User Score

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 261 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 31 out of 261

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 19, 2013
    The game clearly doesn't deserve 50$, I took all my time to finish it, it took me 6 hours. Graphics are really bad but that was not a big deal, the gameplay was catchy and the voiceover was amazing, from the two series actors. I was quiet optimist through the whole game, but then the game just ended, probably the worst ending ever in the video games industry. Even if you're a great fan of the Walking Dead, don't spend 50$ on that. Expand
  2. Mar 19, 2013
    No More Room in Hell way better Zombie survival game with 8 player cooperative... and that games FREE. Riddle me that... I have to agree with GameDev11 on this one and say it's a rushed title with little to no effort put into it, just to collect on the payout of the 'Walking Dead' label/franchise. Save your money I see this game dropping down to $5 just like Duke Nukem did within a month or two.
  3. Mar 24, 2013
    It's a real shame this game was made the way it was, an utter cash in with the only redeeming features because the amazing voice acting by Norman Reedus and Michael Rooker. Graphics are a complete let down with rooms being full of nothing more than one chair and a table half the time, if this wasn't a Walking Dead game it wouldn't be worth a second glance.
  4. Mar 19, 2013
    Story and characters:none found in here.There's no weight to any of the characters and the story is laughable.After telltales master peace this game proves how badly things can go in this segment.
    Gameplay:horrible.Its very repetitive and basic.It requires no skill no timing,nothing to be quite frank.Its just mouse button mashing over and over again.Weapons variety is poor and all the
    melee weapons do same damage also it takes 4 hits to kill a zombie no matter where you hit it.Also gameplay is very linear and map design isn't impressive at all.Also FOV is very narrow and there's no way for you to change it.
    Graphics:yeh,they are bad.But the thing is that its a game from activision it's not an indie game.It looks like the game is made out of clay.Everyone expects good graphics from such a huge company but be prepared to be disappointed.This game looks ugly,it's obvious that they didn't even try to make this game look good.
    Sounds:i guess its OK at best.Dialogues feel forced and since they are poorly written voice-over makes them sound awkward.
    Bottom line:an obvious cash in on the franchise.Game is rushed out,it has nothing unique in it,nothing worth while.
  5. Mar 19, 2013
    This tile was created for the sole reason to gain profit off of the Walking Dead series. It was forced out by Activision and it's subsidiary developers in under half a year, with literally no effort put into it. The campaign is linear, the engine is using tech that is presumably pre-2006, and the gameplay is generally all around terrible. The ending is NOT an ending. It feels like the end of a mission that you'd play in the middle of the game .

    There is absolutely no reason that you should ever pay for this title.. This game is worth maybe five dollars at most. 1/10
  6. Mar 20, 2013
    This is not a Telltale Game! So expect it to be bearable. Unlike the God awful Telltale Game this has game play. Which will allow you to got through the subpar graphics and meh story. People will bash this and act as if the Telltale game was some how better, but this suffers the same fate. Shoddy graphics, lazy story telling, BUT it gets one thing right. The Game play is fairly fun. Unlike Telltale Games this game actually is fun to play. Expand
  7. Mar 19, 2013
    To start off, this is no Telltale game so don't expect it to be. Once we got that out of the picture now lets actually look at the game. The game plays fairly well, although the one issue I have is that a lot of times that I hit a walker, it doesn't really feel like the hit connected. Other wise it's solid. Graphics aren't revolutionary but aren't bad either, Voice acting is great, combat for the most part works and it introduces good survival concepts. All in all it has its flaws but is still fun to play and a must have if you're a fan of the T.V series. Expand
  8. Mar 19, 2013
    Graphics is terrabad, storyline is okay. Horror factor is somewhat scary. Daryl is really a plus in this game, and it does gives back the atmosphere of the show though. Not the greatest game ever, i wouldn't recommend it for a full price.
  9. Mar 19, 2013
    This polished piece of crap locked up on me within 5 minutes of gameplay. The textures are hideous and I wish I had never preordered it. I tried to contact customer support but the developers were rude and offered no help. So far it has locked up on me ten times in 2 hours. I'm returning this to gamestop.
  10. Mar 21, 2013
    The Kings of Cash-In have done it again. I seriously believe that this is what Activision has been reduced to: making bad games to cash in on licenses. This newest FPS cash in is very short so I will make this review short and spoiler free in regard. Walking Dead: Survival Instinct doesn't deserve $50 nor does it deserve $10. Survival Instinct is a complete disrespect to the license and its fans. On the PC version, you will experience horrendous frame rate drops from dated graphics that look like they could have been made for the PlayStation 2 and XBOX. A lazy story that ends abruptly with loose ends (though I seriously doubt Activision is going to release any DLC for this disaster). Terrible voice acting with some of the worst AI I've ever encountered because on five different occurrences, the Walkers in this game RAN....yes RAN!!! Also keep in mind that Terminal Reality is used the same engine that was used for Star Wars: Kinect. With that in mind you will experience badly timed QTEs and mini games that probably come from iPhone games and climbing mechanics straight out of Minecraft. If you are a fan of the series then stick with Telltale's version of The Walking Dead. Expand
  11. Mar 22, 2013
    It's like Day of the Dead (horrible zombie-game on Unreal engine 2), but with «updated» graphics (still looks horrible).
    The rush with which game was made shows. It's glitchy as hell. Shallow and repetitive gameplay.
  12. Mar 22, 2013
    At first i thought it is a joke, when i saw the graphics 1st time. But no. It looks like cheap games done 5-7years ago. I said OK... Nevermind, its all about athmosphere so i go on. I played like 30 minutes, got almost done 1st mission and suddenly... game crash! Checkpoints not saved, so i had to start mission over again from the beginning. Next bad thing about TWD: SI, it just freezes all the time, its hard to aim in it at all. There are some better things like map travels, equipment, but its definitly not worth its price. What a waste, especially when there are such awesome characters like Daryl and Merle used. Expand
  13. Mar 20, 2013
    This is probably one of the worst games I have ever played. I actually can't believe that they released this game in the condition that it's in. The graphics were basically really high end 2005 graphics. It feels like and plays about as well as the new Duke Nukem did. I think that there were about 5 various zombies in the whole game. If you played the game Land of the Dead imagine a much worse Next-gen version of that. I can't believe this game is retail for $50. It should be $20 at most. Do not buy, do not look at it even. It's bad. Really bad. Expand
  14. Mar 20, 2013
    Played for 25 minutes and unistalled. The game has horrible quality, idiotic gameplay and super linear. The oposite of "The Walking Dead: A Telltale Game Series". The only good think is the recorded voice Daryl and his brother. Dont buy this trash! It is an insult to the franchize.
  15. Mar 19, 2013
    Only created to gain some cash from Telltale's success and The Walking Dead series. The gameplay is bad, the graphics are bad, the story is linear, and no effort was put to create this game, and the pc port is awful. Also, so many fake reviews and rates. Casually, some of these people have rated only and only this game high for all platforms. Pathetic.
  16. Mar 25, 2013
    The Walking Dead: Survival Instinct is an enjoyable game that combines the claustrofobic feeling of being chased by walkers and the need to scavenge in a good way, but the graphics are very dated and some issues keep the experience from its prime.
  17. Mar 20, 2013
    this game really reminds me of the good old Medal of Honor on PS1, compass, graphics, it's almost the same, it would have been the best FPS in 1998 before Half-Life, now it's just garbage, the only good Walking Dead is from Telltale Games, this is complete waste of time, exactly like the tv show.
  18. Mar 20, 2013
    As a huge fan of the series and also zombie video games I was looking forward to try this game. Can't say I'm disappointed because what I feel is more than that. Can't still believe they used that awesome series name for this crap. Graphics is somewhere on Quake 2 level but that's not too important (remember Payday: The Heist with terrible gfx and awesome game). Gameplay is even worse than gfx and audio also terrible. I almost never give games score 0 because there is at least effort of programmers and we should respect that. Here, seems no even effort to make playable game. Expand
  19. Mar 20, 2013
    I am totally disappointed
    I have played for only about 2 hours but so far it's better then i expected.
    Graphic is bad (looks like 5-7 years old game) I think everybody will be agree with me
    It is a not a game It's a piece of
  20. Mar 26, 2013
    Terrible graphic and video optimization. The graphic just look like those 10 years before. This is the only FPS I have ever met in my life, which can make me feel dizzy upon playing for just a while. Very repetitive and linear gameplay with a dull and boring combat system, always aim for head, other ways won't work. Such game is just made within 6 months for rushing out as a quick cash-in product. Avoid at all cost! Expand
  21. Jul 29, 2013
    This game was a huge disappointment as I’m such a fan of the Walking Dead series and Norman Reedus, but it’s like TR didn’t even care, the game feels and plays like a pretty good college-project with a Walking Dead theme slapped on it. The basics of the game is you travel from instanced area to area with one main mission with optional side-quests thrown in, allowing you to do things such as change vehicles, get extra supplies, and find other survivors. Vehicles determine how many extra survivors you can have when travelling from one area to the next. At the beginning of each area, you can assign tasks to the survivors such as searching for ammo, finding gas, or finding food (healing). It all sounded so cool and the ideas were there, the lore was there; but the execution was piss poor. The combat gets tired after 15 minutes and the gameplay repetitive, nothing you do or the choices you make really seem of relevance, you don't ever get into the story before it just ends. Pretty bad. Expand
  22. Mar 25, 2013
    This game was not even completed! The animations look unfinished, concepts are there but not fully implemented, almost everything seems half-arsed and rushed. There appears to be no optimization at all. Changing screen resolution and graphics options crashes my game to desktop followed by a bunch of error messages. It's as if this was an alpha build and some idiot in charge said, "Release this now!", and the developers gave up trying to explain to that person that the game wasn't completed. It should have spent a few more months in development. I don't even care that the graphics aren't the best I've seen, I was just hoping for a game that actually worked and was finished, and had all the ideas FULLY implemented into them that were talked about while it was in development; a game that put me into the walking dead world and was tense. I just hate to have to give a game such a low score, but the fact that it was released like this with a $50 price tag ticks me off, and I want everyone to know that they should avoid buying this game like the plague. I seriously doubt they can fix (finish) this game by releasing a series of patches. It's just awful. The one point I do give it is for the fact that they put in RPG elements and the ability to lean to look around corners as well as a few other little things. But these little things that might surprise you and make you say, "hey, that is cool!" are just overshadowed by the gut wrenching fact that they are inside of a big steaming pile of over-priced pooh. Expand
  23. Mar 21, 2013
    To start off this game is terrible not worth the $50 price tag at all more like $15. Because it was published by activision the game was rushed out and it's a mess. The controls are clunky and the missions suck. Last, but doesn't matter that much, the graphics look like they came from 2003. Don't buy this game even if you are a die hard TWD fan like me, take your $50 and buy season 3 when it comes out on dvd/blu ray. Expand
  24. Mar 23, 2013
    i don't understand how people are giving 9/10 to this game, i wonder if they are payed or just dunno are still playing games released 15 years ago and they are like wow this is a video game and at 40$+ you would expect AAA quality or refund, this worse than War Z and this is not a compliment.
  25. Apr 1, 2013
    This game is... borderline broken... I don't wanna do a review... just don't buy it... please. The only good thing in this is the Voice Acting of some characters. Awful AWFUL AWFUL game.
  26. Mar 22, 2013
    I was expecting a game like a TWD in First Person, but i need to admit I was expecting more than a repetitive merry go around of facts and mechanics and a butt-ending that blows me off...
    taking out the fact of (poor) interacting with other survivors, scavenge of new items for continue adventure with new cars, weapons and more, the game include lack of graphics and Gameplay, that makes
    the game boring and repetitive...
    The history isn't that bad, but isn't good though, resuming: only a REAL fan (like me!) will TOLERATE a ONE time gameplay (you finish the game, and you put on your game stash and never touch him again...)
    Other positive point is the GREAT voice os Norman Reedus and Michael Rooker, they were good in the series, they were good in the game too...
    Well, if you aren't a REAL BIG FAN of TWD, i think you should prefer to play Left 4 Dead, or No More Room In Hell, even The War Z (just kidding, haha)
  27. Mar 21, 2013
    I have to change my initial review because this game is BROKEN,and that's sad because it could have been so much fun The first 2 hours are fine and they shows a promise it will get better and better but it actually it's getting way worst.Zombie AI is unacceptable in stealth based gameplay i get spotted in so random situations i were scratching my head how has that happened.Location design is ok,it kept me wondering what's going to be around the corner (at least before it become schematic),however you CAN'T SAVE during a missions and some of them can be very long especially if you try to play stealthy.TW:SI got a great atmosphere and it would be a surprisingly fun even with 6 years dated graphic,but it's totally broken game because of horrible zombie AI,sometimes weird quest design (zombies jumping on you from nowhere after for example you pick up a key),and invisible walls (keeping you away from strategic decisions sometimes).I want to play a game like this but a one that actually works.Avoid at any cost. Expand
  28. Mar 19, 2013
    Registered to say that...THIS IS BEST GAME EVER 10/10 GO-TY OF ALL YEARS, deep compeling story, character development, amazing series just got better.
  29. Apr 23, 2013
    This game... I have been so excited about it and thought it would be awesome! But it all let me down... This game became a piece of The graphics are on really not that bad but still its so crappy! You will ALWAYS find freaking zombies ignoring you and just hitting the wall or breaking a door even if you are just by them! I would have gave this game atleast a 1 out of 10 if it had CO-OP but no! They said they actually wanted to focus on the STORY! Does this look like a good story for you?! The ending is way worse than the ending of Mass Effect 3! The voice acting is really bad and when you send out a survivor for scavenging for some stuff for you he or she will ALWAYS come back with with a tiny little bit of health! Also they will NEVER EVER get valuable stuff! About of 4 survivors you sent will get you about 2 or 1 piece of gas, food, ammo and weapons! They didn't even try to get the stuff you wanted! And while you fight zombies out there you can have them stay in the car just doing NOTHING! Not even helping you! As a huge fan of the show and the Tell Tale Games' Walking Dead this is a HUGE piece of bull****! This deserves a very bad and stupid 0 OUT OF 10!! I can't give it a higher rating because of all this crap the game has to offer! Everyone who gives this game a rating over 7 is a dumb idiot who doesn't know what TRUE games are! Anyway thanks for thinking that this review is helpful so it can make idiots who love this game BELIEVE that it sucks! Expand
  30. May 21, 2013
    Oh, man.... I'm so glad I pirate games before buying them right now. I've been hearing good things about "that Walking Dead game" from co-workers for a while, so I gave it a go. I was coming here to see why on Earth they recommended that to me. (Oops!)

    I was told of character depth and exploration, as well as meaning in choices not presented in a binary format. For this game, it's quite
    the opposite. Characters are just "there." I guess you are expected to have seen the early part of this series, which I did not (wish I had, because I hear it was even better toward the beginning). There aren't really any meaningful choices in the game which isn't objectively bad, but it doesn't have any character development, either.

    There aren't many weapons, but there's not an unreasonably limited amount of weapons, which I think would actually be good if the weapons were very different. Unfortunately, a machete pretty much functions the same as a hammer or a sledgehammer, and enemies are all the same, so the weapons' differences (within their own classes [melee, handgun, rifle]) are mostly skin-deep. Melee combat is pretty boring, and I have no idea why auto-aim would be default-enabled on the PC, but melee and ranged combat is fairly well-balanced (that is, the increased power of ranged weapons is often outweighed by the disadvantage of grabbing nearby walkers' attention).

    There's a "companion" kind of system in the game, but nobody ever fights alongside you in-game. There's not really any point to it. Survivors generally require more supplies to heal than they're able to scavenge (none of which I ever ran out of), there's no special reward, and there's no reason at all for them to be in the game, really.

    Levels are pretty small, and shockingly enough, repeated over and over in scavenge situations. The devs at least made item and enemy placement in SameLevel semi-random. Praise Jesus for the man who implemented that... I would've quit the game early on if I had to go through the exact same scavenge missions.

    The game devs decided to limit inventory, both in how much you can store on-person, and how much you can store in your car. By doing this, they've effectively limited how many weapons you'll ever use. Find a favorite weapon in each class (I brought the early bolt-action rifle and machete to the end), dump the rest.

    The game does a good job at getting a few cheap scares in. It's no survival horror, though. There were maybe four or five times it managed to catch me off-guard, and the first few levels gave me the sense of dread. They give you more powerful weapons as you progress and same-strength enemies, so combat ends up very uneven, totally ruining the atmosphere they appeared to be going for. That said, you can just go through the game with a first-level melee weapon without much trouble. I somehow managed to get the game to run at 2x speed (did this when I enabled "windowed" mode) on the last three levels and didn't have any problems getting through. It actually made the game feel much more intense.

    The game is indeed about 5 hours long. There's replay value in that you're forced to choose between "story" levels, so you can go back and do the other ones (not that you'd want to). -But really, it's probably the shortest non-indie game I've ever played. With a pretty mediocre graphics engine (or poorly utilized one, perhaps), it's shocking that this game takes up >8gB of storage. I'm not at all sure how they managed that.

    It's a forgettable, unpolished game with little depth. I'm giving it 3/10, but the game was running at 2x speed through the end level, so all I remember was shooting a bunch of super-fast zombies in the face with a machine gun, which was a pretty decent ending for me!

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 13 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 13
  2. Negative: 12 out of 13
  1. Jul 10, 2013
    After the excellence of Telltale’s The Walking Dead, it’s clear that Survival Instinct is the weaker of this species.
  2. 38
    What’s frustrating is that Terminal Reality, whether you believe it or not, had laid the foundations for an extraordinary game. WD:SI includes all the activities that a decent zombie survival game should have. [May 2013]
  3. May 13, 2013
    None of its elements is done well enough. The combat system is primitive and slapdash, there’s practically just one enemy type with several skins and the level design based on simple greyish blocks is trivial. [CD-Action 06/2013, p.68]