We probably all have the one game or two that we like despite its flaws. Even though it might be a little rough around the edges we can see the potential there and still appreciate it despite of these rough edges.
Yet there is a part of you that thinks; if this game could just get a sequel they could take it from being an okay to good game with flaws to a great or maybe even amazing game.
I was recently replaying CounterSpy and while this game by no means is a masterpiece, I do enjoy it. It's a simple little stealth game with great style. But it just have a few things holding it back from going from an okay to a great little stealth game.
The game's biggest flaw is a lack of information. The game simply doesn't provide the player with enough information before you enter a new room. CounterSpy consists of randomly generated levels and each level has multiple rooms you need to go through. The rooms consists of a set number of layouts that the game randomly chooses between so no two play throughs are similar. In theory at least. This is another criticism I will come back to later.
A good stealth game provides the player with enough information so the player knows how they could potentially stealth their way through an area. You can make your plan in your head and try to execute it. You may not succeed of course. But if you do in fact succeed it's incredibly rewarding. As long as the rules of the game world are set up nice and clear and the game is good at giving you the necessary information.
What I try to say is this; if you do fail it should because you made a mistake as a player and you know why it didn't work. But if the plan fails because the game didn't provide you with enough information for you to pull of your plan... well then it's the game or in other words the developers that failed. The last example is frustrating instead of fun.
Since CounterSpy is a 2.5D side-scrolling game you can't really see that far ahead. If it was a 3D game you could easily see what awaits you further ahead in a room/area and plan your approach accordingly. Unfortunately there are often times where you enter a room in CounterSpy and before you can even reach the first cover point in that room you have been discovered by an enemy off screen. This then leads to a cover based shootout until the room is cleared. The shooting is not the game's strong suit.
This is a minor nuisance that sadly drags the experience down. It could easily be avoided if the game was better a providing me information about enemies ahead. Something the developers could easily fix if they made a sequel.
Second criticism is that there are not enough room layouts. The layouts very quickly begin to repeat and properly halfway through your first play through of the game you will know all the potential layouts the game has to offer. This is something that could also easily be fixed with a sequel. The game simply needs way more room layouts.
Too many of the levels, if not all of them, end in the same type of big open room with lots of guards that you simply need to shoot your way through. This is simply not fun. One because CounterSpy is not a great shooter and you die real quick. Two because it's too predictable. What's the point of having randomly generated levels if they all end the same way?
So these are some of the frustrations I have with CounterSpy. Yet I still appreciate and enjoy the game from time to time. Because it does feel fun when you successfully clear a room and find all the secret documents in that area. I just wish the game got a sequel that was better at providing the player with the necessary information and more varied in terms of level layouts.
I really didn't expect to write this much about CounterSpy.
TLDR; What flawed game, which you like, would most benefit from a sequel?
Log in to comment