Hydrophobia Review

By Simon Parkin Published 30 September, 2010

Water into whine.

Version tested: Xbox 360

Water, that most precious of all life's commodities, is the highest prize of virtual worlds too. Land, in its immovable dependency, has always been a straightforward task for game artists. Water, by contrast, is a creature of ten thousand different forms.

So water has become an artist's calling card and a benchmark of computer performance. Turn on a tap in a videogame and you can tell a great deal about its world, the men and women who built it and the hardware that fires it. If the water's good, chances are the same care and attention runs through the rest of the experience.

Judged on this asset alone, Hydrophobia represents a high bar for the medium. As with BioShock, this is a game world straining to hold back the sea and failing. The Queen of the World, a giant ocean liner city which finds itself the stage for a terrorist attack at the game's opening, is riddled with holes: leaks that cause water to drip, stream, slosh and wash about its insides.

Shoot a barrel and the resulting explosion will cause a frothy wave to billow out around it, transparent undulations rippling off in all directions. Open a glass door to a side room in which the water is at a higher level than in corridor outside and the wave of displacement gushes out with all the credibility of a tsunami. It's impressive and, thanks to some concerted attempts to integrate it into the game's puzzles and mechanics, it's interesting too.

There's little time to stop and stare at the fluid realism, however. Kate Wilson, the improbably acrobatic security engineer whom you control, is propelled through the game with all the urgency of a high-pressure hose. Your immediate fight is against physics. The water level changes about Kate constantly, her sprints morphing to swims and back again. Wrestling Kate through the forces that buffet her is a challenge nearly matched by the one presented by the hyperactive camera, never comfortable in the tight shafts that define the game's environments and therefore requiring constant attention.

Hydrophobia's first 15 minutes.

But, camera aside, this is not an un-enjoyable battle. Developer Dark Energy Digital smartly derives puzzles from changing water levels in rooms to access higher air shafts and tunnels and - at this fundamental conceptual level - should be praised for the efforts made to ensure water is more than a gimmick.

The problem, then, is everything else: the lacklustre combat, the imprecise platforming, the lack of meaningful feedback, the repetitive hunting for keys to locked doors, the over-fussy map, the intolerable cover system and the poor signposting that will leave even the most attentive player floundering for direction and purpose. These factors frustrate, pulling the game time and again under the high mark established by its water.

Access to the ship's floors is handled by way of a system of locked doors. To move to new areas you must find and kill the enemy that holds the relevant frequency key. This will enable you to read directions daubed on the wall using a handheld computer. Rendered as a series of graffiti arrows, these point the way to the relevant cipher that, when installed into your computer, will unlock the encrypted door in question. This sequence is used with such repetition that it quickly becomes tiresome, especially as you run at quarter speed when holding your MAVI computer up to read the hieroglyphic directions, needlessly slowing down what was already an uninspired hunt.

The combat is idiosyncratic. Your handgun uses, by default, stun bullets that will momentarily knock enemies back, or temporarily incapacitate them if you charge a shot up by holding the trigger down for a few seconds. Knock an enemy down and you must continue firing on his prostrate body for the kill, the torso skidding awkwardly about the ground with each successive hit. It's far more satisfying to use the environment to take out your enemies; shooting a gas canister to knock them forward, or exploding a nearby barrel to set them on fire.

These environmental effects can be combined, and as all enemies can drown if knocked unconscious into water, there's fun to be had from setting off a chain reaction of explosions that land an enemy face down in a watery grave. However, the jittery aiming and the way the enemies flit in and out of cover at hyper-speed make combat feel woolly and undistinguished.

Likewise, the lack of a melee attack when you have a weapon equipped is extremely frustrating at close quarters, leading to frequent moments when you're forced to retreat from an enemy standing metres away in order to line up a shot. The inexplicable decision to only allow Kate to use cover when she has her weapon drawn is a constant frustration too, as you tap a button expecting to duck away from danger only to dive towards it.

Dark Energy Digital chooses style over transparency with regard to HUD information, clearing all screen furniture and gauges in order to provide an un-obscured view into the game. However, this comes at the cost of clear feedback and, during a gunfight, you'll rarely know how close Kate is to death. Modern Warfare's trick of intensifying the crimson edges to the screen as the character approaches death is handled poorly here, and often the first you'll know about it is when Kate crumples into the game over screen. When diving, too, the lack of a gauge to show how much oxygen Kate has left in her lungs makes judging the distance between safety and drowning impossible, leading to trial-and-error runs that irritate with each restart.

A lack of clarity typifies the game's objectives, too. The developer arbitrarily chooses when to signpost the next goal, one moment highlighting a computer panel that must be interacted with to open a door, the next minute leaving you to guess which corridor you must head down in search of the next target. An overly complex map does little to alleviate the frustration, offering an admittedly stylish 3D rendering of your immediate environment, but at the cost of intelligibility and speed of use.

The result is a game that feels like it needs more playtesting. Part of that is cultural; we are no longer used to being stumped in action games (and make no mistake, this is a third-person action game, devoid of any of the resource management systems necessary for true survival horror), searching the beams and walls for a way out of the room into the next rush of adrenaline.

But in truth, Hydrophobia is simply poorly signposted, and the rules of its environments are too blurred and inconsistent. Sometimes doors are locked for no better reason than needing a cut-scene to play out first; some pipes that can be exploded in one area to raise the water level will be impervious to the same attacks in the next area, an inconsistency that causes you to doubt yourself and the developers every time you get stuck. Am I baffled by design or by bug?

So, while Hydrophobia breaks new water, it treads old ground. The systems beneath the ebb and flow of its technical accomplishment are archaic and, without exception, lack finesse. Arguments that this is a downloadable title, and as such expectations should be suitably lowered, are irrelevant. The game fails to match its ambition, and, in its cumulative small failings, drags the player down into infuriation. By the moment you break the surface of the game's ending, much like its lead character, the abiding feeling is one of relief not enjoyment.

4 / 10

Hydrophobia is available now on Xbox Live Arcade for 1200 Microsoft Points. PS3 and PC versions, and further episodes, are planned but unconfirmed.

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Simon.

About Simon Parkin

Simon Parkin is an author and journalist on video games. A core contributor to Eurogamer since 2005, he is also a critic and columnist on games for The Guardian.

Read more articles from Simon by visiting the Simon Parkin archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (72) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • darkmorgado #1 2 years ago

    I'm really on the fence over this.

    EDGE gave it a 3, GamesTM gave it a 7, and now a 4 here... reviews are all over the place, even amongst the places whose scores I normally find broadly consistent with my own tastes. And at 1200 points, I can't afford to run the risk of throwing money at shit games.

    O_o

    /boggle

  • Dolly #2 2 years ago

    What a shame, I thought this had great potential from early previews :(

  • menage #3 2 years ago

    It looked promising tech wise 3 years ago, but the trailers I saw of late just looked generic, ugly and dull. So kinda expected it to suck.

    I don't really know why people where excited by this in the first place. Seemed like a action platformer set in a total metal, concrete closed of environments gameworld with a generic plot (the stuff everybody hates). Seemed like the only thing different was the water.
    Edited by menage at 30/09/10 @ 13:06

  • brseg #4 2 years ago

    Join the 4/10 club, matey.
    (seriously though, I'll try the demo just to see how the water affects the gameplay).
    Edited by brseg at 30/09/10 @ 13:06

  • midnight_walker #5 2 years ago

    As good as Mafia II then?

    SOLD

  • Boomerang #6 2 years ago

    "smartly derives puzzles from changing water levels in rooms to access higher air shafts and tunnels and - at this fundamental conceptual level - should be praised for the efforts made to ensure water is more than a gimmick."

    Are you serious Simon? Like this has never been done in a game before...

    Oh, and the water looks bobbins.
    Edited by Boomerang at 30/09/10 @ 13:10

  • NimbusTLD #7 2 years ago

    Expect a call from Deborah Jones.

  • DAN.E.B #8 2 years ago

    I was so bored I nearly bought it.
    thought id wait for the review thanks EG!
    i,ll save my points for L4D maps.

  • muscleblade #9 2 years ago

    Comic jumper next week will proably be much better.

    And Castlevania is just around the corner.

  • Fightclubber #10 2 years ago

    Anyone notice how the early test footage looks years ahead of the actual game? The game looks like a fucking ps2 port.

  • Iain815 #11 2 years ago

    Is this only out now? Feels like yonks since I first read about it.

  • andywilkie35 #12 2 years ago

    On the second page there are two boxes for screenshots. One suggests there are two screenshots yet one of them is an advert, and the other suggests there are 48 but again, there is at least one advert in there. Can you fix this please? kthxbai

  • groovychainsaw #13 2 years ago

    Played the trial last night and it was... ok. Bit glitchy, graphically, but it IS an XBLA game, and is trying pretty hard. The water could be impressive, but isn't used much in the triall. Where it is, it is impressive ,clearly trying to do far more than other 'wet' games (I'm looking at you, bioshock).

    Combat sounds rubbish though, you don't get any combat in the trial - I wonder if they knew it wasn't very good?

    I'd prefer no combat at all, to be honest, just a watery/firey puzzle game would have sufficed. I wish games developers would be more brave and take the guns out of their games sometimes. I felt similar playing the enslaved demo last night, lovely looking game, enjoyed the crazy platforming, got slightly bored by hitting things with a stick.

  • Big-Swiss #14 2 years ago

    same here, so is it now a mafia II 4/10 or is it a normal 4/10?
    that is important to know for deciding on purchase or not.

  • cianchristopher #15 2 years ago

    When diving, too, the lack of a gauge to show how much oxygen Kate has left in her lungs makes judging the distance between safety and drowning impossible, leading to trial-and-error runs that irritate with each restart.

    Now that's just fucking stupid! Whoever made the call on that should be fired...

  • Bernkastel #16 2 years ago

    It never looked that good to me, to be honest. Had a lot of things that could easily go wrong.

  • Embra #17 2 years ago

    If the first 15 minutes are anything to go by, your friend on the radio (with the worst attempt at a Scottish accent since Mel Gibson copied Russ Abbott) must get very tiresome very quickly. So much pointless talking from both characters!!!

  • Machetazo #18 2 years ago

    I don't believe this to be a solid enough game to buy in to. If the initial adventure appears as such a laboured patchwork, after all the time that has been for this, I don't even want to see any more. :( The review (in the second to last paragraph) also brings to light one of my most aggregious gaming bugbears, that only reinforces the likelihood of what I posted as being accurate.
    Either way, I'm just not at all convinced, so, no sale.

  • Deckard1 #19 2 years ago

    had a feeling this would be poop

  • Big-Swiss #20 2 years ago

    EG'ers fancy 4/10 games since August 2010.
    4/10, the new overaverage score!

    or we just all play it wrong! ;-)

  • ZuluHero #21 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher

    .... because making one small error of judgement while trying to maintain artistic vision and cinematography is a sackable offence? And it's not like any of the great designers have never made any poor design decisions over the years (oh wait!)...

    And how do you quantify it? What if the 'responsible' designer also had 10 good ideas for the game? Is it a 1-to-1 cancellation or does one strike mean you're out, regardless of the number of good ideas?

    I can only hope that your place of work doesn't carry the same low tolerance for error as you!
    Edited by ZuluHero at 30/09/10 @ 13:34

  • 32768Colours #22 2 years ago

    @Boomerang

    Couldn't agree with you more on that. Labyrinth Zone on Sonic 1 had rising and falling water to change routes through the level, and that's nearly 20 years old!

    For me the water sections in games are almost always the low point of a game and I can ever wait to get off them. So the idea of a whole game full of being sloshed about in a sluggish slo-mo fashion wouldn't be my thing at all, although I do respect that they were at least trying to do something different.

  • cianchristopher #23 2 years ago

    @Zuluhero

    "small error of judgement"???

    I'd say it's pretty big, tbh. And the game sounds woeful, utterly woeful.

    Seriously, a game about water? Where swimming constitutes a major part? And you have to come up for air or you'll die? And they can't even give you an adequate indicator of how much air you've got left?

    That's a [/i]small[/i] error? Jesus! What the fuck constitutes a big one, genius?

  • BBIAJ #24 2 years ago

    They didn't want a HUD, according to one f the dev interviews on the dashboard, hence there being no oxygen indicator.

  • MuppetThumper #25 2 years ago

    for all you muppets comparing the score with Mafia 2, give it a rest.

  • JohnnyWashnGo #26 2 years ago

    Phone: Ring, ring.
    EG: Hello?
    Deborah Jones: You're not playing it right.

  • muscleblade #27 2 years ago

    Simon never take cost into the matter when reviewing games so this is treated as a full retail game in that regard. Its not worth 50, but maybe a tenner.

  • Spuzzell #28 2 years ago

    'They didn't want a HUD, according to one f the dev interviews on the dashboard, hence there being no oxygen indicator.'

    Fair enough, but Dead Space went the same way with no HUD and I always knew exactly how much air and health I had left. Not presenting information that's actually needed is bad design, even if it was a concious choice.

  • scottycam #29 2 years ago

    Thats the problem with games that take 3+ years to make.

    90% of the time when they finally come out they look like their 3 years old.

    An if you didn't get NimbusTLD's reference: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/...

  • Nephirion #30 2 years ago

    pure sinkage

  • DoctorFouad #31 2 years ago

    so is it 4/10 mafia2 quality ? or a real 4/10 ?

    I am confused LOL

  • Eighthours #32 2 years ago

    Simon, I can't believe you didn't mention the voice acting, which is hilariously diabolical. Worst Scottish accent since Daniel Carrington in Perfect Dark 64.

  • Skandalle #33 2 years ago

    I have a phobia of shit games, so i think i'll pass...

  • ZizouFC #34 2 years ago

    Sounds so watered down compared to the previews!

  • Big-Swiss #35 2 years ago

    the doc is stealling my humor and my lines.........

    -1

  • lucifonz #36 2 years ago

    This is one score I actually have to agree with on here. Was completely dissapointed by this game. Feels like a crappy budget game. Visually pretty good though.

  • noTHINGface #37 2 years ago

    This one was always in the not for me section... But I am surprised by the polarized review scores on metacritic. If you do get the call from Jones please update the article with a transcript, that would make for a happy read :D

  • SlackMaster #38 2 years ago

    Played the demo and wasn't really impressed. It has great water effects but was just dull to play and not worth the 1200 points asking price.

  • GAmbrose #39 2 years ago

    @Eighthours - Daniel Carrington was voice by Chris Sutherland, who was lead programmer on the Banjo Kazooie games...he was Scottish...

  • ZuluHero #40 2 years ago

    @cianchristopher

    It's not a major part. Play the demo. In 20 minutes I only swam once and that was only because I was too slow running to a closing door otherwise I wouldn't have had to swim at all. Also they give you indicators. Both your heart rate increases and you get the edges of the screen going red (just like mentioned for taking damage in the review), If you watch the EG 15 minute video, if you can't be bothered to play it for yourself, it even shows swimming and she is submerged for nearly a minute without that even happening! (to give you an idea for how long you can be underwater in this, quote unquote, game about 'swimming'.

    Besides I'm not saying it's a great game nor defending it and based on the demo (which I played all the way through) I'm certainly not going to be getting it (unless it comes up in a XBLA sale further down the line). What I do take exception to is people who call for the death penalty for someone stealing a mars bar. It's just a tad extreme, no? :)

    Right or Wrong, it is just a small error. Not worth someone losing their job over. Going by your reckoning, Tim Schafer should NEVER be allowed to make games after adding that RTS atrocity to Brutal Legend, but we all know that we wouldn't want that to happen, right? ;)


    EDIT: And aren't you the BIG man coming in here with all your swearing and stuff. It's like, all proper grown up and everything!
    Edited by ZuluHero at 30/09/10 @ 14:36

  • dominalien #41 2 years ago

    Aw, I wanted this to be good and to come to PS3 :-(

    And now, seeing how these guys behave, even if it does come to the PS3, I won't buy it. They really are dicks, aren't they?

  • kinky_mong #42 2 years ago

    smartly derives puzzles from changing water levels in rooms to access higher air shafts and tunnels and - at this fundamental conceptual level - should be praised for the efforts made to ensure water is more than a gimmick

    Simon Parkin, you must be the luckiest gamer alive, because you clearly have never been subjected to the Water Temple in Ocarina Of Time.

  • dudefella #43 2 years ago

    Did not much care for the Trial version at all. Floaty controls and a far too distant camera cause a disconnect between input and the character on screen whilst removing the sense of claustrophobia. The voice acting was atrocious, the writing stock.

  • spekkeh #44 2 years ago

    Excellent review, clearly somebody who understands games and can tell exactly why this game is bad. A lot better than the one by Edge too. Eurogamer is becoming the definitive authority on videogame criticism with every new review it seems.

  • Cheif.Inspector #45 2 years ago

    I would rather felch myself than play this mess of a game. Now where's that numpty who said this was a fine studio?

  • GreyBeard #46 2 years ago

    I dunno, the last few paragraphs gave me the feeling that the reviewer wanted to get through the game as quickly as they could, and got sniffy when it didn't hold their hand every step of the way.

  • GaryStew1980 #47 2 years ago

    Some strange review scores of late on this site. As others have mentione 4/10 for Mafia II ok Red Dead it was not but it deserved higher than 4 thats for sure 6-7 at least. As for this it has split the game reviewers fraternity IGN had a good review 7 or 8 if i remember correctly. I saw the Top 20 ways to kill in this game video and to be honest it was woeful, I also watched the video on Live which basically consisted of the person playing constantly talking about the water and pretty much nothing else. So I am thinking they havent got high hopes either. Even look at the FIFA review i playesd the demo and it is better than last year it appears they marked it down because it was harder than previous versions. Pretty much just look at reviews here now to laugh at how silly they are. Should be called http://www.badreviewsandkoticksquotes.org these days.

  • carlitoswagon #48 2 years ago

    Watched the Xbox Live team reviewing this. They were very upbeat (as you'd expect) but it actually looked much like the review has stated. Not floating my boat.

  • Big-Swiss #49 2 years ago

    whats up with all these suckup users on EG, every review they mark all the comments down that questions the review, the reviewer or the score itself. What kind of groupies post or read on here. What a sick gay bunch of idiots adn suckups!

  • rivuzu #50 2 years ago

    Wonder how many of these 4/10 whiners have bothered to read EGs scoring policy?

    Could perhaps be a cult hit, but I'm in agreement. Missold by the trailer as being better than it actually is. Shame ):

  • Cheif.Inspector #51 2 years ago

    Sounds like G-Surfers all over again, at least Blade Interactive is consistent

  • TheJuriel #52 2 years ago

    Played the trial, but it doesn't offer you any combat (or much water), so, yeah, bad demo.

  • captainrentboy #53 2 years ago

    Just tried the demo and yeah, it didn't do much for me :/ Shame, as I've been looking forward to it for quite a while. Controlling the woman just felt a little 'off' and that guy's awful fucking Scottish accent made me want to jam red hot pokers down my earhole.
    Sorry about the language but he really was an annoying cunt, and that was after just 5 minutes of it.

  • Eurolamer #54 2 years ago

    Hmm, a bit of a damp squib then

  • Lord_Gremlin #55 2 years ago

    Quantum looked promising too, yet got 3/10. Another promising game turned out to be shit.

  • Zaiz #56 2 years ago

    @ZuluHero

    While I'm not a fan of general stupidity like that, please cut the tone trolling. It is really tiresome to watch someone get their knickers in a bunch because someone said something offensive ON THE INTERNEEEET.

  • Azazel #57 2 years ago

    When I was 14 I had an idea for a Quake level which was all underwater called Hydrophobia.

    That's how average an idea this is.

  • kwospecialk #58 2 years ago

    I've brought this and dare I say it I'm enjoying it!! Ok graphicaly it's not ground breaking but this is still a nice looking arcade game and the water looks really good. Right now I've just got my gun and so far the shooting seems fine.

  • ouchio #59 2 years ago

    All aboard the FAIL boat!

  • gorf #60 2 years ago

    Dick Van Dyke has come out of retirment to do scawtesh acceents.

  • medicineboy #61 2 years ago

    Really good review.

  • ZuluHero #62 2 years ago

    @Zaiz

    Acknowledged, if somewhat paradoxical :)

    I still stand by my main arguement though, remember to err is human, we all make mistakes I just don't think we should all be nailed to the wall for them :)

  • muscleblade #63 2 years ago

    IGN scored this higher than Castlevania so its much about taste and what you compare the game too.

  • Quixz #64 2 years ago

    Completed it and it was rather fun. 1200MSP is a bit high but i had 2400 just sitting there wanting to be spent!

    The game is a 7.5/10 maybe 8.

  • kwospecialk #65 2 years ago

    Right I take back my comment about the shooting gameplay being alright. It's actually not very good but I would still give the game about a 7.5. I think the person who reviewed this was way off the mark but then again most of EG reviews lately have been way off the mark aswell.

  • Collymilad #66 2 years ago

    Played for a few hours today, and chalk up another miss for EG.

    Seriously, does anyone take the review scores here seriously anymore? Even the writing has an air of whiny spoiled child to it in many of the reviews.

  • ShiroBen #67 2 years ago

    This game has one of the worst demos I've ever played. Cutscene cutscene cutscene cutscene CUTSCENE cutscene run around a bit cutscene cutscene RUN AWAY FROM THE WATER (cutscene) 'Press B to roll under the door' (doesn't work) (swim around a bit) (cutscene) cutscene cutscene oh it's over. You don't even get to try out the combat, I assume because it follows the pattern the rest of the game sets in being dull and rubbish. And why has 1200 points become the 'default' price setting on XBLA? For 800 points I'll take a chance on a game (a better one than this, mind), but 1200 is a leetle rich for my blood.

  • vincent80 #68 2 years ago

    I made the stupid mistake of purchasing this based on hype and previews alone, what a waste of time and money. The review is spot on, fair enough if you like it but it really was for me a short lived experience and a let down for XBLA titles which on the whole (this being an exception) have been quite impressive over the last few weeks.
    Edited by vincent80 at 03/10/10 @ 18:59

  • kwospecialk #69 2 years ago

    Finished the game now and after the stupid ending which wasn't really an ending and seem a bit rushed (like the team that made the game ran out of time) I would give it a 6 out of 10. Still think EG we're way off the mark on their review.

  • Spong #70 2 years ago

    I bought it yesterday after playing the demo and enjoying it, I'd heard it had shit reviews but I didn't care. Despite the absolutely undeniable gameplay flaws, there's still elements there that make it pretty cool.

    I think the review itself was pretty spot on. The 4/10 is off the mark though.

  • JamieR #71 2 years ago

    Simon Parkin is in the wrong line of work, this game is an easy 8. Simon your a joke.

  • NorfolkNClue #72 1 year ago

    What's it like after the 'Pure' update - you, EG, said you'd re-review it!