Primal Carnage Review
The multiplayer-only, man-versus-dinosaur shooter Primal Carnage is a fun and well-balanced game, but stumbles in its execution.
The Good
- Good variety in individual human and dinosaur play styles
- Large maps create both exciting group combat and nerve-wracking isolation.
The Bad
- Several small technical bugs hamstring the game
- Lack of overall content.
Of the great dream matchups in humankind's evolutionary history, none is more pervasive than humans versus dinosaurs. Countless books, movies, video games, and more have broached this subject, but a definitive winner remains elusive. The latest in this ongoing academic effort is Primal Carnage, a team-based, competitive multiplayer game that hits on a fun design, but stumbles in execution. A lack of content and some technical issues leave this game feeling like a $15 beta rather than an official release.
Primal Carnage has only one game type: team deathmatch. One side plays as the humans, and the other controls the dinosaurs. The first team to shoot, bite, stomp, or grenade the other into submission wins. The two teams then switch sides, and it starts up again.
Each side is composed of five distinct classes. On the human side, every class comes equipped with a gun, as well as a secondary ability. At the most basic there's the commando. He has a machine gun that shoots lots of bullets and doubles as a grenade launcher. Pretty simple. On the other end of the spectrum sits the trapper. He can disable dinosaurs with his slow-firing net gun and wields two pistols that can be fired (and reloaded) independently.
While the humans' focus is ranged combat, the dinosaurs like showing off their fine dental work. Running and biting are key pillars of the dinosaur fighting style, but developer Lukewarm Media has injected distinction into each of these dinos as well. The Dilophosaurus' attacks cause temporary blindness or poisoning, while the headstrong Carnotaurus can charge through and scatter groups of humans like bowling pins. Meanwhile, the Pteranodon circling overhead can mark enemies for all teammates to see.
Then there's the Tyrannosaurus. Its specialty is swallowing people whole.
While shotguns and sharp claws are handy, the greatest weapon in Primal Carnage is teamwork. Generally speaking, the humans stick together and watch each other's back as they migrate between health and ammo kits to resupply. Meanwhile, the dinosaurs patrol on the fringes, sending in the occasional Carnotaurus or T. rex to break up the pack and feast during the ensuing chaos.
Despite having wildly different play styles, the humans and dinosaurs are well balanced against one another. Each human class is designed to best a specific dinosaur, and vice versa. For example, commandos are great at laying down fire on a slow-moving T. rex, but have trouble tracking nimble raptors (who are easily netted by trappers). This subtly encourages a balance of classes during every match by further defining each character's role. In turn, this balance creates more dynamic, and enjoyable, matches.
Isolation is a vulnerability for both man and beast. The maps are very large, and after respawning, your character is usually located on the outer rim, far away from his or her allies. The jog back can lead to some great Jurassic Park-esque hilarity, because every faint footstep or distant growl can lead to near-instant death. And when you see a bush rustle out of the corner of your vision, you know it can't be anything good.
With 10 characters, five maps, and one game mode, Primal Carnage is short on content. The core game is a lot of fun, but it grows repetitive and is subject to the quality of competition found online. And since this game is online only, there are no offline training or single-player modes. Creating a private room to test-drive the characters isn't even an option, since you cannot enable a password. To play, you must undergo a trial by fire with the rest of the game's community.
Getting shot by other players is bad enough, but you can also get shot down by the game's technical bugs. Oversized geometry and background elements flickering in and out of existence are some of the less-serious hiccups. At the time of this publication, the option for antialiasing has been removed because some players have reported that enabling it causes repeated game crashing. On a less serious note, sometimes after losing a match the game will display the victory logo. While inaccurate, this mismatched logo does help boost self-esteem.
Thankfully, the developers have been quick to release updates to correct these issues. But this less-than-stellar first impression may sour your interest interest in this prehistoric cage match. Primal Carnage has the markings of a great game, but is held back by a number of bugs and a shortage of content. For a game that celebrates the excitement of dinosaurs, hopefully it will not share their fate.
Maxwell McGee earned a degree in Journalism from the University of Arkansas, and has contributed to The Escapist, GamePro, PC Gamer, and more. His introduction to video games was Sonic the Hedgehog 2 on the Sega Genesis, and he has never looked back. He welcomes your feedback through the site, or Twitter.
If you were to ignore the fact the game lacks alot of content the game is quite good. The graphics are standard 2012 graphics. Not amazing but not bad. The Dinosaurs are extremely fun to play as. There is only one class I didn't really care for (Dilophosaurus*). The humans aren't bad either, not nearly as much fun as the dinosaurs as they are quite simple. I would of liked to see a little more depth like maybe iron sights for some weapons. Surprisingly the game is quite balanced tho. The maps are great aswell. On top of this the game is only $15. At first I thought the lack of content was excusable because of this because the game's mechanic are all there and quite good. But then I realized counter strike is 15 and that game is fully loaded. If this game was fully loaded with map changers, voice chat, game modes, ranks it's easily a 7.5-8. At first I disagreed with the low score of 6.5 but when I think about it, the lack of content and only one gamemode with no map changer (you gotta leave the server and join a different one to change maps) is pretty unacceptable. I am sort of biased because I was following the game before it was released so I sorta knew what to expect when I bought it. I also love dinosaurs : P.
Bottom line is the game is actually very well made and is loads of fun to play. It's the lack of content that significantly hurts it. Honestly they should of added more content before making the release official. Alot of people follow game reviews now and this game would of gotten way better reviews had they waited and actually finished the game.
ABakedAlien They needed the money. If they had the resources to do what the likes of Hi-Rez does (e.g. already offering microtransactions during the beta or earlier but owning their own servers and online services), they could have delayed the official launch of the game.
Nice review Maxwell, you think the guys upstairs will let you review it again in 6 months when its gotten a bunch of updates? From my brief soiree with it, I can see a lot of potential for mayhem and fun.
reminds me Jurrasik Park movie
ahmedkabir.tumblr.com
SAK bit.ly/g8iPA
fawad2k80 ???????? ???? ????????.
Horrible graphics.
TheOnlyConan graphics are actually quite good
I completely agree with his rating. I know they just released it not TOO long ago, so I wouldn't expect them to have 100 different maps out, but to have only about 4 out, and only one kind of mission, deathmatch, is rather disappointing. Also the fact that the characters look rather dull and unappealing isn't enjoyable to play. I wish they had more player customization, which from what I've heard, they aren't going to do. But the good thing is they said they're releasing more maps and missions very soon so that's something to look forward to.
deutscherschule I agree. When I play the humans I feel like its almost more of a chore and I'm just taking my turn as a human so I can get back to playing as a dinosaur. I think they should of ditched the class system for a more customizable approach. I also think adding simple iron sights to the assault rifle and shotgun would make the FPS mechanics seem alot better, increasing the enjoyability of playing as the humans. If you took COD or Battlefield (any developed FPS) controls and mechanics for humans, the game would be alot better. The humans as is just aren't that fun to play.
Guess they didn't get the "Dinosaurs had feathers" memo.
CloWnCircus Actually only a handful of dinosaurs had anything even slightly resembling feathers. They did a recent analysis on the dinosaurs that claimed to have proto-feathers and it turns out it was just skin protein... yeah... probably should add that to the books.
Rickystickyman I don't think 30+ Dinosaurs can be considered an "handful". Can you show me the study you're speaking about?
Any game that has a T-Rex class is a win in my book.
I would be giving Primal Carnage the exact same score mainly because of the lack of maps, game modes and such. But since we will be receiving those later I ended adding +1 to the score already. The way the game is now is "fair", but when the expansions are released Primal Carnage will be "good".
Maxwell McGee..hmm.the same guy who was making stupid expressions in a farcry3 vid.
anyone else miss turok?
Conker91 aniforprez
Some of you should be reminded that promises of more content and technical support remain just promises until they are fulfilled.
If promises can be considered as significant in reviews, any game-maker can make a lot of promises on their (somewhat) functional games and then their games can be considered worth playing.
Gelugon_baat Conker91 aniforprez Well, I for one am just glad that we are able to be play an actually good dinosaur game.
AgentMothman95 You can well say that, but do know that "we" do not include everyone. ;)
Gelugon_baat The problem with that statement is that we're dealing with something altogether different these days with online games. If a game is built around the idea of continual growth, no good review would discount that aspect. This IS, after all, multiplayer only.
Now, I'm not saying promised content or technical attention is as good as content that's ready to go or a stable game, but for a game like this, the future *is* going to be a factor for any prospective buyer, and therefore absolutely needs to be for a reviewer.
parrot_of_adun If you are going to say that, how would you work promises into a review and, more importantly, its verdict then?
parrot_of_adun Also, you may want to consider the caveat of the future being a "factor": the future is not for certain. The value that is promised to come may or may not arrive for the faithful player.
Gelugon_baat I know that promises may not be fulfilled (honestly, I'd have to be exceptionally stupid not to), but here's the thing, if an understanding regarding future content isn't reached by a reviewer, then most online games would get rotten reviews. It's difficult to think of online-only games that begin with all that much (except those that start with gargantuan budgets). Yet, there are a decent number of such games that people play frequently because said titles have been faithfully maintained.
Honestly, this isn't even an issue with the review. Any human with half a brain will take what they want from the review itself to form their own conclusion. The problem is the score. There is no reason at all why reviews should have them, they do nothing but manipulate people who can't be bothered to read. So when something like this effects the score, people steer clear (because 6.5 is bad now, I guess) without getting any actual information. Information that might just change someone's mind (such as "lukewarm likely aren't going to just abandon the game").
parrot_of_adun You do know that your first passage is cutting game-makers slack, don't you? That they can make games that are functional and promise more to come to add to what is there on release won't go down with everyone, especially with those expectations of value.
Also, if you are going to argue that, you may as well suggest that these games be reviewed long after their release, so that the review benefits from hindsight. Otherwise, the review has to be based on whatever there is now for the game; after all, there would be people who would knock on the "credibility" of the review if it considers the promises.
Also, I am not going to discuss scores. I actually agree with what you said, but I am not going to argue about the amount of the numbers when I am already against the concept of scores.
Gelugon_baat parrot_of_adun I actually really like the idea of reviewing games a significant time after release. Kind of like a retrospective, or a 'Second Look' like they used to do with some heavily patched games.
A game can suck major balls at release, but after a decent amount of time has passed, can become almost classic.
Maybe Gamespot should invest some time in 'Second Opnion' reviews, or 6 month later look sees.
nait2k4 Gelugon_baat parrot_of_adun why the hell would they? if you release a game, you in this day and age agrees to it being a reviewable product. i mean, you actually are charging money for a "finished" product. so expect the reviews to mirror the products quality at the time of release. any more speculation of future is just wrong. if you want the game to be reviewed after another 6 months of work put into it, then bloody hell release it after putting in 6 months of extra work. Of COURSE the reviewer have to review its current state and give it a numbered verdict of its current state now, because it is being sold as so, and therefore there will be buyers who would like an opinion on the game.i know this game got potential and it didnt really live out all its amazing potential and you guys really wish it did, and think that only if more people would buy it, it would. but be serious, they could have done a better game. they could have worked extra hard on it for more time and only after then released it. and it would definitely get a much higher numbered rating. but they chose not to. so who's to blame really.dont sucker people into buyin this game now buy promising them "future" stuff. give them an honest review of what is in it NOW and let them decide whether they should buy it now or not.
Looks good. Could use some more game modes though.
mstrchf12 New game modes coming soon.
nocoolnamejim They are a super small indie studio, what did you want, a Trespasser 15+ hour single player with branching storylines and 25 different endings?
nocoolnamejim
Funny, I kept reading at multiplayer only. That's the reason why I clicked on the link.
nocoolnamejim You're so elite.
I was so close to buying this game, it still sounds pretty interesting so I might pick it up. I feel there's a mismatch between the written review and the score given.
this is a ridiculously harsh score. come on for $15 the amount of content and free dlc planned, its really worth it. for not enough content and a few bugs you give it a 6.5? i don't usually complain about review scores but this is an indie game that needs some love. they have free dlc planned and there's your more content right there
Actually they keep working on fixing all bugs, and they are gonna add more contents soon, so Primal Carnage definitely deserve more than just 6.5.
Conker91 should I get this?
GamerOuTLaWz If you like shooters games and dinos you're gonna love this game.
Conker91 hehe I might get it this week-end then
Conker91 servers are populated??
GamerOuTLaWz Yup.
I personally thought the beta was great but I thought the game felt incomplete and was not willing to buy the final product. The only problems I had with the beta were not being able to connect to official dedicated servers and my desktop doesn't like the Unreal 3 engine.
Natural Selection 2 6 Primal Carnage. 6.5 Gamespot hates shooters trying to be different.
Niklasdiver Being different does not automatically give a game better numbers.
Gelugon_baat Niklasdiver Ever checked the user ratings?Its a 9.0.Compare that with 6.0.
Gelugon_baat Niklasdiver Not that I have actually played it,but the user rating was actually fanboy free.
gamefreak215jd Which 6.0? Which 9.0? Where are you getting these numbers from?
gamefreak215jd "Fanboy-free"? You can say that without any doubt when you don't have any proof that it is not the result of spamming by its ardent followers?
Bit of a harsh score. The game might not be perfect but it's the best at what it does. Certainly better than a lot of other shooters that get much higher scores on here.
flammable_zeus Yeah, but they have singleplayer. And more gameplay modes. And more maps.
FlamingFury flammable_zeus True but they are 60$. This is 15$. For that price, it's hard to complain... especially considering that free DLC are planed.
Game Emblems
The Good
The Bad
User Reviews
A fresh, exciting online game that has amazingly fun gameplay but feels incomplete and lacks content.
Primal Carnage
Follow for the latest news, videos, & tips from experts & insiders
- Publisher(s): Reverb
- Developer(s): Lukewarm Media
- Genre: Action
- Release: Oct 29, 2012 (US)
