How to Survive 2

About

In How to Survive 2, players must navigate through a world overrun by a pandemic, several years after the events of the first game. With the infection now a global issue, survivors must do whatever it takes to endure while facing infected enemies. Returning players who own the previous games on Steam receive a special armor set called "Primal Fear," crafted from bones and scrap metal for improved protection.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Local Multi-Player Play with friends in the same physical space using split-screen or multiple screens
2-Players Play with one other player, either online or locally, in a cooperative or competitive game mode
Multi-Player Compete or cooperate with other players online
Co-Op Team up with friends to complete levels or missions together
Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo
PvP Player versus Player - Fight against other players in real-time, often in arena-style combat
Split Screen Play with multiple players on the same screen, often with divided or shared screen real estate

66%

Audience ScoreBased on 3,844 reviews

story154 positive mentions

grinding300 negative mentions

Fun gameplay, especially in co-op mode with friends.
Improved crafting and base building mechanics compared to the first game.
Engaging zombie combat with a variety of enemy types.

Repetitive missions and grinding for resources can become tedious.
Lack of a pause function in single-player mode is frustrating.
Camera angles and inventory management are clunky and poorly designed.

story
1,742 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
9%
83%
8%
The story in "How to Survive 2" is largely considered weak and underdeveloped compared to its predecessor, with many players noting the absence of a cohesive narrative. The game primarily revolves around repetitive fetch quests and grinding for resources, lacking significant character development or engaging plotlines. While there are humorous elements and mini-stories from various NPCs, the overall experience feels more like a series of disconnected missions rather than a compelling story-driven adventure.
- “The story is really interesting and doesn’t get boring after a while.”
- “The voice on the radio gradually leads you through quests and tells you how and when to build up your camp.”
- “The concept of the story such as the how and the why you are where you are and such is actually interesting in the sense of to me its a new way to look at a apocalypse.”
- “The first 'How to Survive' game had a story; this game does not have any story and is more of a pay-to-win quest grinding game.”
- “Unlike the first game that had a story with side missions used to progress it, this game has nothing.”
- “The quests get really boring quite fast.”
gameplay
448 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
31%
56%
13%
The gameplay of "How to Survive 2" has received mixed reviews, with many players noting its repetitive nature and grindy mechanics, which can lead to boredom, especially in solo play. While the cooperative elements and crafting mechanics are appreciated, the overall experience is often described as lacking depth and innovation, with some players finding the combat and mission design uninspired. Despite these criticisms, the game offers enjoyable moments, particularly when played with friends, and features solid mechanics that can be fun in short bursts.
- “A well done game that has fun gameplay and is enjoyable with friends.”
- “The gameplay is high quality and the content is densely packed.”
- “Tons of fun, great local co-op mode, interesting missions, zombies, crafting, new weapons, etc. it's not the most polished game ever, but the gameplay is bordering incredible.”
- “The gameplay is extremely repetitive and in my 18 hours of playing I was bored most of it and only going through the motions hoping that the game would get more varied and better.”
- “Also sometimes they will hit you from far away, and other times your attacks will pass through them; tons of boring fetch missions where I had to get back to the other side of the map because 1 item out of 20 is missing; there are missing assets and I even found 1 invisible NPC and another one with missing dialogue; there's a useless 'picklock door' mechanic just to annoy you by making random doors open more slowly - doors which you can destroy with 2 or 3 melee attacks anyway; when I tried multiplayer, the game never saved and always crashed; this game has a useless day/night cycle where the only difference is a type of zombie that comes at night and it makes it really hard to see the game since it's so dark, and there's no real difference in gameplay.”
- “Repetitive mission maps, lots of annoying bugs, poor storyline, battle system gets boring fast, dull gameplay.”
grinding
306 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
1%
1%
98%
The grinding aspect of the game has received overwhelmingly negative feedback, with many players finding it excessively tedious and repetitive. While some appreciate the grind as a core element of survival gameplay, most reviews highlight that it quickly becomes monotonous, requiring players to repeatedly complete the same missions for resources and experience without a satisfying sense of progression. Overall, the lack of engaging content and the overwhelming focus on grinding detracts significantly from the game's enjoyment, especially in single-player mode.
- “If you aren't grinding quests for XP to level up, you're grinding quests for items to build better weapons and upgrade accessories, armory, and your traps, which are the only things worth leveling up.”
- “While it starts on a somewhat promising note, it very quickly devolves into this never-ending, soul-wrenchingly grindy slop.”
- “The grind of the game is so unsatisfying and tedious that you're better off trying to survive in the real world wilderness; heck, at least you get to take in the environment.”
- “I stopped having fun midway through the game when it turned out to be a funless infinite grind where even the achievements were 'make all of this, craft all of that' which would take days of grinding for each.”
graphics
284 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
38%
54%
8%
The graphics in the game receive mixed reviews, with some players praising the improvements over the first installment and noting decent visuals, while others criticize the lack of graphical options and repetitive environments. Many users express disappointment with the overall aesthetic, describing it as bland or outdated, and highlight issues such as graphical glitches and limited customization settings. Overall, while some find the graphics acceptable or even good, a significant number feel they fall short of expectations, particularly for a modern title.
- “Amazing graphics, well balanced story line.”
- “The graphics are very nice although the camera angles could use some tweaking so you could see more of the area.”
- “Loved the graphical improvement!”
- “Graphics: some areas are acceptable, but the majority of the buildings' insides look worse than Silent Hill's textures on PS1.”
- “There are also no graphic options, the camera cannot be rotated, you cannot pause the game or manually save, inventory is text-based and very plain, the environment always looks the same, you never pick up any cool gear or weapons, and your character always looks the same and never seems to improve in any noticeable way.”
- “The graphics are also a pretty huge letdown, feels archaic.”
stability
96 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
6%
94%
The game's stability is a significant concern, with numerous players reporting frequent bugs, glitches, and crashes that detract from the overall experience. While some users noted that the game runs smoothly at times, many highlighted issues such as glitched achievements, network problems, and frustrating gameplay mechanics. Overall, the game is described as "buggy" and "imperfect," making it a risky choice for those sensitive to technical issues.
- “Really nice game, runs great on Linux.”
- “I have not gotten stuck on a single thing once in all my playtime; I can't really help you there, this game is surprisingly bug free.”
- “While mostly bug free, the few I noticed were agonizing.”
- “I thought Bethesda games were buggy, but they are nothing compared to this excuse of a game.”
- “The game is awful and buggy with so many half-working mechanics.”
- “Actually, I could forgive such things and still force myself to enjoy the game even if the devs rather release paid DLCs instead of fixing/adjusting their issues, but when you sink tons of time on a mission map, clearing everything, scavenging stuff, and complete everything, and before going back to camp your game suddenly freezes and you have to shut it down through task manager or when servers go nuts and you lose connection and all progress and your spent time goes to waste?”
humor
86 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
98%
2%
The humor in the game is a mixed bag, with some players enjoying the return of Kovac's quirky personality and the absurdity of the zombie apocalypse, while others feel that the humor has diminished compared to the original. Many appreciate the cooperative play aspect, which enhances the comedic experience, but some criticize the attempts to inject humor as forced or lacking depth. Overall, the game retains some funny elements, but opinions vary on its effectiveness and consistency.
- “It is a fun, chilling and humorous grind.”
- “In addition, it combines the zombie apocalypse with humor and makes for a great mix.”
- “This game is funny and has so many zombie jokes and parodies of movies and books!”
- “Kovac is not funny”
- “Kovac is not funny”
music
42 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
29%
64%
7%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the soundtrack and sound effects while others criticize the repetitive nature and lack of variety, particularly noting the reuse of music from the first game. Although there are enjoyable holiday-themed zones with different music, they are considered too infrequent to alleviate the overall monotony. Additionally, some players pointed out issues with background music and copyright concerns related to sound effects.
- “Soundtrack is great and so are the sound effects.”
- “While I still have some personal irks with the game, this installment does stand above and beyond better than the first title in terms of graphics, gameplay, music, humor, and scope.”
- “Absorbing soundtrack.”
- “I found it to be rather lazy to utilize the same music from the first game; however, it was reassuring, albeit already knowing the encounter was getting spicy.”
- “The music gets repetitive.”
- “The music is the same as the first one, the enemies are the same, the sound effects are the same.”
replayability
36 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
44%
47%
8%
The game boasts significant replayability, with players highlighting thousands of hours of potential gameplay through repeatable quests, scalable missions, and engaging base-building mechanics. While some feel the overall experience can become linear after completion, the charm of crafting and the ability to replay missions keeps the game fresh and enjoyable, especially in multiplayer settings. Overall, it is regarded as a captivating addition to the zombie survival genre with ample replay value.
- “Tons of replayability and I'm excited at possible DLC.”
- “Awesome game, loads of replayability with the scalable repeatable missions, and building your own camp with traps and defenses.”
- “It offers great replayability value, and even though it's early access, it's very enjoyable to play.”
- “The game doesn't have much replay value for this reason.”
- “After you finish the game there is no replay value.”
- “- replayable missions and levels (unlike the first game)”
optimization
36 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
50%
17%
The game's optimization is a mixed bag, with some players reporting smooth performance and no crashes during extended play sessions, while others criticize it as poorly optimized, particularly in multiplayer scenarios where lag and visibility issues arise. Despite some minor latency problems and a few bugs, many users find the game enjoyable and well-optimized for both newer and older hardware, though there is a desire for more performance options. Overall, while some aspects of optimization are commendable, significant issues remain that could affect the experience for certain players.
- “The game plays out really smooth and is very well optimized - surprising for an early access game.”
- “Optimization is great, even on the second (old) machine we have, it works pretty fast on ultra shadows with 1920x1080; we had a problem to launch it at first, there was a black screen on our old laptop, but it appears to be an Nvidia Optimus bug; just force it to launch with the Nvidia card instead of the integrated one, and you'll be fine.”
- “Still, from what I've seen so far, this game is awesome - decent graphics, smooth controls, good optimization, fun gameplay, interesting and funny characters from the storyline, very well done cutscenes, perfect voice acting (well, for one character anyway).”
- “This game is horribly optimized.”
- “Poorly optimized game.”
- “Multiplayer is extremely glitchy; whenever I tried to play with more than 1 friend, the 3rd or 4th person could not see other players and would experience severe lag or stuttering. With only 2 people, it would run fine.”
atmosphere
22 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
55%
32%
14%
The atmosphere in "How to Survive 2" is a mixed bag; while many players appreciate the spooky, immersive setting—especially at night with effective weather effects and graphics—some find it bleak and lacking in engagement. The game's Louisiana backdrop is favored over the previous game's islands, enhancing the overall experience for those who enjoy atmospheric gameplay. However, criticisms highlight moments where the atmosphere feels dull or uninspired.
- “How to Survive 2 is a blast to play with a friend, especially at night for that extra spooky atmosphere.”
- “The graphics and gore are pretty good and plentiful, the weather effects and night and day are awesome and atmospheric.”
- “Night time is dark and atmospheric, leaving you partially dependent on your flashlight.”
- “It's got a rather bleak and boring atmosphere.”
- “Just make this, go there without any atmosphere.”
- “The game with its mechanics and atmosphere is somewhat similar to 'Project Zomboid', but here it is not a completely open world, but divided into locations.”
monetization
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The monetization strategy of the game has been criticized as a blatant cash grab, with users expressing frustration over excessive advertising and a lack of genuine online multiplayer experience. Many reviewers recommend avoiding the developers due to their focus on profit over player experience.
- “Clearly a cash grab by the devs. Stay away.”
- “I recommend to stay away from these developers simply because of their cash grab system.”
- “The base layout ads strategy.”
emotional
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game fails to evoke emotional engagement, as players find the characters unlikable and lacking depth, leading to a lack of attachment. Repetitive missions contribute to frustration rather than emotional investment, and the absence of a compelling narrative further diminishes the overall emotional experience.
- “You will also play 1/4 - 1/3 of the missions over and over until you want to cry, just to get enough junk to upgrade your armory in hopes of getting a weapon upgrade to stem the ever-growing pain of the zombies that level better than you do.”
- “This game doesn't offer you a deep and emotional story.”
character development
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
50%
Character development in the game is criticized for being minimal, with reviewers noting a lack of story arcs and depth in character progression. This has led to lower scores, though some express hope that future updates could improve these aspects.
- “Very basic, next to 0 character development or story arc.”
- “I give the score 75 out of 100 because of the problems, low number of character items, and its main character design. Maybe if these negative points get solved, I would change my mind to 85-90.”