Zero Punctuation: Dead Island
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Two props on this vid. First the danger mouse reference was awesome, second the imp drawing the poo mustache made me laugh out loud.
I find this game quite enjoyable. Playing on PS3, and I must give the team credit for making a huge game like this which runs without any basic technical problems (Fallout 3 anyone?). The only problem is that you ahve to play LAN, since online modes are glitched. This is a serious issue though.
Have to disagree with Yahtzee about Ram zombies. Their ramming attack is very easy to sidestep, even without using dodge move. What's bad about them is their kick attack, which they really love to use and which drops your health by 50% or so.
Have to disagree with Yahtzee about Ram zombies. Their ramming attack is very easy to sidestep, even without using dodge move. What's bad about them is their kick attack, which they really love to use and which drops your health by 50% or so.
I've been telling my friends that Dead Island seems like Borderlands meets Dead Rising to me. Nice to see the experts agree with me too.
That said I personally don't think the game is so bad it's unplayable. It's just pretty much like Frankenstein; you can clearly see how the parts of other games have been stitched together to make it. Frankly I think the combat mechanics do work with the right strategy. The problem I see is that if you don't adopt the one strategy that seems to work, you're going to be in serious trouble. Because of this, there's really no point for the survivors to have different expertise. You've got four types of combat: blunt weapons, blades, thrown weapons and firearms.
Now I'm only into Chap. 3 or 4 so far, so I can't speak too much to what you'll start seeing in later levels, but so far the winning strategy I've found is to throw every weapon I have at the zombies I can keep them at bay and not take a lot of damage, so long as I give them the occasional mighty boot to the pelvis. If they start getting too close, a fast kick will knock them down long enough for me to grab one of my tossed weapons and plant it in their forehead.
To me, this seems like the only sensible strategy because guns and bullets aren't readily available to the point of barely being an option and because strangely enough, swinging a weapon makes it take damage and wear out quickly, but throwing a weapon doesn't seem to hurt it at all. After using a sickle to hack down about a half-dozen undead by tossing it into their chest cavities, it graphically looked a bit bent and blood-splattered, but according to the durability gauge it was still top-notch. I don't know if this is a design flaw in the game or a deliberate mechanic, but whatever it is, it works.
My other criticism is some of the missions. Now, in this case, I have to say this is one scenario where having stationary NPC's give you instructions makes sense. There's a reason most of them won't venture out and take care of things themselves; there's fucking flesh-eating zombies out there! THEY aren't immune to whatever virus has caused this but YOU are, so guess who it would make more sense to send out exploring?
So while keeping the NPC's in one spot makes sense since the scenario is supposed to be people hiding from slathering undead, some of the missions they send you on seem really stupid. Collecting supplies? Makes sense. Repair power sources to signal for help? Good idea. Go fetch some personal nick-nack left behind in a hotel room or collect money for you? Are you insane or do you just have really fucked-up priorities?
Simply put, I'd say Dead Island isn't anything revolutionary in gaming, and simply puts together a bunch of tried-and-true game mechanics together in a zombie apocalypse setting. It works in some areas and doesn't in others, so I'd say playing through this to the end is worth doing, but I don't see this game having any sort of replay value.
That said I personally don't think the game is so bad it's unplayable. It's just pretty much like Frankenstein; you can clearly see how the parts of other games have been stitched together to make it. Frankly I think the combat mechanics do work with the right strategy. The problem I see is that if you don't adopt the one strategy that seems to work, you're going to be in serious trouble. Because of this, there's really no point for the survivors to have different expertise. You've got four types of combat: blunt weapons, blades, thrown weapons and firearms.
Now I'm only into Chap. 3 or 4 so far, so I can't speak too much to what you'll start seeing in later levels, but so far the winning strategy I've found is to throw every weapon I have at the zombies I can keep them at bay and not take a lot of damage, so long as I give them the occasional mighty boot to the pelvis. If they start getting too close, a fast kick will knock them down long enough for me to grab one of my tossed weapons and plant it in their forehead.
To me, this seems like the only sensible strategy because guns and bullets aren't readily available to the point of barely being an option and because strangely enough, swinging a weapon makes it take damage and wear out quickly, but throwing a weapon doesn't seem to hurt it at all. After using a sickle to hack down about a half-dozen undead by tossing it into their chest cavities, it graphically looked a bit bent and blood-splattered, but according to the durability gauge it was still top-notch. I don't know if this is a design flaw in the game or a deliberate mechanic, but whatever it is, it works.
My other criticism is some of the missions. Now, in this case, I have to say this is one scenario where having stationary NPC's give you instructions makes sense. There's a reason most of them won't venture out and take care of things themselves; there's fucking flesh-eating zombies out there! THEY aren't immune to whatever virus has caused this but YOU are, so guess who it would make more sense to send out exploring?
So while keeping the NPC's in one spot makes sense since the scenario is supposed to be people hiding from slathering undead, some of the missions they send you on seem really stupid. Collecting supplies? Makes sense. Repair power sources to signal for help? Good idea. Go fetch some personal nick-nack left behind in a hotel room or collect money for you? Are you insane or do you just have really fucked-up priorities?
Simply put, I'd say Dead Island isn't anything revolutionary in gaming, and simply puts together a bunch of tried-and-true game mechanics together in a zombie apocalypse setting. It works in some areas and doesn't in others, so I'd say playing through this to the end is worth doing, but I don't see this game having any sort of replay value.
Oi, Yahtzee, Y U NO REVIEW WARHAMMER 40K: SPACE MARINE?
Too bad you didn't 'cause that means you probably won't, ever. And that makes me a sad panda.
Personally, I'm not sick of zombie games as of yet, I'm just sick of the kinds of zombie games we do get.
I'd REALLY like to see a zombie game such as the one the trailer for Dead Island sort of promised. No, I'm not surprised it's nothing like the trailer, I just wish someone would make one, one that truly inspires dread and fear and the feeling of being alone in a world full of the hungry murderous undead... something like the TV series The Walking Dead, in fact, though with fewer characters, or if as many characters then that they'd meet eachother at various times, et cetera but aren't in constant contact with 'em... but I guess that's too much to hope for from an industry that caters to the braindead masses ('scuse the pun).
Too bad you didn't 'cause that means you probably won't, ever. And that makes me a sad panda.
Personally, I'm not sick of zombie games as of yet, I'm just sick of the kinds of zombie games we do get.
I'd REALLY like to see a zombie game such as the one the trailer for Dead Island sort of promised. No, I'm not surprised it's nothing like the trailer, I just wish someone would make one, one that truly inspires dread and fear and the feeling of being alone in a world full of the hungry murderous undead... something like the TV series The Walking Dead, in fact, though with fewer characters, or if as many characters then that they'd meet eachother at various times, et cetera but aren't in constant contact with 'em... but I guess that's too much to hope for from an industry that caters to the braindead masses ('scuse the pun).
I think "Dead Island" is a lot of fun personally, it's about what I expected given the producer, one of the better action RPGs in recent years, and I actually think overall this is a fairly good take on the whole Zombie apocolypse thing.
That said, I do tend to agree that they recycle the same Zombie tropes a bit much, and it would be nice if they did something a little differant with the idea. It seems like the whole "zombie virus" thing has gotten a little too stereotypical, and most times it's not especially well thought out. As I've said before if I ever planned to do my own Zombie game I'd probably go back to the staple of black magic for the explanation of why the zombies are around and why the whole idea defies any rational examination... even when you try and use pseudo-science.
In the long run I think when the zombie fad DOES end for a decade or so, "Dead Island" will be one of the big genere classics from this time period, looked back on fondly.
I hope that if they DO make a sequel, they decide to focus a bit less on the co-op, and a bit more on the single player and the depth of the game world.
That said, I do tend to agree that they recycle the same Zombie tropes a bit much, and it would be nice if they did something a little differant with the idea. It seems like the whole "zombie virus" thing has gotten a little too stereotypical, and most times it's not especially well thought out. As I've said before if I ever planned to do my own Zombie game I'd probably go back to the staple of black magic for the explanation of why the zombies are around and why the whole idea defies any rational examination... even when you try and use pseudo-science.
In the long run I think when the zombie fad DOES end for a decade or so, "Dead Island" will be one of the big genere classics from this time period, looked back on fondly.
I hope that if they DO make a sequel, they decide to focus a bit less on the co-op, and a bit more on the single player and the depth of the game world.
Kekekeke. Everyone I reckon. Jokes aren't really meant to be sympathetic to anyone in particular and sometimes they relay on exaggeration and hyperbole which blurs the knowledge of the subject in question. Ah well Hakuna matata.DragonManRen said:
But yeah I'd be more than happy to see this zombie phase pass right on through. I prefer the ninja and kung fu phase a lot more. Not so much the alien phase though.
Not to steal YZ thunder, but I knew that this game was a piece of crap when I saw this:
I second that motion of having a Werewolf and or Mummy apocalypse.
I second that motion of having a Werewolf and or Mummy apocalypse.
Oi!
Bad Company 2 wasn't brown and dull looking, it had the most vibrant color scheme I've seen in a modern warfare game. The warm autumn colors of Chile, the dusty, dried look of the desert, I already got the chills when looking at the snow maps and vibrant jungle maps all make for a very varied game in terms of looks.
Oh, yeah, Dead Island. Yeah I can't say it's good either, with it's crapton of bugs and all that. And yet, I'm still enjoying it. Caving zombie skulls in just never felt so satisfying. One storms at me, I hit it in the face with a baseball bat with perfect timing, he stumbles, I kick him on the ground, and while he's dazed I curb stomp his face.
What can I say, it's a satisfying thing to do after a hard day at school. Then again I haven't entered the sewers yet. Fingers crossed...
Bad Company 2 wasn't brown and dull looking, it had the most vibrant color scheme I've seen in a modern warfare game. The warm autumn colors of Chile, the dusty, dried look of the desert, I already got the chills when looking at the snow maps and vibrant jungle maps all make for a very varied game in terms of looks.
Oh, yeah, Dead Island. Yeah I can't say it's good either, with it's crapton of bugs and all that. And yet, I'm still enjoying it. Caving zombie skulls in just never felt so satisfying. One storms at me, I hit it in the face with a baseball bat with perfect timing, he stumbles, I kick him on the ground, and while he's dazed I curb stomp his face.
Play Versus, that's a whole 'nother ballgame. Also, you can't deny that, mechanically, it works really well.Zack84 said:
Oh fuck yeah, Zeno Clash has some excellent combat.teh_Canape said:
For some reason Yahtzee doesn't like melee combat games with enemies that surround the player (this is also evidenced by his review of The Witcher 2.) I, on the other hand, love the frantic and exciting combat in that sort of game. I frankly don't understand Yahtzee's objection to that style of melee combat. After all, he likes that sort of thing when it's done in a shooter (see: Serious Sam, Painkiller.) Maybe it's a psychological thing.
Okay, I have heard that the versus mode is more compelling. Yes, mechanically-speaking the game plays very fluidly. That doesn't change the fact that it's boring as hell. Guns are boring, melee has no real kinetic feel to it...I dunno, as far as I'm concerned, zombie games are a fucking copout for AI programmers...let's see, single-minded behavior: run directly at player-character.
Team Fortress 2 is still my fps of choice--balance issues, stupid hats, F2P noobs, and microtransactions aside. I wanted to like BF:BC2 and I bought it just after release, but I quickly got sick of the god-awful hit detection (yes, I did change the lag compensation), bugs, glitches, and generally sluggish performance over my (admittedly awful) 3.0 Mb DSL connection. I also just never got the hang of the way weapons handle in BC2. I just suck at it. And I used to pretty much own everyone in any public BF 2142 server. Rorsch sniping, mmm.
Funny review,though I don't agree fully with it.
I enjoyed it and haven't found any glitches throughout my playthrough when I started solo.No problems also whatsoever when trying to play co-op.I'm surprised Yahtzee hasn't touched on that,this is a game with a co-op play in mind.This whole thing was on the PC,wether I've heard that the console versions are more buggy/glitchy.
So there's that.
I enjoyed it and haven't found any glitches throughout my playthrough when I started solo.No problems also whatsoever when trying to play co-op.I'm surprised Yahtzee hasn't touched on that,this is a game with a co-op play in mind.This whole thing was on the PC,wether I've heard that the console versions are more buggy/glitchy.
So there's that.
I thoroughly enjoyed it, and consider it my favorite zombie game ever.
In what other game can you do something like this?
Though you are right about the sewer sections. They can go fornicate a garbage disposal.
In what other game can you do something like this?
Though you are right about the sewer sections. They can go fornicate a garbage disposal.
maybe it's that when it's in a shooter, you can keep the mobs at bay, but when it's melee, you gotta take them upfront, where they do most damage =PIron Lightning said:
I enjoyed Borderland's MMORPG styled mechanics and range of environments but didn't feel any progression of the game other than finding and killing the next boss critter. I enjoyed Dead Rising 2's survival atmosphere, story and characters but hated having everything I did based on timers and an overall lack of depth in the gameplay. Dead Island sounds like it could take the strengths of those two games so my interest is piqued.
There's no _____ apocalypse games because nothing spreads more virulently and ruthlessly than well... a virus. Werewolves kind of work, but lycanthropy suggests that you turn back into a person at some point and are back in control. A virus that you can't see and can't treat that reanimates your body or infects you and corrupts your mind before sending you to maul and infect every other living person seems a little more "End of the World"-ly than having to spend the remainder of your nights in the dog house and taking flea baths. Mummies, as far as I can recall, don't actually threaten you with anything unique to them aside from a potential curse. There's also the entire question of ceremony behind making a mummy and that they're typically notable persons, which you would need to ditch entirely in order to make an army of them, at which point they're just zombies wrapped in toilet paper.
Although, as far as end of the world events go...
www.bearmageddon.com
As an aside: I once heard an interesting theory regarding trends in the monster genres.
When there's a depression/recession the world focuses on vampires. Beautiful (not in the Twilight way, in the deadly night stalker way) refined creatures who have a laundry list of weaknesses (Crosses, sunlight, crossing moving bodies of water, no reflection etc) showing great potential and power but always a step away from destruction.
When the world is in surplus it's Frankenstein (or man-made monsters). Man wants for nothing and takes the power of creation into his own hands.
They didn't reference zombies, but a dogged determination to continue surviving despite unexpected and life altering events, indicating a struggle to right the economy makes sense to me.
There's no _____ apocalypse games because nothing spreads more virulently and ruthlessly than well... a virus. Werewolves kind of work, but lycanthropy suggests that you turn back into a person at some point and are back in control. A virus that you can't see and can't treat that reanimates your body or infects you and corrupts your mind before sending you to maul and infect every other living person seems a little more "End of the World"-ly than having to spend the remainder of your nights in the dog house and taking flea baths. Mummies, as far as I can recall, don't actually threaten you with anything unique to them aside from a potential curse. There's also the entire question of ceremony behind making a mummy and that they're typically notable persons, which you would need to ditch entirely in order to make an army of them, at which point they're just zombies wrapped in toilet paper.
Although, as far as end of the world events go...
www.bearmageddon.com
As an aside: I once heard an interesting theory regarding trends in the monster genres.
When there's a depression/recession the world focuses on vampires. Beautiful (not in the Twilight way, in the deadly night stalker way) refined creatures who have a laundry list of weaknesses (Crosses, sunlight, crossing moving bodies of water, no reflection etc) showing great potential and power but always a step away from destruction.
When the world is in surplus it's Frankenstein (or man-made monsters). Man wants for nothing and takes the power of creation into his own hands.
They didn't reference zombies, but a dogged determination to continue surviving despite unexpected and life altering events, indicating a struggle to right the economy makes sense to me.