Metascore
60

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 19
  2. Negative: 2 out of 19
  1. Nov 20, 2013
    91
    There are no areas where How to Survive really stumbles, and there are plenty of areas where it shines. The combat flows well, though ranged seems to be a better idea than melee, and the enemy variety keeps things from becoming stale.
User Score
7.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 203 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 29 out of 41
  2. Negative: 6 out of 41
  1. Oct 30, 2013
    0
    This game was advertised as multiplayer co-op and it's not. May all liars burst into flame; they stole my money.

    The idea of surviving by
    making cool things from items found in the environment is great, but the execution on this idea is abysmal. It really has the feel of a High School project.

    The gameplay is dull and repetitive, the spawns are infinite giving everything you do a pointless feel.
    Building things might be interesting, except they managed to take all mystery out of that process.
    Full Review »
  2. Oct 23, 2013
    5
    Disclaimer: I've played this for 2 hours as of writing this. I will continue to play it and will adjust the review/score accordingly if something major changes. This games premise is pretty good. The execution leaves something to be desired, however. The controls on PC are just weird at the start; although aiming is easy the movement feels more like you are controlling and old nes game with a dpad. Movement is much more fluid with a controller as you don't "steer" with the mouse unless you are aiming so it gets some getting used to. It's quite linear so far with a bit of sandbox. You move from island to island (as of writing this I'm on the 3rd island) and do (sort of) what you want on each island. The downside is you really don't have much time with the respawning enemies and how obnoxious it is to explore at night. I applaud the premise of this but the execution just makes exploration very menial and more high risk low reward. Resources seem to respawn every once in a while meaning it's basically impossible to run out of ammo. Fatigue is particularly annoying because you can only rest in designated areas and sometimes that means going back from where you came and the enemies respawn and now it's night so you have more annoying enemies after you too. They needed to either implement more rest areas or allow you to construct your own rest areas. The crafting system is decent but it only allows you to combine when there is something to combine so there isn't any experimentation. If it says combine when you select something then you can combine. I have been playing on ironman and the difficulty is lacking but the tediousness is quite high, so maybe if you play on a lower difficulty it would be more enjoyable. Overall it's an extremely mediocre title so far with nothing exceptional. It's repetitive and tedious at times and the best it has to offer is the feeling of getting some parts and making a cool new weapon. I'm glad I bought the game at a heavy discount with store credit rather than paying money. Could be worth a few hours romp but lower your expectations coming in and you might enjoy it more. Full Review »
  3. Oct 25, 2013
    7
    "How to Survive" is basically "Dead Island" packaged as an isometric perspective twin-stick shooter, but it doesn't take itself as seriously. The gameplay is good and responsive and the fighting feels right: you're tough and fast, but by no means invincible. There's no camera control and no way to rotate the view, which is primitive by today's standards and leads to parts of the map that are permanently hidden. The crafting adds nice variety without overly complicating the game like in "Far Cry 3". The skills aren't very exciting, but they don't hurt the game either. The humor is cutesy, but forced and unoriginal. Kovac, the author of the survival manual, is a blatant rip-off of Marcus in Borderlands. I have two complaints. The first is that you can't remap the controller buttons. Only laziness can explain this in a game that's released in 2013. The second is that it uses checkpoints instead of actual saves. Again, that's just pure laziness. But what's worse is that it's not clear where and when the checkpoints occur, so you don't know when it's safe to exit the game. But overall, while this game isn't stellar, looks and plays like a game from 10 years ago, and won't win any GOTY awards, it's still well made enough that someone who likes the zombie genre (and isn't fed up with it) will enjoy it. Full Review »