How to Survive

Surprisingly entertaining to play, it it just too easy. [Dec 2013]

My initially negative impression started to melt away when I reached the second island. I don’t blame myself too much for that, as the game’s presentation at that stage is kind of bland and uninviting and especially its God-awful music needed switching off immediately. But sticking around a little longer, I started to appreciate what the game was trying to achieve; combining the therapeutic fun of slaying zombies with requiring players to apply their brain and look for ways to survive tomorrow as well as today.

Despite finding one or two things fiddly and frustrating, How to Survive is a good game. I found the survival aspect addictive, challenging and most importantly, thrilling.

How to Survive's story can be played quickly, so the two-player co-op and the Challenges are a buyer's best option to extend the play time. That's the only way the average player will be able to explore all the seemingly inconsequential upgrade options and power-ups and not feel bored.

While it may be tinged with an insubstantial campaign and a few other minor problems, How to Survive is a worthy game built on a strong foundation of exciting experiences.

There are a lot of games better in terms of technical execution, but How To Survive makes up for that with interesting gameplay. [13/2013, p.68]

How to Survive is a quite good game with a fair amount of flaws. After a longer session it can be boring, and the RPG & survival mechanics aren't being used sufficiently. Fortunately the fun coming from killing zombies is surprisingly strong. The game is quite cheap, has some interesting ideas and looks nice - these things should outweigh all the mistakes. But the most important question is this: are you not sick of zombies already?

How to Survive has some undoubted merits, mainly thanks to the crafting and combat system and the survival component. However, the game is very immature from other points of view, like the variety of enemies and locations, the limited size of the islands, the graphics and the triviality of quests and dialogue.

Other rickety spots aside, How To Survive’s biggest issue is that it doesn’t do enough to keep you engaged across its short, repetitive campaign.

Solid action RPG with some survival aspects that might help you make it through a boring day – but not any longer. [Issue#237]

How to Survive is more or less a minimalistic RPG bringing nothing new to the table. Fans of the zombie theme will like it as long as they are not bored by the game's repetitive setting, limited combat system and wasted potential of crafting.

What we're left with is a quirky combination of tones and systems that never really mesh together to create an engaging whole. The game feels like with a bit more depth, length and ambition it could've given us a pretty unique experience.

It's an adequate twin-stick shooter, and a few years ago that might have been enough. With so many zombie games out there now though, one this uncommitted to its own ideas can never hope to be more than just part of the horde.

The fact that the campaign is so short is actually something of a blessing. [Jan 2014, p.85]

Too many ideas without nearly enough follow through. [Jan 2014, p.65]

Occasionally funny but mostly rather rote, How to Survive drowns under the weight of the developer's ambition. [December 2013, p.83]

How to fall asleep – that would be a more suitable title. Or: Uncle Kovac’s island hopping for stressed out zombie tourists… You will stumble over the occasional good idea. But good execution should mean more to development than another way to dismember the undead.