Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-81.151.74.3-20130524211618

I love the early stages of Survival Endless, in particular the logistics of setting up the plants in the best order to bank maximum sun while doing so.

A well-designed game, however, should get better as it goes along, and Plants vs Zombies fails this test.

It wins - and it always wins eventually - not through strategy or superior artificial intelligence, but simply by throwing more and more brute force at one's defences until they collapse.

I have particular issues with the Jack in the Box Zombie, which can destroy an expensive and carefully planned defence strategy with one explosion. This is not challenging, it's simply frustrating and annoying.

Maybe PvZ version 2 will address these concerns.

How much better the original version could have been though, if, for example, one could choose handicap levels by being allowed to disable two kinds of zombies per game, or if one were able to buy extra columns on the lawn, or new and effective weapons, or more copies of existing weapons.

Which brings me to my last gripe about this potentially great but ultimately unsatisfying game: what is the point of enabling us to amass $999,990, and then have absolutely nothing to spend it on? 