Reviews and Expectations

I've played through most of Shadowgrounds: Survivor twice now. It's good mindless fun. So why did it get a score like it wasn't good enough to play through twice when I first reviewed it?

Review Format
I was still using the structured review format at the time. It emphasizes theatrics as right below gameplay in determining the value of a game. S:S does not do well by that metric.

Sequel Issues
The original Shadowgrounds had serious problems, mostly related to pacing and horrible theatrics. S:S mostly got rid of the pacing problems by making the game linear and somewhat improved on the theatrics. These half measures made me feel the game wasn't that much better, really just good enough to enjoy. That's a three game, not a four.

Different Genre
Because of the way S:S tries to treat its story (especially at the end), it's trying to be considered "Serious Business". That probably hurts the score as well. The reason I picked it up again was that it's good mindless fun, not an epic saga. One thing I liked about RIP was the ridiculous option to turn enemy blood splats into flowers. That's right. You shoot a guy, and flowers come out. If S:S had offered itself up as a beer and pretzels game, it would have gotten a four.


Devotees of this blog (if there was more than one. Hi Paul. :) might remember an earlier entry with me railing against the enthusiast press for trying to judge Clive Barker's Jericho as "Serious Business" when it should have been rated on the beer and pretzels scale. This begs two questions. Should there even be two scales? How does one tell the difference?

The question of whether there should be two scales is actually a little disingenuous. There already are multiple scales. It's not fair to mark down a strategy game for being less visceral than an action game. Everyone (sensible) understands that. So why did I rate Shadowgrounds: Survivor and Jericho on the "wrong" ends of the action / horror spectrum compared to other reviewers?

Truth be told, I'm not sure. There's enough in either game for someone to think they "know" what it was trying to be. Jericho has unlockables that give its characters fairly detailed and traumatic backstories. It was developed with input from Clive Barker. It was released on Halloween. Is it really fair to call other reviewers fools if they thought it was supposed to be scary? Hell, the PR for the game practically guaranteed it! By the same token, Shadowgrounds: Survivor was a budget title from the word go. When mainstream reviewers have gotten acclimated to $60 games, anything remotely playable (much less fun and good looking) for $20 is a pretty big deal. I can see why they think that way.

It all comes down to expectations and context. I knew people hated Jericho going in, so I didn't expect as much. But I also knew the original Shadowgrounds wasn't very good, so it's not like I had unreasonable expectations of Survivor. Survivor built those up all by itself. With its Aliens vibe and forlorn mission briefings it was trying to build a sense of dread. But the gameplay was adrenaline.

A lot of people talk about how much story and character add to games, but Survivor's was done so poorly that I would have given it a higher score if they had skipped it. Listening to poorly directed actors talk about their apprehension and fear totally undercut the fast action that drove the game. Going through the game again, and skipping the briefings has been more fun. It's kind of like a Star Wars prequel. The first time I expected characters and story, and I was sorely disappointed. But watched a second time, just to see stuff blow up, it was good.

Okay. That's all well and good. But what about the score? Now that you've figured out the right level to enjoy Shadowgrounds: Survivor on, what score does the game get?

It gets a four. But does my learning how to enjoy it mean the game is really that good? Was it my fault that I didn't enjoy it before?

No.

The game has its baggage on board. It has a lame story and poor characterization that tarnished the experience, whereas Jericho had it's problems outside of the game. The game itself never felt like anything but an Ultimates style super hero comic book with a Clive Barker influence.

I will cop to not giving the gameplay in Survivor enough credit. Especially after playing pretenders like Alien Shooter Vengeance and RIP, I appreciate it more now. But all I can do as a reviewer is tell you what the experience was like for me at the time. That's all any reviewer can do.

I can say that after writing this, I'll try to be more sensitive to my own expectations going in. In fact, I'll try to briefly write them up in the first paragraph. It wasn't doing anything useful anyhow. :)