![]() ![]() The biggest positive addition to the core formula here is weapon modifications. The guns run the gamut in terms of usefulness: you may find a shotgun that lacks oomph or another that decimates, or an SMG that you don’t want to let go of. Once you’re actually out in the field it’s all about the gunplay, which is strong but more reliable than revelatory. However you play, it’s definitely worth playing with others, and the crossplay worked well enough from the PS4 side. It’s admittedly a chaotic, messy experience with an already steep-feeling learning curve, but that’s part of the charm. There are an impressive amount of special characters to play as on the ridden side. It’s pretty good fun and can be a nice distraction. Swarm mode on the other hand offers competitive, best-of-three, round-based multiplayer that will have you playing as a human or special type of ridden. After you gather your team, which you’ll want to opt for that over the passive, environment-clipping bots, even if it’s randomly done online, you’ll be able to jump into the first of four acts and cooperatively battle the hordes of rambling dead. You’ll have two main options of gameplay from this hub, either the campaign mode or swarm mode. While Back 4 Blood is undeniably, inherently fun, the gameplay can only feel as good as the level it’s taking place in, the people at your side, and the objectives or boss battles the game is hopefully not asking you to complete. It’s really just a question of “is that more fun than quickly loading into a game and making some headshots?” For all the respect that can be allocated to trying new things, couldn’t time have been better spent evolving the fundamentals? It’s in the gameplay that things really start to rise above, but even that has its limitations. It’s not even fair to say these additions are all barebones. In Fort Hope you can do things that you can otherwise (and maybe more effectively) simply do through the menus. Most of all, perhaps it’s Fort Hope, the hub world to walk around in and interact with between levels. Or maybe it’s having a card system, which is commendably fleshed out and usable, that still feels a little intangible and disconnected from the “get going” feeling that this game really benefits from. Maybe that’s just the modern lens of needing supply crates to open or an on-screen timer to let you know when the amount of zombies is about to skyrocket. However, past the core conceit, it feels like the new additions can detract from the core experience rather than compliment it. Back 4 Blood isn’t afraid to bring some new things to the table. Four-player teams make their way from one safe room to another, zombie locations and frequency are randomized, hordes can be alerted, and there are unique zombies with powers, among other returning elements. It’s skin deep, just with the added bonus that the rotten flesh of its zombies (or “ridden” as they’re referred to) is inherently fun to deal with.Ĭore elements are carried over from the Left 4 Dead franchise. While it’s fun in the moment and can be very fun during set moments, it generally doesn’t rise above surface-level thrills. The lines can’t help but blur between what you expect it to be, what it is, and what you want it to be. Maybe that’s why Back 4 Blood can be hard to talk about. With a spiritual successor, you open yourself open to comparison. That’s a hard thing to grapple with, emulate, and keep as clear-cut in the modern era of gaming. There was no filler, no extraneous menus, and no downtime. ![]() The beauty of Left 4 Dead was how streamlined of an experience it was. Meeting fan expectations while trying to do unique things in the process, is a tricky tightrope to walk. On the other, it’s hard to escape the looming shadow of past success. On one hand, it means developers already have a built-in fanbase. Spiritual successors are a tricky prospect.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |