, and some pretty awkward controls. Its difficulty curve is absurd: you can stumble into the game's most difficult boss battles within minutes of starting the game, but you can also level grind to the point where nothing is a threat. Your first playthrough is almost assured to be a losing effort, and even if you finish it there's no guarantee you'll get a good ending.

The sequels improved the controls and smoothed out the difficulty curve a bit, but there's still plenty of things that hold the series back from mass appeal.

Simply put, the games aren't for everyone. And that's perfectly fine.

Aside from a few games, the series seems to actually discourage players who want to run around and kill zombies with fun weapons. It's possible to do that, but the timer is an constant reminder of what you should be doing. The real appeal of the game is completing the story under the strict time limit given to you. It's a constant balancing act between rescuing survivors, fighting off bosses, and managing your tiny inventory.

The best Dead Rising moments happen because the time limit is there. I recall escorting a group of 3 survivors in Dead Rising 2. Without the time to return them to the safe zone, I decided to take them all with me to the next mission. This required cutting through a part of the casino that housed Snowflake, a tiger who was hellbent on killing me and all of my group.

I commanded the group to run to the nearest exit while I fought off the tiger. But fighting a tiger is much easier said than done, andand I was soon running low on healing items. I emptied out all of the steaks I hoarded in my inventory to draw the tiger away, making my way to the group who were near death after fighting off zombies with tennis rackets and golf clubs. We made it to the next waypoint, but with no healing items, the horde picked off two of us and only 1 survivor and I made it to the mission on barely any health.

Moments like that are the highlights of Dead Rising games. Trying to balance rescuing survivors to get stronger and completing the main missions to progress the story. Dealing with a small inventory of breakable items, which force you to scavenge and pick up anything around so you have some form of defense.

The appeal of killing off zombies is only part of the Dead Rising equation. Individual zombies are not challenging to kill. But when there's a horde of zombies between your group of damaged survivors and a mission marker that's a mile away, they turn from an inoffensive threat into a major issue.

The later games in the series added more options to appeal to more people, like Sandbox Mode in Dead Rising 2: Off The Record, and Dead Rising 3's "save anywhere" options and relaxed time limit.

Dead Rising 3 was a fine game, and received well. Capcom is responding to this by stripping away the rest of the game's identity for Dead Rising 4.

According to early reports, Dead Rising 4 will have no timer, and Frank West will have regenerating health. I understand why Capcom wants to appeal to a larger audience. But these changes worry me, as they seem to take away the challenge and tension I enjoyed playing Dead Rising games.

With no timer, players can run around and slaughter zombies as much as they want. Is that appealing to a mainstream audience in 2016, who groan when yet another zombie game is shown on stage at E3? Now that The Walking Dead TV series has settled into a predictable groove, is there even a "zombie media" craze to capitalize on? The control of Dead Rising games is still somewhat awkward and outdated. If new players are drawn in, will they even stick around with these imperfect game mechanics?

Removing the timer also removes the core conflict of the series: balancing your need to level up and gear up with the simultaneous need to progress through the story and see new areas and enemies. Without a timer, escorting survivors becomes trivial, and zombies are even less of a threat because you have infinite time to clear a path.

Despite Capcom's backing, Dead Rising has always been a niche game that turned off mainstream players with high difficulty and imperfect controls. But getting over the initial thrill of killing hordes of zombies brought an even more rewarding feeling of completing difficult tasks under strict constraints, and overcoming a constant threat to be rewarded with satisfying boss battles and great ending sequences.

Dead Rising doesn't have to be for everyone. Many games that try to appeal to everyone end up appealing to no one. And if the changes to Dead Rising 4 do strip the game of its identity like I fear it will, I hope the remastered titles show a new generation of players how special a game can be when it refuses to compromise for mass appeal.

@perfidioussinn said:

Simply put, the games aren't for everyone. And that's perfectly fine.

Despite Capcom's backing, Dead Rising has always been a niche game that turned off mainstream players with high difficulty and imperfect controls...Dead Rising doesn't have to be for everyone.

In 2016 I think this is wrong. Games are more expensive than ever to make and Capcom is not doing great financially. They do not want this to be a niche product. They want this to sell big.

Speaking as someone who was always drawn to the Dead Rising games for the goofy fun but then repelled by the strict time limits and awkward gameplay...I am interested in this game and probably wouldn't be if it had the old, awkward, systems. They're making it kind of sound like a zombie Saints Row game but with sleazy Frank West and a Christmas theme. Sounds great! I think zombies are still very viable if you do something interesting with it, and this is something interesting.

I get why you want the older style controls and the time limits that appealed to you, but this is going to be a console exclusive on the Xbox for a year, and that console is not friendly to clunky weird Japanese game design. The ONLY play here, for an Xbox audience, is to make zombie Saints Row, and that's what they're doing.

Hopefully they will include or patch in a time limit mode for the hardcore fans.

I think a large part of the population (especially gamers) still really like zombies-despite how tired I am of them. I only ever played the first Dead Rising; I was an early teen and didn't even try and grasp on to the timer and other weird systems. I played through the game once, playing it like a standard sandbox style game, and completed it. I must of have gotten one of the pretty bad endings considering the circumstances. I believe it ended with Frank West beating a general on a tank. Then the tank got surrounded by zombies and the camera panned up showing how big the horde was and how hopeless escape was. This is actually making me interested in going back and playing the first game and really trying to master the systems they force on you...or at least knowingly participate in them.

I agree. The timer and the way the games were desgined around it with the missions and survivors was one of my favorite parts of the series. I think what Danny said on the bombcast this week really summed up my feelings on the subject. Like how the crazy weapons were a lot more fun and exciting when you just a baseballbat with nails 70% of the time and then got the wheelchair/lawnmower combo. The way they seem to lean into it with DR 4 just seems kind of boring and a little bit like they try too hard to make it zany.

I pretty much agree with everything your saying.

It's also about the missions you don't do (on your first playthrough, anyway). I started enjoying the games once I understood that most of the human side bosses are not meant to be beaten your first time around. Plus this is also a game where it's important to get a lay of the land, to know where to find what stuff and which shortcuts exist, which ultimately makes "experience" something more than a number that's constantly going up.

And yeah, I did 90% of my kills with the spiked bat. It's available and it gets the job done. There is some hilarity to be had in these games, but for me that comes mostly from having Chuck/Frank wear a coon skin cap and a baseball outfit during dramatic cutscenes.

I couldn't agree with @bigsocrates more. I was in a similar boat, some parts of Dead Rising really appeals to me but the parts that rubbed me the wrong way really stopped me playing that game. The idea that games don't have to be for everyone as a statement can be a doubled edged sword you risk landing on though. While I agree that it is the case, I also think arguing that when the game changes away from your preferences is ironic. But maybe it's emblematic of the larger consensus; niche products sell less and perhaps Dead Rising the way you want it just isn't viable financially.

I suppose the question then becomes; a varation of Dead Rising without your preferred restrictions or no Dead Rising?

@pezen: I would disagree with you that the op is saying that the game is changing away from their preferences, the game is moving away from the things that made it interesting and unique. Dead Rising was a special game, it was the first taste I ever had of Japanese game craziness and I thought it was really cool. Aside from the first sequel there have been few games like it.

I understand why Capcom are making that move, they're in a bad position. But I don't think that making a more generic zombie killing game is going to save them.

I fundamentally agree. Dead Rising is a really polarizing series because of how unique the mission mechanics are. I completely understand why some people would really hate the timer and the inventory management (because they're kind of for crazy people) (like me), but as you said, that's what Dead Rising is. If you take those out, it basically becomes a different series (or at the very least a RE 4 style shift in identity). Capcom is is rough waters financially, so I get that they would want to make a crowd pleaser, but I think it's a real shame that the Dead Rising identity is going to get lost in the shuffle.

My issue with the DR games is the occasionally bad design choices within these specific constraints. In DR 2: Off the Record, the entire last day of normal mode and all of Overtime mode are ruined by the gas zombies. They're remarkably frustrating to fight or even run away from, and they make transporting survivors nearly impossible. Also, a lot of the psychopath fights, especially in DR2, are really badly designed. Unless you're cheesing them with the LMG, it's actually impossible to beat some of them without just trading hits with them. I think designing enemies who can't be attacked without the player taking damage is really lazy and frustrating. I don't remember Dead Rising 1 having these problems, so maybe it's just a Blue Castle Games issue.

I never got through the 1st 1, and I hope the PC re-release happens. The control are really cumbersome, but I've never played a game that felt more living, open and urgent. It was a survival and crafting game before survival games, and its stakes were the most deadly.

@avantegardener:

There is indeed a PC rerelease coming out on September 13th! Hopefully they'll fix the infamous Food Court bug for it!

Doesn't everyone hate timed missions and escort missions? I welcome it.

The timer was always one of the absolute worst features in Dead Rising (along with the god awful boss fights) and I don't get why anyone would be opposed to getting rid of them. It's crazy that it's supposedly so ingrained in Dead Rising's identity that people want to keep it.

I played through the original Dead Rising and enjoyed it mostly on the novelty of the hundreds of items and the sandbox mall but the game always felt archaic as fuck especially after they released 2, 2's prequel/sequel and off the record. 3 was thankfully a step in the right direction and hopefully 4 is even better.

It's only recently in the wake of the negative feedback Dead Rising 4 has been getting that I have learned that people think there is something sacred about the Dead Rising series. Whereas I had always thought of it as some jovial mass-zombie-killing game, and nothing more.

Even without a timer, I just never liked how the games controlled. Nothing actually felt satisfying to use and despite the vast number of weapons you have access to, I just never felt the need to make most of them and even when I did, it wasn't especially great. "I'm killing zombies with an electric chainsaw!!" is just not interesting enough on its own to me. There need to be more satisfying mechanics attached to that.

I have a bit of a fun story about Dead Rising. A few months after the game came out I was all set to have my wisdom teeth removed. Knowing that this would mean that I would be stationary for long periods of time I sent out a yelp to the only professionals I trusted at the time...that being the panel of The Hotspot. Luckily they ended up reading my letter a few days before I went under the knife, but their recommendations were

• Alex said to play Space Giraffe
• Ryan, Jeff and Brendan Sinclair recommended Dead Rising

Needless to say, I went with Dead Rising. That said I recall next to nothing about the game on account of my medication. All I remember was that I failed the game thanks to me ignoring the mission and just killing zombies.

When I finally recovered I never played the game again. It had its purpose in a wonderful vacuum, and I never want to think of that game other than the hazy nightmare that I have always thought of it.

Capcom has a history of trying to make their franchises appeal to everyone and while they dont end up appealing to noone (I know people who enjoyed RE6) They do lose some of their core fan base. I'm a fan of the original DR for the reasons that were mentioned by the OP. I also prefer the original Pikmin for part of the same reason. I like survivalist gameplay but i'm not a fan of permadeath or grinding so the Dead Rising games strike a good balance with me. (having a story also helps) But I know i'm in the minority. People dont like time limits.

Blue Castle games knows this which is why DR3's time limit was barely an issue and was really only there to create the illusion of urgency but apparently that was still too much. So they really had no where else to go. I'm sure they'll have a mode that adds a time limit though, for weirdos like me and the OP. It will feel tacked on (because it is) but it's something.

Well by trying to appeal to everyone I bet they'll end up appealing to no one. I'm a fan of the first 2 games. They were colorful, original and unforgiving. The third one lost most of that and added a grim filter over everything to make it look like total trash. This one is just pushing further into that direction.

Capcom has really lost it.

I really hated the timer in Dead Rising 1 and 2. It was super annoying and made it so you could easily miss out of stuff your first way through. It should definitely be an option in the game but it shouldn't get in the way if you don't want it to. That's why my favorite one is DR3.

@boboblaw: For me, the timer is the whole point of the game. Killing zombies is just fucking boring. There is a never ending amount of them so what's the point. What made the games interesting was the time management mechanic, forcing you to make decisions that impacted heavily on your success. I could bring this survivor back now and get exp. but if I do then I fail that mission. I could go fight that boss but do I have time to craft the right weapons before this person dies? Without that timer, the game is a poorly controlling boring endless slaughter of zombies. There are plenty of those games already. I hope that helps you understand why people would be opposed to getting rid of the mechanics that make Dead Rising different.

In literally every other game, they are poisonous and horrible. But Dead Rising managed to implement them in a way that made it work, at least for me. There is no louder critic of the escort mission than I. But Dead Rising, which is about 72% escort missions, sits atop my "All Time Best" list. I realize this makes absolutely no sense. But it is simply the magic that is Dead Rising. There's just something about it, some ineffable quality that keeps me wanting to play them.

I go back every 2 or 3 years and replay the original or 2 (sometimes both) just because there's nothing else like it and I enjoy getting all the stuff done. I love working out the exact path to getting all the survivors, all the Psychos, and the best storyline in one play through. It's the core of the experience in 1 and 2 (not so much 3). Mastering the layout, the shortcuts, knowing exactly where I can stop to make Quick-Step potions or a Nectar when I need them. Glorious.

I just finished a blog voicing my DR4 concerns so I won't go into them here. I'm buying the game regardless though. As I said, Dead Rising is my favorite so I'm in, however they serve it up. I do get the need to appeal to as many gamers as possible, but I hope the identity of Dead Rising isn't lost in the process.

This video might be a little harsh but it seems like they've streamlined a lot of the quirky elements that make the game unique.

Definitely waiting for a review on this one. It wouldnt be the first time one of these games was poorly marketed so who knows how it will turn out.

@boozak: I watched that video and rolled my eyes. Not at the game, but the people who made the video and commented. We can't know the quality of the game until it is out, but to say that Dead Rising 1 was the peak of the series and act like killing zombies in crazy ways isn't the main attraction is ignoring a large audience that enjoys it for that reason. Including me. Making missteps or humour that doesn't speak to an individual doesn't make it bad. It all depends on why you liked the games in the first place, and it's OK for those things not to be in this game while the video is acting like it's not OK.

@alistercat: What's "okay" for some isnt for others, as i've said I do think the video is a bit too harsh and i'm still adopting a wait and see attitude as I did really like the other games.

But I also think theres more to the identity of Dead Rising than killing zombies, and it needs to keep that identity to stand out amongst all these other games where all you do is kill zombies.

Why don't they just include a hardcore mode that has all the old school features from DR1?

I find it really weird how people play up Frank West as this iconic character when I don't remember a single thing about him other than, "I've covered wars you know."

We can call it Ubisoft Syndrome. :P

I was just thinking about this, and I am totally opposed to the timer. It takes away from my favorite aspects, which is roaming the interesting world, and being able to see all the content at my leisure the first time through. The fact they made it a lot easier in that respect three was great, and the fact they're taking it out of four altogether is even better. That said, they should add it in for those that like it. I was just going to make a thread asking who else is excited for this game. It's probably the game I'm most excited for this year of the games that hadn't come out yet, and albeit it has zombies, it looks like the perfect Christmas game considering it takes place during Christmas. I just watched IGN's video where the art director shows of the setting, and it looks to deliver in that important aspect to me. The fact you can kill a bunch of zombies, although very fun, isn't my favorite aspect of the Dead Rising games. I like the decidedly goofy story with interesting characters, and I love exploring the setting. Dead Rising to me doesn't live and die due to the timer, especially not to me, and it has, or can have a lot of other aspects that make it a good game to play.

I'm just surprised it comes out so soon. I guess you can look at it as a way to get more people to play it, but I don't in this case see it as a bad thing. The games challenge was never the appeal of Dead Rising to me, and if they wanted to make it challenging, do it some other way that doesn't have to do with starting the game all over with your upgrade status, that's just dumb. The fact they didn't release the remasters with a choice for a more lax time, I decided I wouldn't pick them up, as much as I wanted to. The thing I'm most disappointed about, if true, is that that maniacs may not have a cutscene and interesting personality. Aside from that, everything they've said about the game speaks directly to me. I don't ask that the game be easier, only that the time not be a factor because that, again, takes away from what I want and find so appealing about the series. I understand being disappointed about this aspect taken out, but I think fans of the games even with that in should still see it for other qualities.

I love Dead Rising, but the strict timer is a big turn off to me. Furthermore, a little off topic, but I am not that big a fan of zombie stuff, but more often than not, when it comes to games, they make something interesting out of it, be it Dying Light, Dead Rising, and even The Last of Us, which I find it hard to call it a 'zombie' game.

@zzombie13: Frank's iconic camera, season pass DLC pre-order now.

@boozak: What's interesting about that video is that it kind of works both ways for different people, because many of those things pointed out I'm thinking 'awesome' and is what makes me excited, while others could be disappointed.

All the systems in place in the first game are what made what would have been an average game into a fascinating average game. I spent SO much time on that game and I didn't even like it that much, but it was interesting. The time limit, the survivors, the psychos. It was so weird and different.

It's a shame Capcom is in position where they need to reach a wider audience. I liked the niche thing the first game was even though it wasn't amazing.

@alistercat: The video is about Dead Rising's identity, and that identity being lost as the series goes on. It's completely fair for a Dead Rising fan to think it's not ok.

I agree completely. Like most games I enjoyed, as the series progressed and the publisher or developer bet more and more on hitting it big with a mainstream audience, they stripped out the parts of the game that I considered fundamental to the experience in favor of streamlining for 'mass market appeal.' Dead Rising was interesting because its mechanics were unique and were more than just 'kill zombies in an open world.' The direction Capcom took Dead Rising in after 2 is one of the most disappointing things they could've done.

Considering the first game didn't have the combo weapon system and instead was about scavenging whatever you could find and using it as a weapon, I think it's inarguable that the series was not about just killing zombies when it started out. There were silly weapons in the original Dead Rising but none of them were effective, you couldn't kill zombies by slamming Servbot heads on them or throwing fistfuls of CDs into a crowd. The game had a campy style but most of the outright humor was around the periphery in sidequests, and at its core was a survival focused game rather than some comedic power fantasy. Dead Rising 2 was when things started turning more towards killing zombies in ridiculous ways, though it still had all of the survival aspects the first game had. For my money Dead Rising 1 is still king of the franchise in spite of feeling much clunkier than later games.

The thing that bugs me about Capcom moving away from the series roots is that the thing they're changing it to is less unique. Why do you have to get rid of the thing I loved to make something that's just like dozens of other games on the market? Obviously Capcom can do whatever they want with the series, but likewise I can say whatever I want about that decision, and then not buy the game when it comes out. I just hope if Dead Rising 4 bombs the fans won't be blamed for being "entitled" by choosing not to buy it like they were with DmC.

Well...its not on PS4... so that means It wont be for me.

No co-op is also a huge deal. 2 was some of the best coop I ever experienced

For me personally, I never liked the "challenge" of Dead Rising. I thought the timer stuff was really shitty because you could potentially miss out on a ton of stuff if you didn't know where every single person was and followed a specific route. Thats not fun for me. The most fun I had in those games was exploring the world and murdering zombies with lots of stupid weapons. Thats why Dead Rising 3 was by far my favorite. The main campaign was still goofy and dumb but they made the world bigger and doubled down on the dumb weapons by adding vehicles. The silly arcade dlc was also really fucking fun with buddies even though it was a bit shallow. Dead Rising 4 looks like it could be really good but who knows, it might be shitty because they haven't really been showing the game off that much.

@TechnoSyndrome: @boozak: @frostyryan: I was a bit too harsh, but what I meant was that people like Dead Rising for different reasons and that's OK. Dead Rising losing it's original identity doesn't make it shit. It makes it a worse game for you, if those things are important to you, but there are other people still able to enjoy it for different reasons.

When Dead Rising 1 came out, I loved it. I enjoyed 2 quite a bit as well. Dead Rising 3 came out to mixed reviews, so I skipped it until just a few months ago. I finally got around to playing it, and, somewhat to my surprise, I thought it was great. The reduced stress of the timer was a welcome change now that I no longer have the time/energy to replay a game multiple times, and the game still had all the goofy outfits and weapons that I'd enjoyed in the past.

The one thing I felt DR3 was missing was the mall. I thought the environments of the first two games were fantastic, and the move to an entire city didn't feel as good. I'm looking forward to getting back to Willamette in DR4 - they have to have the mall in there, right?

@atastyslurpee: There is co-op it's just it's own seperate mode. (also it's on PC if you have a rig that can handle it)

Seems to be a mix between the sandbox mode in off the record and the arcade mode in Dead Rising 3.

I would have liked regular co-op in story mode too but maybe it's absence is justified? (as in certain sections couldnt be made for co-op)

I have been a fan of Dead Rising since the beginning and while the timer is undoubtedly one of the things that made the series unique, I never actually liked it at all. I grew to tolerate it but I would have always preferred it to not be there. Also, I'm a weirdo who wishes that all games were singleplayer so no co-op campaign means nothing to me.

I hadn't seen this video before so I thought I'd share it here in case others hadn't had a chance to see it either. Cheers!

I dont :(

I have enjoyed the series since the start, however I felt that 3 was just too easy. I think that is because the timer was so weakened and you could just run around finding a pile of the best weapons. I think with the time completely removed the challenge will go with it. I am still going to play it because I enjoy the strange and batshit crazy situations in the series, but something will be really lost. An option to remove the timer would have been a better way to handle it.

The original Dead Rising had the perfect opportunity to be much more than a cult classic, but that timer mechanic completely ruined the game. I spent more hours in the demo than i did in the actual game.

I like the way Case West did it with a free play mode. People who wanted their time limits, and story got that. While my friend and I got to explore the casino, and make custom weapons to blow up zombies at our leisure.