I entered Infogrames
Survivor: Australian Outback with a generous spirit. Hopes not high for a computer game
based upon a television show, I expected to be surprised and maybe charmed by a few
diverting hours of play. As the one star above testifies, this title instead took me for a
long, dull ride that I was happy to get off. I like to think all games into which some
developer has invested some time and money have at least one or two moments of fun, but
this title unfortunately disproves such an assumption. Survivor uses the characters (why
bother calling them people) from the Australia series and allows you to either play one of
them or to create your own, allocating character points across physical or personal
traits. You can be a skilled communicator, a tough dynamo (win those immunity challenges),
or the usual average-in-everything combination. Theres not much depth here. Becoming
really good in running means being really bad in so many other things that mediocrity is
the best option which should in no way reflect on the quality of contestants on the
television show.
You are then thrown into a Survival period in which you pick an in-group role
(cook, fire-tender, wood-gatherer, etc) and allocate scarce empathy points to other tribe
members (thereby creating alliances) before meandering through a three minute animation
during which you watch your character walk around, sit, and walk around some more
you are supposedly performing the afore mentioned cooking, gathering as well as
talk to other Survivors, earning more empathy points in the process. I thought this would
be the best part of the game: backstabbing people, spreading rumors, pimping for the
camera, but the dialogue trees are rudimentary and easily deciphered. No surprises lurk
and nobody will erupt into a storm of verbal abuse. Here the game could have been
interesting but squandered the opportunity.
Next comes an immunity or reward challenge. Win and you or your tribe gets a
pack of waterproof matches or immunity in the up-coming tribal council. These are banal
and slow. One challenge has you towing a log a certain distance and then running a long
race. Your only input is to make your character run faster or slower. Thats it. Tap
the faster arrow when he or she is not too tired. Tap the Slower arrow when she or he is
too tired. Bored yet? You might get a puzzle challenge so simple as to be laughable. The
only really fun challenge I played placed you in a first-person shooter interface floating
down a river and shooting arrows at targets. The controls, however, were inexact and the
graphics terrible.
Finally, a tribal council happens and features another clunky animation of your
character walking towards a podium to vote and voting some lucky person off the outback.
This rigmarole continues for the thirteen episodes of a full season. Ive played it
so you dont have to. There is a multi-player mode but its more of the above
only with real people forced into mindless repetition. Be bored with friends.
I think the developers made a critical mistake envisioning who would play this
game. They ought to have geared it towards the casual gamer and built it along the lines
of Deer Hunter or Trophy Bass. The game should have been quick to load (the load times
between sections are sometimes longer than the sections themselves) and provided twenty or
thirty minutes of diversion. Instead they went for immersive gameplay that mimics the
television series. First, hardcore gamers arent going to buy this title. Not that
gamers arent fans of the series, but there are too many other, better-made titles
demanding their attention. Also, and this should be obvious, a television show is passive
and a game is interactive. Therefore, a game ought not mirror television. But thats
exactly whats been done. I spent more time watching things occur than making things
occur. In fact, much of the game is video shots of the actual show. I dont buy games
to watch television. One of the best casual games Ive played this year is Sheep.
Its fast, easy to understand, and simple in execution. Additionally, it looks great,
something not true of Survivor. Survivor should have been built on that model, and while I
have no problem with CBS looking for tie-in dollars, I wish they had made a good-faith
effort with this game.
Further
exposition on graphics, sound, or storyline is pointless as they dont exist and the
overall quality of the game is so poor as to render technical excellence (if there was
any) moot. There isnt even an options screen; you are trapped listening to the
endless didgeridoo beat. Was this a rush job? Did the producers just not care? I hope
Survivor was banged out quickly as that would explain and render some of the games
flaws forgivable if unbuyable. I dont want to sound acerbic, but I began with low
expectations and even those were not met. If you liked the show, watch it again.