Dead Nation Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 1 December, 2010

Happy entrails.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

A top-down twin stick shooter filled with zombies, the only way Dead Nation could be less original is if developer Housemarque found a way to squeeze some space marines and a dropship in there. It's the definition of a Ronseal game, offering exactly what you expect and not a pixel more.

Do you like shooting zombies? Lots of zombies? Have you not had your zombie-shooting itch scratched by Left 4 Dead, Dead Rising, Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare and every other game with "dead" in the title? Or by The Walking Dead on TV? Or by Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, which was a book and is now being made into a film? Zombies, rather appropriately, are bloody everywhere and it's sadly inevitable that Dead Nation's no-frills approach leaves it suffering from a severe case of over-familiarity. That's a pity, since there's a solid and satisfying shooter engine under the tired memes, and it's delivered with admirable attention to detail.

1

Different mix-and-match armour pieces can be looted from chests.

It seems redundant to explain the plot but in the interests of review etiquette: zombie outbreak, you survivor, reach safety. What matters is what happens next, as you advance through 10 levels of undead mayhem, exploding thousands of heads along the way. Starting out with basic armour, an assault rifle (with infinite ammo) and a linear path ahead of you, the action quickly establishes a rhythm of cautious progress punctuated by sudden influxes of zombie hordes that send you back-pedalling down the street, firing into their scrabbling mass. Every now and again you'll be sealed into a small area, and only allowed to leave when every zombie is splattered.

There are two currencies at work in the game's economy. One is plain old cash money. This can be found in the boots of undamaged cars, or in crates tucked away in the margins of the level. At each checkpoint you find a weapon shop where you can spend your loot on new weapons or upgraded stats for your existing arsenal.

The other currency takes the form of floating red blobs, left behind by every enemy killed. These raise your multiplier, and since Dead Nation is very much a high score game it's in your interests to keep that number high. International leaderboards track not only personal performance, but also which nations are doing best in the fight against the zombie epidemic. It's a witty concept, even if it's immediately clear that by using simple "most kills" criteria the US is going to dominate the top spot through sheer weight of numbers.

2

In a stunning twist, vending machines provide health items.

These two driving needs allow for the game's most interesting strategic twists. Cars not only contain gold, they double as useful smart bombs, detonating after a few shots and wiping out any zombies in the blast radius. Some have car alarms, and once triggered will attract every ghoul in range to come and hammer on its soon-to-explode chassis. Of course, doing so before you've cleaned out the money within means the cash is lost forever. Wade into the undead for monetary gain, or take the opportunity to clear some space quickly and easily? It's a trade-off that tugs at you throughout the game.

The same is true of the multiplier. During quieter stretches, you'll come across lone zombies, or small groups that pose little real threat. Do you take them out, perhaps by using the charged-up power shot that decapitates zombies in a line, and stop that multiplier from drooping? Doing so may result in a rush of enemies though, so there's yet another balance to be struck.

You'd expect nothing less from the developer of the superb Super Stardust HD, and Dead Nation's construction is suitably confident and robust. It's noticeable in the little things as well, like the handy circle indicator that shows you exactly how much terrain an explosion will damage, and the slick blue silhouette that keeps you in view, even when behind scenery items.

Having built such impressive foundations, Dead Nation's biggest disappointment is that it then builds a rather ordinary construction on top. This is a game that varies very little over its play time. Whether you're battling to a police station, a skyscraper, through a graveyard or up an abandoned highway, only minor changes to the scenery tip you off that you've moved on from the previous level.

The zombie threat never really challenges you in different ways (admittedly difficult with such literally mindless enemies) but nor does the level design take you far from your comfort zone. You came for excessive zombie slaughter and that's exactly what you get, over and over and over.

There are some different zombie types to break up the tide of rotting flesh, but they're so beholden to Left 4 Dead's cast of mutated ghouls that Valve should probably get royalties. Big fat zombies that explode in a shower of guts? Big tank zombies that pound the floor and attack with crushing jumps? There's even a carnival section with clown zombies who honk their noses after a melee attack. It's hard to be scared when you're rolling your eyes at the rather craven imitation on display.

3

When Micro Machines goes horribly wrong...

The expanding selection of weapons should help foster variety, but it rarely proves essential. You'll be able to fully max out the stats on the assault rifle within the first few levels, after which point the infinite ammo and considerable stopping power make it the default choice for pretty much every encounter. Toss in some grenades, modelled after (yes) Left 4 Dead's zombie-distracting pipe bomb, and you'll never really need to play around with mines, flamethrowers and contraptions that shoot sawblades.

With such limited scope, 10 levels starts to feel like a long haul. There are few moments when there's more than one way to progress, and even when the boundaries do retreat and offer the chance to roam more freely, you're only really choosing between several paths offering practically identical experiences.

What the environments lack in inspiration, however, they gain in detail. These are phenomenally detailed apocalyptic tableaux, with some fantastic lighting and sound to enhance the mood. It would be a gruesome joy to explore them, if only there were more of interest along the route.

4

The way fire spreads through the horde is one of many nice visual touches.

Dead Nation's secret weapon is online and offline co-op play, which helps to mitigate the numbing repetition with some old-fashioned human unpredictability. It's a pity the levels never really stretch the co-op concept to more than just two players blasting away in the same space, but these things are always more fun with a friend, and so it proves here. With limited room to improvise, and scripted enemy encounters rather than the terrifying chaos unleashed by the AI Director, it never comes close to the one-for-all intensity of Left 4 Dead (yes, that comparison again) but then Dead Nation feels very much like it's intended as merely an impulsive snack for people who gorged on Valve's more nourishing meal of red meat.

Dead Nation is guilty only of being a decent game with few pretensions and even fewer ambitions, never attempting to improve or advance the clichés it so readily deploys. Played a few levels at a time, that approach is just enough to satisfy the instinctive need to lay waste to zombie throngs. It's just a pity that a developer with the unmistakable talent of Housemarque hasn't seized the opportunity to tweak, twist or otherwise refresh an overused formula.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (99) Latest comment 8 months ago

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

  • Gambit1977 #1 1 year ago

    Lies!!!! Lies!!!! :D

    Poop! It played so well...I was really looking forward to five o'clock.

  • andywilkie35 #2 1 year ago

    MOAR GAMZ NEED MOAR ZOMBEEEEZ!!11!!

  • captain_Carl #3 1 year ago

    I'll listen to everyone else on earth who loved it.

    Also (not trolling, just saying) it's funny how some games are marked DOWN for being the same as others games, but others (notably COD) are not marked down for being pretty much the same every year

  • Hei #4 1 year ago

    This game is superb, 9 atleast... so much bias lately

  • GamesConnoisseur #5 1 year ago

    Lol at the comments that HouseMarque owes Valve Royalty for getting so close with the Special Infected types in the super fanastic L4D games.

    Perhaps Housemarque is just serving L4D starved PS3 owners, and thus cannot accuse them of using formulaic and overtired co op zombie game when there arent that many on PS3?!

    Still pretty keen on Dead Nation and will be downloading it, as dual stick shooter n zombies = short burst of funs!

  • Fab4 #6 1 year ago

    "CoD: Black Ops is guilty only of being a decent game with few pretensions and even fewer ambitions, never attempting to improve or advance the clichés it so readily deploys.

    8/10"

    Its a shame all cliched-ridden, ambition-free games werent judged the same.
    Edited by Fab4 at 01/12/10 @ 14:10

  • XanderFish #7 1 year ago

    Different reviewers have different opinions. Shock.

  • Gambit1977 #8 1 year ago

    It's nice to see I'm not the only one that enjoyed this game!

  • Vanmunt #9 1 year ago

    definately getting this later, its suposed to be a fun romp for co-op online and its only a £10. as usual Dead Space misses the point.. why do you insist of letting him review anything that is not a p*ss lego game.

  • solidSnake04 #10 1 year ago

    reads 7 - 8 ish

  • mkreku #11 1 year ago

    Dan Whitehead: I think it's time to get another job. I don't think you like games any more, period. You sound so incredibly blasé and bored in almost every one of your reviews.

    I read a Joystiq review of this earlier and it sounds like a blast in that one.

  • GreyBeard #12 1 year ago

    It's a budget priced top-down shooter Dan, what did you expect?

    Idiotic score.

  • ouchio #13 1 year ago

    Wilfully mean , jaded score deliberately sabotaging a great game by a very talented studio. Please get another job more suited to your personality such as a stock broker or an estate agent and just go away. Stop trying to ruin everything.

  • GreyBeard #14 1 year ago

    Its also an extremely lazy review in that it draws a comparison with Left 4 Dead rather than more relevant counterparts like Burn Zombie Burn, and Zombie Apocalypse.

    L4D is a great game no doubt, but its hardly got a monopoly on the zombie killing genre.

  • ToAks #15 1 year ago

    YIKES!.. ok i'll get the game anyway.... as Housemarque has never dissapointed me (neither has Terramarque or Bloodhouse).

  • Gambit1977 #16 1 year ago

    Dan Whitehead. The new Ellie!

  • beatwolf #17 1 year ago

    relax dan cockhead
    Edited by beatwolf at 01/12/10 @ 14:41

  • HisDudness #18 1 year ago

    Be interesting to hear what difficulty the reviewer played through on. I've heard that the experience is much different on higher difficulties, and requires more strategic use of the player's various resources.

  • ShiftyGeezer #19 1 year ago

    For those of us who didn't play L4D, and have endured the poor quality of Alien Breed's no-voice-chat online, this sounds like a big improvement and worthwhile game, especially when only a tenner. Although I do hope gameplay is a bit mixed. Games with varied arsenal ought to provide gameplay encounters that use them.

  • Zebula77 #20 1 year ago

    *uses Jedi mind trick*
    There WILL be a demo as well as full game on PSN.


    ...please?!?

  • Diogo_Ribeiro #21 1 year ago

    Or maybe boring games don't elicit joy out of a reviewer. Nah, that would be impossible.
    Edited by Diogo_Ribeiro at 01/12/10 @ 14:52

  • Cappy #22 1 year ago

    The PS3 doesn't really have any 'zombie' games worth a purchase so I've yet to become fatigued with the formula.
    Edited by Cappy at 01/12/10 @ 14:52

  • Turbotim3 #23 1 year ago

    This game is incredible. Not everyone has played every zombie game out there so to slam a game because it has zombies is so predictable with videogame journalists. This is yet another example of why you should ask your friends about a game instead of taking advice from a complete stranger who may or may not have anything in common with you. Also this game has lots of replayability and some cool design choices. A must but if you have a ps3, not to be missed!

  • Supposedcorpse #24 1 year ago

    Terrible review..

  • JHuxley #25 1 year ago

    "to slam a game because it has zombies is so predictable with videogame journalists"

    Well put.

    I'm not saying Dan is right or wrong because I've not played Dead Nation myself yet, but I must admit I rolled my eyes as soon as I'd read the first paragraph. The rest was inevitable.

  • Supposedcorpse #26 1 year ago

    God forbid that the PS3 should try and 'rip off' a winning formula for a game! It's not like the 360 or MS have ever done that... oh, wait.

  • Geordiemp #27 1 year ago

    I recall when Ellie marked down R&C A crack in Time because it was too similar to the first....

    When I read these put downs, but not on COD or Halo or any other franchise then it makes you wonder how biased and what agenda the reviewer has.

    Especilaly when the samey put down seems always to come up witha PS3 exclusive.....

  • hosepha #28 1 year ago

    Judging games like this, with so many similar peers, is always going to be a challenge. Not everyone will have seen all the alternatives and those that have will have different thresholds for how much they can take! Which I guess leads to an argument that reviewers should ignore originality (not sure that word works) in the reviews - simply focusing on the specific game in its own right. Leaving us to work out the most suitable for our needs.

    But i'm not sure that works with a scoring system as each games score will inevitably be compared. So instead the score puts it in place relative to the peers. In this case the games is decent enough but ultimately lacking in variety and enjoyment after a few hours. Its plus points are co-op and high scores, enough for some perhaps, but both as old as games them selves! 6/10

    Black Ops on the other hand is derivative and unoriginal but at the same time fantastic fun from start to finish
    with top end graphics, variety and a full and deep multiplayer. 8/10

    Both opinions, both valid and both give and idea of the games relative charms.

    I've played neither and probably wont because i'm to busy playing the fight! I just got annoyed at all the whining!

  • Diogo_Ribeiro #29 1 year ago

    "Not everyone has played every zombie game out there so to slam a game because it has zombies is so predictable with videogame journalists."

    He didn't slam it because it had zombies, he slammed it because the developer didn't go above and beyond to dispell the "me too" approach. One may argue how well familiarity is a bonus or hinderance to appreciating a game, but you're making a wrong judgement call. Also see: the abominable slew of third rate WWII games and Sniper Whatever variants which use well worn themes and are marked down for being abysmal in their own right, and of doing little with the themes in question. Conversely, the same applies to Pacman CE versus endless Pacman clones.

    Also, public awareness of a genre shouldn't have an impact on its score. People may ramble about all they want, but you don't give high marks to a game based on the off chance that someone in the audience hasn't played it (I'm sure many people have played and enjoyed games with zombie gameplay though, but that's a different matter altogether).

  • SeesThroughAll #30 1 year ago

    "Judging games like this, with so many similar peers, is always going to be a challenge. Not everyone will have seen all the alternatives and those that have will have different thresholds for how much they can take! Which I guess leads to an argument that reviewers should ignore originality (not sure that word works) in the reviews - simply focusing on the specific game in its own right. Leaving us to work out the most suitable for our needs."

    Avoiding comparisons across platforms is a good thing too. For example, I hated the Uncharted 2 Gametrailers review: despite giving it a high score, the reviewer just went on and on about the game's lack of originality and "how much it borrows" from Gears of War.
    And the numeric score could be dropped as well. Replace it by a summary of "you'll love" and "you'll hate" points.

  • Feanor #31 1 year ago

    Tough crowd, lol.

  • RedSparrows #32 1 year ago

    Why avoid comparisons cross-platform? Games don't exist in a vacuum, and critically, platforms mean bugger all, despite what people bleat about with 'bias' et al.

  • Retro_ #33 1 year ago

    Its a decent 8/10 game, no less. play with the sound cranked up and the lights down low.

  • jtodroc #34 1 year ago

    The Sixth Axis' review makes it sound a lot more entertaining.

  • Whizzo #35 1 year ago

    Was this the title at EG Expo that was shown on one TV only opposite the Gears 3 stands with no banners (or easily visible banners that I could see all three days!) or indication to show what it was?

    That was where it was, very strange that there was no banners or anything about it. Myself and El_Meurko probably did more promotion for it when asked what we were playing than whoever had set it up in the first place. I enjoyed my time with it though and so did he.

    I'm not a PS3 owner but I'd certainly be coughing up for it if I were, it's a rather fun game.
    Edited by Whizzo at 01/12/10 @ 18:44

  • Synthesis #36 1 year ago

    All I really wanted to know is how well it compared to Zombie Apocalypse (a dual stick top down zombie shooter in the same price range), but apparently it's more relevant to compare it to an FPS game.

    Little disappointed over the fact it only has 10 levels, was hoping for a more expansive Zombie Apocalypse style slog through lots of levels whilst deliberately avoiding the 'continue' button to keep it interesting.

    The ultimate reason I wont buy it yet is because most people I know have 360's rather than PS3's.

  • JHuxley #37 1 year ago

    "He didn't slam it because it had zombies, he slammed it because the developer didn't go above and beyond to dispell the "me too" approach"

    Which is surely still a criticism resulting from the choice of 'genre' (well, theme really), no?

    Like I said, Dan may well be spot-on and I'm not going to quibble with the outcome until I've played it, but bookending the review with this kind of stuff makes me wonder if he'd made his mind up when he saw 'Dead' in the title:

    Dead Nation's no-frills approach leaves it suffering from a severe case of over-familiarity. That's a pity, since there's a solid and satisfying shooter engine under the tired memes, and it's delivered with admirable attention to detail

    Or at the very least, Dead Nation was always going to have to be something genuinely spectacular to make any kind of impression.

    Personally I would have preffered to see more comparisons to other twin stick shooters than a few vaguely related zombie games. I have a feeling Dead Nation still wouldn't have fared that well, but...meh :p

  • Machetazo #38 1 year ago

    I thought Dan was trying to play on people's expectations, in the first paragraph.
    But then, reading on, I cannot help but feel that too much emphasis was placed on the enemies similarity to those of another franchise, of another genre, on other platforms. I think this a poor review, because the gameplay content of the game under consideration was summarily passed over, no detail was offered, nor much information about the reviewer's play time with the game given.

  • FogHeart #39 1 year ago

    Personally I would have preffered to see more comparisons to other twin stick shooters than a few vaguely related zombie games. I have a feeling Dead Nation still wouldn't have fared that well, but...meh :p

    To use another tired old meme...."This."

  • Turbotim3 #40 1 year ago

    Diogo I am not saying the fact that not all people have played zombie games is a reason to give the game a higher score I am simply responding to his comment about this genre being played out and thus impacting the review. It's just a reminder to him that not all people are burnt out on zombies. I don't think a game should get a higher score because of that but at the same time I don't think it should be penalized either.

  • BritishBlue1 #41 1 year ago

    @jtodroc

    While I'm not a particular fan of zombie games (and by extension, Dead Nation), it's nice to see another Sixth Axis reader; they seem to avoid the bull**** of the majority of gaming sites.

  • el_pollo_diablo #42 1 year ago

    I liked the Die Hard strapline.

  • Diogo_Ribeiro #43 1 year ago

    Maybe, but if a less than stellar game arrives on a turf dominated by better games, it's nonetheless hard to recommend (of course, I am aware of exceptions, particularly games which may be very good and fall to the cracks or lousy ones which are well received). Usually it's better to bring up that caveat in the review itself because, on a broader sense, a reviewer can't accurately judge just how many people have played all games in a genre and shift the score accordingly. It's damned if you do/if you don't, in a way, but Dan did make a point in there, somehow: in a time when zombie games are just about everywhere - and when some of them are met with critical and commercial success (Left4Dead games come to mind) - a game like Dead Nation (thematically, mostly, but mechanically as well) doesn't seem to offer anything particularly relevant. But in the off chance that a reader isn't a part of the millions that played the games Dan mentions, he should probably adjust the score personally (and that's another two ways the argument could go, from devs betting on demos and the problemas with a numerical score in itself).

    Maybe in the future we'll have a review system where the reader needs to fill out a form before he can read it, with questions ranging from previous experience in the genre to expectations and whatnot, then the system produces a specific review and score better suited to him. But then, what would happen to bickering in comments sections? :p

  • Lord_Gremlin #44 1 year ago

    Why are you comparing it to L4D2? It's a PS3 exclusive and L4D2 never came to PS3. Eurogamer fail.

  • morriss #45 1 year ago

    More great PS3-only titles. I really should buy one.

  • Chufty #46 1 year ago

    The game should be compared to twin-stick coop shooters, not zombie games. The zombie apocalypse is just a setting, albeit a fashionable one at the moment; exactly the same game could be set in deep space, high fantasy, world war 2 or an office full of accountants.

  • drumbaby #47 1 year ago

    "Have you not had your zombie-shooting itch scratched by Left 4 Dead"

    Nope, it's not on PS3.

    "Dead Rising,"

    No, because first one wasn't on PS3 and the 2nd doesn't have the same DLC so no sale.

    "Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare"

    Don't like the Western setting, so no.

    "and every other game with "dead" in the title?"

    Not many more I can think of featuring realistic looking zombies.

    "Or by The Walking Dead on TV?"

    You can't play a TV show/ comic like a videogame.

    "Or by Pride and Prejudice and Zombies"

    No, because that looks like a tediously shameless cash-in.

    What a flimsy premise for dissing a game because it's unoriginal.

  • Tallon4 #48 1 year ago

    6/10 it's not like it's the end of the world but 6/10 is not doing the game justice imo.

    Ah well, still buying this. Loved it.

  • mrfrostynova #49 1 year ago

    The neverending calls for reviewers to lose their jobs over sub-7 reviews convinces me that the developers are spamming. Hi devs! Come one come all!

  • Nozzinja #50 1 year ago

    Got this today and coupled with custom soundtrack support this game is awesome. The AmeriCanadians are top of the rank tables, lets get em off!!!!!!!!!!

  • Stompy #51 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • Stompy #52 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • Emmit_Assassin #53 1 year ago

    After reading that review, I was about to say -

    I was jealous of PS3 owners for having this, but after your review I'm quite relieved I only own a 360 and that I'm not missing out!

    But then I read the comments here.

    I'm now back to being jealous of all you PS3 owners. Lucky fuckers.
    Edited by Emmit_Assassin at 01/12/10 @ 19:32

  • menage #54 1 year ago

    way too expensive

  • VandelayIndustries #55 1 year ago

    It is indeed wonderful :D

  • Oh-Bollox #56 1 year ago

    A fucking tenner is way too expensive? I've already got more out of it than I did Castlevania: POS and I paid £25 for that.

  • Chazmeister #57 1 year ago

    @JHuxley
    Personally I would have preffered to see more comparisons to other twin stick shooters than a few vaguely related zombie games. I have a feeling Dead Nation still wouldn't have fared that well, but...meh :p

    You're probably right because the only other recent twin stick shooter that springs to my mind is the excellent Lara Croft And The Guardian Of Light, and this doesn't sound like it has any where near the amount of depth and variety of that title.

    If all you're doing is ploughing through 10 levels with the same gun against the same enemies over and over again, then to be honest 6 sounds like quite a justifiable score.

  • randompanda #58 1 year ago

    Anyone who says the PS3 doesn't have any good zombie games is an idiot who hasn't played Burn Zombie Burn.

  • Triggerhappytel #59 1 year ago

    Well, I bought it and am enjoying it; certainly moreso than Burn Zombie, Burn and the demo of Zombie Apocalypse. However, I see this review was written by Dan Whitehead, and I don't really put much stock in his opinion as I rarely agree with him. Perhaps if it had been LEGO Dead Nation it would have scored better, huh?

  • Retroid #60 1 year ago

    Times like this I wish there were demos as standard on PSN.

    @Hei: "This game is superb, 9 atleast... so much bias lately"

    What on earth are you talking about?

  • Dave52 #61 1 year ago

    I think they're talking about the fact that this review is absolutely shocking and not in keeping with any other review or user experience...

  • SeesThroughAll #62 1 year ago

    Why avoid comparisons cross-platform? Games don't exist in a vacuum, and critically, platforms mean bugger all, despite what people bleat about with 'bias' et al.

    I understand your point. On the other hand, if a game of a specific "new" gender is released for the first time on one specific platform, while until then it only existed on other platforms, there's hardly a point in blaming it's unoriginality: what other choice do owners of that platform have? Gamers will worry about it being a "rip-off" anyway, without any need for reviews to dwell on that irrelevant point.

  • Turbotim3 #63 1 year ago

    Diogo, you just don't get it. You are way off in left field and you are only hearing what you want to hear. sorry

  • Retroid #64 1 year ago

    @Dave52: "I think they're talking about the fact that this review is absolutely shocking and not in keeping with any other review or user experience..."

    That's what *other* people are talking about and that's fine, a review is a matter of opinion and there are plenty of other places to get opinions from and the Metacritic average is just above 8/10 putting this a fair bit below that average.

    It's just the "bias" bit I'm asking about.

    Once again I'll point out I'm not on the EG staff payroll and I've disagreed with plenty of their scores in the past. Hence me wanting a demo.

  • Hei #65 1 year ago

    The meta score is only 80 because it got some 60ish review that lowered the score a lot, it got more 80+ by far than 80- :p

  • Retroid #66 1 year ago

    That had occured to me!

    Besides, if this is by Housemaque I should give it a go anyway. Super Stardust HD is one of my all-time favourite twinstick shooters EVER.

  • Noble6 #67 1 year ago

    Ive played this game as well as L4D and I dont see the comparison. L4D is a fully priced retail game made by Valve. This is a downloadable that costs a tenner. I think its a lot of fun but definitely aint something new or unique.
    Imo the review aint as bad as Ellie Gibson's Alan Wake disaster. Thats the bench mark for an epic fail.

  • Noble6 #68 1 year ago

    @Emmit Assassin

    Lol Ur either a ps3 owner pretending to be a xbox owner or ur 12 years old.

  • TheJuriel #69 1 year ago

    Was hoping more from this. I'd like to support finnish developers, but ah well.

  • NBAoz #70 1 year ago

    I wish Housemarque would make another Transworld Snowboarding game for this current generation of consoles. It wasn't quite up to Amped standards, but it looked pretty and is still better than most of the garbage snowboarding games we have been dealt this generation. We have more powerful consoles now yet no snowboarding games that do the sport justice. In a perfect world I'm sure we would see a new SSX game and Amped 4 that would be more along the lines of the first 2 games except with prettier visuals and more realistic environmental effects.
    Edited by NBAoz at 02/12/10 @ 06:26

  • coolbritannia #71 1 year ago

    Why are people shouting 'bias'? How on earth would a 360 bias reflect on a PS3 exclusive arcade title anyway?!

  • drumbaby #72 1 year ago

    Maybe average for a fully priced game, but it's only a tenner. Left 4 Dead and Dead Rising aren't that cheap, and nor are they particularly groundbreaking (or available on all consoles).

    So, get over what again exactly?

  • drumbaby #73 1 year ago

    Btw, have played this for a couple of hours, and as maddening as getting swarmed by zombies gets after the umpteenth time of dying, it has that 'oh go on, just one more go then' factor big time. Definitely worthy of a higher score.

  • drumbaby #74 1 year ago

    I think the opinion that a good game deserves a good score is more widely spread than your very own personal 'Sony fanboy' theory, and yes, this is a very good game.

  • coolbritannia #75 1 year ago

    Wait, so you can't just look at the score and think, 'a 6 is pretty good for a tenner', the score has to be modified because you can't make an objective decision on whether it's worth your cash?

  • makeamazing #76 1 year ago

    I am really enjoying the game so far, only level 3 in... i do agree that its a little predictable and they could have done some other things with the game.

    Seeing how well all the other countries are doing is great, really like that.

    Overall, I would agree with the review that it doesnt do anything new and it might be better to play it in short plays, but I am enjoying it, at the moment i would give it an 8 for the moment.... it helps that i like zombies :D

  • Diogo_Ribeiro #77 1 year ago

    "Diogo, you just don't get it. You are way off in left field and you are only hearing what you want to hear. sorry "

    Amusing, since I actually agreed with part of what you were saying.

  • Cigol #78 1 year ago

    I was hoping for Super Zombieguts HD, but it's a lot slower and more plodding.

  • Arwin #79 1 year ago

    I only really started loving Super Stardust HD properly when they released that awesome Endless Mode for it in that Solo Pack ... that was absolutely fantastic. I hope they can manage something like that for this game too.

    No voice chat in online co-op is unforgiveable though. But I have good hope they may add it still. I mean, if they won't, who will?
    Edited by Arwin at 02/12/10 @ 16:11

  • Syrok Verified Community Coordinator, Tarsier Studios #80 1 year ago

    @Arwin: They will http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2010/12/0...

  • vmanb #81 1 year ago

    TSB in i'm not a fanboy but everything PS3 is sh*t shocker

  • BIG-GIT #82 1 year ago

    Been playing this and i have to say best tenner i've spent this year.. great game!

  • wingZero21 #83 1 year ago

    Damnnnn!, another half assed EG review. Game is the same as others but Black Ops is Cool cause we got PAID.......

    oh well its back to reading other sites reviews for me....

  • Bangaioh #84 1 year ago

    I'd call it an 8.

  • smartgun #85 1 year ago

    All done with zombies now. Please move on, games industry.

  • bosseye #86 1 year ago

    Only 6/10? For £9.99 this is an absolute steal - well made, well designed, crammed with clever little touches, beautiful graphics (notice the real time shadows on the zombies when you shoot them, even the blood and bits get shadows - looks awesome), entertaining gun play, great environments, some mild tactical elements. 6/10 seems pretty harsh.

    Don't understand the comment on using the same default gun either - I'd maxed out the default rifle by level 4 and whilst its fine for the slower long distance encounters, but when you're getting mobbed you have to switch to something more agressive like the maxed out shotgun or the SMG. In fact I'd say that juggling which weapon to use in which situation, along with the various items is one of the main bits of tactical stuff in Dead Nation.

    How Alien Breed got rated higher than this is a mystery. Although you know, its daft to be assigning scores to any games really they're not really easily quantifiable things, but its a shame to see such a good game from a small team, so cheaply priced get a decidedly average score when its actually an excellent game.

    Edited by bosseye at 06/12/10 @ 07:17

  • Arwin #87 1 year ago

    So now that I've played some: 6/10? Are you mad?

    And how can you reconcile that score with http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-0...

    Some consistency would be nice, and so far, AB is at least an 8/10. For the money, I dare say it's a 9/10 just because of the excellent production values, which put many a retail game to shame.
    Edited by Arwin at 05/12/10 @ 16:05

  • DaftVice #88 1 year ago

    "You'll be able to fully max out the stats on the assault rifle within the first few levels, after which point the infinite ammo and considerable stopping power make it the default choice for pretty much every encounter."

    What an absolute load of rubbish. I'm playing on Normal and there's a definite need to switch up the guns used.

  • Arwin #89 1 year ago

    Well I've heard from others that on normal you can get by with the basic gun as well. Not at higher levels though.

    Perhaps they changed tihs in the 1.01 patch? Got that when I started the game, so I don't know what changed. Either that, or some people are just more hardcore for this type of game. :) Thanks to so many other good games I haven't played this more than one level still.

  • TitusCrow #90 1 year ago

    I bought this game for me and my friend 2 nights ago and we had a fking blast man. Advice play it on the most difficult setting so you really have to work together and communicate to get through. Graphics are fantastic, I was looking for something that was a mix if L4D as a top down and Diablo - my only downer is that there should be more weapons, lots of them :) and maybe things like turrets etc you could set up. There is nearly no limit to the toys they could have put in this game and that is its only failing.

    Oh and I wish it could have been 4 player too but as it is I am well satisfied - the review is harsh I think, unless you are tired of all zombie stuff. This is one of the better ones out there - recommended - 8/10

  • Spydy #91 1 year ago

    After playing the game it's pretty clear that the review hasn't completed it. Single-shot assault rifle against lvl 10 hordes? mmmkay.

    And the game isn't meant to have an overarching story or be mad-original. It's a high-score shooter, risk-reward. Almost the same as Super Stardust but with Zombies. I didn't read in your review the fact you have to get near to a Zombie and kill it to get the most reward. That's a pretty big gameplay mechanic you completely forgot to mention. Please, next time finish the game and don't go into it with daft expectations. NOTE: L4D is just as repetitive.

  • riseer #92 1 year ago

    LoL @ the review thats just stupid..the co op alone is worth it.9/10 for me it's fun and you gotta use stratgy or you will get owned.It reminds me of l4d in ways, but thats not saying much since zombies all look the same.

  • almo2001 #93 1 year ago

    I've played Left 4 Dead 2, and Dead Nation. DN is WAY better. I played Left 4 Dead 2 on the highest difficulty unlocked when you first boot the game. I did not die until I had to get in the car to leave the mall because I couldn't figure out how to get into the car. L4D has a dynamic difficulty that makes sure you don't get mobbed if you don't have enough health to handle it. This leaves is boring.

    Dead Nation uses a spawn-trigger system. If you're at very low health and you hit the trigger that makes 200 zombies appear, it's your problem to deal with it.

    Also, Dead Nation's use of lighting generates much more fear than L4D ever could.

    DN is a far superior game in every way except one. You can't play it 4 player.

  • db3 #94 12 months ago

    Just picked this up as one of my freebie pack based purely on the comments. What a great game...these days this is something I'm far more likely to pick up and have a quick blast on.

    Thx Eurogamer peeps and Sony...would have missed this otherwise. Only pity is it's not full 1080HD.

    8/10

  • kimchibaka #95 12 months ago

    Shocking, shocking, shocking review.

    I picked this up two days ago as a 'welcome back' freebie from Sony, and it's unbelievably good. I've almost done nothing else since than play it. One of the most addictive games I've played on the PS3. Frustrating in places yes, but brilliant. Far, FAR better than a lot of full-price titles I've played.

    10/10 for me - again, I'm absolutely shocked to see this get a 6 here. A well-written review but the author obviously has less taste than the zombies.

  • Arsian #96 12 months ago

    I'm another one who picked up the freebie from PSN. It's much better than the review suggests. The derivative subject matter is of no concern compared to the high octane gameplay.

    8.5/10

  • Music_Man #97 11 months ago

    When I glance at a score of '6' I often won't read the text review, because a game that poor doesn't even warrant my time.

    So after downloading this from the welcome back pack, and only after remembering that I had 2 psn accounts, I've been playing it straight for the past few days and, well, it's an absolutely spot-on, grade-a title, no doubt about it. I can't believe I nearly didn't get to experience this incredible game because of your score, and I gotta say that I think it really stinks now I've read your review to see how much you praise the quality of the game in all of it's implementation, and then simply mark it down for unoriginality.

    I'm so pleased that there's all these people rushing to disagree with your score, because this is a war crime. All I have to say is, thank god for Sony's welcome back scheme, because this game is tight. Great graphics, wonderful lighting with the torch, and quick-thinking tactics when things get busy. The enemies are familiar, but that only serves to keep things simple when a lot is happening on screen (which is most of the time).

    It's a shame that people like you can wield the power to not only keep an absolute gem like this out of gamer's experiences, but also betray a clearly fantastic developer who could benefit greatly from your assistance. A massive shame you were ever hired, and I certainly won't be reading another review of yours in the future, or even glancing at the score.

  • gammonbanter #98 10 months ago

    Super fun game 8.5/10

  • Obli #99 8 months ago

    I agree with what Music_Man ^ said, apart from the final sentence. I feel guilty for getting this for free but otherwise I wouldn't have experienced it. Brilliant game.