John Carpenter's Toxic Commando

There are few filmmakers who have influenced me as much as John Carpenter. I grew up with his films, and cult classics such as Halloween, The Thing, The Fog, and Big Trouble in Little China had a profound impact on me as a curious young boy in the 1980s and early 1990s. Whether it was through late-night TV broadcasts or worn-out videotapes rented from the local store, there was something very special about his creations, that unique blend of ice-cold atmosphere, pulsating synth music, and a passion for craftsmanship, plus the unforgettable characters.

The films were wonderfully cynical, punk, and uncompromising, a big middle finger to the establishment. Carpenter was a person who seemingly always did what he wanted and never sold out or bowed to those in power with their fat wallets. In his later years, his interests have naturally shifted somewhat, with more focus on music and fewer passion projects. So when Toxic Commando was announced, with his name attached to it, it was hardly surprising that I became a little curious.

Carpenter in digital form, or at least his essence, could certainly be something. But the more time I spent with Toxic Commando, the clearer it became that Carpenter's name mostly serves as a draw on the cover, which in this context, feels about as natural as sticking The Thing logo on a can of energy drink and selling it over the counter. It's dirty and dishonest.

And that's a little disappointing because Saber Interactive (the team that graced us with the eminent World War Z in collaboration with the master of horror himself) and Carpenter should sound like a recipe for a pretty nice cocktail, offering grotesque monsters, multiplayer, pulsating synth music, and a little 80s aesthetic sprinkled on top. Blood and apocalypse cast in neon, quite simply.

The premise really feels like material from any B-movie and is actually quite charming. An energy company drills down into the earth's core in search of unlimited power, which ends in disaster. Instead of clean energy, they find something completely different, a mysterious and evil substance - a form of supernatural sludge, if you will - which begins to transform people into grotesque monsters. The world is heading for total collapse and the only thing standing between humanity and complete destruction is a bunch of semi-competent soldiers sent in to clean up the mess.

The tone is clearly pulp - moderately self-deprecating and pretty damn silly - but also the game's strongest suit. It's not a story that engages, but it entertains and is conveyed with a delightful gusto mixed with a good dose of exaggerated acting. There is undeniably something liberating when a game of this calibre actually chooses to skip the serious and overly dramatic. John Carpenter's Toxic Commando shamelessly wallows in its B-movie aesthetic, and for that I give them a thumbs up. You can tell that Saber has really tried to capture some kind of godforsaken 80s energy here.

But a fun (silly) story and pumping soundtrack are hardly enough to carry the game and the problems quickly become apparent as soon as you spend more than an hour with Toxic Commando, which underneath that crisp 80s surface layer, is honestly just another hoard shooter among many. It's the same old co-op experience we've played a hundred times before, but now with John Carpenter's name plastered on the cover. The whole thing is almost painfully familiar and the feeling of déjà vu is almost overwhelming. Four players work together in various missions where you drive between checkpoints, defend positions, and shoot your way through massive hordes of enemies.

The structure is so soporifically familiar that you fall into what can almost be described as a trance, where everything just goes on autopilot and completely fails to engage on an emotional level. The class system is also exactly what you'd expect; a medic who (surprise) patches up the team, a defender who can tank damage, and two other roles that focus on a mix of explosive weapons, damage output, and gadgets. Everything works fine technically, but it also feels like you've seen the exact same setup in a dozen other shooters over the past ten years.

In all honesty, the most unique feature of the game is the incredible number of enemies that attack, and this is where Saber's game engine really flexes its muscles. Technically speaking, it's hard to complain. No, it's not something that will blow you away visually, but everything flows at a breakneck pace without a hiccup. Another minor bright spot worth mentioning is the vehicles, which add some variety and create genuinely fun moments, where ploughing through hordes of enemies in a big jeep never gets boring.

But at the same time, this is also part of the problem because what does Toxic Commando actually want to be? There's a very "everything at once" feel to it, where they seem to have thrown everything at the wall and hoped it would stick. Is it a tactical co-op shooter? An arcade game about slaughtering zombies? Or some kind of off-road action game where you drive through mud while monsters jump on the bonnet? Everything is so wildly scattered and it becomes unfocussed, where systems are never really integrated into the larger structure and mostly feel silly.

When it comes to shooting, at least it's competent and the battles can sometimes be quite spectacular with almost impossibly large hordes of enemies rushing at you from all directions, mixed with bosses of varying sizes and calibres. And if you've played Space Marine II, much of this will feel familiar, albeit this time with zombies rather than xenos and heretics. When everything clicks, the blood splatters, the enemies pour forth like an unholy flood, and the screen is filled with explosions and it's actually quite fun.

But those peaks are few and far between and are almost always followed by long transport distances that quickly become very boring. The structure of the missions doesn't help the situation, which time and again boils down to: Drive to a location, shoot enemies, defend an object, drive on, rinse and repeat. It works in short doses, but after a few hours, the feeling of being on a hamster wheel starts to take its toll. Then you also start to notice how thin the content actually is. You do your missions, gather resources, upgrade your equipment, and level up. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's definitely not particularly memorable.

Perhaps the most ironic thing is how much the game leans on Carpenter's name. His musical fingerprint is definitely there and the soundtrack is actually one of the best parts of the game. But at the same time, it almost feels like the marketing promises more than the game actually delivers. When I hear the name Carpenter, I expect a lot more than this. Where is the mood, the atmosphere, the slowly creeping horror? Instead, Toxic Commando is loud, chaotic, and relentlessly generic. Its big saving grace is (unsurprisingly) the multiplayer. Playing with three other friends really elevates the experience and trying to rescue a stuck vehicle while ammunition is running low and zombies are climbing onto the roof can be hysterically fun. In those moments, the game works exactly as it should.

But that also says a lot about the game as a whole. When playing alone, it quickly becomes clear how repetitive everything is, as the battles feel longer, the missions more mechanical, and the game's charm disappears quite quickly when you're no longer laughing along with three friends on Discord. That is perhaps the game's biggest problem. John Carpenter's Toxic Commando is not a disastrous game. It's not even bad. It's just... very, very mediocre. A competent piece of craftsmanship that delivers a few hours of fun but lacks that spark that could have made it memorable.

Is there an audience for Toxic Commando? Yes, absolutely. For (approximately) £35, you get a lot of action and entertainment, provided you have three other friends to share the experience and who are on board with what you're getting into. It's yet another shooter in an already overcrowded genre and despite Carpenter's name and the (at times) beautiful aesthetics, there's nothing here that stands out or makes you react. Fun in small doses? Absolutely. But something you'll be talking about in a year's time? Hardly.