Yes it's channelling Dead Space visually, conceptually, and narratively for all its worth, because that's their sales pitch, but it deserves credit for its own contributions to the horror TPS genre and it's not yet getting it. But I think with time it will.
See, that's the problem. There is obviously some elements in TCP which reminds us of Dead Space (I won't name them all, you know what I'm talking about), but Dead Space is a better game overall and TPC is nothing like it.
First of all, I can't call Black Iron or Callisto a character in TCP, cuz they simply are not, not even close. There's barely any lore and worldbuilding, overall design of the game is very straighforward - you're always going from point A to point B, there's no sence of scale (even when you're out on the surface of Callisto), there's barely any interesting and unique environemnts with something other than walking and shooting for you to do. There's almost nothing in TCP to ground you into the world, environments and make you believe in it in a way Dead Space did it.
Ishimura, on the other hand, was a character in Dead Space and even more so than Isaac was. There is a sense of scale to Ishimura and sense of place. Design of Ishimura is more ambicious and interconnected - that's why there's a map. Ishimura is a huge ship with various unique and memorable places and environments for you to explore, there was also variety in terms of gameplay to immerse you into the world and offer you something beyond just walking and shooting (in case of TCP - walking, shooting and beating everyone to death). There's way better worldbuilding and lore in Dead Space to emphasize the sence of place and make you believe in it, that it was alive not that long ago and is alive now with all those audio logs, environmental storytelling etc.
That's the key difference between Dead Space and TCP. Now, I've nothing against linear games, far from it, but TCP suffers from straightforwardness in terms of design which is not allowing to fully flesh out the potential this IP had before the game was released. I think SD oversimplified things too much in comparison to Dead Space and I wish a I had an opportinity to talk to Glen and ask him why they did what they did this time around and what they were thinking while deciding what to do.
I mean, I already said that TCP is ultimately disappointing game to me, there's quite a few things that are wrong about it and they're very obvious. But at the same time, I think that it's a good game which potential simply was not fully realized. SD can fix and improve combat (add more moves and counters to fight with multiple enemies at the same time using melee option) with patches, same goes to bosses (3 of which needs to go and the rests needs to be reworked to feel more unique and less BS), but they can't fix overall design and vision for this game, not without very serious rework which can take up to 1 year if not more.
I don't think the game will get better with time and be at the level of the first Dead Space, they can and probably will fix some stuff as I've said, but they can't and won't fix the most needed things to improve the game overall - it's a lot more work and Idk if Krafton will allow them to and will finance this endavour - my bet is that they won't. What I would've done after all this not so great reception is 1) cancelled most of the season pass content (let's face it, no one cares about horde modes, boss rush etc. especially in a game of this genre - it's just BS content), 2) focus on delivering way better story DLC with a proper ending, character development, lore and worldbuilding 3) maybe try and overhaul some stuff in the main game beyond just patches - CDPR did it 4 times already over the course of almost 15 years.