• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Which Dead Rising games are worth playing and why?

Stepping up to say I even had fun with 4! I know it betrayed the original vision, but I had a good time.

I feel like original releases of 1, 2, and 4. I never got a chance to go through 3, but to me it feels too grimey to fit what I need from dead rising.

You need a bright mall, stocked shelves, and goofy Muzak.
 
Last edited:
This first one is great, but it doesn't auto save, and you only get one save slot, which a lot of people did not like. It also gives you a time limit which you can ignore, but if you want to progress to and explore new areas you will have to work with the time limit, and a lot of people didn't like that either. Also, in true Capcom form, the boss fights can be be unforgiving and annoying (a particular boss fight will keep showing up after you've already beat it, and they are in an area you have to use a lot).

Other than that everyone loved DR1. The controls feel great, the graphics hold up well, it's fun to work with the time limit (imo) and keep doing new runs until you figure out the best routes and locations of food and weapons that help you get to where you need to go in time, the weapons and hordes of zombies is endless fun and often hilarious, there is a underground tunnel area where you can get in vehicles and just mow through thick crowds of zombies who have piled up in the tunnels, you level up and learn new moves, get faster, stronger, etc... I loved DR1, but you have to be ready for those negatives I mentioned.

DR2 is similar but adds in combo weapons and I think it gives you extra save slots, not sure though...?

DR3 is way easier, more open world with auto saves, forgiving time limit that doesn't make you feel pressured, weapons combos are still in and now they have vehicular blueprints to make tanks and vehicle weapons (super fun), and in general it is basically open world dead rising ala gta or saints row.

DR4 is irredeemable and terrible. Avoid it if possible or burn it with fire
 
Last edited:
1, 2, and 3.

Dead Rising: Started the whole thing, fun game with cool boss fights and is a smaller more constrained game overall. A classic. Really fun.
Dead Rising 2: Great protagonist, better story overall, the map is WAY more interesting and enjoyable. Lots of replayibility and stuff to do without feeling overwhelming.
Dead Rising 3: Good story, interesting "darker" tone with more mechanics. Looks great, vehicles are fun, the DLC is a blast. World feels smaller and more detailed, combat feels better than previous games.

My ranking is 2, 1, 3 personally. I'd still play 1 before 2.
 
1 and 2, because they're the only ones that actually follow the unique formula of having a set time limit and events that happened at specific times

3 is an OK zombie game but lacks what made the first 2 distinct and 4 is complete garbage
 
Last edited:
Wonko_C said:
Only the first one. From the second onwards it all went downhill.
Click to expand...
And that's not true!

They just went in different directions afterward. The second game resembles the first the most. Then 3 and 4 just aimed for a bigger crowd and have a much different tone. I don't think it makes them unfun.

I have to say tho that the first one did best at experimenting with the object surrounding you and had more small details to interacting with them. I mean yeah, the first one is the best but it doesn't make the rest of the series bad by any mean!
 
I gave the one that released at the start of the generation on Xbox One a try. I didn't like how it controlled so I pretty much gave up on it. Did not enjoy at all.
 
Last edited:
Second one is good but a bit cringe with all the on the nose references that became memes from the first one. OTR has some MODERATE changes but not enough to justify back to back playthroughs.

Never played 3. 4 is renowned to be fucking terrible, I bought it blind on sale without knowing but I never played it.

First one probably is the best one even with the trash AI and that text problem back in the day on 360.
 
Only one mention of OTR so far, but it's easily worth including.

Dead Rising 2: Off The Record is a retelling of 2 but from the perspective of the character from DR1. Other than that it's largely the same game, and it's worth considering over the original 2.

I've only bothered with 2 and OTR, because I started hearing about the decline in quality from 3 onwards so I never went back to the series. I had plenty of fun with what I did play, though.
 
Get the remastered version on Steam if you can. MT Framework is godlike and the game can run at 240Hz if that's your thing.

There's just something that is very iconic about the First Dead Rising. I don't know how to put it. But man.. I enjoy it a lot. It's what got me to buy a 360 instead of a PS3.

Definitely play that first and then I'd recommend DR2 afterwards. I can't speak for the other games afterwards. DR3 was ok to me. I know of people who enjoy it. But I thought that it was subpar.
 
The second one is the best. 1-2 are worth playing but 1 can be really difficult.

3 is when it starts really straying into Superhero vs zombies gameplay.
 
Id play the first one first, then the 2nd if you have a friend (if not its the same as the first with crazier weapons) could play off the record as well but the rest id skip
 
I'd definitely agree that the first game is a product of its time, but that game is the main reason I got a 360, and I loved it so much.

I'd say...
1. Dead Rising
2. Dead Rising 2
3. Dead Rising 3

Then I wouldn't bother with what comes after to be honest.

The first game's content feels great because it's the first iteration, there's a certain "thing" that game has that the sequel doesn't. However, the second one does kind of add on more content and smooth out some jank. Still has great characters and content. The third one is... when you start to get into forgettable territory IMO. When it originally launched on PC it's performance was ALL over the place, fortunately for me it was alright. The game still felt like Dead Rising, just... with a few new things. Some worked, some didn't.

Much like I said above, what came after 3 is not worth even touching, and I say that in the nicest way. What I played of 4 felt like a shell of all the games that came before it. It felt more shallow in a lot of ways, was missing that "charm", etc. I couldn't even bring myself to playing more than a half hour of it or so. Then I never touched it again. I've always been curious about going back to it, but the longer I wait the less I care to. 🤷‍♂️
 
Play 1 & 2, or 1 & Off The Record.

Case Zero and Case West are cool little bite sized experiences and act as the prologue and epilogue of Dead Rising 2. If you're looking to get the "full DR2 experience" you'll want to play Case Zero, then DR2, then Case West.

If you really, really want more then go play 3. It's a decent enough game in its own right but it is a major step down from the first two entries, and you're good to entirely skip 4. 4 is absolutely terrible and has very little if any redeeming qualities.
 
You're missing out if you've never got the chance to play Dead Rising 1 and 4. The others I can take or leave, but 1 and 4 (plus the DLC for 4 is amazing) are great games. They strike a perfect balance between serious and slapstick, horror and joke - but the mechanics and the crazy weapons are most importantly - genuinely fun.
 
Last edited:
I'd play all of them but Dead Rising 2 Off the Record was my favorite and the first game was my least favorite. Frank is way too weak at the start of the first game and the game isn't fun until your second playthrough after leveling Frank up a bit. This was fixed in the later games.
 
The only correct answer.
RINE08.png


If my memory serves well, I'm pretty sure this is the straw that broke Matt Casamassina. I remember his downward spiral on the Nintendo Voice Chat episodes with his outlook on the Wii, just seemed like a broken man towards the end of his IGN run. lol. Poor guy.
 
I would start by trying out DR1. This isn't a series for everyone and you can be easily put off by the time limit, wacky boss fights, escort missions or not being able to save easily.
 
I'd only really recommend 1,2 and OTR. But for me the biggest draw of Dead Rising is the "Groundhog Day" and somewhat strict time mechanic where you won't see or do everything the first run. You're learning the map and getting an understanding of where you need to be at a specific time and where the good items are on the map as you make your way to your destination.

Part 3 eased up the time mechanic so much that it was basically pointless to have it on there and then with 4 they god rid of it completely. 4 is complete and utter trash and the studio got shut down largely because that game was such a colossal failure.

Edit: If you're not sure about 2, then I'd say try Case Zero which is a small prequel and a slice of what you can expect. Then if you do like 2, then Case West is a nice self contained story after the events of 2.
 
Last edited:
Dead Rising 1 was amazing. Played it multiple times to get the different unlocks and endings. By the last playthrough I was fucking Mega Man.
 
Last edited:
speedomodel said:
1, 2, and 3.

Dead Rising: Started the whole thing, fun game with cool boss fights and is a smaller more constrained game overall. A classic. Really fun.
Dead Rising 2: Great protagonist, better story overall, the map is WAY more interesting and enjoyable. Lots of replayibility and stuff to do without feeling overwhelming.
Dead Rising 3: Good story, interesting "darker" tone with more mechanics. Looks great, vehicles are fun, the DLC is a blast. World feels smaller and more detailed, combat feels better than previous games.

My ranking is 2, 1, 3 personally. I'd still play 1 before 2.
Click to expand...
This is exactly my answer. 1 is a lot of fun and set the tone for the series, 2 is more of that and has coop which is always fun, 3 is a darker tone but with an awesome city and a great attention to detail.

I'd agree with this ranking too, 2,1,3 in that order of which I think is best.

4 dropped the ball hard.
 
Krappadizzle said:
This is exactly my answer. 1 is a lot of fun and set the tone for the series, 2 is more of that and has coop which is always fun, 3 is a darker tone but with an awesome city and a great attention to detail.

I'd agree with this ranking too, 2,1,3 in that order of which I think is best.

4 dropped the ball hard.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
Bridges said:
Play 1 & 2, or 1 & Off The Record.

Case Zero and Case West are cool little bite sized experiences and act as the prologue and epilogue of Dead Rising 2. If you're looking to get the "full DR2 experience" you'll want to play Case Zero, then DR2, then Case West.

If you really, really want more then go play 3. It's a decent enough game in its own right but it is a major step down from the first two entries, and you're good to entirely skip 4. 4 is absolutely terrible and has very little if any redeeming qualities.
Click to expand...
This is a great answer. I actually enjoyed 3, but the first two are better. The first Dead Rising is my favorite out of the series and is even in my Top 10 on the X360. If you are a Capcom fan, there is tons of fan service throughout the series, especially in 3.

The Dead Rising games are enhanced if you are playing on a One X or Series X. The original is enhanced to 1080p/60fps.
 
The first game is one of the best I've ever played. Never really enjoyed 2 because of the tone but can see how people enjoyed it especially with coop. 3 was a cool launch game for Xbox One and was pretty fun but not as good as the previous two. Never even touched 4 because it looks like ass and Is some corporate piece of shit cash grab. Crowbcat has a couple videos on it.
 
Majima Everywhere System said:
Stepping up to say I even had fun with 4! I know it betrayed the original vision, but I had a good time.

I feel like original releases of 1, 2, and 4. I never got a chance to go through 3, but to me it feels too grimey to fit what I need from dead rising.

You need a bright mall, stocked shelves, and goofy Muzak.
Click to expand...
4 had some redeeming qualities and i had my fun with it. but in the end it just wasnt enough to keep me gong. i put it down after 15 hours or so. it could have been great and im sure the studio that made had talent, but were probably constrained by time, or money or whatever. id say its worth kicking around if you can play it on gamepass or get it free somehow.

3 was actually pretty great. not as good as 1 or 2 because like you said it wasnt in a mall, and it didnt have the time limit so it didnt feel like a DR. but i 100% the game and really had a blast with it. you should give it a shot one day, just dont expect it to be as good as 1 and 2.
FromDuskTillGameOver said:
The 4rd and the 1st one. Play the 4rd one first so after that the first game feels even more like a revelation
Click to expand...
images


MiguelItUp said:
I'd definitely agree that the first game is a product of its time, but that game is the main reason I got a 360, and I loved it so much.

I'd say...
1. Dead Rising
2. Dead Rising 2
3. Dead Rising 3

Then I wouldn't bother with what comes after to be honest.

The first game's content feels great because it's the first iteration, there's a certain "thing" that game has that the sequel doesn't. However, the second one does kind of add on more content and smooth out some jank. Still has great characters and content. The third one is... when you start to get into forgettable territory IMO. When it originally launched on PC it's performance was ALL over the place, fortunately for me it was alright. The game still felt like Dead Rising, just... with a few new things. Some worked, some didn't.

Much like I said above, what came after 3 is not worth even touching, and I say that in the nicest way. What I played of 4 felt like a shell of all the games that came before it. It felt more shallow in a lot of ways, was missing that "charm", etc. I couldn't even bring myself to playing more than a half hour of it or so. Then I never touched it again. I've always been curious about going back to it, but the longer I wait the less I care to. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
brother you didnt miss anything by putting down 4. it was pretty awful all the way through. like i said above there were some fun things about it, but after 10-15 hours i just wasnt having fun and the game was just straight up bad at times. id avoid it unless you can get it free.
NinjaBoiX said:
Nah, the second game is really similar to the first. They're both loads of fun.
Click to expand...
if i can go bck to 2006 for a second, id say the second one is basically the same a the first just "bigger, better, and more badass"
cliff_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
I've noticed nobody mentioned the multiplayer yet. Although 1 is probably the best single-player experience in the series, 2, Off The Record and 3 have amazing co-op experiences. Two player mode is an incredible way to experience those games if you have a friend willing to join you.
 
Bridges said:
I've noticed nobody mentioned the multiplayer yet. Although 1 is probably the best single-player experience in the series, 2, Off The Record and 3 have amazing co-op experiences. Two player mode is an incredible way to experience those games if you have a friend willing to join you.
Click to expand...
true! cant tell you how many hours i killed in dr2 with me and my buddy doing dumb shit like this...
 
I never played 4, don't plan to either. There's (DR1, DR2: Case Zero and DR2: Off The Record ) for the Frank West timeline. DR3, is the peak of the franchise. Ppay DR1, DR2 Case Zero, Dead Rising 2 and Dead Rising 2:Case West is the ending of Dead Rising 2 (Overtime mode in DR2 isn't the true ending as it was in Dead Rising 1. Blue Castle, made the ending of DR2 DLC that's Case West) then you're ready for DR3.
 
I've only played 1, 2 and Off The Record. Seen bits of 3 and 4. Personally, 1 is the only one that did anything for me. It has the classic mid 2000's Capcom charm to it. It was fun, new, exciting, and Frank was a likable main character. 1 was developed by Capcom. Blue Castle Games developed 2 onwards and you can tell when you play them that they were developed by different teams. 2 lacks something. Chuck was a boring character and I didn't want to keep running back to the kid with a vaccine. I get the appeal of combining different items to create bigger weapons but it felt like a lot of work for an item that just kills zombies like any other weapon off the shelf. I'll just grab a chainsaw to mow the zombies down or I'll grab a Scythe or something. It felt like a waste of time to me to create these super weapons. 3 and 4 just look uninteresting to me. 1 is the only one I cared about.
 
The first one has way too many restrictions and weird gameplay caveats to the point where you will get frustrated at the older game design. Nostalgia-heads love it.

Part 2 takes almost everything from 1 and makes it better to the point where the only thing you can criticize is the protagonist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Why are Gamecube games worth so much more than PS2 games
2
54
2K
blacktout replied
Console Gacha Games - Which?
8
502
Danjin44 replied
Video Game Esoterica: A Very Early Dead Rising Prototype is Out! And Its VERY Different
Retro Trailer 
0
206
IbizaPocholo replied
Which genre / franchises ( that are not dead) hasn't been represented on current generation hardware that you feel would make people upgrade?
13
237
NeoIkaruGAF replied
  • Poll
Which Marathon Runner Shells are you most likely to play?
10
448
L*][*N*K replied
Top Bottom