Zoo Keeper review review Review
I've changed my mind. It's definitely worth buying.
Version tested: DS
Order yours now from Simply Games.

It's been just over a month since I reviewed the American version of Zoo Keeper, and it's been bothering me pretty much ever since.
At the time I described this Flash game as Zoo Keeper's "primary mode of play", which for all intents and purposes it is. You're given a grid of animal icons, and you can switch adjacent squares wherever doing so creates a line of three or more of the same. Those ones then disappear and more fall to fill their place, which leads to chains. There's a timer ticking down trying to catch you out before you can find a move to make, there are a few power-ups, and so on and so forth. We all know how puzzle games with a sense of gravity generally unfold.
And if that was all you got then my assertion that £30 is way too much would be totally accurate. The main single-player mode makes it too easy to just zone out of whatever's going on around you, and probably isn't transparently goal-oriented enough to hold the puzzling veteran's attention for more than a week or so. You'll play it and play it and play it (and so will your girlfriend, for those of you still looking for a universally appealing Tetris-style effort), but you don't get too much out of it in the long run; it just rips through hours like the game's cutesy little lion-head icons would rip through the butter that appearances suggest wouldn't otherwise melt in their mouths.
Doing so (playing and playing and playing it, that is; I've left my butter-eating days behind) left and still leaves my head in a kind of barren wasteland, while my hands carry on mechanically and instinctively. I might as well go to sleep instead, really. I play Zoo Keeper so much I genuinely have started seeing the bloody animal icons when I close my eyes. Glue a pen to my hand and the experience would be similar.

Zoo Keeper earned itself a six-out-of-ten because I knew that anybody who bought it would sit and play the main mode endlessly and use it to fill gaps in the day. That it served such a purpose, featured a few little distractions (including a similarly enjoyable and similarly flawed wireless multiplayer mode), and proved so slick both aesthetically and functionally was never in any doubt; I just couldn't imagine it representing value for money for anybody who could play the Flash game, which basically meant anyone with a powerful enough PC to read what I was writing. (And however many Flash banners we try and ram down your eye sockets, the technical bar of entry has never been that high.) And I could see how really I wasn't playing it, I was just wallpapering my hours with it. The DS version was always nicer in looks and feel than the Flash game, and letting you make moves in really quick succession was another plus, but it didn't seem like enough.
But what I hadn't really grasped at the time was that although Zoo Keeper on the DS is a flawed little puzzle game - a bit directionless, a bit too random - and probably not sufficiently more absorbing than its Flash cousin, the other bits of the game are a lot better than they initially appeared to be. I've barely touched the normal mode in weeks. I've been playing the Time Attack and Quest modes instead, and although neither of them is perfect either, as I've learned in the weeks after the review went up, Quest mode is significant and fairly compulsive, while Time Attack is good enough that you will come back to it obsessively. And with purpose.
And that's why we're here. I'm writing this because of an internal backlash. I'm simply not happy with my assessment in light of the way I've been playing Zoo Keeper in the past month. I want to chastise myself in public for not giving it more time and give it a bigger score in light of what I've learned since, and apologise to you and the makers of Zoo Keeper for having to do so. You could be sympathetic and say that the pressures of life and copy deadlines are the reason it happened, and given the volume of work we have to get through that that's somewhat understandable. But for me that's no excuse for basically not spending enough time with a game and I wouldn't be happy with myself if I didn't address that now it's available to buy here in Europe. I've said some controversial things about games in the past and I know it's wound a few people up, but that's just the way this reviewing lark works. The key point is that you have to believe in what you've written. If something happens to change your mind, then you should make amends and, frankly, apologise - and not just stand around defending the indefensible. I'm sure there'll be plenty of people who beat me with what I'm saying here for weeks, months, even years. Hell, maybe you'll all call for my head. But I'll be much happier for having said it.

So here we are.
Last month I said that Quest mode set you various specific tasks to complete and didn't add a huge amount of value. To elaborate on that - you are given a series of ten tasks, all but one of which involves playing regular Zoo Keeper in a particular way. Capture (the game's short-hand for "make lines of") 20 lions, make 30 chains, get 15 more pandas than giraffes, etc. Your performance in each of these tasks contributes to a points total. And in the middle there's a luck-of-the-draw bit that gives you the chance to add some points or even multiply what you have.
The game's assessment of your performance here isn't always entirely fair, and some of the tasks prove much more difficult than others, or even themselves on previous attempts. But if you top the highest score in each game mode you unlock another difficulty level - and that becomes significant, because it means you can get really, really big scores in some of the other modes. Most notably Time Attack.
Time Attack is so much better than the regular Zoo Keeping mode that it makes me weep. Playing against a six-minute countdown, the idea is to play as fast and well as you can to build up the biggest score possible. Scores are bigger the tougher the difficulty level. And because it's "just six minutes", you pick up the DS off the desk while you're waiting to download a big email full of 2MB JPEGs of concept art and corporate logos you know you won't use on your website. You grab the DS while you're waiting for someone to get their bloody shoes on and go to the pub with you for a pint. You grab it because it's the ad break. You grab it because you're waiting for the water to boil. You grab it because it's there and it's the most entertaining thing you can do with six minutes that I can write about here without Kieron popping up and going "Nyar! See! Told you we hadn't used up all the wanking reference potential!"

And it always overstays its welcome in the nicest possible way. It's just another six minutes to have another go, after all. So why not? Playing it is somehow both relaxing and feverish. It makes no sense. But it makes perfect sense. And now it's clicked with me, I want the whole world to know about it, because if the whole world did know about it the whole world would agree that it's pretty much worth buying the game for outright. The other modes add hours more fun - some more involved than others - and despite the flaws there's just something so intoxicating about it all that you stick with it. I dunno. To revisit an earlier comment (seems to be a theme today), maybe it's like the difference between sleeping and being awake. There's fundamentally a lot more to being awake than being asleep, but your bed is warm and cosy, and sleep leaves you happier and energised. Even when sleep's hard, you still want to be sleeping. And you definitely want to lie in when you wake up.
I've played Zoo Keeper more than I've played any other game this year. A lot of that came before I first put fingers to keyboard a month ago, but a lot more has come since, and it slowly changed my mind until I decided enough was enough. Zoo Keeper is deceptive. But the key point for me is that while it won't reveal all of its charms immediately, it has enough of those charms - and enough that you can't get for free - to keep you happy for a very long time. It's not perfect. There are things that could make it better. But it's good enough to warrant a better score than I gave it originally, and it's good enough to be worth buying if you're in need of a puzzle game for your new handheld.
So play the demo. For that's all it really is. And I'm glad I've been able to come out and make amends for saying otherwise. Then buy the game.
The Internet makes it all better again.
Order yours now from Simply Games.
8 / 10
You may also like...
-
Happy Action Theater Review
-
Call of Duty: Black Ops has best game ending ever, says Guinness World Records
-
Mass Effect 3 Demo: The First 20 Minutes
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Tim Schafer: publishers aren't evil
-
Face-Off: Final Fantasy 13-2
-
Halo 4 Master Chief action figure flaunts new suit design
-
Sony confirms PS Vita 1st Party digital only game prices
-
App of the Day: Monkey Bump
-
Sony's $50m Vita marketing campaign targets PS3 owners
-
UK Top 40: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning beats Darkness 2
-
Fallout: New Vegas dev asks fans what game they would like it to Kickstart
-
Retrospective: Star Wars Episode I Racer
-
EGTV: Eurogamer playtests PlayStation Vita
-
Metal Gear Solid 3D demo on eShop this week
-
Metal Gear Solid 5 expected between April 2013 and May 2014
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Making FIFA Street in the FIFA engine's image
-
Ridge Racer Unbounded delayed by four weeks
-
FIFA Street footage pits France vs. Germany
-
Activision: games are relationships, "brands in people's lives"
-
DICE working on multiple Battlefield 3 fixes
-
No plans for Journey PlayStation Vita version
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
Lollipop Chainsaw screenshots show off custom costumes









Comments (38) Latest comment 7 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Seriously, it's a great way to look back at the game after the hype has resided. I've stopped buying games within the month or two they've been released, just because no-one (NO ONE) is immune to hype, or knee jerk reactions. Opinions are like a fine wine - they need time to mature, are made from grapes, and can make you throw up in your shoes.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
warning!!! do not show it to partners,friends of family or you will lose your ds, you have been warned
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What annoyed me about PC Zone was the way they'd give high scores to hyped games only to slag them off a few months later (Klingon Honour Guard, Black and White, Dungeon Siege from the top of my head). This way they kept publishers happy with high scores and could slate the games after all the sales had been achieved and so call themselves harsh critics. So it's nice to see someone go the other way - own up to what he feels was an honest mistake.
Well done sir - i'm almost tempted to get this at lunchtime now. Had convinced myself not to bother with a ds but..... just got paid... psp delayed for months.... What the hell
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
More wortwhile is 2 people reviewing the same game (not necessarily simultaneously).
Comment below viewing threshold Show
/bows
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Somehow I don't think it would be valid to re-review a game that came out years ago. And besides, Halo deserved all the praise it got. Sure, it wouldn't stand up today, but that's hardly the point. I appreciate the reviewer's honesty, and can maybe understand why he had to rush his first review, but I wouldn't make a habit of changing your opinion about a game and writing another review with a different score. You're supposed to take these things into account the first time around.
That said, I'm all for reflections on a game a few months after you write a review. I just don't think you should be changing the scores too often.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Sorry, but that sounds absolutely terrible. I need to play early missions several time to gain enough cash to be able to beat later missions? What kind of game design is that?!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
They sort of "re-reviewed" it when they covered the PC version, iirc.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
At any rate, the PAL version is supposed to have infinite continues.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
This was a very specialised case and scoring certainly is not arbitrary.
If you talk to Edge or GamesTM journos, incidentally, they'll openly admit to changing their minds from time to time after publication. The difference is that they don't have or choose not to have a means of communicating this. That they change their minds doesn't make them any worse at what they do. But apparently in my case it does because I decided to admit it.
As to the other comment about the combo system - it's certainly a joy. Just another thing about Zoo Keeper that gets better over time.
Anyway, I've got to leave the animals behind now. It's Polarium time. At least for a little while...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Aaaaanyway - Zoo Keeper is amazing! So so addictive and INFINITELY better than the flash version.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Case in point: I'm sure a lot of reviewers who wrote that Super Smash Bros. had a shallow fighting system would change their reviews after spending a few months with it. Greg Kasavin of Gamespot fame even managed to say that button mashing would usually work, even against veterans of the game. This is so untrue, that I hesitate to even laugh about it. I don't remember what EG wrote though.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
...but what about people who use these reviews to help them decide what game to buy?
First review - "This game is great! Buy. It. Now!"
Next issue - "Actually, I've changed my mind. Disregard all the stuff I said in my first review; I didn't mean it. Utter, utter shite."
A professional reviewer should never, ever change the score that he gives a game. He should think long and hard about the score that he gives at the end of the first review before he writes it down, because once it's there, it's there to stay. The same person doing a review of the same game with a different score just creates confusion. You want MORE magazines and websites to do this? It'd be utter chaos! It'd turn into a '1984' scenario, where reviewers erase all existence of their original reviews to make way for the "real" ones.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
fihu I have a US DS and a UK ZK. The sleep mode works fine on mine.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Top game tho and more than deserving of a re-review.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
53,676.
Beat that.
Comment below viewing threshold Show