Proof that execution makes/breaks a game - no matter the concept

Ah, Scribblenauts.
 
I wanted to like you so much.
 
So much.
 
 
Scribblenauts enjoyed a few months of being an internet sensation ever since its huge breakthrough at E3. Media and fans alike were transfixed by the seemingly infinite amount of items and interactions at their disposal. The hype was huge.
 
I'm sure you see where this story is going.
 
As a game, S cribblenauts is bad. No way around it. Controls are loose and hard to use as everything is done with the stylus. Well over half o f the 220 levels aren't very interesting, and trying to complete them all in the "Advanced Mode" si mply results in frustration at best and boredom at worst (and yes, being bored of a game is worse than being frustrated with it). Almost every time you lose a level it'll be due to a fault of the game - and as any gamer w ill tell you, that is simply infuriating. Items often won't work like they should or glitch and simply break. Loose controls means you'll walk Maxwell right off the edge into some lava. Unclear level objectives means you'll lose a level and not know why. These are things you will eventually get used to and you'll learn of ways to circumvent them in some roundabout ways...but you shouldn't have to!
 
There's a strange lack of thought and direction throughout the entire game. It's almost as if 5TH Cell either ignored feedback or were getting the wrong type from their QA. For example, you unlock a few things with in-game currency called "Ollars". New Worlds (10 total), avatars, and music are bought this way. However, you seemingly have enough money to buy EVERYTHING by the end of World 2. Indeed, if you complete all of World 1 in Advanced Mode you'll end up with enough money to buy worlds 2-10. I found myself right around World 4 with hundreds of thousands of Ollars...the most expensive World cost just 16,000 Ollars. So what's the purpose of this system?
 
Worse still, levels can be uninspired and boring. Certain design aspects seem tacked on to force you to use a particular item. Too many levels have a goal that's just a little too out of reach for Maxwell to get to by jumping. You'll find yourself simply going back to the same 3-4 fl
ying items out of pure necessity, not because the level should have called for it. For instance, in one Action level I had to lead a cow and a bull down to a cowboy who was chilling out in a mine. The level had a few challenges in it, including getting the animals to follow me, getting by an explosive next to a pile of gunpowder, and dealing with a snake who scared the cows. At the end of the level a door is opened...to a starite being hung on a rope out of reach. You have no choice but to get up there somehow, forcing you to use a item that had nothing to do with solving the goal. 

There are tens of thousands of words, but a very limited number of categories. Think of one flying item, one swimming item, one rope, one weapon, and one monster. You've just complete almost every Action level. Now one could say this is the fault of the player, not the game, and that it's up to the gamer to be creative. Well, why should I be creative? After all, there is quite literally no difference between a sword and a mace and an axe. They all kill enemies and can break things at the same effectiveness. True, they use different skins, but so what? As far as the game is concerned they're not different. In fact, most words share an object with at least one other word. An axe is the exact same object as a "Fire Ax", "Battleaxe", "Lumberjack Axe", etc.
 
Alright, so that was an awful lot of bad.  Where does the game shine? In its concept, which is perfectly represented by the start menu. It's a sandbox mode: there are no levels, no goals, and cannot you die. You can simply spawn objects for fun, see how they interact, what they look like...then you can go and kill all of it. And that's cool! In fact, that's incredibly innovative! And it quickly becomes apparent why so many previewers were psyched for this game...they didn't get to the levels. They didn't get to see the numerous limitations as they probably stuck with the "mindless" sandbox mode. If you are a gamer you will enjoy Scribblenauts for a least a couple of hours in the sandbox, blissfully unaware of the numerous problems and failures that lay before you. Unfortunately, this mode eventually wears thin, and once you make your way into the levels... 

  Like I said, as a game Scribblenauts is no good, but as a concept - as an idea - it's amazingly interesting. No one has done this before, no one has even attempted this before, and because of this 5TH Cell deserves an amazing amount of credit. They are a small studio that bit off more than they could chew...and it shows. If they had more time, more developers, more polish...this could be literally the game of the century.
 
Scribblenauts is great at first blush. But a good game, like a good movie or a good book, is based entirely on its execution. It's about that elusive "feel" of a game, that strange term that is seemingly tied to the controls, pacing, and emotion behind the game. The feeling is so magical at the beginning and ends up falling flat on its face at the end, the cons vastly outweighing the pros. It's a great concept suffocated by its bad design decisions...and unfortunately, at the end of the day, that's what the game will be remembered for.
 
Hope for a sequel.
 
Time spent: I completed 8 worlds and part of the 9th and 10th. I "gold starred" every level up until World 6. In total I spent around 20 hours with the game.