‘Aliens: Colonial Marines’ is not good… but is it really that bad?

Aliens: Colonial Marines
Feb
18

‘Aliens: Colonial Marines’ is not good… but is it really that bad?

Aliens: Colonial Marines was seen by many as one of the most anticipated releases of early 2013. Following a long development cycle under the supervision of Borderlands developer Gearbox, hopes were high that the video game would be the one the Alien franchise always deserved. When I had the chance to play the game at PAX East 2012, I was extremely impressed by the atmosphere the game created, as well as the way the presentation remained loyal to the film franchise. In addition, the multiplayer was beyond enjoyable, giving me extremely high hopes as the release neared that this would be a first-person shooter that could finally break Halo 4‘s hold on me.

aliens colonial marines screenshot 1 610x334 Aliens: Colonial Marines is not good... but is it really that bad?

Early warning signs

Sadly, as embargoes on reviews lifted, it became clear that something wasn’t right. It soon became painfully obvious that this was not the game that the legions of Alien fans had been hoping for. Reviewers took to Twitter to warn players to not only steer clear of the game, but to poke fun at what seemed to be, based purely off tweets, one of the worst games of this generation.

Since I was so impressed by the unfinished version of the game shown at last year’s PAX East, I had to see for myself where it went so horribly wrong. Not wanting to spend the full $60 on a game that has been so critically panned, I opted for renting a copy from a local Redbox. Upon starting up the game, I felt the severe weight of the pessimism I had experienced in the reviews and on Twitter. I navigated through the menus to start the solo campaign, and once the action began about 20 minutes in, I had a revelation: I wasn’t hating my time with the game.

Don’t get me wrong, this is not the game I witnessed in action at PAX East 2012. As VideoGamer.com so brilliantly examined, the 2012 demo shown to the press and attendees of PAX East 2012 was far superior to that of the finished product. The lighting, the textures and the animation were all beautiful on the next-gen-looking demo shown by Gearbox, but as VideoGamer.com notes, there are times when the finished game actually manages to look like an HD re-release of a title from a previous generation. Add to that the screen-tearing and the overall lack of polish (AI running through supposedly solid walls, enemy weapons pointing through walls to fire, characters’ legs being ankle deep in the ground as they walk, etc.) and Aliens: Colonial Marines can be described as nothing more than an absolute mess compared to the demo.

aliens colonial marines screenshot 5 610x343 Aliens: Colonial Marines is not good... but is it really that bad?

Letdowns beyond the lighting

While everyone has focused squarely on the presentational aspects of the game (understandably, seeing as how many are likening the graphically beautiful demo to false advertising), the disappointment goes deeper than simply the graphics. The very first thing I noticed outside of the game’s presentation was something that set it apart from the films in the Aliens franchise: the Aliens have absolutely no presence. When you’re watching the movies, you just know when an Alien is nearby. In Aliens: Colonial Marines, that feeling is nearly nonexistent  You can see the Aliens on the motion sensor, but you just don’t feel that one is near. This lack of tension takes away an undeniably key part of the films’ experience that should have translated into the game.

The title also suffers from an indecisiveness as to what it wants to be. The game wants to make the player believe they’re in for a survival horror experience, but it then disrupts any tension it attempts (and subsequently fails) to build by completely removing the Aliens from the picture for a decent chunk of the game. Instead, the player goes head-to-head with other humans. The reasoning behind this shift is poorly demonstrated, and it is in these moments where the game tries to copy the Call of Duty formula that Aliens: Colonial Marines is at its absolute worst.

Logically, the most formidable enemy should be the Aliens, but I found myself having a harder time with the human enemies. I struggled to figure out why this was, refusing to blame it on unbalanced difficulty tuning. I came to the conclusion that when you’re firing at the sporadically-moving Aliens, you aren’t able to directly compare the gunplay to that of games with superior shooting mechanics like Halo 4 or Black Ops 2. But once you start shooting at human targets, you’re able to make that comparison, and it becomes glaringly apparent that the gun mechanics are woefully unable to keep up with the industry leaders, making the your conditioned virtual gun skills useless in this title.

2430636 27592acm preview online 01 610x357 Aliens: Colonial Marines is not good... but is it really that bad?

While this may be in part thanks to poor shooting mechanics, it should be mentioned that the small selection of guns is also sorely lacking. In fact, every facet of the gameplay is woefully mediocre, leading to an experience that is frustrating and, to be blunt, inadequate. Aliens: Colonial Marines is a barely competent shooter with the luxury of having the iconic Aliens as the main enemy. Throw that concept out the window, and the player is left with a generic shooter that excels in no area but falls short in many.

The campaign as a whole falls short due to the unimaginative and unvaried levels, which are all grounded by a linear “Point A to Point B” mission structure. The monotony of this structure has brought down the experience of far better games, so when combined with the gameplay of Aliens: Colonial Marines, it’s nearly a death sentence. Sadly, the AI is even worse than the level design, as human enemies favor standing out in the open over taking cover, and Alien enemies tend to sprint right past human enemies and straight for the player. There’s no logical reason for these things to happen, but the AI in Aliens: Colonial Marines isn’t based on logic as you and I know it.

Aliens: Colonial Marines – Unable to deliver on promises

Despite all of these problems, I didn’t despise this game. It’s a frustrating experience overall, but nothing about the gameplay is downright terrible. In fact, there were times where I actually found myself thoroughly enjoying the game. Sure, those moments were typically isolated, but when you’re blasting your way through wave after wave of Aliens, it’s hard to not have at least an okay time. And, even with the single player campaign being as below average as it is, the multiplayer does redeem it significantly (though it’s still not as good as it could have been). There are plenty of worse games released in the last 12 months, let alone this generation.

In fact, the worst thing about this game is the level of disappointment I felt in the final product following my experience of the game at PAX East 2012. Had Gearbox not shown the stunning preview with the different lighting engine and better cinematics, perhaps the final product of Aliens: Colonial Marines would have been more well-received. Instead, it seems as though Gearbox succumbed to the hype monster and ended up promising things it couldn’t deliver. Instead of the atmospheric masterpiece the demo had us believing we were receiving, gamers got Aliens: Colonial Marines.

About Brian Shea

Brian Shea is VGW's Editor-in-Chief and one of the founding members of the site. In addition to leading the team at VideoGameWriters.com, he contributes such regular features as “Shea’s Say,” "Eleven Things," "Commercials from the Past" and “Essential Gaming." Follow Brian on Twitter

4 Comments

  • Jared
    Feb 18, 2013 @ 7:51 am

    I’d have to agree.
    Since I’m in school and can’t really keep up with game announcements and such I wasn’t able to get my hopes up as I knew hardly anything on the game other than it has taken a long time to release.
    I own it and thought the campaign was decent. Definitely NOT the best game, but also not as bad as most reviews made it seem. I have the PS3 version and so far I’ve only encountered one glitch. As far as the textures go, it looks like a really good Xbox game. It’s almost as if they were originally releasing it for Xbox so the textures were lower quality and then they went through and tried to replace as many of them as possible before release. Some are low and some are high quality. I could be wrong about the release, but that’s just my thoughts.
    The mulitplayer is really interesting. I feel they did a much better job at that than the campaign. Textures and all.
    Overall, it’s at least a little bit better than what the reviews say.

    Reply
  • Feb 18, 2013 @ 9:24 am

    I agree with you a ton here, although the game was full of let downs, it really isn’t terrible. Yeah Gearbox is really sucking too lately (Duke Nukem Forever ouchhh) but I find the internets really tears games up just because they aren’t 100% epic. I believe this could be the beginning of the end for commercial gaming and we will see tons more mods and user generated content being created for the bigger solid engines.

    Reply
    • Jacob
      Feb 18, 2013 @ 17:34 pm

      You can’t really hold Gearbox to blame for all the shortcomings of DNF. Their part in it was less bad than the remainder but it changed hands so much throughout the better part of a decade that it was next to impossible for it to be what anyone was hoping it would.

      Reply
  • Ouch!
    Feb 18, 2013 @ 14:46 pm

    Oh my goodness, I thought I was the only one feeling like this about it! Totally agree with you and the 2 commenters above me!

    Reply

Leave a comment