Zeno Clash is out

[PlanHex]

Joke's on you guys, I bought it on steam when it was 50% off a couple of weeks back.

 

[vrok]

Was it cheaper than free?

 

[Satori (original)]

It's pretty repetitive and the fights aren't really engaging, not much more to say about it.

 

[crakkie]

$20 for 4 hours. Most $50 action games are at most 10 hours nowadays. What's the problem? Selective Bitching Disorder? Irrational Troll Syndrome?

 

[racofer]

Neither. We just don't bend over to shit, and neither do we play games from "nowadays".

 

[WanderingThrough2]

From TIGSource:

I've got to say, while the visuals in the game were nice, the gameplay itself was awful. I managed to make it through the entire game without ever using block or dodge or those exploding skulls; the lock-on system was simply an impediment to fighting (since focusing too much on one guy meant others would inevitably shoot you) -- I would've gone through the game without using it, but you can't avoid it since it auto-locks when you do a charge attack and inadvertently locks when you pick up a weapon.

On top of that, the boss fights against the Hunter seem to be broken. When played the way they seem to be designed to work -- running around avoiding and picking off squirrels while whipping off shots of opportunity against the Hunter -- they're extremely difficult. But if you just stand there, take your aim, and continually shoot the Hunter, he never gets more than a shot or two off.

It was seldom possible to figure out why I'd won certain fights against the heavies, when I'd lost other times engaging in identical tactics. In the final boss battle I also had the experience of losing dramatically, then winning with ease, without a significant change in strategy.

The game relies upon one of the most narratively annoying tools: making you lose battles you're winning. This happens three times. Then, in the final battle, you can't beat the final boss, leading you to assume that this is the fourth "let them win" moment (one had already occurred against the same boss). Wrong. If you let the enemy win, you lose. On this enemy, and this enemy only, you have to switch combat modes to finish the fight. Yawn.

The shooting weapons are totally unsatisfying. They lack "weight" -- for lack of a better word -- and universally feel like pea shooters. The shooting sequences are tediously easy and slow. Of particular tedium is a long sequence against the "stone men" at the midpoint of the game.

It's probably the most linear game I've played in years, and much of the linearity is frankly goofy -- "minefields" are used twice to keep the player from wandering into open places; walls 6 inches high bar you path (since you can't jump); fence gates can only be opened by your companion; etc.

The voice acting is fair but not great. The emphasis is consistently put on the wrong words, particularly by the actress playing Deadra. Other actors do a better job, though the misemphasis is common. The voices are often too soft to hear, so I played the game with subtitles on. The written text is rife with typos, and certain names are pronounced oddly. The city called "Halstom" is spelled "Halstedom." I'm not sure if they dropped a syllable in the recording script and forgot to change the written script or what. Some voices were outright bad, but mostly they were just very inconsistent.

The visual design is quite good, but the game is a poor vehicle for enjoying it. It always seemed like something was blocking my view, or forcing me to keep looking around, so I never could really stop to admire things.

Although the characters weren't especially interesting as characters, and although the big reveal in the ending was obvious to me from about 1/3 of the way through the game, there was still a certain charisma to the whole cast that really kept me hooked. Particularly, Father-Mother's visual design and Golem's look, voice, and forebodingness were solid.

I'm not sure why people say the ending is vague or unclear. It's not in any way. It's just a cliff-hanger ending.

The game is very, very short. Maybe 4 hours long. Since it's so unengaging to play, I have no interest in a second go.

 

[Brother None]

The first DLC is free, racofer.

Anyway, the fights are surprisingly good, but it still feels like a rather simple-end beat 'em up, before the genre was refined into its high-point (Streets of Rage 2). Only one PC with only one set of moves just isn't that lovely in beat 'em ups, but at least they vary it up with weapons and end-boss fights.

I'd say the fighting is, well, good. It's not great, it's not worth buying the game for the combat. But I doubt a lot of people will, if you're buying this you're buying it for the visuals, and it really is something else.

Story is good, but kinda f'd by stilted presentation.

 

[Mangoose]

I like the first-person-perspective melee combat design. It feels very unique and pretty fluid.

But besides that and the visuals, it's not got much going for it.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

before the genre was refined into its high-point (Streets of Rage 2).

God Hand would like a word with you.

So is this game decent? Sounds like a lot of cheap difficulty, and fighting in first-person makes me think off-screen attacks would be killer. Is this better than taking a gamble (though a decent one) on MadWorld?

 

[Brother None]

God Hand would like a word with you.

Never heard of it. Don't really play console anymore. I seriously doubt it's better than SoR2 though.

So is this game decent? Sounds like a lot of cheap difficulty, and fighting in first-person makes me think off-screen attacks would be killer. Is this better than taking a gamble (though a decent one) on MadWorld?

I haven't really looked at MadWorld so I can't say.

The fighting feels intuitive and - like beat 'em ups - depends less on your manual key-manipulation ability and more on common sense. If you're good on your feet, realize circling is important and move about getting the enemies to get in each other's way, you'll find fighting is pretty good. Like beat 'em ups tend to, this game does throw unfair fights at you, and if you get surrounded or cornered you're fucked.
But honestly, I assumed the combat would be atrocious, but it's good. It's not great, and it gets repetitive, but it's solid.

But like I said; if you think from the descrition that this world's design would appeal to you, go for it. It backtracks in the last hour but before that it's a 3-hour roller coaster ride of some of the greatest world design we've seen in years. It's weird, but it's consistent and beautiful, puts the shit a lot of AAA studios turn out to shame.

I should have a review going up soon, I'll toss in a link here for full thoughts.

 

[Hobo Elf]

MadWorld was shit. It's like you went in expecting something great because it was made by former Clover, but instead you got the very embodiment of everything wrong with the Wii (gimmicks, minigames, short, easy, tedium)

Zeno Clash is ok, but not great. Basically, I had no expectations for it other than knowing that I'd be beating the shit out of odd guys in Dr.Seuss land. I wasn't disappointed in any way since I didn't really expect much, and I only paid like 6 euros for it anyways, and I still got more out of it than from MadWorld. Seriously, fuck that game. I paid 50 euros for it, and I beat it in 3 hours. Fuck it.

Oh and the FP view combat is done pretty well. It does a good job at making you feel like you're in the middle of the fray. Auto locking is horrible, though. It can really screw you up sometimes.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Never heard of it. Don't really play console anymore. I seriously doubt it's better than SoR2 though.

Oh it's much better. It's amazing if you like old-school beat-em ups. Just about everything in them returns, but totally modernized in the right way. Fully configurable and customizable combos, a deep fighting system, varied enemies, great bosses, cool power-ups and weapons, a quirky and tongue-in-cheek "story", and great one-liners. The only slight is that it's one player only. That might kill it for you. But it's much more fun than any other beat em' up single player.

If you have a PS2, it's worth a try.

I haven't really looked at MadWorld so I can't say.

It's some ex-Clover guys. Some people who made Viewtiful Joe and God Hand, so I'm interested in it. Of course, a lot of guys at Obsidian made Torment and Fallout 2, and have yet to really make a full game that isn't, well, mediocre or crap.

Action games (both modern and beat em' ups) are pretty much right next to RPGs in genres I like a lot, so I usually try to scope out the promising ones (stuff with Itagaki, Mikami, Ninja Gaidens, ), and avoid the "Oblivions" (like God of War, Heavenly Sword, or Dynasty Warriors).

The fighting feels intuitive and - like beat 'em ups - depends less on your manual key-manipulation ability and more on common sense.

So it's less about pure twitch and more about using the right moves at the right time? Sounds good. That's one of the many reasons why Ninja Gaiden is truly something.

If you're good on your feet, realize circling is important and move about getting the enemies to get in each other's way, you'll find fighting is pretty good.

Sounds decent, but seems kinda repetitive from the way you say this. The way I'm interpreting it (and I could be totally off) is that it falls onto one of the key flaws of old beat em' ups; that you just spammed the same ultra-effective moves/tactic ad nauseum to victory. That's one of the things the action games that spawned from them (Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry) really corrected in force, by making varied enemies who must be fought by equally varied methods, keeping things fresh.

I hope I'm misinterpreting you though. This game does sound unique enough, and a Western dev actually making a good action game would be nice.

Like beat 'em ups tend to, this game does throw unfair fights at you, and if you get surrounded or cornered you're fucked.

Are there ways out? Like the typical super-move, screen-clearer, space-maker kind of stuff that can be saved for these scenarios? And is it your own fault when this happens as opposed to artificial difficulty?

But like I said; if you think from the descrition that this world's design would appeal to you, go for it. It backtracks in the last hour but before that it's a 3-hour roller coaster ride of some of the greatest world design we've seen in years. It's weird, but it's consistent and beautiful, puts the shit a lot of AAA studios turn out to shame.

So it's a nice environment I take it? Does the environment factor into gameplay, or is it purely aesthetic?

Sorry for basically going all KGB on you. I'm just kind of an action game snob. Probably more so than an RPG snob.

Edit:

MadWorld was shit. It's like you went in expecting something great because it was made by former Clover, but instead you got the very embodiment of everything wrong with the Wii (gimmicks, minigames, short, easy, tedium)

Damn. That pretty much sinks every Wii game. No More Heroes was the same way. Shit, at least the Gamecube had Viewtiful Joe, F-Zero GX, and shit. The Wii is turning out to be one of the worst impulse buys yet. I don't really own a single game for it now. I just rent stuff. And on that, is it at least worth a rental of some sort, or is that shit?

 

[racofer]

The first DLC is free, racofer.

DLC is evil and corrupts the children, no matter what form it takes.

Anyway, the fights are surprisingly good, but it still feels like a rather simple-end beat 'em up, before the genre was refined into its high-point (Streets of Rage 2)

Oh my. I thought I was all alone in here thinking SoF 2 (and the other two as well) were the pinnacle of beat-em-up games. Glad to know other people saw the light.

 

[Occasionally Fatal]

So it's less about pure twitch and more about using the right moves at the right time? Sounds good. That's one of the many reasons why Ninja Gaiden is truly something.

Well, kind of. You end up just running around and spamming the same attacks (sprint + elbow, run away and time haymaker, use clubs on big enemies, spam guns if you have them) most of the time, there's not very much variety or depth (I'm only half way through, then i got bored, so for all i know it could change half way through). If you're hoping this is going to be ninja gaiden in fps, you're going to be mistaken though. Personally I think it may have been more interesting as a shooter/adventure game with strange puzzles and possibly a more balanced version of dark messiah's combat engine.

Sounds decent, but seems kinda repetitive from the way you say this. The way I'm interpreting it (and I could be totally off) is that it falls onto one of the key flaws of old beat em' ups; that you just spammed the same ultra-effective moves/tactic ad nauseum to victory.

You're pretty much spot on. If you're looking for challenge, I doubt you'll find it here.

Are there ways out? Like the typical super-move, screen-clearer, space-maker kind of stuff that can be saved for these scenarios? And is it your own fault when this happens as opposed to artificial difficulty?

I haven't run into these kinds of situations (at most faced 3 or 4 guys at the same time), but the arenas were big enough so I could run around elbowing everyone continuously.

So it's a nice environment I take it? Does the environment factor into gameplay, or is it purely aesthetic?

Yes, visuals are quite interesting and nice. Unfortunately, the environment has little effect on gameplay, you can't kick dudes into fire or spikes or anything like that, though occasionally you can throw them into pits. also, you cant jump or crouch, so I felt handicapped the entire time.

 

[BearBomber]

I've only watched trailers but the fighting system looks strangely similar to the fighting system from that Chronicles of Riddick game.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Damn. That pretty much sinks every Wii game. No More Heroes was the same way. Shit, at least the Gamecube had Viewtiful Joe, F-Zero GX, and shit. The Wii is turning out to be one of the worst impulse buys yet. I don't really own a single game for it now. I just rent stuff. And on that, is it at least worth a rental of some sort, or is that shit?

I suppose it's an ok rental at best. But it's still pretty annoying to play through after a while. I mean, I remember watching trailers where they showed Jack impale people through the head with sign posts, put a tire over him and then impale him on a rose bush.. BUT YOU DO THAT IN EVERY SINGLE LEVEL. That's pretty much all you do. You keep rose bushing people to rake up points to play some shitty minigame to get enough points to get to the easiest boss fight yet who you continue to decimate while sometimes going through struggle events where you have to shake your wiimote like a spastic retard.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

From TIGSource:

The city called "Halstom" is spelled "Halstedom." I'm not sure if they dropped a syllable in the recording script and forgot to change the written script or what.

That happened to me too. I was playing this game called "Knights of the Round Table" and yet every voice-over pronounced them as "Nites of the Round Table" I mean WTF? It's like they deliberately mis-spelt it in the game's title or something I dunno. It should clearly be pronounced "Kerniggets of the Round Table". I'm very upset about language.

 

[peak]

It's well worth it's price I'd say. It does get repetitive in quite a few fights as they don't vary much, but as you get better with time they are more fun later on than in the beginning. But honestly, for me it was worth the price just to have something else than all these standard shooters that are released these days - Zeno Clash does that both with its combat and world. I can't believe an indie team creates an FPS game with more interesting graphics than most "AAA teams".

Not everyone will agree with me on that of course. It's not very polished and the locking mechanism has it's problems, as I said it's somewhat repetitive gameplay wise and perhaps they should have built on the shooting parts some more (there's basically a shooting range area 3/4:s in the game which is pretty fun) without making them more viable in CQC, but it's fun and interesting which is what I think indie gaming is all about.

They have talked about doing a full fledged adventure if they get the money, which could be cool.

 

[Brother None]

If you have a PS2, it's worth a try.

*snurk* Of course I don't.

Sounds decent, but seems kinda repetitive from the way you say this.

It is very repetitive. If this game was any longer than 4 hours or less interesting visually, it'd bore the sox offa you. It still can.

It's certainly not a high-end beat 'em up. In simplicity it's closer to the older, less refined titles of the genre. That's why I compared it to that.

That's one of the things the action games that spawned from them (Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry) really corrected in force, by making varied enemies who must be fought by equally varied methods, keeping things fresh.

There are some forced varied tactics, but only a few.

This game does sound unique enough, and a Western dev actually making a good action game would be nice.

They're Chilean.

Are there ways out? Like the typical super-move, screen-clearer, space-maker kind of stuff that can be saved for these scenarios? And is it your own fault when this happens as opposed to artificial difficulty?

No way out which, honestly, kinda sucks and feels kinda weird in a beat 'em up.

It's usually your own fault. Like I said, the game does give you a few matchups that feel unfair, like tossing in small enemies in the middle of a boss-fight, but it never forces you into a corner.

So it's a nice environment I take it? Does the environment factor into gameplay, or is it purely aesthetic?

Purely aesthetic. It's a typical Source Engine linear hallway-job, but it does a good job of stopping you from becoming too aware of that. It doesn't feel constricted, even though it is.

 

[Mangoose]

I believe there's a demo in the works.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Trust some chilean nobodies to have a decent crack at the game design goliath that is first person melee.

Playing this game i'm reminded how awesome a modern PS:T could look.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

hmmm... it's fun for a while. Repetitive? yes...

But kicking fallen enemies is damn cool.

 

[PlanHex]

Looks like they fixed a lot of the prevalent complaints: http://store.steampowered.com/news/2459/

 

[Brother None]

Review if you still need an opinion

Patch smells good.

 

[Panthera]

I've got to say, while the visuals in the game were nice, the gameplay itself was awful. I managed to make it through the entire game without ever using block or dodge or those exploding skulls; the lock-on system was simply an impediment to fighting (since focusing too much on one guy meant others would inevitably shoot you) -- I would've gone through the game without using it, but you can't avoid it since it auto-locks when you do a charge attack and inadvertently locks when you pick up a weapon.

...

It was seldom possible to figure out why I'd won certain fights against the heavies, when I'd lost other times engaging in identical tactics. In the final boss battle I also had the experience of losing dramatically, then winning with ease, without a significant change in strategy.

This is basically a long winded way of saying he sucks at the game and can't be arsed how to learn to play. A simple action game is too hardcore for him.

 

[feighnt]

i find it odd that nobody has mentioned one, particular thing... and i'm kinda wondering if i've just somehow missed it :shock:

was i the only one who was unable to *manually* save my game? like, from what i saw, they gave *no* option to save your game - you have to rely on autosaves, and the game doesnt tell you when it's saved itself or not (that i recall).

or did i just miss it? i couldnt see any save option when i opened the menu while playing, i couldnt see any hotkeys for quicksaves or anything either.

it doesnt *hurt* the game that badly, since each level is fairly short, so if you stop your game and dont restart precisely where you left off, you dont lose much. but it's kind of a baffling choice to neglect to give a save option