There are no areas where How to Survive really stumbles, and there are plenty of areas where it shines. The combat flows well, though ranged seems to be a better idea than melee, and the enemy variety keeps things from becoming stale.

My initially negative impression started to melt away when I reached the second island. I don’t blame myself too much for that, as the game’s presentation at that stage is kind of bland and uninviting and especially its God-awful music needed switching off immediately. But sticking around a little longer, I started to appreciate what the game was trying to achieve; combining the therapeutic fun of slaying zombies with requiring players to apply their brain and look for ways to survive tomorrow as well as today.

How to Survive's story can be played quickly, so the two-player co-op and the Challenges are a buyer's best option to extend the play time. That's the only way the average player will be able to explore all the seemingly inconsequential upgrade options and power-ups and not feel bored.

Other rickety spots aside, How To Survive’s biggest issue is that it doesn’t do enough to keep you engaged across its short, repetitive campaign.

How to Survive is more or less a minimalistic RPG bringing nothing new to the table. Fans of the zombie theme will like it as long as they are not bored by the game's repetitive setting, limited combat system and wasted potential of crafting.

It's an adequate twin-stick shooter, and a few years ago that might have been enough. With so many zombie games out there now though, one this uncommitted to its own ideas can never hope to be more than just part of the horde.

Attractive in its original idea, How To Survive could have been more fun if it was not as lopsided: the gameplay is cagey and the game is quite repetitive. There is still a multiplayer mode, and battles are sometimes letting off steam.