Which version of Dead Rising 2 should I play, the original, or Off the Record?

Which version of Dead Rising 2 should I play, the original, or Off the Record?

But these are different games user.

Original

OTR

They're different games from what I remember.

Is DR3 worth playing at all?

The one with Chuck Norris in it

no

Neither. They're both slow nacuck spinoffs that do everything the original did right horribly.

Just wait for the PC port. It's being done by the same poles that ported Dragon's Dogma.

Christ this thread is a mess.

Ok so first of all ignore this fuckboy

And all the replies he's no doubt gonna try to sneak in to this post with his shit """"opinions"""".

Second, DR2 is shit.
Plain and simple.

OTR is DR2, but fixed.
However what OTR doesn't fix is the plot, the plot in OTR is terrible.

So if you want a cohesive experience with some decent plot that is at least entertaining, you play DR1 first, then OTR to fuck around.

If you want the best gameplay the series has to offer but -only- the gameplay and nothing else, play OTR.
No matter what, avoid DR2 and you'll be fine.

Off the record is much better.

>>>/tumblr/

They're sorta different games but not completely. OTR has a different start and ending (with a new final boss), however roughly 80% stays the same.
Survivors, cases and cutscenes are almost all the same. In the cutscenes that both games have in common since the psychopaths and survivors have the same dialog there's very little leeway in what Frank can say so he's not very talkative. In the new cutscenes he talks more but it's one liners in the same fashion than Chuck times 100.

If you want to play only one of those games play OTR, it has more content.

Also, no, Dead Rising 3 isn't worth it.

The original has a better protagonist, less bloat, runs better and it doesn't fellate Frank.

If you really want to play Dead Rising 2, just play Off The Record.

Or just play Dead Rising 1.

I enjoy both, but 1 is the best.

Both. If you want a canon storyline, go with Dead Rising 2.

If you've never played a Dead Rising game, start with the first one and work your way up.
Dead Rising 3 isn't bad but it is laughably heavily casualized.

I honestly liked Dead Rising 2 more over the first game though. Moreso, because the first game had that really irritating in-game timer that was more punishing. Story was better in the first game though.

But you get to fight Kanye West in the second game.

Off The Record is more Sandboxy and has numerous extras including a entirely new Map section and has the DR2 DLC available in teh base game (Though IIRC wwithout they Cheat Effects).

DR2 has MUH CANON and is tighter with timelimits (Gotta get AND give that Zombrex, and get the Survivors AND do main plot.)

DR3 is casualized fuck and basically shit out COMBO WOMBO super weapons that make Knife Gloves look tame (Grim Reaper Series in particular) and the time limits are incredibly generous, while it is larger it is basically feels like the same areas over and over, which really stands out compared to DR2s smaller, but varied ones and makes it less then fun to just goof around.

And it feels like the Zombies are "worse" too what with them grouping up so weirdly, which certainly feels different from DR2.

DR3 went so hard on LARGER AND MORE that it forgot the charm, one of the things i found fun a about DR1 was that it actually kind a played up just how varied a "small town" mall could be despite the size.

I would say go for OTR if you only gonna get one, more bang for the buck.

...

Flip a coin. They have some differences:

Vanilla:
-different push broom animation
-Playboy product placement
-you must get zombrex for Katie

Off the Record:
-push broom animation from the first game
-get zombrex for yourself
-Chuck is a boss fight
-photography makes a return
-underground tram fight is shortened
-plot unfolds differently so new details are revealed (T.K. and Brandon colluding the zombie outbreak together).
-new amusement park area

But, they're essentially the same and it all comes down to preference.

The original first. OTR is more of a remix for those who enjoyed it and want to play as Frank West, and from what I remember OTR is nowhere near as well optimized as 2.


I can't find it in my heart to recommend DR3. Lackluster optimization not withstanding, it does a lot of things wrong. Boss fights are the easiest in the series, combo weaponing on the fly is a good idea but they fuck it up by forcing you to get blue prints and ruining experimentation in 2, regular weapons are the most useless they've ever been, the game is not set up around the traditional gameplay structure as going into nightmare mode it does not tell you where the save points are on the map, it's hard for me to recommend it given all the polish it has.

These are the wisest posts.

Don't settle with the shitty outsourced sequels that weren't even written by the same Nips. Just dig the original.

1 > OTR > 2 > ????

...

WELL WHAT? WELL WHAT?

Well, On a Mission is the best boss theme.

Trust me. I'm a butcher.

Forgot to mention,
This last one is the biggest improvement for me since height is no longer and issue.

The sequel really fucked the series' shit up. I guess that's what happens, when you outsource your flagship games, but it's not like Capcom will ever learn from that, seeing how this isn't the first time.

I liked DR2, I thought it left a lot to be desired and didn't quite get everything right, but the new features and enviroments were alright. At least OTR fixed most of the bullshit gameplay wise. Except for moving the sledgehammer to make crafting the Defilier harder fuck that shit.

Off the Record is the better version.

It's also not canon, but none of the games after 2 are or look worth giving a shit about, so might as well make the series a duology starring Frank West.

The spoilertext just means you aren't judging the game by the merits of the original, which is meant to be more challenging, than cathartic.

*1

Also, a series chronicling only Frank would be just as ass. It'd be better to give the series back to the original team, before doing anything else.

Saying 1 is the only one worth playing is contrarian bullshit, 2 is the same damn game with a new setting, set of psychopaths and a few minor improvements.

Unless you really, REALLY like the mid-western mall as a location, it's dumb to disregard 2.

The only easily craftable item that was worth a damn was the Defiler. Everything else took to much time like the Blitzkrieg chair, or the slow moving chainsaw staff.
Are the best go to combos that you will actually use all the time. I never felt like I was breaking the game by using them.

Every crafting room usually had the ingredients for one uncommon craftable item nearby, that helps.

I take it you never played the first one blind then, since it's obvious that the zombies feel more like an obstacle by the start of the game, rather than a legitimate threat. The fact you go from snapping pictures while under total danger to just tapping zeds pretty much tells you how close to the original the sequel is.
Such as removing certain moves and features, like the knee drop and the entirety of photography, while either removing certain weapons entirely, or turning them into combo weapons so that you'd actually feel obliged to use the damn crafting tables, in the first place.

There shouldn't have been any obviously good weapons to work with. The fact you showed me some off the top of your head while lamenting how more difficult the game is because they moved a few ingredients away shows just how much you're out of touch with what made the original so great. At least in the first one, mannequin torsos and mini-chainsaws weren't presented up to your face as weapons at your disposal. You had to find that out, yourself, or read a guide, like a faggot.

I guess the Katana, Shotgun, SMGs, and later 1H chainsaws weren't obviously good.
Stop. Just stop posting you autist, I complained about it but in no way am I lementing the difficulty of OTR. I am moreso complaining that my favorite weapon is harder to get. Honestly the repositionings were probably more balanced but this is a DR2/OTR specific point and has nothing to do with the first game, which I have said is better anyway.
Yup, just a little bit later when you kill Adam, then you can grab them whenever. Lot of surviviors in that area, plenty of time to grab one on a fly by.
Oh god it's this autist again. Nice strawman
One of the original fucking ideas behind Dead Rising is to allow a ton of zombies to be on screen at once without them being as threatening as they are in Resident Evil, they were always more of an obstacle than a threat. Unless you just really sucked at the game.

This is really no different from the first game,


Chuck had an elbow drop that functioned identically to the knee drop. As for other moves, well, he's a different character. All of his moves are based more around sporting events unlike Frank's wrestling, it's sort of apples and oranges depending on which character's moveset you prefer. Frank's moves are more flashy and satisfying but every important one Chuck also has.

You got me there on photography but it added combo weapons as a thing, and they're fun, and there's a lot to make. It also adds a layer of strategy to the game that would otherwise be missing, do I keep this ineffective weapon in my inventory in the hopes that I can make a good combo out of it or not?

I love the first Dead Rising, probably more than any motherfucker has a right to love a game, but I wouldn't write off 2/OTR because they're pretty solid additions to the franchise in their own right.

As far as the writing is concerned, I dunno, Dead Rising 2 has more of a summer action movie feel but I found it engaging enough. Chuck was a decent protagonist, his interactions with Katey were good, it worked.

I like to think of Dead Rising and 2/OTR as the two different versions of Dawn of the Dead in the story department.

Dead Rising 1, naturally, being the original. Tonally more grim, and with more artistic merit, as well as being a genre codifier. Dead Rising 2 is the remake, a pretty damn entertaining piece in it's own right, but more surface level.

I really did like the idea that zombie outbreaks became a sort of natural disaster sort of occurrence after the events of Dead Rising 1. A bad thing that happens sometimes and kills a bunch of people, but doesn't necessarily lead to an apocalyptic scenario. Was an interesting idea.

Exactly. They were there, but not exactly advertised, like the benches, TVs, and showerheads were.
Yet you're never explicitly told about how durable they become, with books. That kind of stuff is left to you for guessing.
I'll take that as a "no", then.
Except they only dulled them down for the sake of balance, not for the sake of ease, ya casual.

Mate, the moment you see the horde awaiting you at the Entrance Plaza, there is definitely a sense of dread, rather than one of annoyance. You know that.
That's an issue. The fact the developers didn't even bother to conceive his character as being relates to journalism or the press in any way cements the game's perspective, meaning there's no point in having photography return, which was one of the original's most famous features.
This kind of logic is what got the franchise to where it is now. Derailment, and the outright ignorance of it is basically what throws series like Saint's Row into the trash.
Except they might as well be knockoffs or unrelated to the series at all, since the only thing they have in common, gameplay-wise is that there's zombies, and you wail on them.
A summer action movie isn't engaging. It's entertaining. What DR2 did was make an interesting take on the undead into yet another zombie game.
What a coincidence, seeing as the remakes are absolutely worthless, in comparison to the cinematic excellence it makes of the B-Movie original.
Except that ruins the feeling the original game gave you. There's no sense of discovery, or mystery. No photography to take risky shots with. No sense of desperation in using anything as a weapon. Not even a proper sense of isolation with the living-impaired, since the improved Survivor AI makes it all a grand cakewalk, rather than a mad dash for the saferoom. It's not even an apocalypse, from the beginning. You're trapped within this disaster, from the beginning, and you're getting to the bottom of it, because that's what you came there for. That's how a "Dead Rising" game should always start. It doesn't even have to be Frank, yet again. It could be some wannabe buffoon jumping into his american pickup with a camcorder in hand wanting to ape his coverage of the incident, for all I care.

Is that not how Dead Rising 2 starts?

That sounds like it could be a pretty interesting take on the mechanic. Instead of taking photos, you take short little video clips.

Chuck didn't come to Fortune City to "get to the bottom" of anything. He got caught up in the incident, and the proper role is assigned to some chink.

Exactly. That's where the series probably would've explored, had it been done by the old team of nips, rather than the canucks who played the game, rather than developed it.

Because of that, the series is derailed to what the damned leafs believe the game should he about: easily knocking over zeds with the most zaniest shit.