Dynasty Warriors meets Hades in Tears of Metal, a spectacle beat-’em-up set somewhere between real Scottish history and fantasy. This Early Access gem sees you battling through a roguelike campaign to reclaim your homeland from an invading army harnessing the powers of twisted magic, gathering a force of captains and companions along the way. This game came onto my radar a few months ago, and while I had a great time during my playthrough of the current Early Access build, I definitely spotted some problems that the game could work on before it enters its 1.0 launch.
One of the first things you’re likely to notice is the incredible art style of the game. Medieval fantasy meets heavy metal vibes as a cast of fun, uniquely designed characters come together to cut a bloody path through a fictional Scotland. Historical men-at-arms are mutated into grotesque, imposing beasts of men, and overall, the game just feels very stylistic and confident in its own awesome presentation.
The Dynasty Warriors x Hades comparison is the best one I can make to explain the gameplay of Tears of Metal: A roguelike progression structure meets the Dynasty Warriors combat style as you lead a force of AI-controlled soldiers into huge battles, controlling the tides of victory with your combo attacks and flashy clan-emblem-powered upgrades. Your troops, commanded by captains, play a role in the battle by fighting off the other fodder units, attacking the powerful bosses and captains you come up against, and serving as the source of your powerful abilities. You can, for example, command a charge of swordsmen towards a specific enemy you want dead to watch them be swarmed by steel for hefty damage.
My biggest issue with Tears of Metal comes with the fact that I’m not quite sure to what extent your captains and soldiers play a part in each battle. Captains have statistics, and through basic observation, I can tell that they do damage to enemies around them. You’re even prompted to help captains in danger to prevent them from falling on the field of battle.
The issue is that each and every mission objective, besides the rare “kill enemy fodder,” is completed by defeating enemy captains, which are larger units who stand above the enemy fodder. This is a task you’re almost always completing on your own, and doing so sends enemy fodder running. You quickly get the feeling that all of the fodder units on the battlefield, yours included, aren’t really playing a part in the battle, making the large battles feel much smaller.
The feel of battles could be improved by increasing the incentive to kill enemy fodder. Perhaps making it so that killing captains doesn’t instantly end the battle, or making fodder more of a threat so you can’t simply ignore them. Or, to be more friendly to the player, giving more of a reason to free up your allied unit’s targets.
Your allies’ combat AI could also be greatly improved: I noticed that during boss fights, my army would follow me a bit too closely, choosing to hover around me in a semicircle as I dodged boss attacks and generally kept on my feet so as not to succumb to AoE abilities or unblockable hits. Giving them more agency, and allowing them to actually target enemies on their own more often, would make having them on the field feel much more important, and give you some incentive to kill the enemy’s fodder so that your own can help you with more serious threats.
The beat-’em-up combat is fine, but I also wish the game had put a bit more effort into its combo system, which, as implemented, is pretty simple. This, when paired with relatively low damage numbers from the player, can make combat feel really slow, especially in boss fights. Certain areas of the game tended to drag on much longer than they should have. Meanwhile, other encounters were over in mere seconds, as I walked in, killed a few captains, and ended a massive battle. There’s an overall inconsistency with combat time that I found to be a bit counterintuitive to either the immersion of these supposed massive battles or my own enjoyment of the combat system.
Lastly, I feel as though the combat could be greatly improved if the game took another pass at its roguelike upgrades, many of which are either boring and downright ineffective statistical bonuses or simply aren’t very exciting to play with. This is an incredibly important part of any roguelike game, as the power and player enjoyment found in your upgrades is what motivates you to get through a run. As it stands, the game desperately needs improvement in this area and should rework many of its passive statistical boons, which didn’t feel exciting or impactful to use.
All that being said, the game is still fun: it has an incredible art style, a fun concept, and a unique blend of gameplay genres that you just aren’t going to see elsewhere. It is only because the core concept is so fun that all of the little problems are so noticeable, and given that the game is in Early Access, it’s forgivable that they’re there in the first place. While I do think the game needs to improve in the areas I mentioned, I have full confidence that the final product will be much different from the early impression we have now, and I highly recommend interested players keep an eye on this unique gem in the making.
Pros:
- An exciting blend of massive-battle spectacle and roguelike progression systems
- An incredible art direction, soundtrack, and fun, unique theme
- A strong mechanical foundation, with good ideas to expand upon
Cons:
- The main gameplay loop is full of many small problems or design decisions that add up to make the experience less exciting or engaging than it could be
- Roguelike progression, namely power-ups and passive systems, are mostly generic statistical boosts or are generally unexciting
Try Hard Guides reviewed Tears of Metal on the PC. Find more detailed looks at popular and upcoming titles on our Game Reviews page!
Comments