Sons Of The Forest

Sons Of The Forest

View Stats:
Is Green Hell a good game like this ?
Would u rank it same fun as this game , i consider it buying
< >
Showing 1-15 of 19 comments
Green hell is hell. It's probably the hardest survival game ever. More than worth playing
Sylar Jan 21 @ 5:09am 
No, not the same fun. The main problem I have with Green Hell, and why despite the bugs this game is a better experience for me is that Green Hell is very, very linear. The so-called open world is extremely closed.

You are very much bottle-necked into the story and bombarded by illnesses and diseases that beset you so fast it makes the entire game essentially a grind-lover's festival, and exploration is very much narrowed by a not-at-all-open world.

It may seem open world, to the untrained eye, but it's not open world. It's a survival game more than a horror game, and it's grind more than craft, which will only make sense to you once you actually start playing it within about the first 15–30 minutes of gameplay.

When you actually start exploring the not-open world, you will soon realize how they bottleneck you to move in a very linear direction. It's a smothering experience, but some people are into auto-erotic asphyxiation of game worlds that choke the life out of freedom of choice and range of motion.

Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
Green hell is hell. It's probably the hardest survival game ever. More than worth playing

It is hell, but it's hell because of annoying reasons. My friend and I easily beat GH, but the way to finishing was just an overall irksome experience. No replay value.
Last edited by Sylar; Jan 21 @ 5:12am
Originally posted by Sylar:
No, not the same fun. The main problem I have with Green Hell, and why despite the bugs this game is a better experience for me is that Green Hell is very, very linear. The so-called open world is extremely closed in reality.

You are very much bottle-necked into the story and bombarded by illnesses and diseases that beset you so fast it makes the entire game essentially a grind-lover's festival, and exploration is very much narrowed by a not-at-all-open world.

It may seem open world, to the untrained eye, but it's not open world. It's a survival game more than a horror game, and it's grind more than craft, which will only make sense to you once you actually start playing it within about the first 15–30 minutes of gameplay.

When you actually start exploring the not-open world, you will soon realize how they bottleneck you to move in a very linear direction. It's a smothering experience, but some people are into auto-erotic asphyxiation of game worlds that choke the life out of freedom of choice and range of motion.
There is also Survival mode, no story, and it is open world
Sylar Jan 21 @ 5:14am 
Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
Originally posted by Sylar:
No, not the same fun. The main problem I have with Green Hell, and why despite the bugs this game is a better experience for me is that Green Hell is very, very linear. The so-called open world is extremely closed in reality.

You are very much bottle-necked into the story and bombarded by illnesses and diseases that beset you so fast it makes the entire game essentially a grind-lover's festival, and exploration is very much narrowed by a not-at-all-open world.

It may seem open world, to the untrained eye, but it's not open world. It's a survival game more than a horror game, and it's grind more than craft, which will only make sense to you once you actually start playing it within about the first 15–30 minutes of gameplay.

When you actually start exploring the not-open world, you will soon realize how they bottleneck you to move in a very linear direction. It's a smothering experience, but some people are into auto-erotic asphyxiation of game worlds that choke the life out of freedom of choice and range of motion.
There is also Survival mode, no story, and it is open world

If that's true, they updated it since I last played it with my friend. Is it open-world from coast to coast or do you play through a certain shape of jungle as in the story?
Originally posted by Sylar:
Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
There is also Survival mode, no story, and it is open world

If that's true, they updated it since I last played it with my friend. Is it open-world from coast to coast or do you play through a certain shape of jungle as in the story?
All 4 map are open, in Survival mode. I don't know nothing about story, i didnt play story mode yet
Sylar Jan 21 @ 5:24am 
Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
Originally posted by Sylar:

If that's true, they updated it since I last played it with my friend. Is it open-world from coast to coast or do you play through a certain shape of jungle as in the story?
All 4 map are open, in Survival mode. I don't know nothing about story, i didnt play story mode yet

Ah, yes, all four maps, meaning the four regions of jungle you can only move between from certain locations, which isn't open world at all. You have to travel through specific points to access the other maps. Which is annoying as "hell." It's a segmented world map, and the segments link up at certain access points, but isn't open.

Originally posted by Corvo:
Would u rank it same fun as this game , i consider it buying

If you’re looking for a seamless, open-world experience where you can explore and roam freely without boundaries, "Green Hell" may not meet those expectations.

The game's structure is more akin to a series of survival challenges within interconnected zones, rather than a fully open, unrestricted world like in "The Forest" or "Sons of the Forest."
Last edited by Sylar; Jan 21 @ 5:26am
Originally posted by Sylar:
No, not the same fun. The main problem I have with Green Hell, and why despite the bugs this game is a better experience for me is that Green Hell is very, very linear. The so-called open world is extremely closed.

You are very much bottle-necked into the story and bombarded by illnesses and diseases that beset you so fast it makes the entire game essentially a grind-lover's festival, and exploration is very much narrowed by a not-at-all-open world.

It may seem open world, to the untrained eye, but it's not open world. It's a survival game more than a horror game, and it's grind more than craft, which will only make sense to you once you actually start playing it within about the first 15–30 minutes of gameplay.

When you actually start exploring the not-open world, you will soon realize how they bottleneck you to move in a very linear direction. It's a smothering experience, but some people are into auto-erotic asphyxiation of game worlds that choke the life out of freedom of choice and range of motion.

Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
Green hell is hell. It's probably the hardest survival game ever. More than worth playing

It is hell, but it's hell because of annoying reasons. My friend and I easily beat GH, but the way to finishing was just an overall irksome experience. No replay value.
This summary of Green Hell is very good. It is a grind-fest.
I've got a little more that 450 hours in it and it has been one of my favorite survival games to date. I will probably go back to it eventually, I've just got too much of it committed to memory for it to be much of a challenge anymore. It definitely has a huge learning curve and can be brutal in the beginning, but I have really enjoyed the struggle to maintain a balanced diet and really take care to avoid injury and sickness. I highly recommend if you are detail-oriented and willing to die a lot in the learning process.
Floppa Jan 21 @ 9:51am 
your gonna play it then your gonna beat the game within the timeline of 40hours and then your gonna never return to the game because thats just how these games are
Zero Jan 21 @ 10:07am 
Originally posted by Sylar:
No, not the same fun. The main problem I have with Green Hell, and why despite the bugs this game is a better experience for me is that Green Hell is very, very linear. The so-called open world is extremely closed.

You are very much bottle-necked into the story and bombarded by illnesses and diseases that beset you so fast it makes the entire game essentially a grind-lover's festival, and exploration is very much narrowed by a not-at-all-open world.

It may seem open world, to the untrained eye, but it's not open world. It's a survival game more than a horror game, and it's grind more than craft, which will only make sense to you once you actually start playing it within about the first 15–30 minutes of gameplay.

When you actually start exploring the not-open world, you will soon realize how they bottleneck you to move in a very linear direction. It's a smothering experience, but some people are into auto-erotic asphyxiation of game worlds that choke the life out of freedom of choice and range of motion.

Originally posted by LonelyWolfSurvival:
Green hell is hell. It's probably the hardest survival game ever. More than worth playing

It is hell, but it's hell because of annoying reasons. My friend and I easily beat GH, but the way to finishing was just an overall irksome experience. No replay value.

Agree with all of this. I like it, but the game is linear, with the illusion of open world.
Green Hell is story driven game with linear direction it not open world. its story is good but in term of suvival and exploration son of forest better
BETMARK Jan 21 @ 2:00pm 
As a survival, it's good and I like it more for some reasons.
As "fun"... no, it's not more or AS fun as Sons.
Too many bugs and limitations, especially if you like to build.
Also very repetittive.
In Sons, when you become so skilled that you can't die unless you do something stupid, you can still find ways to have fun alone or with friends.
In Green hell you just eat, sleep, cure the deseases and.. that's pretty much it.
Still, if you have the right friends to play with, you can waste some good days, before to get bored.
Sylar Jan 21 @ 2:55pm 
Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff:
This summary of Green Hell is very good. It is a grind-fest.

Originally posted by Zero:
Agree with all of this. I like it, but the game is linear, with the illusion of open world.

You will choke on the linearity of the map, seizure from the high-rep sequence of checking your arms and legs and running the same circuits to survive, and finally you OD on the grind, then the Zeigarnik Effect forces you to keep playing like a zombie, even though your heart is dead to the anticlimactic events.

You pat yourself on the back for being done with it and ironically feel 5 years older, suddenly, after less than two days of gameplay. Then you immediately uninstall it. If you found toilet paper with the words "Green Hell" printed on it, you'd buy it just to wipe your ass off on it, to feel like somehow there's some equitable relief for everything the game has put you through.

Oh, and you don't hate it, you also don't love it, and it's not because of any IQ-breaking difficulty or a skill issue that it fails to impress you. Mainly, it's the way that thinking matters less than trial and error, and constantly saving to take advantage of your ability to see anywhere from fifteen seconds to two minutes into the future.

Pretty much like if the only reason you ever beat Green Hell for the first time is because saving and reloading gives you special powers, like turning Jake Higgins into Cris Johnson from the movie Next (2007) staring Nicholas Cage.

Aside from that, you're totally ♥♥♥♥♥♥ because the game demands an insufferable pace of grind due to the fact that without a constant state of crisis to keep you preoccupied, you'd realize the world isn't as open, and the game doesn't offer much else.
Last edited by Sylar; Jan 21 @ 2:58pm
Originally posted by Corvo:
Would u rank it same fun as this game , i consider it buying
Buy it for the sanity.
Nakama Jan 21 @ 7:02pm 
I think the plot of "Green Hell" is pretty good and worth buying.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 19 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Jan 21 @ 4:32am
Posts: 19