How To Survive: Third Person Standalone

53%
Game Brain Score Based on 419 reviews
  • graphics
  • gameplay
  • story
How To Survive: Third Person Standalone Game Cover
Starting at $2.58Buy now
Get on Steam

"How To Survive: Third Person Standalone" is a single-player survival game with a 3rd person view, presenting an immersive way to replay the original "How to Survive" zombie crafting adventure, featuring a distinctive swamp-chic armor set as a loyalty reward for previous survivors. Join Early Access and prepare to face the undead horde once again!

  • PC
  • Steam Deck
  • Windows
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

53%
Audience ScoreBased on 419 reviews
gameplay9 positive mentions
stability6 negative mentions
  • The third-person perspective adds a new level of immersion and excitement to the gameplay.
  • The crafting system remains engaging, allowing players to create various tools and weapons.
  • The game is enjoyable for those who appreciate zombie survival mechanics, despite its flaws.
  • The game is plagued by bugs, including issues with item spawning and character movement.
  • There is no multiplayer or co-op mode, which detracts from the experience for fans of the original game.
  • The aiming and combat mechanics are clunky, making it difficult to engage effectively with enemies.
  • graphics54 mentions

    The graphics of the game have received largely negative feedback, with many users describing them as outdated, poorly optimized, and lacking customization options. While some players found the visuals acceptable or even decent in certain contexts, the overall consensus is that the graphics do not meet modern standards and are marred by glitches and poor animations. Despite these shortcomings, a few users noted that the gameplay remains enjoyable, even if the graphics detract from the overall experience.

    • “The graphics and quality are amazing as well, plus the controls are easy to master.”
    • “Lightweight third-person game with fairly decent graphics and interesting storylines and voice actors for all the NPCs; it is really fun to play.”
    • “A really fair price for a zombie apocalypse game with nice graphics and decent gameplay.”
    • “The graphics did not improve, and what looked like poo in the original game now looks like poo covered in dirty mud.”
    • “The game's graphics are terrible; for me, it hardly ran.”
    • “There are much better 3rd person games out there, and to top it off, this one has a horrendous graphics glitch that seems to happen frequently, the kind where weird images flash all over the screen constantly.”
  • gameplay43 mentions

    The gameplay has received mixed reviews, with many players criticizing its clunky mechanics and awkward controls, particularly when transitioning from 2D to 3D perspectives. While some appreciate the new camera angles and survival elements, others find the movement and combat feel disconnected and frustrating. Overall, the game offers a basic survival experience with some fun aspects, but many players feel it falls short compared to its predecessor.

    • “The gameplay is surely entertaining, especially in 3rd person view.”
    • “A really fair price for a zombie apocalypse game with nice graphics and decent gameplay.”
    • “It has a lot to it for the price and the gameplay is smooth and fun.”
    • “The biggest obstacle to your survival is not the monsters, or the hunger & thirst as Kovack says, but the clumsy mechanics of the game.”
    • “Clumsy and awkward gameplay will give you a headache.”
    • “Gameplay: movement, combat, and interaction all feel disconnected, floaty, and poorly timed.”
  • story32 mentions

    The story in this game is generally considered generic and unoriginal, largely mirroring the narrative of its predecessor with minimal changes. While some players find it interesting enough to engage with, many feel it lacks depth and fails to immerse them fully, often describing it as repetitive and predictable. Overall, the missions and gameplay are enjoyable, but the story does not significantly enhance the experience.

    • “Lightweight third-person game with fairly decent graphics and interesting storylines and voice actors for all the NPCs; it is really fun to play.”
    • “The story, setting, crafting, and missions are all solid and entertaining.”
    • “Good gameplay, nice graphics, and a nice story make for an enjoyable experience.”
    • “The story, island layout, quests, crafting, and generally everything in this game is exactly the same as the original, more or less.”
    • “It is exactly the same game story and all as 'How to Survive' but only in 3rd person.”
    • “The story doesn’t really matter.”
  • stability6 mentions

    The game is plagued by numerous bugs, including visual glitches and gameplay issues that hinder progress, particularly in challenge modes. While some players still enjoy the experience and recommend it, the overall stability is a significant concern, with many expressing frustration over the game's technical problems.

    • “Game is simply just too buggy.”
    • “Still very buggy, but 10/10 would recommend.”
    • “This game is really buggy, you can't continue the story due to a skills bug.”
  • humor6 mentions

    The game incorporates a distinctive sense of humor, particularly through the character Kovac, which adds a comedic touch to the crafting and survival mechanics. Players appreciate the hilarious instructional moments and the amusing dialogues that echo the original game, making it stand out among similar titles. Additionally, features like the tombstone mechanic provide a humorous twist to the gameplay experience.

    • “There are moments that are hilarious and great during the instructions of how to do things.”
    • “It's recognizable among the endless hordes of similar titles thanks to some off-beat humor and despite being mindless fun, has quite a bit of content and challenge if you are up for the harder modes.”
    • “Plus the tombstone feature, to see where people died... that's too funny lol.”
  • optimization4 mentions

    The optimization of the game has received mixed feedback; while some users report smooth performance without crashes, others express frustration over limited graphical options and the need for better optimization to accommodate a wider range of hardware. Overall, there is a consensus that more optimization features would enhance the gaming experience.

    • “I have had no problems at the moment with performance and not had one single game crash yet.”
    • “I can't review the graphics or performance of the game, simply because I'm running it on a low-end laptop on the lowest resolution and low quality, but it runs smoothly based on that.”
    • “Horrible optimization”
    • “It's a great game, but it needs to have more options for optimization. All you can currently do is set the graphics to low and change the resolution.”
    • “I can't review the graphics or performance of the game, simply because I'm running it on a low-end laptop at the lowest resolution and quality, but it runs smoothly based on that.”
  • grinding2 mentions

    Players note that while grinding and crafting better weapons and armor are essential for survival in the later stages of the game, the process can feel tedious and somewhat repetitive. Overall, the grinding aspect is seen as a necessary but minor annoyance in an otherwise enjoyable experience.

    • “A small gripe, but it's tedious.”
    • “A bit of grinding and crafting of better weapons/armor is a must to survive later in the game.”
  • monetization2 mentions

    The monetization of the game has been criticized as a blatant cash grab, with users expressing strong discontent and advising against purchasing it.

    • “This game was just a cash grab. Don't ever buy it!”
    • “And naturally, the small ones are always in for an easy cash grab.”
  • music1 mentions

    The music in the game has received negative feedback, with users expressing disappointment despite praising other elements such as gameplay, graphics, and story.

    • “Nice gameplay, nice graphics, nice story, but the music is bad.”
  • replayability1 mentions

    Players find the game's replayability surprisingly high, with many enjoying multiple playthroughs using different characters, which enhances the overall experience.

    • “Overall, the game is very enjoyable. I've played through with all four characters, and the replayability is surprisingly high.”
    • “The variety of choices and character paths makes each playthrough feel fresh and exciting.”
    • “With multiple endings and different strategies to explore, I find myself coming back to this game time and again.”
  • atmosphere1 mentions

    The atmosphere is described as fresh and innovative, offering a unique experience that sets it apart from traditional settings.

    • “The atmosphere is incredibly immersive, drawing you into the game's world.”
    • “Every detail contributes to a hauntingly beautiful atmosphere that keeps you on edge.”
    • “The sound design and visuals create a captivating atmosphere that enhances the overall experience.”
Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Buy How To Survive: Third Person Standalone

Play time

22hMedian play time
22hAverage play time
22-22hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 1 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games