This small shot from the Mexican developer Tequila Works. A platformer, focused mainly on puzzle solving a bit of combat. It happens in the city of Seattle, during a zombie apocalypse. Zombies, platforming and puzzles.
The visuals are great. Very detailed environments and characters. The animations between stages are very well produced. It’s probably the highest point of the game. Since the very first moments I was impressed by it.
The story is bad. Lots of cliché situations and setups. Among the several problems, are:
The tension of the gameplay is valid. It’s real. The zombies offer enough challenge. It’s not like the running kind from Left for Dead nor the super slow and easy to avoid from Alone in the Dark
I feel that if Tequila Works invested in a second game, it would be much more refined in the storytelling department. It falls short on its potential.
From the acclaimed author of Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown brought another story from his symbologist Robert Langdon.
Now, instead sitting under Leonardo Da Vinci’s works to create the conspiracy and mystery, the author drank from another Italian writer: Dante Alighieri. This fellow was the responsible for written the Divine Comedy, a narration about the 9 rings of hell.
Without revealing to much information about the book itself, I did not like the book. The character seems to know all the places too well, from secret doors, geography, history and local informants. He knows everything. Also he remains too calm and lucid even on life threatening situations.
All the characters, good or bad, including Langdon, are also too resourceful. They need to travel across the globe now? No problem, there are always a contact that can spare a private jet, boat or helicopter. There isn’t any dead end moments, It is too much straight forward adventure.
The Dante’s material is fascinating, but it was over used. He is not Da Vinci, it is not believable that everything in the world somehow conspired to link to his works. Finally, Brown used too many repetitive artifacts in his writings. It annoyed me by half of the book.
I would not recommend this book. I going to read some technical books to change the air…
You control a ball that will roll downhill until it crashes at the enemy’s castle front gates. Repeat if it is not damaged enough. Your adversary does the same. The first to break into the castle wins. You can put obstacles between your enemy’s ball and your castle, in a Tower Defense way. You should balance your time and money between preparing defenses and attacking.
It’s overall idea is really nice but actual gameplay is not that fun. Well, It is fun at the beginning. I believe that it is fun in a sandbox mode, which you might experiment a lot. But for a single single player campaign, it is very frustrating. In the defense mode, the match is too short to allow you to test different strategies (or you win, or you lose in 2 or 3 rounds), neither gives you hints of would be a good call. In the offense ball rolling mode, the strategy is simple: avoid obstacles that make your ball weaker and go as fast as you can in the final meters in order to hit the gates as harder as you can. The problem is: that’s it. Not much else to do.
Nor difficult, especially for a strategy/action game. I was able to finish the game without complex thinking. The basic defense units, presented in the very first stages will take care of most of your needs in the entire game. The extra unities, gained when you reach later levels, are just visuals, offering almost no useful functionality. In like manner, the collectible stars, which was supposed to be difficult to obtain and would give the right to pass some portals, are also a piece of cake. So, it is more a matter to go and take them.
Another polarizing aspect is the humour. I felt it is genuine and fun, but you have to give it a chance, because it is not obvious or for the masses. Each stage is thematic from historic figures like Pope, or ancient legends, like 300’s spartans. The jokes are silly and the application in the actual level is vague. Nonetheless, it reminds me the same weird fun style from Zeno Clash.
Bottom line: play this game if you want to explore an original and beautiful game. Does not expect deep strategy nor loads of LoL moments.
With the promise to bring back the fun to a popular genre – First Person Shooter -, the Epic’s Bulletstorm is a mess.
One of the main problems is the core idea: stimulate the user to perform vary the play style by using different weapons. The player now is psychologically forced to vary. And because this concept is presented and used in the main campaign, several times the player will stop to pay attention on the story – which will comment later – in order to
Several of the “skillshots” are too dependent on luck, like killing several enemies at the same time in a specific condition. It brings a lot of frustration. Its a immense TODO list to be executed.
The other pillar of the game, extensively advertised, is the bad language. Fun at the start, it becomes a annoyance by the end of the game because the player feels it is forced and unnatural.
The story, i must say, is terrible. ALL the characters try to look bad but be good ALL the time. The players’ character best friend, the cyborg Ishi, thru the WHOLE game goes back and forth saying “Ow… the pain is huge. The computer is trying to dominate my mind”… we simply not buy it. I would say that the 4 characters of the game are among the worst I ever seen.
The visuals are amazing. Even with a modest pc you will still get a fantastic looking game. The loading time are impressively quick and there were only few times when the framerate dropped. Unreal Engine showcase.
The curious part is that the game play is actually good. If the player were not “forced” to worry with the long TODO list, it would be much better. I didnt play the multiplayer yet, but if it follows the chaotic formula of the single player campaign combat, I think people will like at first but the annoyed soon.
Bruno Massa é político, programador e fotógrafo.