Bulletstorm and MadWorld: A match made in Hell

Chas_profile
Tuesday, February 01, 2011

I know this guy who I swear is the crudest, most obnoxious person on the planet. While I wouldn't call him a friend, I'm always interested to hear what he'll say when he first arrives (uninvited) to a gathering if just for the sheer shock value. Of course, the novelty always wears thin in just a few minutes. So, when Bulletstorm hero Grayson Hunt calls me "dicktits" while introducing the game's demo, I get the feeling the final product will get old fast no matter how much fun this small taste will be.

Bulletstorm

It doesn't help that his detailed description of how to stylishly murder people for points reminds me of MadWorld, another testosterone-fueled bloodbath that quickly loses its violent appeal.

 

The two games share a lot in common. Both treat enemies as fodder. They don't present a threat to the player as much as they offer a challenge. Each blundering baddie exists for you to destroy in glorious fashion. Each game claims to reward creativity when it comes to killing, but their respective developers seem to misunderstand the meaning of the word.

In MadWorld, players earn more points for causing as much pain as possible prior to executing foes. You can easily cut your way through thugs with protagonist Jack's wrist-mounted chainsaw, but you'll win way more points if you wrap an enemy in a tire, skewer his skull with a road sign, sever his limbs in a meat grinder, then ram him repeatedly into a bed of spikes.

Likewise, players can easily shoot down mutants in Bulletstorm with one of the game's varied implements of destruction, but it also features more rewarding ways to slay baddies. Most begin with the leash, a chain of energy that violently drags enemies toward you. When they're close enough, a powerful kick boots them into bullet time so you can perform a gruesome coup de grâce at your leisure. Blow off their heads, shove them into a patch of exposed rebar, render them into a pile of bone with an energy blast, turn them into fireworks.... You'll find plenty of effective finishing moves in no time.

The variety of ways to kill enemies in MadWorld and Bulletstorm sound endless, but you'll quickly notice they're anything but creative (at least not on your part). You're not inventing new methods of murder, just reenacting kills the developers intended for you to perform. MadWorld at least partially disguises this fact by presenting its levels as playgrounds for you to maim and kill in as you please. Instead of progressing from point A to B, you roam around an open area finding new death machines to play with.

Bulletstorm, however, seems to follow the typical first-person shooter corridor approach to levels. You'll encounter strategically placed enemies waiting for you in each chamber. You can kill them all in a variety of ways, but you have to work with what the developers give you moment to moment.

Both level types have their advantages, but when you get tired of delivering extravagant death, you'll probably find yourself performing the same moves over and over. MadWorld's chainsaw and Bulletstorm's efficient Bullet-Kick make it all too easy to mindlessly slaughter incompetent enemies when you grow bored, undermining the point of both games.

I can't say whether or not Bulletstorm will surpass MadWorld based solely on a short demo that only features an exceprt of the game's time-trial Echo mode, but I'll probably never give myself the chance to find out for sure with the retail version. MadWorld's short campaign and quickly fading novelty left me with buyer's remorse. Downloadable content (like new kills, weapons, levels, etc.) and competitive leader boards could keep the shock value alive, but over-the-top violence can only make me smile for so long.

 
Problem? Report this post
CHAS GUIDRY'S SPONSOR
Comments (6)
167586_10100384558299005_12462218_61862628_780210_n
February 01, 2011
Yeah but...dude...gears 3 MP beta. That being said, I agree wholeheartedly and will be trading this in as soon as the beta is over.
Dcswirlonly_bigger
February 01, 2011
I for one won't be so quick to be pessimistic of Bulletstorm: 1) We just saw one level. From what I saw, the big points are in the level design gimmicks like spikes, pits, and the sideways elevator. If later levels can keep thinking up more and better gimmicks and give you an increasing variety of weapons (this developer's last game, Painkiller, had a gun that shot shurikens and lightning), I think Bulletstorm could become a very fun arcade take on the FPS. 2) I actually liked MadWorld. A lot. I found each new level to actually bring a lot of new fun into the formula. I appreciated how tight the controls were and I really enjoyed experimenting with the new gimmics presented in each level. I hope Bulletstorm ends up having that kind of creativity. Even if you didn't like the actual game you have to admit that he commentary in MadWorld, for all its coarseness, was actually funny.
Me_and_luke
February 01, 2011

100% agree.  I knew coming out of the demo that I really didn't need to play much more, even if it was rather fun (and damn pretty; Epic knows their engine).  I disappointingly burned out on MadWorld quickly, and I'm certain I'll do the same for this similar title.  Not even a beta for a game I'm highly anticipating can compel me to shell out $60 for this.

@Daniel: I love Greg Proops, and the commentary was indeed funny, but it can't carry the game.  It simply didn't click with me like it appeared to do with you.

Also, if all the levels are linear like this, then once you've seen each level's various environmental, point-grabbing hazards (like pulling down the roof in the middle of the demo level), they'll quickly lose their novelty when it inevitably happens the second time and every time there after that you play the level.

Chas_profile
February 01, 2011

Daniel: I actually loved MadWorld as well. My only real disappointment is that it took me only five hours to beat it, and that its core concept constantly requires new content to stay fun. I'd be all over a sequel if there ever was one.

Me04
February 02, 2011

I enjoyed MadWorld for what it is, but I got rid of it once I was done. It was an instantly forgettable game, and one I have no interest in playing ever again.

Since my experience with MadWorld, Bulletstorm is something I'm not even going to bother wasting my money on. I enjoy the odd shooter here and there, but I just can't shake the fact that Epic are targeting this game at the teenager/manchild market. Irrespective of the "creative" ways to kill, and I wholly agree with the point you're making here, Chas, I just found it immensely painful to play because of the stupid "jokes" being cracked all the time.

If the gameplay concept is good enough, I could potentially switch the language to something I don't understad, turn off subtitles and just enjoy the shooting, but sadly I too think it'll wear thin. The developers are banking on people enjoying the humour enough to carry them through a slightly above average shooting experience. No thanks.

I think if I'm going to get a "novelty" FPS this year, it has to be Duke Nukem Forever, despite my concerns about Gearbox potentially blocking community mods and creations in favour of paid DLC. Hopefully the fact that its humour derives from pop culture references and the fact that it's a satire -- as opposed to Bulletstorm's semi-serious dudebro humour -- will keep me interested.

Chas_profile
February 02, 2011

Chris: I'm actually not all that bothered by the language. I enjoyed MadWorld, afterall, and the commentary in that game was pretty damn stupid and raunchy throughout, but it definitely added to the theme. I'm not so sure how well it will work in Bulletstorm, though, because MadWorld at least tied its ridiculous gameplay to its story by making it revolve around a city-wide game of death. Is there going to be some sort of justification in Bulletstorm for why Grayson and his friends are stylishly killing a planet of mutants?

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.