Developer(s): Coffee Stain Studios
Publisher(s): Coffee Stain Studios
Platform(s): PC, Xbox 360,
PS3
Review Platform: Xbox 360
Release Date: May 15, 2013
The tower defense genre has grown more
popular over the last several years, as digital distribution platforms like
Steam and Xbox Live Arcade have made it easier for development studios to get
their games out there. But, somewhere
along the way, the sense of tedium grew as the market was inundated with tower
defense titles that did little to innovate within the genre. Last week saw the
release of two games that provide something a little different and mix up the
traditional tower defense formula. One of those games was Sanctum 2. As a first-person shooter/tower defense hybrid, it
immediately presents itself as an interesting prospect.
Sanctum 2 is a game that some may struggle to come to
terms with. It doesn’t fit comfortably into the preexisting molds from which it
was cast. But, the resulting mélange is an exciting new toy. Half tower defense
and half first-person shooter, Sanctum 2 takes
a while to get used to. It mixes the two aspects of each genre nicely, but not
necessarily in a way that presents itself as immediately comprehensible for the
player. But more on that later.
In Sanctum
2 aliens are attacking various outposts that contain oxygen-producing cores. Your job is to fend off the
advancing waves of enemies, all the while building a labyrinth of walls and
turrets for the aliens to stroll through on their way to the core. You choose
from one of four distinct classes, each with their own weapon and a
character-specific trait. For instance, the standard assault class is given a
trait that causes bullets to gain more damage with each successful hit on an
enemy target; and the anti-air class uses ammo that sets enemies on fire, doing
damage over time. Each class feels distinctive enough from the other. A
universal leveling system gives players the chance to choose from various
secondary weapons, perks, and unlocks numerous towers as you level up.
At the beginning of the match, the map you
are playing on is void of any structures whatsoever. At the start of each
successive wave, a resource and barrel pickup drops on the map. Resources allow
players to purchase towers to attach to barrels. Barrels are what players place
on the map to create a system of walls that act as a maze, funneling the
enemies in as many directions as possible so that they take as much time as
they possibly can in getting to the core. Each barrel pickup only drops a set
number of barrels and resources, so the building of the maze system is
incremental and happens as you complete each successive wave. Throughout the course
of a match it is essential to engage in some resource management.
Sanctum 2 is designed to be played as a cooperative
experience. Up to 4 players can take to the various maps created for Sanctum 2. There is a story mode—which
can be played privately or in public lobbies—that has players completing maps
to unlock comic-style storyboards explaining why it is that aliens are trying
to destroy the cores. But, the story backdrop ultimately proves to be
unnecessary. You don’t have to justify a tower defense hybrid with a storyline.
That’s kind of one of the nice things about making games in the genre. You can
also engage in a survival mode that can be played in private lobbies with
friends, by yourself, or in public matches.
Ultimately, the cooperative experience
requires a lot from the player. Playing Sanctum
2 in public lobbies is one of the most exhaustive multiplayer experiences
I’ve had in a while. Allow me to explain: Tower defense games, by their very
nature, have a strategic element. The strategic element in Sanctum 2 is experienced in the placing of barrels and towers in
such a way as to make the enemy much less efficient in accomplishing its goals.
Add to that certain enemy types with certain weaknesses and specialized towers
that do everything from slow enemies within a certain radius of the tower, to
towers that only affect ground forces without armor, and you’ve got the makings
of a solid tower defense experience. But, an experience that begins to fall
apart when the cooperative aspect of the game is introduced.
The game has a terrible tutorial that
explains next to nothing about how things work in Sanctum 2. This creates a situation where players are having to
experiment on their own to find out what the rules are. It creates an uninformed player-base creating problems
when playing in public lobbies. People clearly didn’t understand several key
aspects of the game, because the tutorial failed to introduce certain pillars
in the mechanics of the game. The frustration is compounded by the decision to
make resource and barrel pickups shared among players. I can’t tell you how
many times people just stopped playing near the end of the wave so that they
could be waiting in the spot where the pickups drop at the beginning of the
next wave. Once a player picks up the resources and barrels they’re gone for
good, no longer available for anyone else to pick up.
The developer tried to design around this by
making any tower or barrel already placed on the map reclaimable by anyone. For
instance, I dropped in to a public match with only one other person in it. He
and I were playing on-mic and talking to each other to develop a strategy for
barrel and tower placement. Everything was going along fine, until halfway
through the match when someone else dropped in. He didn’t like the way we had
our barrels positioned and so he went around reclaiming barrels from certain
parts of the maze structure, leaving huge, gaping holes where there weren’t
towers to defend. He then went around the map reclaiming the towers we had
placed so that he could get himself some resources. Once he had the resources
he wanted, he placed low-level towers at points in the maze structure that
didn’t need additional tower structures. If it sounds like a troller’s
paradise, it’s because it is. I can’t tell you how many times I played in
public matches where someone dropped in halfway through a match and went on a
reclaiming-spree that ultimately led to our losing the match.
The cooperative experience is designed in
such a way that it requires you to play with people you know, people you get
along with and people that you trust. As it stands currently, the public-lobby
cooperative experience is a troll-fest, a frustrating experience full of
players sabotaging those who they don’t agree with and backstabbing their
teammates if things don’t go the way they want them to.
| Final Score | “Unique, But With Problems” | 7.0 |
| Graphics |
Sanctum 2 is stuck somewhere between the last generation and the current generation. It doesn’t look horrible, but it ain’t pretty either. The muzzle flash on guns is a joke, and the way aliens dismember when you blow them up looks like something from the PS1 days. Visually, the game is uninspiring. Aside from the use of some interesting colors, it has little going for it.
|
6.0 |
| Gameplay |
The gameplay is exciting and unique and deserves to be experienced. But, without a group of friends to play with, it can sour really fast. Some of the cooperative design choices lead to player behavior that can be frustrating at best.
|
7.0 |
| Value |
Here’s the deal. Sanctum 2 really is a blast to play, especially for a $15 title. It gives you the opportunity to have a good deal of fun, and chances are you have a friends who you can bring along for the ride anyway.
|
8.0 |
| Sound |
Nothing notable to say here. The music is interesting, but in a campy, genre-specific way. Gun sounds and alien noises ultimately prove dull and generic.
|
6.0 |
Review by Jon Hamlin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Hamlin is a freelance game journalist living in the San Francisco Bay Area. He plays too much Mass Effect 3 multiplayer and enjoys a good glass of wine. Occasionally, he can be found commanding his legion of doom on Xbox Live as GeniusPantsPhD. Follow him on Twitter @WordsmithJon, or email him at jonshamlin@gmail.com All Articles by Jon.
