Lots of fun, but it's kind of hard to identify the powerups as they're falling, which is very frustrating since one bad powerup can ruin your whole level. Maybe they could be colour-coded, like green for good and red for bad or something?
The first time I played this game, I took one look at the amount of story and thought "tl;dr. It's a 2D shooter for gosh sakes. Can't you just say we need to save the galaxy or something?" and quit before playing a single level. But I just gave it another try from the beginning, and I gotta say that both the gameplay and story are ridiculously awesome in this game. Totally addicted. I am now a believer in this type of game. If you make a sequel, I might even pay you a small sum. 5/5
I think this game is automatically better than the first simply because it's zombies instead of bugs. I liked Insectonator, but found it hard to play just because of the gross-out factor. You might be thinking "What, so massive blood and guts is just dandy, but somehow smashed bugs are gross?", and you'd be right. It doesn't make any sense. But that's the way it is.
Not a bad game at all, but why mouse control? Wouldn't arrow keys be better for a game like this? When you need to dodge stuff or grab a far away mineral (especially near the edge of the screen), it would be nice to be able to move as fast as the upgrade level will allow without having to worry about losing control when the cursor slips outside the box.
@pyromanta I guess I'll just get rated down like you did, but I wanted to say I totally agree. Short, bland game + tacked-on wannabe-profound arty BS = total masterpiece? Guh. I guess it's not nice for us to take a dump all over the parade of people who think it's great, but jeez... let's all show some respect for the true art form video games have always been. Fun first, story optional. These games do need their own category... so I can avoid them.
It's great to see a sequel with new features, but I can think of a couple of reasons why the first is still way better:
1) Enemy units are now invincible when outside of cells? What's up with that? I guess it's an attempt to reduce the effectiveness of the "cloud of 1s everywhere, all the time" strategy, but it still seems weird to change something so basic about the original game.
2) Both games can get laggy as hell (especially when using the strategy mentioned above), but at least in the first game the level ended as soon as the last enemy unit was killed. In this one, you have to wait until most of your units have reached their destination. I just finished level 7, and had to wait 5 minutes between when I beat the level and when it actually ended.
The only real problem is that the game only rewards you for gold and trolleys arrived, so that encourages the player to just creep veeery slowly and cautiously along the landscape... which isn't much fun. It would be awesome if there was a time bonus as well, which would force the player to balance speed with not losing stuff, which I think would be way funner. Still fun as it is, though. 4/5
Great game, though it seems like it should be called "Playing the Field" or "Commitment-Phobic" or something. If it's supposed to be Love, shouldn't the goal be to figure out which square gives the most happiness, and then crash into it on purpose, not knowing whether it would give a huge bonus or a game over? I guess that wouldn't be as interesting to play, though. The important thing is, it's a fun game. 4/5
The cash total should be displayed onscreen during play so that you can see at a glance when you have enough to buy something, rather than having to just pause and check every so often. Also, it would be nice if the pause key was spacebar or something instead of P. It's hard to dodge stuff while looking down at the keyboard to find it. Still fun though. 3/5