Spotlight: Get up to 90% off at GOG's big fall sale on over 700 DRM-free games!

Outlive (Windows)

63
MobyRank
100 point score based on reviews from various critics.
1.9
MobyScore
5 point score based on user ratings.
Written by  :  Geraldo Falci (13)
Written on  :  Jan 10, 2007
Rating  :  2.83 Stars2.83 Stars2.83 Stars2.83 Stars2.83 Stars

2 out of 2 people found this review helpful

write a review of this game
read more reviews by Geraldo Falci
read more reviews for this game

Summary

Too much micromanagement...

The Good

It has an interesting story. The overall graphical design is very good. Very easy to learn and use map/mission editor. Interesting spy system.

The Bad

It focus too much on research. Every little ability and unit must be researched making it a extremely slow paced game. The AI suffers from some basic weakness. The sound is too repetitive and the music isn't very inspiring.

The Bottom Line

This is a game built by a very small team. Besides, it's focused in a market where, by the time it came out, most PCs were very weak (this is a reference to Brazil). This way, we have a game with great graphical designs but aged graphics. And the game system is all based in the well known mister popular StarCraft.

While it has a good story, it suffers with the excess of micromanagement. Every little upgrade is researched from the same structure. To make it worse, there's a huge load of them. And you start off with very few stuff available.

Of course you can automate the researches but by doing so, you risk yourself to take a longer time to access very important structures or units which may determine your very own defeat. And there's no way to speed up the process (you're only allowed to build one research center) only slow it even more.

This "slowing" feature is actually a management system were you define the amount of the necessary resources delivered to both research and auto repairing your units (if you're human) or buildings (if you're robot). It's interesting, yes. But only contributes to the slowness of the gameplay.

The units themselves are very nice, though the research system keeps their best special abilities away from the player for a lot of time. Both sides play with a certain degree of difference while keeping most basics, like resource harvesting, the same.

The spy system is very nice. It allows the player to affect many things in the enemy base while defend himself from enemy spy attacks. The only weird thing is the inability to steal money from the enemies, a very common resource in most games.

The super weapons system only reflects the micromanagement focus of the game. Robots can clone up to five of its units in a row (allowing the player to build up a deadly attack team quickly) and humans can build a powerful nuclear warhead (ICBM). The ICBM, once launched takes 2 minutes to hit a target, allowing human enemies to disable it or robot enemies to redirect it using the respective intelligence systems.

The AI is mixed. While strong and expansive in certain aspects, it's foolish and weak in others. Let me add that I'm a pretty bad Strategy-games-player. If I start off trying to focus on my base, the AI builds up much faster than me becoming very hard to me to beat it even on easy. But, if I rush it with a few flying units right from the start, it will rarely manage to survive the first 20 minutes of play even on hard difficulty setting.

One last thing: patch the game. The game will become much better balanced and some annoying things will be kindly removed.

My final statement: It's a good game considering what it proposes. But it's considerably far from what most players look for when willing to play a good strategy game. Had it been less management focused and more battle focused it could have survived a bit more in the game market.