Wot I Think: War For The Overworld

Let's give 'em a big hand

Dungeon Keeper has always felt important to me, and I’ve rarely analysed why, for the same reason I don’t question why I like cheddar cheese or very tall buildings. For my young sensibilities, it was the right game the right time, and as such it feels like it’s almost always been there: “I like Dungeon Keeper” is simply something I’ve always been able to say. Unfortunately, this also means I recognise when a game isn’t Dungeon Keeper, and it’s very hard to draw a distinct dividing line between adroitly noticing that something feels off and a deep-set resistance to any aspect of it changing even slightly.

That was my disclaimer of sorts: please keep it in mind for the rest of this piece. War For The Overworld is an unofficial sequel to the late-90s Dungeon Keeper games, although perhaps that’s going too far. It might be more accurate to say it’s a remake of Dungeon Keeper II, tweaked to have a less rigid structure, a mild graphics boost and with every unit and building replaced with a close analogue that should keep Dungeon Keeper keepers EA at bay.

Dungeon Keeper, to belatedly recap for the already confused, was a game in which you take the role of malevolent architect and manager of an underground lair, in which assorted beasties are trained and catered for with the eventual aim of wiping out invading ‘heroes’ or rival keepers. It offered a far more straightforward and limited take of the dig-to-design ethos long before Minecraft did it, and it threw in real-time strategy battles in which you had only limited control of minions who didn’t entirely want to be there.

War For The Overworld, at heart, is that again. The key beats are brought across intact: tag blocks to have your worker minions go and mine them, drag oblongs to construct assorted rooms within spaces you’ve opened up, build traps and research spells to increase your offence and defence possibilities. Much of Overworld feels, satisfyingly, like second nature: the basic, essential feel of Dungeon Keeper is there. Something in me really, really enjoys drawing lines and rectangles on the rock then seeing it slowly chipped away into a workable space, and I’m relieved that Overworld has recreated rather than remixed this. If I don’t look too closely, at times I’m right back there in 1997.

As much as I’d love to claim I’m a tireless pursuant of The New, the reality is that, yes, in this instance I want a shinier remake of Dungeon Keeper. While this means I find Overworld intrinsically compelling, it also means I’m troubled by its changes. These are focused on two fronts, the first of which is the creature design. Overworld has to play it safe here, as to sail too close to the copyright wind would have seen the whole project shut down, but I really do struggle to feel that it’s imbued its characters with as much distinctiveness and personality as Dungeon Keeper did.

Then again, and this is very important to keep in mind, what seemed distinctive and characterful to a teenage boy in the late 90s may well not have been distinctive and characterful by any other yardstick. Big, fat, red farting demons were the height of wit to a kid who only read Pratchett books at the most superficial level, after all, and it’s true to say there are plenty of DK creatures I can’t quite recall the names of if they’re not in front of me. But what I could and can do is tell what everything does and what its non-combat purpose is at a glance; that isn’t entirely the case with Overworld. The defining characteristics of so many of them are ‘brown and spiky.’ There are a couple which stand out, like the guy with an anvil for a head and the Succubi, the unit closest to the DK original (The Mistress, a comedy S&M character who went on to be cynically used at the lad-pandering forefront of DK2’s marketing), but all told it’s this indistinct throng.

Clearly I can tell what everything is if I look closely, but there is this double-whammy of sameness to many of them and in turn not really caring about them. They don’t feel like little, ill-tempered characters in my dungeon, they simply feel like fodder. Maybe that’s appropriate – I’m not roleplaying as a world-shattering tyrant with a secret heart of gold, after all – but it’s this slight blandness I can’t move past. Completely gone is any sense that my creatures are on the verge of killing each other; they’ll get unhappy if needs aren’t met, but there isn’t that Jurassic Park feel, that things could go horribly wrong at any given moment due to the absurdity of thinking I can tell monsters what to do.

I also struggle with the presentation, specifically in terms of user interface. The edges of the screen are bombarded by a mish-mash of buttons and numbers, and while not at all overwhelming, it’s not terribly attractive and seems to have prioritised ‘get everything up there somewhere’ over actual usability. For instance, trying to click the little Cancel Rally button usually ends up with me tagging a bit of rock instead, because it’s just floating on top of the main screen and the cursor can’t always tell whether I’m clicking the button or what’s underneath it.

Then there’s the sprawling new research interface, reflective of Overworld’s noble urge to move DK away from a linear tech tree into a strategic, pick-what-you-need one, but which in practice is a splurge of similar-looking icons which requires far too much squinting to decipher. Once they are researched, the game then sub-divides spells into four separate categories on the main UI, and again it’s a minor feat of memory or tooltip-browsing to keep tabs on exactly what is where.

A great many of the spells and buffs in here are realistically only relevant to multiplayer or high-difficulty skirmish too, and incidental confusions if, like me, you’re in this for the stoic base-building of singleplayer. I appreciate what this tech tree – known as The Veins of Evil – is trying to do, in terms of liberating DK from being a straight romp to a predetermined finish line, but it looks and feels like it went slightly too far, like a long list of ideas didn’t quite get whittled into a shortlist. Or, perhaps, that the focus has been heavily on expanding the micro, and not anything like so much on growing or evolving the essential dungeon construction aspect.

This is reflected too in some of the levels, which have a manic, all-out quality that presupposes a certain degree of expertise that people who’ve never played Dungeon Keeper competitively may not have. In terms of presenting a remixed and sterner challenge to people who have drained the DK games of every last drop, I suppose this is hard to argue with, but for me it’s a bit like visiting an old friend only to discover they’ve got enormous tribal tattoos on their arms, animal heads mounted to their walls and keep giving me a look which says “c’mon then, you wanna throw down?”

All of this combines into a game which feels less like a living dungeon and much more like a fairly steely RTS I have to put a great deal of learning time into. I can absolutely understand why this might be – this is a game made by and for people who are already very, very good at Dungeon Keeper – but I feel like some of the essential tinkerer’s appeal is undermined by this move to great precision and fine understanding of every mechanic. I only care about my creatures as a resource, and I don’t think about them as actually living here: this is the loss I most mourn.

I should also mention that there are a fair few bugs at launch, a few of which have required me to restart levels, and some modes remain unfinished. It’s being patched regularly and the devs seem open and humble about the state of affairs so I’m reticent to beat it too heavily with that particular stick, but if you intend to buy it now please at least go in aware that it is, frankly, not quite finished. It’s improved noticeably in the time since I started playing it for this piece, but clearly there are no guarantees that all issues will get ironed out.

For all that, War For The Overworld is closer than I ever dared dream to a new Dungeon Keeper game. The perspective, the cleanness of construction, the echoing sound of solitary mining, the audio duvet that is the returning voice of Richard ‘Daddy Pig’ Ridings as narrator, the lively pleasure of a room’s contents simply popping into being when you drag out its shape, the way the treasure slowly piles up everywhere, the laconic power of grabbing creatures by the scruff of the neck and depositing them wherever you want them… To get that stuff right is a triumphant and enormous achievement for a self-motivated first-time team who started off as fans and then brought about the nearest thing we may ever have to DK3. Core aspects of Overworld feel like a cuddle, and for all its (satirical and broad) themes of darkness and torture, a cuddle is what I want from Dungeon Keeper games.

So yes, an awful lot of what makes Dungeon Keeper Dungeon Keeper is in here, and I respect the hell out of that, but there’s a certain degree of elegance missing due to the micro-intensive method it’s chosen to move the dial towards. For those fans who, unlike me, have kept on playing Dungeon Keeper II regularly in the many years since release, I’m sure this big blow-up in complexity is a gift. For those who, like me, only revisit occasionally, slipping on old shoes just for the pleasure of it, it does feel like the game got dragged off somewhere else, somewhere more intense, fiddly and competitive. I shall leave it to you to decide whether I’m being a noble keeper of the flame or just an old man.


  1. Siimon says:

    There was competitive DKII? Didn’t even know it had multiplayer at all hah

    • AngoraFish says:

      It was fantastic when it workled, but me and my friends could never play for longer than 30 mins without getting sync errors and the like or we’d still be playing it today.

  2. rabbit says:

    A pity. Sounds like the framework is there but they … maybe should have spent a little less time getting the mechanics down and a little more time on the magic dust.
    Couldn’t agree more on the character designs. If you squint .. if you just let your eyes pass over the images, it looks like vintage DK. But those designs have always seemed … lazy, really. v. off putting.
    A very idealistic part of me hopes that the devs might see feedback like this and try to work on it … new character designs, say. Be a lovely start.

  3. Bull0 says:

    The new minions are probably the worst bit of it, in my view – the new beast minions are better realised than the humanoid ones, I think, which speaks to how limiting it must’ve been to keep the humanoid minions suitably different from the source game. I like the game design changes although agree that having spells, potions, “constructs”, etc all on separate tabs is a bit too much when they’re all basically just spells. It’s hard not to admire the ambition on display, though, but definitely more of a technical effort than an artistic one.

    • LionsPhil says:

      On the upside, art is prrrobably easier for other enthusiastic modders to fix than technology.

    • Orful Biggun says:

      Agreed about the minion “look” or lack thereof.

      I know nothing about copyright and the business world, etc., I’m just a lowly programmer … but I can’t help but mourn what we would have if this game’s devs, somehow, *COULD* have used those assets?

      Like – would buying the whole DK license from EA be the only way to go about it? Or could they have just bought the minions … ala carte as it were? :)

      “I’ll take a Bile Demon, a Hell Hound, and a Mistress … meh, the Troll is public domain, we’ve already got that.”

      Never mind, that’s dumb. If they were somehow able to add in the Bile Demons and stuff, and the Horned Reaper, etc., what’s left? The room types? Might as well call it DK3, then, and it would be EA’s game.

      They obviously skirted the edges of what could be done … Riding’s voice, all by itself, is significant. For food you have pigs, rather than chickens, etc.

      Maybe the graphics will be improved at a later date … maybe they’ll be modded, as a nearby comment suggested. We can hope. I def agree with Meer: this is far closer to another DK than I ever thought we’d get, so it’s far better than nothing, IMO. I’m enjoying it as is at the moment, and am very much looking forward to the multiplayer.

  4. Ethaor says:

    Yes, All pieces are there, it’s just not been assembled in the right order. It seems to catter for a competitive RTS crowd while capitalizing on a Dungeon Management Sim legend. The pacing is all wrong, or rather isn’t Dungeon Keepery at all, it feels like they’re trying to sell a Starcraft to a Tycoon crowd.

    I can live with the launch hiccups or the questionnable creature design, the pacing though is a deal breaker to me. I read some people in the dev team is/are simply huge fan of competitive gaming and oriented Wfto accordingly, a statement that is merely a rumor.

    • Simburgur says:

      Hey Ethaor, designer on WFTO here.

      We’ve certainly heard the comments on pacing and are going to be working on slowing down the pace of several of the levels as well as some parts of the core gameplay (some of these changes are actually coming in the next patch: link to steamcommunity.com).

      When we get around to working on more content later this year we’re also going to be designing those levels from the ground up with this in mind.

      • Ryuuga says:

        That’s excellent news! I’d love to pootle around in a single-player campaign and just build stuff for the love of building. Fast-paced multiplayer RTS is as far from my gaming cup of tea as it gets.

      • Ethaor says:

        Thanks for taking the time to adress such concerns. It is great to hear you are considering touching on the core gameplay elements in that regard. As I planned to do, I will follow its development and will most assuredly jump in the WFTO fan base the second I see that I’ll be able to enjoy my time in WFTO the same way I did for years on DK & DK II.

      • AngoraFish says:

        Other than the multitude of launch day bugs, dramatically toning down the RTS-rush elements and significantly scaling up the importance of base building is number one on my wish list.

  5. aircool says:

    I feel that all these games ‘inspired’ by Dungeon Keeper are heading in the wrong direction, and should instead, be looking to create the bastard child of a resource management game and a tower defence game. Build your dungeon and traps, recruit monsters and keep them happy, and kill the crap out of goody-goody heroes coming to steal your loot.

    • Severian says:

      Absolutely agree with you. DK was not a good RTS. It was at its best when you were creating a living breathing dungeon and then, when you were a little bored of that, sending in those silly adventurers to die hilariously from your well-positioned boulder trap. Evil Genius kind of understood this, but suffered from its own flaws.

    • zaygr says:

      There is a game exactly like that, and it was the extremely lacklustre Dungeons. It could actually be more described as Theme Park Tycoon Dungeons but less silly, if that can be believed.

      • malkav11 says:

        I’m pretty sure Dungeons was nowhere near the best possible rendition of that particular gameplay concept.

    • mafon2 says:


  6. Nixitur says:

    You say that you “only care about [your] creatures as a resource, and [you] don’t think about them as actually living here”, but I don’t quite get how that’s a problem with the game and you don’t really explain that, either. It frankly just sounds like you saying “I don’t like these creatures.” without going into any detail.
    Is it just because you can’t immediately tell what they do just from looking at them?
    Is it because you’ve seen these creatures before and they’re basically paintjobs of creatures you already know?
    Is it just nostalgia and you simply miss the old creatures?
    You don’t really explain why you can’t think of them as living beings, and given that it’s apparently “the loss [you] most mourn”, I think that it should be explained.

    • cpt_freakout says:

      I think the idea is conveyed in other parts of the review, and it’s basically due to the design and the pace: on one hand, the design seems to be inclined towards RTS elements, thinking of the dungeon as ‘base’ and not as simultaneous ‘home’ and ‘trap’ like it was in DK. In DK, you got the feeling the monsters weren’t just ‘units’, they had their own mind, they decided to live in your dungeon, and that your relationship to them as a dungeon master was based on a kind of convenience-trust: you give them good facilities for their particular inclinations, they give you the power to conquer lands. But your dungeon was also built for hostility – you planned it in ways that would make heroes suffer the most if they wanted any glory. Together, these concepts turn the dungeon into something different than if seen as a ‘base’ from where you build your forces to overcome your enemies, which turns everything at your disposal into a resource meant to help you towards the objective of destroying them.

      That was one of the fantastic things about DK – being evil, you expected to hold absolute power over everyone, like every RTS does (you would never expect your Marines to revolt, or your Zerglings to go wandering for food, ignoring your orders), but your power is instead manipulative, subtle, “below the ground”, if you will. An RTS has a fast pace because it’s about absolute decision-making, while DK is slower because it’s about manipulation and trying to control creatures that are by principle opposed to any and all order. That’s why I think it’s understandable that the RTS parts of DK kind of sucked and were limited – there’s two sort of opposed designs at heart, and Bullfrog were much better at doing sims and god games where subjects have a little mind of their own. It seems this game tips the balance towards the RTS end of things, but hopefully a good balance can be achieved eventually since the devs are so willing to listen and change stuff.

      TL;DR: I think you have to read a bit more closely to find why Alec might think that way.

  7. ssh83 says:

    This is exactly why I did not back this game. The designers went on and on about improving the RTS mechanics of the game, but very little of how to take the thematic uniqueness of DK to the next level.

    It was very obvious to me that it would end up with something more mechanically complex like DK2 and not thematically unique nor friendly to insane creativity like DK1. A true DK sequel has more to learn from Goat Simulator than Star Craft.

  8. ffordesoon says:

    If I were Subterranean, I’d be extremely happy with this review, because basically all the problems described seem to me fixable.

  9. Kempston Wiggler says:

    Hmm. This is going to be a difficult purchasing decision. I’m all about the single-player too and really not into the pro-RTS multiplayer angle they’ve gone for, but it sounds so much like DK that I want to try it.

    By the way, chaps, HUUUGE props to you all for getting this to release! I’ve seen so many fan-projects die a death over the years that it’s always great to see one cross the finish line. Well done!

  10. Veldzhes says:

    I dunno. Huge DK fan myself I really like Wfto for what it is. The original DK it may not be but a solid spin off and quite faithful to the main features. And those fearing SP would be not as good: personally, i find the campaign to be great, well paced (reflexes needed in a later-game, but nothing too far stretching. I for one was actually quite pleased to have a challenge) and hilarious*. Sunk 21 hours in it already with 2 (or so) levels left. I highly recommend going through the campaign first. And Richard Ridings IS superb and plays as much a role to set up a mood as Stanley Parable’s narrator did. ‘Welcome BAK Underlo-ord!’
    The only set back is occasional bugs. The biggest issue for me are pathfinding calculations (i suppose) for huge amount of creatures which can result in significant frame drops during, for example, a payday. Got several freezes and crushes because of it as well. But aside of that WFTO is pretty solid game IMO and i am quite happy with my purchase.
    So yeah, anyone interested, i suggest to wait a couple of patches first. The rest, from my perspective, is very nice and quite a deed for a debut.

    P.s. Does anyone remember the color pallet of the first DK? That lovely green-ish on the stone, claimed tiles and dirt and overall feeling of…er… Used Dungeon for a lack of a better term. Now THAT is what i miss. DK II and WFTO are both too brown IMO.

    *Aside from the necromancers level. While great in demonstrating the mechanic it was a bit same-y all the way trough.

  11. v21v21v21 says:

    On third pic, from start:

    “Ah, yes, the Treasure Room. That is when I finally had to admit to meself that Master was indeed bonkers as Farty Allan had been insisting all along. Threw open the door in a rage, one Sunday afternoon, screaming shrilly over and over, “are you daft boy, are you daft, answer me boy, are you daft?” and clobbered me round the ear with an ashtray. Through the ringing noises and pretty colours, heard Master say, again and again and again “I ‘ve told you once if I ‘ve told you a thousand times, ONE trunk in the middle, one sack HERE and one sack HERE. Not two, not three. And you move to the next pile.”

  12. Ace Rimmer says:

    Myeah, I’m a bit torn over this one too. I respect the hell out of the developers for what they’ve achieved, and setting out to make the game *you* want to make rather than whatever market-tested, focus-grouped title a major studio wants to shell out for seems to be exactly what crowdfunding should be for. That said, as yet another decrepit, non-competitive tinkerer I’m not convinced the game they wanted to make is a game I’m particularly interested in playing. Which is not a criticism per se, by the way.

    • Hedgeclipper says:

      I think I have to agree with you. They’ve achieved something getting it out and I really wanted to like it but everything I see about it diminishes my anticipation a little more.

  13. Bodylotion says:

    I do not own this game yet but like many games who try to ‘resurrect’ or copy a great game, there’s always one important factor easily overlooked: Nostalgia. Even if, somehow, there will be a next Dungeon Keeper, it probably won’t feel the same.

    Tomb Raider 1 was the first game for me on my Playstation, I loved everything about the game. The new Tomb Raider is pretty good, but just misses the same feeling the classic one had.

    Games I hope to see one day (or copies): Theme Hospital 2, Little Big Adventure 3, Outcast 2, Sanitarium 2, Fallout Tactics 2. I would even like to see some FPS games ressurected like; Kingpin 2, Blood 3, Requiem 2 or Soldier Of Fortune 3 ……….. a man can dream.

    • jinglin_geordie says:

      Lemmings 2 multiplayer, split screen as per the Amiga.

  14. disorder says:

    Even if I liked DK2 just fine, I always found it to be a DK-lite. Having played a range of the (single player) DK1 campaigns on link to keeper.lubiki.pl relatively recently, this feels to me more like ‘DK2′ itself, and in mostly good ways.

    Some of the comments about the monsters’ blandness I feel, but I recognise the constraints the developers must have had, though honestly I didn’t find DK2’s monsters intrinsically any better, and really it’s sort of superficial to me. A little less, is being unable to find the ‘hatchery’ and being infuriated because, of course it’s not one anymore. It’s not an unfair complaint that on release it was/(and is) as buggy as its representation of a tavern floor.

    Monsters of course do not spend much time in the tavern. I play/ed DK for the campaign. Against that; WftO is ok. The voice, of course is a joy to listen to and I had moments of genuine amusement at some of the in-character evil that you can decide to partake. But a lot of it is unnecessary. And I solved most of my problems with traps.

    Maybe I could have done these missions another way, or would have even preferred to if I could deploy the 6-8 ‘necessary’ rooms in a format that met my own arbitrary efficiency standards quickly enough to at least beat the first wave and torture-convert the rest of my army hence, so on dungeon-management-sim standards, I find it like DK2: not all that I wanted.

    But I am first and foremost /amazed/ that this exists (and since at least some of its developers are reading this – thanks – and please add shortcut keys to the room/unit/construct etc panels). And also that it feels like Dungeon Keeper. That grants it, from me at least an almost unlimited amount of forbearance.

  15. Orful Biggun says:

    I’m fine with the added complexity of this new game.

    I’d argue that DK and (to a lesser degree) DK 2 were practically perfect for their time, but one of the reasons we fans of those games look back on them so fondly, IMO, is because that singular experience has never been duplicated, really.

    Had we been playing five or six similar games in the years since (provided that they weren’t cheap clones with no thought put into them), people would, I think, best remember DK as the first of them. Much like Civilization and it’s sequels, I guess.

    And had there been a DK 3 back in the day, after DK 2 … well, I’m pretty sure most people would have wanted more than just a reskinned DK 2?

    I felt the same way about the Fallout license in that I’ve never understood why the license owners (Bullfrog until they went away, then EA? I’m not sure how that went) or *somebody* didn’t take the DK license and run with it. The right devs and company could have struck gold with it, IMO, and I’ve always wondered why it never happened …

    • Mr Coot says:

      Yes, I don’t really know what happened. Back in the day I used to log onto Bullfrog’s DK2 site faithfully to see where things were at with DK3. They had gone as far as making a trailer for DK3 which was available on the site. But then development was cancelled.

  16. Mr Coot says:

    I’ve been pleased with WftO so far, but I haven’t gone beyond L6 of the campaign and I’ve heard the rush and exponential spike in difficulty happens soon-ish, so that may dampen my enthusiasm a bit. I’m comfortable with the innovative bits tho’ my focus is single player so they probaby aren’t going to enhance my experience a lot.

    Subterranean have been v responsive with respect to reported bugs and little bits missing since launch, so even with bits unpolished I think you can purchase it with confidence. (I would not save in the middle of a campaign while patches are coming thick and fast tho’, since I did have an problem with L4? Shades of Grey being not completable which I think was an update issue. I had progressed almost to the end, saved and returned later. I think an update reset the level’s objectives, yet would not recognise when I re-completed them, so I was left stuck with the initial underminer objective incomplete, which did not allow me to place an underminer anywhere else in the level, so I could not access the final brimstone enclosed area)

    I spose if I had to say what I am missing so far (and I am an original DK1, Deeper dunjs and DK2 player) it is firstly, that the campaign landscape has slightly thwarted me building my beautiful artistic dungeons of evil with everything, and secondly, I’ve found that even at these early levels I haven’t been able to really sit back and be delighted by the things I’ve constructed because I am dealing with constant waves of heroes eg. explore how the shrine works or just generally get into the zen of my creatures enjoying my dungeon amenities.

    This is a minor thing, but the possibility of your creatures fighting each other, seems not enabled. Lair placement and separation were important lest your flies be eaten by spiders or your captured fairies come a cropper from (?)vamps, that was a kind of annoying yet fun aspect.

    On the whole, I’m looking forward to spending a lot more time with the game and I’m optimistic Subterranean have created something good. I’m slightly nervous on their behalf, tbh! In case EA turn nasty if they are too successful and use comments like Mr Meer’s ‘it is a remake of DK2’ as evidence that the game is commonly seen and perceived as such, in a future legal action.

  17. mafon2 says:

    I strongly agree with an article and feel the same way towards this bastard child. As said before, IMHO, it’d be better for DK-style game to chase after social aspects of different species living together and holding against invading heroes, greedy for loot and exp.

    It always bugged me that heroes have their own dungeon base – it’d be nice to make raids to “overworld”: capture virgins, set houses on fire and pillage. It would had added nescecary evil deeds, while not feeling like you wage war against other keeper.

  18. javier-hndz says:

    War For The Overworld However, not content to resume the basics of what made the success of the series from Electronic Arts to bring up to date, he also adds a large amount of content it also brings a lot of new both in terms of construction, than the monsters.

  19. avensis says:

    a significant mega thing, most of those who are working on this game are people who worked on older bulfrog games ! (dungeon keeper, theme park, theme hospital etc)

    accessoire galaxy note 4 coque galaxy s6

  20. scuttstorm says:

    I agree with the author. I understand wanting to capture whatever competitive feel DK1/2 had, but not all players played the games for that reason. In fact, I’d be willing to bet most people didn’t play either of those games for that reason. I feel like a lot was lost by moving minion presence away from characters living in your dungeon to an xp-accruing resource that come with stabby things and die laughing. I’m a very defensive player, and approach all RTS campaigns almost squeamishly. Dawn of War is my favorite RTS, and I’ve never played the campaign on anything above easy. The vanilla release of WFTO feels too frantic and like I’m throwing monsters at swords hoping to squash the heroes regardless of who survives.

    That said, I still like playing this game. It still *feels* like DK, which is all anyone can really ask for at this point.