Masked Forces 3 (PC) Review

 

Masked Forces 3 is the latest of the Masked games. After having recently played the F2P game Rebel Forces (very similar and also from Freeze Nova) I found out that Masked Forces 3 can also be played for free in a Browser version, so I gave it a shot for this review. It is however important to state, that the browser version of MF3 is inferior to its steam counterpart by having an awful framerate. Online matches with other players are limited to around 20 FPS and playing the Doom mode (which features a lot of explosions) drives it down to around 10 FPS and makes it a real slideshow. These framerate problems of the Browser version appear regardless of your PCs capabilities. The 4 Euro Steam version of MF3 (most expensive of all Freeze Nova games) on the other hand has a stable and good performance. Steam players (which are a very small minority of MF3s already small population) therefore have a clear advantage over all other players. Some might even call it Pay to Win and I honestly believe that Freeze Nova is aware of the bad performance of the Browser version and uses it to tempt players towards buying the game on steam.

EDIT: I tried some other browser versions of the game and some ran more stable than before, but they don't always do.

The gameplay of Masked Forces 3 is very much like Masked Forces 1 and Rebel Forces. The gunplay is nearly identical in all 3 games and movement and jumps (which are higher than most FPS) are also the same here. The Sprint function (which is actually more of a teleport function) is one of the few actually new gameplay feature of MF3. It isn't that great however.

New weapons in MF3 are a Flamethrower and a Crossbow, which are okay, but not among the best weapons of the game. The rest of the weaponry is also identical to the other games.

There are only 3 Multiplayer Maps in Masked Forces 3, which is disappointingly little content (Steam version is supposed to have more MP maps, but I can't verify that). The maps however are really large in comparison to the MF1 and Rebel Forces maps. They all have an apocalyptic city vibe (dark red sky lightning and look like they could be from a Terminator movie). Waste Town is probably the smallest of the three and is entirely set in a street block, some multi-storey buildings and the backstreets between them. Wasteland on the other side is, as the name suggests, mostly a wasteland of ruins of a former desert city and some small town area nearby. It is probably the largest map, but also feature the least cover opportunities. Red Waste (the maps names are so creative...) looks like a combination of both maps with wasteland, city and ruin elements mixed together and is nearly as big as the wasteland map. All 3 maps are also available in even darker night versions. I really like the setting of these maps, their design however is just okay and nothing too exciting. For a lot of the game modes however they just feel too big.

The game features multiple game modes like Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch or the Doom mode, which were also part of the other games. There is additionally also an Arcade mode, which allows players to start with all weapons already equipped. There are also Classic DM and Classic TDM modes, but I couldn't spot any difference to regular DM and TDM outside of not having the sprint/teleport function... Doom Mode in MF3 feels significantly worse than in Rebel Forces, since it on the one hand doesn't allow for higher speed and larger jump settings and on the other hand the large maps don't really fit the arcade style of the doom mode so well.

And than there are also 2 Battle Royale modes in Masked Forces 3. Both modes support up to 20 Players/Bots and the only difference is the weaponry. In Doom Battle Royale players start with rocket launchers (but only have limited rockets, different to regular Doom mode) and in Regular Battle Royale the weapons from TDM and DM will be used. I do like Battle Royale modes, but in MF3 they seem a bit forced. Waste Town is simply too small for a BR and while the other maps have the right size, they just feel like Deathmatch modes without respawns. The gunplay and general gameplay of MF3 is just too weak to save this mode. Doom Battle Royale also sounds more exciting than it is, since you will quickly run out of ammo and the arcady Doom gameplay features a respawn based Deathmatch mode much better than a Battle Royale mode. Both modes are rarely being played by more than 2-3 players, so you will mostly have to deal with Bots in these modes, which doesn't make them any more fun.

The other 'bigger' addition to MF3 is the Zombies mode. There is Regular Zombies (normal weapons), Arcade Zombies (All weapons) and Doom Zombies (Rocket Launchers). The problem of them all is, that there are only 5 Zombies at any time, they are really stupid and their walking animation is awful (it looks like they would be ice skating across the map). There is 0 challenge and fun here, even the Zombie mode of War Identity doesn't look so bad in comparison to this one. You can change the difficulty, but that doesn't make the Zombies stronger or the player weaker, but instead just increases the number of Zombies that needs to be killed overall. The Zombie modes are just being played on regular maps of Masked Forces 1 and Rebel Forces, which don't suit the mode in any way. Sometimes it is better not to add something, than to add something really bad.

There are no Offline Missions in MF3 like in the other games, which admittedly were extremely generic and bad, but instead all online game modes (including BR) can be filled up with Bots instead of players. This is probably better than the Rebel Forces version with Offline missions, but no bot game modes. On the other hand the Bots in MF3 are worse than in Rebel Forces. They often just stand around or move very slowly around and generally feel confused by the larger maps, but open fire on everything in their proximity. These Bots can't really simulate real players. At least the framerate is better in matches against Bot players, it is however still below the steady Steam performance.

The Visuals are comparable to the other games, which means lack of details and general under averageness (Zero visual improvements from MF1 to MF3 doesn't really speak for the game either). Since the maps in MF3 are bigger now, there are even pop up effects, if you walk across the map. Customizability is otherwise the same as in Rebel Forces (which means very basic customizability of everything).

 

Result:

Despite adding new modes and weapons Masked Forces 3 falls flat in comparison to Rebel Forces. Removing the awful offline missions and allowing the addition of Bots was the right move. The Zombies mode on the other hand is truly horrific and thats is not thanks to the Zombies... The gunplay and general gameplay of MF3 is as under average and disappointing as in Rebel Forces and the only asset of Rebel Forces, the Doom mode, was implemented significantly worse in MF3. The maps don't support the gameplay style and the fun speed and jump modifications were simply removed. I do like the scenario and atmosphere of the maps, but what does it matter, if the gameplay is no real fun. The same issues apply for the Battle Royale modes. Some of the maps could fit BR well, but the gameplay is just too generic and bad, plus the bad Bots don't help either. The worst offender however is the sometimes abysmal framerate of some of the Masked Forces 3 Browser versions (which are the most common versions), which is just not excusable, if you look at the much better performance of the Browser versions of Masked Forces 1 or Galactic Force. Masked Forces 3 tries a lot, but mostly fails.

 

3.5/10   

Rebel Forces (PC) Review

 

Rebel Forces is probably the best game by Freeze Nova (developers of games like Pixel Battle Royale, PixelForces.io, Dragon World, Galactic Force and the Masked Forces games). If these games don't mean anything to you, than congratulations, you seem to have good taste and are capable of avoiding trashy games. If you on the other hand know these games, than you also know what to expect. Freeze Nova games are usually low effort games with subpar graphics and basic gameplay. Rebel Forces is no exception of this, but at least manages to have one really decent game mode.

To say Rebel Forces took inspiration of Freeze Novas Masked Forces games would be the understatement of the year. Freeze Nova has published since Masked Forces 1 in 2016 around a dozen very similiar games, that only have very slight differences in terms of weapons and maps (Freeze Nova also published more unique games like Dragon World or their Pixel games, but they also are rather low quality). Rebel Forces is one of their free games on Steam, but otherwise doesn't differentiate itself very much of Masked Forces 3 in terms of gameplay. Weapons and visuals are practically the same and all of the Rebel Forces maps have also been part of either Masked Shooter Assault or Masked Shooters 2 (All of the Freeze Nova games also share the same background menu style and level system).

Talking about the maps, there are 6 in total. The best one by far is Towers, which has two large towers on opposite sides of the map, a bridge in the middle and a couple of smaller buildings around as cover opportunities. It is the only map that has some decent verticality and works especially well with the Doom mode. The Arena map is also not bad, but didn't really live up to its name. Arena looks more like an industry plant than any form of Arena. Gas Plant and Factory X were also bit boring and kept the industrial grey look of the first 4 maps (These 4 maps are also in Masked Shooters Assault btw). Garrison and Outpost are very similar to each other. Both are military camps and look a lot more green than the other maps (Both are maps from Masked Shooters 2). Nonetheless the later two are a bit too small for matches with more than 8 players.

At least you can give the 6 maps of Rebel Forces credit for being the best versions of them, but the difference isn't too large in comparison with the other games. All the maps are a bit too empty and boring in comparison to higher value games, but they at least get the job done. More details and map elements however would have been appreciated. 

All Multiplayer game modes can't be played with Bots instead of human players (like you could in Masked Forces 3), but there are instead specific Solo missions, with which players can own extra ingame cash and XP. These missions are the same as in the Masked Forces games and they can only be described as boring and tedious. You get challenges like 'kill 3 enemies' or 'win a Deathmatch against Bots'. Players can use the gained cash to purchase weapons for a loadout (Loadout only for DM and TDM). This 'progression system' is pretty annoying and useless. Owning money is pretty fast, but that doesn't make it anymore interesting. They should have just unlocked all weapons from the get go and scratched these offline missions entirely. Nobody is going to enjoy a grind against mindless Bots.

The weapons in the game consist of Pistols, Revolvers, SMGs, ARs, Snipers, Grenade Launchers, Mini Guns and Rocket Launchers. The variety isn't bad, but sadly the gunplay mostly is (Hit detection can feel like rolling the dice, sometimes it works, other times not).

The Multiplayer modes consist of Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch and the Doom mode (The developers stripped the Battle Royale mode from Masked Forces 3 for some reason in this iteration...). After playing Deathmatch and Team Deathmatch I was left with an underaverage impression of Rebel Forces. The gunplay isn't really that great and except for the ability to jump a bit higher than in most other Shooters, there wasn't anything special about the game. If you mix this with severly outdated visuals and some movement issues (there is a short annoying delay if you change the direction of your movement, like the players would be ice-skating. It may be realistic, but it is also unusual and very uncomfortable in an FPS. Masked Forces 1 had the same issue and they also removed the new sprint funtion from Masked Forces 3 for Rebel Forces), than this impression seems quite logical.

The redeeming factor of this game however was the Doom mode. In this mode all players start with Rocket Launchers into the match and the server hosts can optionally also active double movement speed and double jump heigth. This mode is actually chaotic fun and the only redeeming aspect of Rebel Forces. Admittedly the Doom mode was already part of Masked Forces 1 and Masked Forces 3, but I believe that Rebel Forces in combination with the Towers map puls it off best (Rebel Forces is also the only free game of those on Steam and the browser versions of the Masked Forces games don't always have a stable performance).

 

Result:

The regular gunplay in the Deathmatch modes left a rather poor impression on me and I was ready to quickly quit the game before I tried out the Doom mode. The chaotic explosive fun is in my opinion worth a try and manages to exonerate Rebel Forces. It may not be a bad game thanks to the Doom mode, but it is overall still not more than mediocre, if you consider the rest of the gameplay, the movement or the visuals.  

 

5/10

War Identity (PC) Review

 

War Identity is a F2P Shooter, that claims to bridge the gap between arcade shooters and realistic military simulation games. Bold claims, that War Identity never even came close to living up to. Since a few months the game isn't even playable anymore (game simply doesn't let you login).

The game has 6 different Multiplayer game modes (TDM, Free for All, Last Man Standing, Capture the Flag, Domination and Gun Trial), so nothing out of ordinary or especially identical. At least the game released with a couple of modes available. The Dev of War Identity also worked on the implementation of additional game modes like Battle Royale and other future updates (kill streaks etc), with only making tiny progress along the way (Obviously none of them will ever be released...). Oh and there is also a really horrendous Zombie mode in the game. I think you can only play alone (even though it claims to be "Coop"), the Zombies are very stupid and all of the games other problems are also apparent in this mode (more to that later on).

The maps in War Identity are also pretty terribly designed. Most of them look like they were completely randomly put together. There is no combination of elements, symmetry or any apparent structure. It feels like visuals elements were put into a randomization generator and whatever came out was the finished map.

The gunplay is stiff, boring and pretty forgettable. The even bigger offenders of this game however are the visuals and the performance. War Identity looks like a mobile game (even though it was only developed for PC) and not even a mediocre one (which would already be awful), but a really terrible one. This is just abysmal and all people, who think this is acceptable for a PC game, should immediately switch their glasses. There can be no excuses for such a mess.   

Probably even worse is, that this game had constant micro stuttering and lag regardless of the PC capabilities of the users. This is not explainable. How can a game look this disastrous and than not even run halfway smooth?   

A playerbase never really existed, since most players smartly ran away and buried this game deep down in the paper bins of their computers after testing it out. So players had to engage against the terribly weird bots. They mostly behaved pretty braindead and slow moving, but somehow could shoot at players without even looking in their direction or by shooting through the ground (maybe this is supposed to be some kind of new challenge...).

The only real good aspect of War Identity was its variety of different weapon attachments. Players could switch many parts of a weapon like iron sights, muzzles, foregrips, ammunition magazines or camos (like the recent COD games). It is just a shame, that these different attachments had practically no impact, since the gunplay felt so lame.

Another real audacity of the game was its skin system. Nearly of them looked either hideous or completely generic and the prices of them were more than just usurious. There were multiple bland character skins sold for 50 Dollars and the top of the cake was taken by a single 135 Dollar skin. This was way beyond madness!

 

Pro:

- Strong weapon attachment system

 

Contra:

- Bland and boring gunplay

- Terrible map design

- Abysmal graphics

- Unaccaptable performance (constant micro stuttering)

- Usurious monetization model

 

Result:

I believe that even most bad games should be preserved, but I can't say I'm terrible sorry, that War Identity is not playable anymore. The weapon attachment system might have been good, but what does that matter, if your gunplay is so unenjoyable and the rest of game is simply not defendable. There was no effort put into the design of the maps, the graphics insult even every potato gamer, the performance is cancerous and the monetization model nigh criminal. I have no idea, how some people can defend a game like War Identity. The game is in no place to improve, it is a death pit, best left alone forever. 

 

1.5/10

Zombie Survival Online (PC) Review

 

Zombie Survival Online is an isometric 2D mix of a Battle Royale and a Survival game, in the style of games like Surviv.io, just with the twist of having a Zombie apocalypse in it. If you play online with up to 7 other players, than the game will be played as a Battle Royale with Zombies, that ends as soon as only 1 player is left standing. If you however play in the offline Solo mode, than the game turns  into a survival mode, that only ends when the players get killed.

You play in an urban city with many buildings (which are way too empty and simplistic designed in the inside), where you can find weapons and items to survive against the other players and zombies. Sadly the whole city (and therefore the whole map) is boringly designed. There are no highlights, the streets and buildings from the outside all look very much the same.

Players start with a sword and can soon find a gun and some healing items in the surrounding buildings. There is a decent crafting system in the game, which allows to combine ressources to create better tools and weapons. There is actually a big variety of different melee weapons, guns and other items (around 100 or so), which is quite impressive for a smaller game.

There are 8 different characters in the game. Players can choose before each match, who they want to play with. These characters differ in their attributes. Some of them for example have better movement speed, but less health, or more ammo, but no melee and so on.

The game has a really fast day and night cycle (a day doesn't take more than 5 mins at most) and while you can meet a couple of individual Zombies during the day, the hordes start appearing at night. Every day there will be more of them and also more dangerous versions of them. After the second day for example Special Zombies will be able to shoot back at the players. Zombies can not run faster than the players, but through their masses can become an issue for inattentive players in the beginning and for everybody else after day 1 or 2 as well.

The Battle Royale matches I attended never lasted more than 1-3 days, since the players found and killed each other pretty quickly. There are no zones or anything else at the beginning in the online matches, it plays just like the survival matches, only that you also fight other people. After some days there will also be poisonous gas coming onto the map in order to direct players towards each other.

Controls of the game function okay, but there is honestly not much failure potential with the relatively simple movement and gunplay in this game. Controls can be freely changed around (except for the attack and pick up function) and the resolution and overall sound volume can be changed. Those are not the most extensive customization ever, but they get the job done.

Talking about the visuals of Zombie Survival Online, they are unfortunately pretty ugly. The whole visual style is just a very simplistic cartoonish version, that could probably run problem-free on Win98 Computers as well. Even a game like Among Us has high quality visuals in comparison to Zombie Survival (and visuals is probably the worst part of that game). Streets also look the same and buildings are from the outside only one coloured elements on the screen. I understand why you would go for a simple visual style, but this just looks boring and unattractive.

 

Pro:

- Mix of Zombie Survival and Battle Royale

- Extensive crafting system

- Many different weapons and items

 

Contra:

- Simplistic movement and gunplay

- Ugly visuals

- City really boringly designed

- Day/Night cycle too fast

 

Result:

Zombie Survival Online mixes a Zombie Survival Apocalypse with a Battle Royale approach. The crafting system and large variety of weapons and items are certainly the games biggest strengths. Nonetheless, I can't say that I liked it too much. Gameplay may get the job done, but in its simplicity doesn't feel rewarding either. The scenario may be cool, but I definitely prefer iterations in third or first person perspective (like Infected Battlegrounds or Dying Light Bad Blood). Visuals may not be the crucial aspect of most games, but here they are offputtingly ugly. The game world also completely lacks details, which just doesn't give me much survival immersion. The rushed day/night cycle also feels like a wasted opportunity. Players, who appreciated extensive crafting systems and the gameplay style of this game (should probably play Project Zomboid), may find some enjoyment in Zombie Survival Online. I however found the game too dull and can't recommend it after all.  

 

4/10