Looks like I'll wait for an update before I get this game. From the sounds of things, it seems as though this is an unfinished product.
I was pumped to get this game, but with the reviews on this thread. I will also wait for an update before purchasing.
And someone saying this game is playable is more than likely getting a commission from the devs, and most definitely lacks credibility.
If your theory is that people have spent years on TouchArcade, writing thousands of postings, just to prepare for that one day when they could cash in their reputation for 99 cents, I think you lack plausibility. Again, as you must know, the fact that you had an experience with a game doesn't mean that other people must have had the same experience. But why am I arguing with a new account with 4 posts apparently created to argue about this? I should know better.
Someone here is not who they seem? You gentlemen (?) have been playing too many conspiracy laden games like War of the Zombie. Speaking of War of the Zombie, it's epic scope, busy real time strategy levels, and ambitious design make up for some of the yet to be implemented features. You are free to disagree but the developers have confirmed here and elsewhere they are rapidly working on fixing reported bugs. This is what iOS gaming is about; indie developers unleashing ambitious projects that you pay coffee cup prices for and interacting with the community. Check out War of the Zombie if you haven't already, it's worth the price flawed as it is. Ok, back to infiltrating the iron gate Touch Arcade community...
Just so you know, it was on your hard sell that sold me to buy this. "Large amount of content" you said, I recall. In my humble opinion, it's this that holds indie developers back---sweeping concepts and scope that are only half delivered but asked full price for. At least half of the game is placeholder. I reference, of course, the land vehicles, the scientists, the research, the tactics, the "content" you spoke of. These aren't bugs but things flat out not implemented. If you want someone to support a half-made project, Kickstarters and the like is your target. But this is launched live. I don't care if you are indie or mainstream, you need to be on your game (ha!) when you ask me to buy. Sad day for indie developers everywhere. Overselling to your audience isn't cool and hurts the community.
I just hope they fix everything and finish what isn't because I really want to try again. Those who say its more than playable or just playable are lucky I guess or have very low standards. I love the concept of this game and can't wait until its finished
Well said and on point! There are some games that are new that I rate poorly while others I rate highly. The difference here in me rating this game as highly as I did despite the quirkiness and few bugs is that it is an ambitiously designed game that I can't find an equal to on he App Store, as it is part Plaque Inc, part Xcom, part Syndicate, and a few other games amalgamated together. I'll mark a game poorly if is a tried and true genre that tows the line before I knock one that is playable, refreshing and ambitious despite its flaws. Sock puppet accounts... Really...
Like undead cow stated, this is the nature of iOS gaming... The straight truth of it is that more often than not we as customers are paying beta testers. I don't mean that as a derogative or mean accusation, merely just as a reflection of the state of digital distribution development in general. I love the concept of this game, so much so that I have dubbed it the "real World War Z" because it feels much more like the book than the Phosphor released, movie inspired game. I can personally forgive the flaws, though I have not encountered nearly as many bugs as others have stated. Admittedly some I have, but that is the nature of ambitious design and I can forgive it just as I forgive the many bugs in a big budget game like Skyrim...
Well, no, it's not; the vast majority of games available on iOS are quite demonstrably not obviously half-finished works-in-progress, even the ones that have developers present and taking feedback. Now, these games might not necessarily be very good, but that's not the point being argued. Liking a flawed game is fine, but there's no need to invent reasons as to why it should be given a free pass.
Touch Arcade forum's Game Of the Week Poll - June 27, 2013 War of the Zombie was nominated as a candidate for Touch Arcade forum's Game of the Week. Final voting is occurring over the next 3 days here: http://forums.toucharcade.com/showthread.php?t=194573
Thank you, backtracking to all 10 threads to change it now. Yeah! Here's this week's GOTW link: http://forums.toucharcade.com/showthread.php?t=194573
I respect this point of view, and understand it. In my opinion War of the Zombie is a fun tactical real time strategy game with a good team management component, nothing more. There are substantial levels available through randomized in objectives and enemy composition. If War of the Zombie humbly sold itself as is, a random mission based real time strategy game with squad management, I would feel it is well worth $2.99. The app description doesn't indicated vehicle use and plainly states research ability is coming soon so I don't imagine those primarily compelled purchases. The developer (vdvgames, who has been largely silent) does mis-step in implementing dead end "options" to purchase vehicles or suggests research when those are not yet available. This seems to create the unfair perception that the game is "incomplete" even if launch features now are comparable to many iOS real time strategy games. I see the eventual addition of research and vehicles as bonuses not "missing," the foot soldier gameplay does not feel lacking in my opinion. I honestly recommend War of the Zombie to other players as is and regret if you've felt mislead. +1, I don't want to imply that I endorse incomplete games being sold... but in this case WoZ feels more complete than not to me. I can't think of many supporting examples for the perception that App Store is used for beta testing or crowd source alternatives, which seems like an over-exaggeration to me (WoZ was in beta testing for nearly three months, flawed as it is).
Hi guys/girls, firstly, our apologies for the bugs you have been finding in the game. While we have spent considerable time testing the game before releasing it bugs did get through. We have nearly completed the bug fix update based specifically on all player feedback and will be submitting this to Apple on tuesday July 2nd. Yes, War of the Zombie is very ambitious, but we are also just as passionate about developing games, even more so, a zombie game. We're working non-stop on all aspects of the game to make it better and as enjoyable to zombie fans as can be. In case i missed any info or replies you can find questions to most if not all your questions at our fan page facebook.com/warofthezombie
I'd respectfully disagree... Quite the contrary there are far fewer games that would be deemed finished or complete games released on the AppStore. The amount of functioning but incomplete games released on the AppStore far outweigh that of the converse. Perhaps you and I have very different concepts as to what beta means where as I get the impression that when you say beta, what you are implying is alpha. Keep in mind that a game that is beta is fully functional and can be missing content, features and modes that are planned to be added. By that very definition that describes the vast majority of games in their release state on the AppStore! I am neither here or there with my position on the subject, I merely am stating that that is the nature of the beast, for better or worse, making no condemnation or condonation of it. Growing up in the dawn of videogames of the 70's and seeing how it has progressed to the present, things have changed not only in the distribution but the development and consequent release state that we have grown accustomed to it. To be candid, I don't remeber waiting for the Materia feature to be added in Final Fantasy 7, waiting for the hacker class to be added to System Shock in a patch, etc. conversely I've bought Angry Birds Star Wars with a portion of the Star Wars content with the rest of the stages "coming soon!". In the defense of iOS gaming though, the price point leaves little to complain about. But I can safely say that of the several thousand apps I own, most of them have been works in progress, missing features, content and more before either becoming complete visions of what the designers claimed they would be, or never seeing that vision to fruition. That's what my previous comment was trying to convey. Again, I am not knocking any games or using this as a defense. I clearly stated in my other post that I supported this game because of its ambitious design despite its flaws because it is a unique game but apparently that post was overlooked for my last one which garnered attention. I am not attempting to construct an argument to give this particular game a free pass... Quite frankly the assumption is insulting. I understand you disagree with my opinion, so I hope that at the very least I have clarified why I believe it.
Ehm, no. Formally released games that are simply open to expansion or updates aren't considered "beta" at all by any commonly-accepted definition; a game like Angry Birds for which the core mechanics and features were refined and complete when it first came out, but which still gained new "level pack" extensions or such later on doesn't retroactively become "incomplete beta software" purely by virtue of those new levels existing. People like to use "beta" as a pejorative when complaining about the quality of a released game, but that doesn't actually make that game "beta" software. Elder Sign: Omens has had three expansions that have added new campaigns/characters/enemies/features since it was released, but it was also a complete, polished game when it first arrived. It's not "beta" because it has had these expansions, neither is the difference between "beta" and "complete" related to whether or not it had an "Expansions coming soon!" sign in the app. I think you'd be better served by providing a number of examples of popular games you consider to be unfinished "beta" software, because in the words of the great Inigo Montoya:
Not to beat a dead cow (ha ha! I keel myself!), and normally I can respect dissenting opinion, but look: I don't know how you can say "substantial" levels. In an hour of play, I found that: There are TWO maps. There are TWO types of enemies (which only one shows up during one type of objective). There are TWO types of objectives: hunt for objects, and hunt for people (which are so ridiculously similar). The mission planning is far from robust and is tearfully straightforward: Go here. Launch mission. Get stuff. End Turn. And you have yet to mention there is only one background music piece through the entire app. And it gets real old, quick. You can like a concept. You can say the developer is a real swell guy or gal. You can disagree with everyone. And that's coolsies. But saying this is substantial is what drives me nuts. This, surprisingly, implies SUBSTANCE. Of which a concept will, inherently, have none. This game is largely a concept (a nice one, I agree!) with nothing but a framework of a game and a large padding of promises behind it. And it's being sold at full price as a full game. Cool concept, sure. That's more than fair. Substantial? By definition, absolutely not. Misuse of definitions will hurt your credibility, and by proxy, the credibility of the developers. In all fairness and respect, please stop that.
