Konami struck gold with Survival Kids on the Game Boy Color, featuring a new type of RPG where players must realistically fight to survive on a remote island rather than fantastically fight mythical creatures to save the world. The gameplay, though slow, was very rewarding in the end and the game itself was one of the more unique RPGs. After years without a sequel, Konami finally released Lost in Blue on the Nintendo DS. The game had nice improvements in the presentation department (mainly because it was staged 2 generations of handhelds later) and the touch screen made chores more unique but overall, the gameplay remained intact (and the need to take care of a second castaway became a chore).
Two games later, and not much change to the format (it’s hard to find a lot of variation or new material after making 4 games of island survival) we now have Lost in Blue 3. Though Konami has made a few subtle changes to the games here or there, we essentially have the same game over and over and over again. Let’s face it, island survival is interesting the first time through but does anyone really wonder why there isn’t a Castaway 2?
Survival Horror
Lost in Blue 3 begins the story in essentially the same way as its predecessors where you fall off a ship and are stranded on an island. Though this time around, the characters seem a little more endearing, the overall premise just feels too similar. Next, you run into another castaway of the opposite sex, find a shelter to live in, and finally you get to spend the next several days figuring out how to survive. Pick up a coconut here, pluck a mushroom there, grab some firewood and bark to make a fire starter, you get the idea.
The one thing that makes Lost in Blue unique is that you really do feel the pressures of survival at all times and this is exactly where the game wins and loses appeal from its fans and critics respectively. For instance, your constant attention to the ever dropping food, water, and stamina meters can either be seen as a strategic element or simply a nuisance. I for one found it to be more of the latter as I felt like it was an artificial way to extend gameplay—the meters drop so quickly, you’ll have to spend the majority of the day searching for food—and the addition of a partner was even more of a nuisance as you literally have to babysit him/her the entire time if you want him/her to survive. So you say you want your partner to walk to the nearby river and take a drink so that he/she doesn’t die from dehydration? Sorry, you’ll have to stop your exploration and travel a mile back to the cave just to escort him/her to the river.
Also, if Lost in Blue is a new experience to you, it can have a very sharp learning curve at times. It’s easy to figure out how to find food and somewhat easy to find the riverbank to replenish your water but learning things like asking your companions to cook or hunt food are a little less obvious. And sure, it is nice that your companions actually serve somewhat of a purpose in your survival but overall they are much more of a burden than they are useful. Understand that another major problem with the game’s design surrounds that fact that you do encounter more people throughout your journey. Yes, this does add elements to the story as well as multiple endings but in the end, this just means more babysitting. Now instead of making one trip to the riverbank to get water, you’ll have to make 2 trips (you can only have one companion with you at a time).
- 1 2