State of Decay reviewed (PC): A messy and buggy sandbox that I can’t stop coming back to

State of Decay

By on November 20, 2013 at 10:41 am

State of Decay inspires equal parts admiration and frustration. At times I’ve cursed at the monitor, walked out of the room and then furiously badmouthed the game to my housemate. Other times, I’ve quietly swung my lead pipe, tossed firebombs into infested warehouses, reversed over hordes of zombies for the hell of it and not realised that it’s four in the morning, and I needed to be asleep three hours ago.

It’s impossible to venture throughout Trumbull Valley without experiencing several glitches. Some are simply an annoyance. Some, like the second-last mission that kept crashing on me, are rage inducing.

That last bug nearly soured the entire experience. All of the items I’d taken out of the group locker to prepare for the mission didn’t get replaced, and I wasn’t refunded the influence I’d spent either. The state of the world mirrors the survivors’ mood: the more depressed everyone is, the worse your situation gets. More hordes show up. NPCs start fighting with each other, dragging morale down further. Infestations become a bigger and bigger problem, and your home base becomes even more vulnerable. And to top it all off, everyone’s morale automatically drops a little every time you quit and re-open the game — even if the break between sessions is only a few seconds.

I walked away dozens of times during my playthrough. And yet, astonishingly, I’d still recommend giving State of Decay a go. Why? The answer doesn’t lie in the first hour. Stuck with just two playable characters, Marcus and Maya, there’s little room for exploration or enjoyment. It’s a protracted tutorial to the basics of foraging, but it doesn’t teach you anything about the finer parts of character management, handling the relationships between survivors or properly rationing your resources.

The game proper only starts proper once you reach the church. One of the survivors is riddled with disease, so you’ve only got Maya and Marcus to play with. The RPG system quietly awards XP for every action: attacking zombies, final blows, sprinting, searching cupboards and so on. Once you’ve relocated, Maya and Marcus will be legions ahead in skill.

The disparity between survivors seems negligible at first, until you’ve searched your third house and your character is gasping for air, head between their knees, struggling to stave off two zombies. When you’re at full strength, creeping around, zombies are like punching bags, A couple of swings of a lead pipe or a shovel primes them for a knee to the head. You feel strong; maybe this apocalypse isn’t so bad after all.

But every kick, each footstep without care makes a sound, so tracking your noise on the minimap becomes a necessity. It’s entirely possible, patience permitting, to plot out a safe route. Zombies are more attuned to sound than sight, although straying too far from the sensible path will easily attract a horde.

Sometimes it won’t matter though, since the AI will bugger things up for you. If you’re skulking around a corner, the AI will follow suit. Occasionally it’ll even let you quietly kill zombies without offering it a solid kick in the teeth. But if there’s more than one zombie around, your brainless partner assumes you want the extra help, runs over, and starts belting the crap out of the undead for all to hear.

This mindless AI behaviour is at its worst on escort missions. Occasionally you’ll have the opportunity to supervise a NPC during a scavenging hunt. They’ll complete the run unassisted if you let them, but you’ll gain influence and improve morale by helping out, while also eliminating the possibility that they’ll get stuck and need to call for help later.

Holding the fort while they raid the pantry isn’t the problem; it’s afterwards, when the NPC charges out of the building and past three hordes on their way back to base. Some missions they’ll hang around for a lift, but it should be implemented across the board with a simple decision tree (offer help/bugger off).

A larger problem was finding enough survivors so I could relocate. Some events and missions are time-critical, so if you’re too busy fighting for your life or caught up in other matters then that’s just too bad. I lost multiple chances to grow my little troupe because I happened to be on the other side of the map. You can direct Lily, the lupus-riddled radio operator, to find more survivors, but she doesn’t always strike gold, and each search takes 20 minutes.

Luckily, there’s plenty of obvious things to do. If nothing’s available, you can clear out a nearby infestation, establish outposts to improve your supply (while preventing zombies from spawning in that area), complete randomised trades, escort your fellow NPCs or simply ransack nearby houses for resources. Stealing cars is always useful; catching the attention of a horde, reversing a little before running them down in a single sweep never gets old. There’s a certain plausibility to it all, almost like your actions are things you’d properly consider in the face of a zombie apocalypse.

Mouse and keyboard support isn’t fantastic. Whenever you climb atop a tower, for instance, to survey your surroundings, the aiming is astonishingly jerky. It’s too slow and yet too sensitive at the same time, almost as if it can’t quite keep up with the mouse input, and then suddenly spews out a string of movements at once. Aiming with a rifle is far more consistent, but it’s not perfect and I missed several shots because I couldn’t smoothly place the crosshair where I wanted.

On the more positive side, the RPG mechanics work well. Characters unlock specialisations after reaching a certain level, allowing them to scavenge more quietly, run further, regain stamina after a Zed kill, reload faster and so on. You can upgrade your safehouse to build more weapons, repair cars, serious wounds, even grow food.

There’s no reticule or aiming arc for thrown objects; you just have to gain a feel for it. It’s a necessary skill, really, since tossing a firebomb into an infested house is by far and away the easiest method of clearing it. Sometimes it glitches though, with your grenade or molotov getting stuck on the corner of a window or a random piece of debris, and you’ll simply end up setting your allies on fire while mildly distracting the zombies.

It sounds like I’m overly negative, and there are plenty of holes to pick at. The plot isn’t particularly moving. The characters aren’t anything special, and at times, their mood swings are downright incomprehensible. But somehow, somehow, everything works.

Maybe it’s because the rules governing the zombies in Trumbull Valley are reasonable, even fair at times. Being overwhelmed feels more like a byproduct of poor preparation than bad luck. Maybe it’s because the actions and machinations of the in-game world are so reasonable, so logical, that it’s easy to become absorbed in it all.

It’s rare, and strange, that I can take issue with so many things and still have a smile on my face. But I kept reloading the game, night after night, no matter what happened. It really is the sum of its parts: flawed, frustrating, but ultimately fun.


  • Enjoyable and sensible RPG mechanics
  • Fair balance between the player and zombies
  • SUV drive-bys are always entertaining
  • A great open-world to explore


  • Average PC port; poorly optimised with limited options
  • Bugs, bugs, bloody bugs
  • AI ranges from ‘okay’ to ‘lobotomy patient’
  • Not enough in-game instruction on base or survivor management

State of Decay is available on Steam for $19.99.

This review code provided by the developer.

Screenshots used in this review also provided by the developer.

26 comments (Leave your own)

AI ranges from ‘okay’ to ‘lobotomy patient’

^^ Well, zombies are kind of like lobotomy patients…



Survivors aren’t supposed to be


Had this a couple of days now, so a timely review. The AI seems pretty average so far, but overall the game is pretty good fun, and definitely one of the better zombie games I’ve played so far.


I might have to invest I think, I’m still a bit unclear about exactly what genre (forgive the term) of game it is but? It seem like a RPG/basebuilder type thing with missions to gather resources/survivors that are a bit like a FPS type thing, is that close or am I way off?



Think of it kinda like a rural grand theft auto V in a zombie apocalypse, complete with character switching (but done more awkwardly) and various factions at once trying to help you and screw you over, with more bugs, and resource scrounging.


Played 5 minutes of it, then spent 10 minutes trying to find a way to get a refund from Steam, to no avail.

Maximum supported resolution is 1920×1080, but I have a 27″ monitor, so the game looks god awful and unplayable.

I never read anything about limitations on the resolution before buying it, so I feel ripped off.



I’m sorry, but people who complain about 1080 resolution on any screen smaller than a 50″ just befuddle me. And you’re looking for a refund over something so trivial? I think you need to realize that this title isn’t AAA, and then maybe get over yourself a little.
Just sayin’.



Not sure if serious.

Google anti-aliasing if you’re actually bothered.



My native resolution is 2560×1440, and running the game at 1920×1080 at Ultra settings looks awful. I am not exaggerating or being pedantic, it really looks that bad.

I restarted the game to ensure I wasn’t missing something as simply as applying the new settings.

Perhaps you guys should try it on a high resolution monitor before thinking I’m an joking.

Not sure how these screenshots will look on lower resolution monitors, but see for yourself. I’ve seen better graphics on the PS2.



You can’t judge this game after 5 minutes. Give it some time.
As the article said: It does have its flaws, but somehow its still a pretty good and fun game.

1920×1080 is no problem at all. You won’t normally notice pixels at that resolution unless you actually want to see them.


Who else remembers when sprites in games were about 4 pixels by 4 pixels and we still managed to have great fun playing? I do.



Dwarf Fortress would be an apt comparison





I think you guys are missing the point.

His native resolution is 1440p, if you guys are running 1080p monitors, set the resolution to 720p and you’ll understand what his issue is. He can’t run the game at his native resolution, leaving him with 2 options. He can use scaling and stretch the image, thereby making it blurry and ugly (AA will not help with a thing like this) or he can play it with black bars around his screen and the game in the middle.

Either way, for people with bigger monitors and higher resolutions, not being able to play at the native res is a big kick in the pants.



Not something worth frothing at the mouth and demanding a refund though. It’s a little sad he can’t look past the slightly blurry visuals and still try to enjoy the game, he’s just got to stick his hand out and demand refund at the first sight of trouble.



He can play the game at the same resolution as everyone else, but he has to shrink his frame to a smaller size which is more inline with the average monitor size anyway. Not exactly the end of the world is it (sorry couldn’t help myself with the pun)?


I have a 27 inch monitor running 2560×1440 and it really doesn’t look that bad. Sure, it’d be nice to run a the native resolution, but not enough of a big deal to jump up and down about a refund, especially if it’s a game you are otherwise enjoying.


It’s not just that the resolution is low, but it’s also the quality. Playing it in windowed mode didn’t make it any better, making me suspect there is something else wrong here as well, or you all have very low standards.

Has anyone looked at my screenshots? Is that the quality you also get, where you can’t even see a NPC’s eyes who is only 2m away? In some scenes it was so awful. I was in a house and tree branches were swaying in the background only 5m away and were just a jagged blurry mess.

I’ve been been playing games since the 80′s, so I’m no stranger to pixelated graphics. Is it really ‘jumping up and down’ or ‘frothing at the mouth’ to want a refund within the first hour of purchasing a game because a significant compatability/quality issue was not stated anywhere in the product description?



He can play the game at the same resolution as everyone else, but he has to shrink his frame to a smaller size which is more inline with the average monitor size anyway. Not exactly the end of the world is it (sorry couldn’t help myself with the pun)?

Pretty much this … if you expect indies … that published on console first none the less to support every PC feature without compromise you’re gunna have a bad time.


freeborne: Is it really ‘jumping up and down’ or ‘frothing at the mouth’ to want a refund within the first hour of purchasing a game because a significant compatability/quality issue was not stated anywhere in the product description?

Honest answer? Yes, yes it is. If the game was graphically flawed in a way to make it impossible to play (missing textures, objects not rendering, psychedelic flashing colours etc) then maybe a refund is in order. As it stands it appears from your screens the game is rendering the game fine.

Incidentally did you bother to search the forums? Or did you just decide instantly after 5 minutes that you wanted a refund? I found this…

Not sure if it would help, but surely it would be better to have a fun game to play than jump through the hoops and try to get a refund. I know I wouldn’t give you one based on your argument.

Leave a comment

You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href=""]Google[/url]

Leave a Reply



Steam Group

Upcoming Games

Community Soapbox

Recent Features logo

Announcement: website closure

Website and forums to shut down on November 30.

Life Is Strange

Life is Strange complete season review: Your move, Telltale Games

The year's most heartwrenching game comes to an emotional conclusion.

Halo 5: Guardians

Halo 5 Guardians review: A boring game and a broken promise

343 Industries are back again with Halo -- but maybe they should have left it alone, says Joab.

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

The Witcher 3: Hearts of Stone is a proper, old-school expansion

From a drunk, possessed Geralt to a battle against an enormous toad, Hearts of Stone delivers.

Streaming Radio
Radio Streams are restricted to iiNet group customers.

GreenManGaming MREC

Facebook Like Box