Project Wingman

A bit of a shorter review this time focusing more on the technical problems I encountered while playing Project Wingman than the game itself. I always wonder if I should even write these, but eh, whatever. It's either this or writing nothing at all.

Project Wingman is a game about flying a fighter jet. It's not quite on the level of a flight simulator, but the controls are definitely not optimized for gameplay, but take the simulation or immersion aspect into account. While the store page says this title runs in both standard and VR modes, this means, as usual, that it's a VR game that just so happens to work without VR. This explains why they want the gameplay to be more immerssive, and why the on-screen controls are for a controller. Despite trying to play with a keyboard and mouse, I got no instructions on what key does what, and the control of the plane wasn't even bound to the mouse. An abysmal experience. The terrible controls made me not want to play for too long, but I played long enough to understand that this was aiming for a more cinematic experience. A lot of fluff, a lot of story, voice acting even. I didn't care for that.

I don't have a VR headset and I generally don't play with a controller, so I can't judge the game on those merits. I also don't enjoy the story in most games. So from a keyboard and mouse, non-VR, and gameplay perspective, I can't recommend Project Wingman, since it neglects those aspects.

Solas 128

Visually, Solas 128 looked like an interesting puzzle game. Rhythmic beams of light packets flow from map to map, and your goal is to figure out a combination of mirrors and other objects to bounce, combine, and separate the beams from their emitters to their receivers. There are some 150-plus little grid-based screens, each their own puzzle to a degree, but some also combining with adjacent ones to form a larger puzzle.

I played for about an hour, beating maybe a third of the levels. They get harder as the game goes on, but I'd guess the whole game still has several hours of puzzles, which is a nice amount. But what's not so nice is that the puzzles never got enjoyable. At first, there was a lot of freedom, so everything was too easy. Just place the mirrors in the right place and you win. But as the levels went on, there were more and more restrictions, which did make the process of finding the right solution harder, but they didn't make it more satisfying. To a degree, it felt like you could find every possible way to arrange things on the board, and eventually you just won.

It's difficult to make good puzzle games, but that's no excuse, and neither the presentation nor the puzzles themselves were particularly good here. Even as more mechanics are added, the game feels minimalistic. Even as the puzzles get difficult, your toolbox isn't large enough to feel like your solutions are anything of your own. It's 90% just a dry quest to find the board state that the developer intended, and I don't believe that makes for a fun game.

Trials of Fire

Trials of Fire is yet another rougelike deckbuilder, except this time it has both a battlemap and an overworld map, both made of hexes. You start by choosing 3 out of 9 classes, each with their own deck, passive ability, and unique equipment slots. Some cards are common cards shared between characters, others are specific to the class. There's no real story mode in the main game. You're just plopped onto the map and given an arrow which way the main quest lies. On the way you can complete various smaller encounters, upgrading your deck, getting new equipment, upgrading your equipment, and gathering supplies to rest every now and then.

To me, there's nothing really new here. The map is nearly purely cosmetic, and there are no real decisions to be made regarding where to go. Just selecting one out of three options for the next encounter would have been the same and easier. Equipment giving new cards is interesting, but they seem to focus more on quantity than quality, so the average card is often not even good enough that I'd want them all. Equipment also gives extra temporary HP (once per combat) and opportunities to swap out your hand, so it's usually worth it, but still a bit frustrating at times. The characters don't seem to have a lot of synergy with each other, and not even themselves. Sure, the cards they get thematically fit them, but it never felt very exciting playing any of them or progressing my deck. This is by far the biggest problem this game has, and the largest contributor to the "it doesn't feel fun" issue, I believe. There are also some balance problems. Some cards and tactics are crazy strong while others are garbage. This does extend to the classes as a whole, to a degree.

Overall, it's actually a fine game. I played for a few hours, and time flew by faster than I expected, but looking back at all the other roguelike deckbuilders I've played, this just doesn't measure up, and I don't even hold the others in high regard. Some of it comes down to this clearly being made by a smaller team, and some comes down to bad game design. If you're a fiend for roguelike deckbuilders and want to play all of them that are half-decent, then go ahead. But this game is #54 on the list of roguelike deckbuilders right now, so there's no shortage of selection among supposedly better titles. I wouldn't recommend trying it.

YumeCore

Rolling a random game from my backlog and getting something from more than 5 years ago often really shows how I had different standards back then. At least, I can not imagine anything that would possess me to add YumeCore to my backlog today.
This is like the most indie Japanese game I can imagine. Graphics and animations straight out of MS Paint. Absolutely nonsensical storyline. And someone just wanted to make a beat 'em up game.

I don't really know what to say about this. The fighting mechanics are on par with some of the better Flash games I played 15 years ago. The graphics aren't. They're worse, somehow. But you get to beat up some trash enemies, and each stage ends with a boss fight, I think. I didn't really feel like playing past the first stage. Oh, and you can grab a different powerup for each stage, if you want. Maybe there's some message at the end, but I'm not expecting anything worthwhile.

In case this needs to be said, I don't recommend it. I'm surprised at the positive review score for a 3 hour game of this... quality.

Frincess&Cnight

I decided to try a puzzle platformer for a change. It's small, rather unknown, but highly rated by its small audience. It's Frincess&Cnight, and it can be played as either a single player game where you control two characters, or you can give control of the other character to a friend in local co-op.

One player plays the Frog Princess - the Frincess, and the other the Cat Knight - the Cnight. The Frincess can walk on walls and ceilings by grabbing them with her tongue, as well as eating the Cnight and either carrying him or shooting him as a projectile. Meanwhile the Cnight has the ability to jump, use platforms, act as a wall for the Frincess, and smash or push blocks. There are other small differences, but the point is that they have very different movesets. Together, they must navigate the levels and both reach the end without either dying.

There are 55 single-screen levels, and it took us 3 hours to beat. Playing alone might be a bit more difficult, as some levels do expect timing, and could take an extra hour. I found the abilties of both characters, as well as the fact that they were divided at all, to be quite unique. Puzzle platformers often live by having some idea that hasn't been done before, and it definitely succeeded in that regard. As for the level design... The single-screen levels were cute, and didn't require checkpoints, but they're not as impressive as a full map. Also, the first levels were extremely easy, with only a couple levels that took more than 2 minutes in the first 45 levels. After that, the difficulty quickly ramped up, and a couple of the later levels even took us 15-30 minutes, but sometimes for unsatisfying reasons like trial and error. The various mechanics introduced weren't always pushed to their limits, and were rarely combined in a meaningful way.

Overall, while Frincess&Knight is far from a masterpiece, and doesn't have amazing level or puzzle design, it was never bad either, and didn't overstay its welcome. For the low price of 1 euro that it's often sold for these days, I would recommend it if you like puzzle platformers and have a friend to play with. If not, then this isn't really the game to step into the genre from.

Overload

I've played a few six-degrees-of-freedom shooters before, and while I don't remember liking them, I figured it's been a while, so I gave Overload a try. It is the highest rated game of the genre on Steam after all.

Sadly, the attempt didn't last very long. I found little excitement in the game mechanics. Aside from the novelty of moving around in 6DOF zero-gravity, which I'm not even sure is a positive, as it only furthered my disorientation in the already labyrinthine 3D level layout, it was a pretty basic game about moving, dodging, and shooting. Sure, there's different weapons and upgrades, and other small things, but it doesn't really change the game. It seems very much like the "boomer shooter" genre (the naming origins of which I still don't understand), which I have tried plenty of times to know is not for me. The focus is more on speedrunning or getting high scores, as well as repeating the same content over and over to get better. Maybe it's good if you like that genre, but it's one of my least favorites.
I did notice nearly all reviews talking about a game by the name of Descent, which is a game from the 90s made by the same people? I guess the postive review score comes nearly entirely from old fans of that, happy they got a modernized version of something they used to love. Honestly, 20 years ago, I would have loved this game too.

Overall, I don't like Overload. I blame it mostly on disliking the genre, but if you like simple shooters then maybe it's worth a try. Supposedly there's nothing better than this in the 6DOF genre. But yeah, personally, I have no ground on which to recommend it. I just don't get what makes these games interesting.

Mini-Dead

Mini-Dead is a short and simple free boss fight game. You can fight three bosses (and later all three at once), each with its own unique attack pattern. You yourself are pretty unique as well, moving instantaneously to whereever your mouse is, unless you hold it down, in which case you shoot a beam, which is your only source of damage, and upon release, teleport to the location of your mouse. It's purely a game of dodging and then finding time to stand still and attack. Impossible to fail in slow-motion, as you can teleport to any point on the map instantly and with no delay, but as a counterbalance, the game is anything but slow.

Turns out it's supposed to be a sort of advertisement for the developer's other similar, also small, but not free, game. I can't say it won me over, but I didn't manage to get bored in the 15 minutes it took me. Would I recommend it? Probably not. While it's not bad for what it is, it also isn't good, but most importantly, it isn't much anything at all.

Regions of Ruin

I tend to be a little more lenient with free games and games I already find in my library, as they are effectively free. And so I had somehow gotten Regions of Ruin, though I'm quite sure I never bought it. It doesn't have a great review score, but honestly, I'm surprised it got one even that high.

Aside from having relatively much content and not garbage art, everything else I saw in this game looked like someone's solo first commercial video game project. Incredibly clunky movement, the most basic of combat actions, nearly no animations, badly designed UI, unintuitive gameplay... I can't go into depth because I had such a bad time at the start that I quit very shortly after. Let me share my opening minutes.
The tutorial got skipped because an enemy forced me to keep backing off since the game hadn't told me the correct keys for combat yet, and then told me to "dash to skip the tutorial". In an effort to not do that, I pressed space, hoping to either attack or jump over the enemy, but it was of course the key to dash. (Jump existed but was unbound. Or maybe it wasn't, because half the UI wasn't visible due to the text not fitting into its boxes, so settings and/or keybindings seemed unlabelled.) Arrow keys were the ones to attack by the way. After forcibly skipping the tutorial I tried to gather wood with the axe I was given at the start considering I was in a forest and this was a game about building a settlement (among other things), but of course trees can't be cut down for wood and the axe is effectively cosmetic. I proceeded to run into an archer who was out of my reach because I couldn't aim my throwing weapon, and who proceeded to kill me because I wasn't told I could use my shield.

I hope even just a fraction of my frustrations got through from this. I did even give it another try by restarting the game, but even "properly" playing, the game was far from anything fun in neither the combat nor the building aspect. Stay away from this one, it's really bad.

Swallow the Sea

Swallow the Sea is a free 15 minute long game I picked up due to its high review score. In hindsight, this may have been from an influencer playing it, as I found nothing noteworthy here.

It uses the mechanic of "you can eat things smaller than you" and places you in a rather unsettling underwater maze-like area. You have to clear each area, eating smaller things, avoiding larger things. And then there's some semi-cryptic thing at the end.

That's all there is to say. I wouldn't recommend it. It's pretty boring and very short, even among this non-novel genre it is in. I can't say it's even worth the 15 minutes it took.

Forager

I usually don't even give games a try that have been abandoned mid-development or immediately after the release, especially if the abandonment has been this... ugly. But I don't want to get into the drama, and since I saw this was still very highly rated despite it all, I figured I would give Forager a try.

As of right now, Forager is the 25th highest rated "Open World Survival Craft" game on Steam. This says more about how much people love the genre than how good or bad the game is though, since the reviews are pretty decent. However, I still don't get it.
Forager seems to play the same as most all other games in this genre. Collect materials, craft them into better materials and build things, upgrade your tools, maybe explore and fight some, and repeat ad nauseam. I understand the appeal of seeing progression and numbers going up, but I don't see the appeal of doing this via repetitive manual labor.
Admittedly, I didn't stick around Forager for very long since if the start of the game wasn't going to be any interesting, the end definitely wasn't, with it being abandoned and all. Despite minor differences in format, with an initially very limited area, and additional space being unlocked by purchasing new islands, there seemed to be no fundamental difference in the gameplay here from any other game in this genre that I've played.

This review is a bit too short for me, but I really have nothing more to say. I obviously didn't enjoy it since I don't like the genre, but even for fans of the genre, perhaps a more complete and nuanced title would be preferable. Even just in the last year, 4 higher rated open world survival crafting games have been released, and I'm sure more are coming.

5D Chess With Multiverse Time Travel

I've long dabbled in Chess. I'm pretty good at Chess as just a person, but not so good compared to actual hobbyists, since it's a bit too plain for me to play regularly. One day, I saw 5D Chess With Multiverse Time Travel on the Steam store, and I was torn between thinking it might just be the kind of twist needed to make Chess more interesting for me, and thinking that this gimmick surely can't make for reasonable Chess games. Admittedly, I believe I was wrong on both counts.

Calling it 5D Chess might be a bit of a misnomer. Perhaps I didn't get into it enough, but it seemed to only have 4 dimensions. Each piece can move in the usual 2 dimensions on the board, but they can also move backwards in time (according to their usual rules of movement). Now, once a backwards (in time) move happens, a parallel dimension is created with one extra piece that was just moved there, and this opens up the other two dimensions. Generally it's not possible to hop forward in time (because the future has not happened yet), but with parallel dimensions that are in the past, you can combine a dimensional and a temporal move to do just that.
Parallel dimensions are resolved first, making moves until they catch up with the present. Normally this would mean that it's too easy to escape a sticky situation (or stall the game) by just going back in time, but doing so actually creates a disadvantage. You see, each player can only create one active parallel dimension more than their opponent. You only need to checkmate their king on a single board in all the past and present multiverses, and usually that means disallowing them from creating another parallel dimension.

I found the rules actually fairly approachable once I read them instead of jumping into a game as the first thing. It's not the rules that are the problem, it's the insane branching of the state space, and developing any sort of intuitive understanding of it. At least for analysing the present situation, a computer has no problem with two extra dimensions, but I do. But as far as I can tell, the games are reasonably balanced for humans at least, so that's one part where I was wrong.
Sadly, I was also wrong in it making Chess more interesting. Adding a more complex space for the usual boring Chess pieces was not the solution to make it more interesting, at least not for me. I was already failing at adequately analysing the present situation in Chess which annoyed me, and the problem was just amplified here. Instead taking the game in the direction that Chess Evolved Online took it by having more interesting pieces instead was way more up my alley.

So a bit more of a letdown for me than I expected. It still feels like the same old Chess I've always been playing, just more complicated. I will give the developers that it's an impressive feat, adding time travel and alternate universes to Chess and somehow making it make sense. It was worth trying it out just to understand what was going on and go "Oh, cool!", but would I actually recommend it as a game? Probably not, unless analysing Chess in two dimensions is too easy for you, and you always wanted to branch into alternate dimensions rather than thinking more moves ahead.

Kenshi

Big game today. Ranked #210 on Steam by reviews. It's a bit of an insane game. It's Kenshi. I hear it was developed over 13 years by a small team, maybe just a couple of people, and honestly, it feels exactly like that, in the best way possible. Well, aside from the part where you will feel incredibly lost at the start of the game, as almost nothing of this complex world is explained.
It's a bit difficult to pinpoint what exactly Kenshi is. It's a bit of everything. An open-world sandbox management survival RPG. There's a lot you can do in this game, and full playthroughs that let you experience everything take about 300 hours. While there are definitely different ways to play the game, it may be a bit more narrow than I initially thought. Let's go through my expriences of the game, and explore it that way.

There are a few different starts to the game, claiming to offer a different gameplay experience. I wouldn't agree with that, because you can change literally everything that makes your start unique. And that's part of Kenshi's pitch - you're not special, you're just another nobody in a big world. Many starts are with a single person of a certain race, perhaps with existing relations to other factions. You may indeed get attached to your starting character and the faction they initially support, but it's easy to just recruit someone new and start over if you so wish.
I wanted to have a fresh start so I started naked in the middle of a desert, hiding from hordes of bandits and giant bugs that could all outrun and kill me. I stayed alive by scavanging the aftermaths of battles. Basic gear from dead bandits, meat from the bugs, grill it over a fire, stave off starvation. I grabbed as many valuables as I could carry (and still manage to run away from threats) and made my way to the nearest town. Most likely in the interest of balance, equipment and weapons are expensive to buy, cheap to sell, and whatever the bandits had was near worthless. Still, I got enough for a small backpack so I could bring in more next time, and set out towards the next town, unsure where I was headed in the long-term.
Towns aren't very different from each other. Smaller ones may not have all the shops, and sell worse gear, and outposts may only be dedicated to military or slavery, and be of little interest to a lone adventurer. The desert I was in was a huge area controlled by the largest human faction that heavily practiced slavery. Both the giant murder bugs and the lack of potential to grow crops made me think this isn't the best place to settle down, so I continued on. Slowly, I got better gear from scavanging, enough food to be well-fed, and got better at running and carrying things, allowing me to start picking fights with smaller groups or ones half-dead from a fight. Attacking any major faction was a bad idea, but most things in this game wouldn't kill you. They'd knock you out, loot your food, and if you were tough enough, you'd wake up in a few minutes instead of succumbing to your injuries.

This might be a great time to talk about the RPG elements of the game. Kenshi is very swordfighting focused, with a beautiful combat system. Characters actually swing their weapons, and attacks usually have to physically connect to deal damage. A bit of it is faked by characters "taking turns" in fights, but regardless, it's beautiful to see blades clashing, attacks being blocked, sometimes a hit going through, the enemy getting staggered. Health is limb-based, with your head and torso being vital organs, causing unconciousness and death upon damage, but otherwise relatively useless to combat. Limbs are quite the opposite, becoming useless if damaged, but not threatening your life. Cuts need bandages, lest they continue to get worse, and recovering from wounds takes a long, long time. Every skill, combat or not, is trained by using it. Even just a 10 level difference is a huge advantage, and after 20-30 levels over your enemies, you may be able to start taking down entire squads alone. But the same is true for your enemies, and the game doesn't scale to you. It will throw level 70 enemies at you at the start if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Anyways, I played the game as an RPG for a while, roaming the world alone, seeing new and wonderful new places, people, and animals. I think the joy of exploration is the best part of the game, so I won't spoil what I found, but generally the playable and friendly (as in, won't kill you on sight) races are in a diagonal from the bottom left to the top right, and the other two corners of the world are increasingly hostile areas. But the one thing I found during my travels was that just about every piece of this godforsaken land was near-inhabitable. There was no "good" place to settle, only bad or worse. The only area with any greenery was controlled by religious zealots who hated women, and unluckily for me, I was playing as one. But after seeing a lot of what the world had to offer, and being mauled and cut unconcious and half to death what must have been close to 100 times, I finally chose a place to settle near an acid river with torrential blood rain and unsettling bug people. Despite their appearance, they are the friendliest race in the game and the only one who will never be hostile towards you unless you straight up attack or rob them. They are also poor and have only the most basic things up for trade.

Settlement building is the other large part of the game, and while it's not stricly necessary, it's by far the best source of large quantities of food, quality gear once you learn how to make it, and money from selling everything you make. After setting up some rudementary mines, storage, a research bench to learn how to make new things, and earning enough money, I went on a search for my first recruit. They're somewhat expensive, but manual labor is terribly slow, and an extra pair of hands makes all the difference. After finding one and carrying her unconcious ass sucked half dry by blood spiders she was too weak to fight and too slow to outrun back to the camp, I set up automated tasks for her to tend to all the farms and prepare food while I went out to find more people.
Progress was very slow at first, as better methods of mining and processing are locked behind research, and research needs books, which cost money, which I also needed for more people. Luckily, the area was rather safe, aside from the occasional gorilla mauling my entire camp and then leaving. Slowly but surely, the town grew to over a dozen people and money started to become somewhat abundant. I wondered if the rest of this game would be this colony sim, but I soon hit another block. Research wanted more than just books, yet no one would sell them. While playing without a settlement is possible, playing without exploring is not. I gathered a small squad of my best fighters, outfitted them with my best equipment, packed rations, and set out to explore yet again, leaving the rest to tend the outpost.

I was about 50 hours in by this point, and this was where my patience started to wane. See, almost no matter how strong you are, you will take a hit in fights, exponentially more so if fighting against many enemies. My original character was strong from tens of hours of exploring the world, but I didn't have the time to invest that much into everyone else as well, and so most fights they got knocked out, and I was left fighting most of the battle. They slowly got stronger, but recovery after each fight took so, so long. Waiting for everyone's wounds to heal, so that they could properly walk, properly fight again, that was the first time I wasn't having fun. But there was no other way. The rest of the game was about the exploration of these hostile areas (and upsetting the balance of power in the world, but that was an even more grand task). Despite the interesting world, and still progressing through the game, I eventually decided it wasn't worth it.

I played Kenshi for a total of about 90 hours, and I generally had fun for the duration. There are a lot of bugs that I didn't mention, and the art and general production quality is very indie-level, but the game itself is unlike anything I've played before. While I would usually say that it's near impossible to make two different games and do them well, I almost feel like Kenshi accomplished this task. I still have the feeling it might have been better if it focused solely on the exploration RPG part, but then again, I'm not sure how to do that without the vital base-building aspect.
There is also the small issue that the game is technically unfinished. I suppose the developer saw the huge interest in the game (and the income from it), and decided to hire a team and start making the sequel, instead of tinkering on this for several more years. It seems to be going well, if equally slow to the first game, so far, and I will most definitely try that when it comes out. But Kenshi itself? It's far from perfect, but it not only gets a recommendation from me, but also earns a spot in my favorite games of all time list. If you like at least most of the genres I listed this game as being earlier, go give it a try. You'll get over the janky and confusing start, and you will love it for a good many hours.

Impostor Factory

It's been a bit too many years, but I finally got around to the third installment in the To the Moon series - Impostor Factory. This has been my favorite Adventure game series (even among games that are not in a series), so I simply had to play this one too, and I wasn't disappointed. I won't repeat my full thoughts on the series here, you can read about them in my previous review that covers both of them. I also can't actually delve too deep into the story, as it's only 4 hours, and can be spoiled very easily.

While I wasn't disappointed, I do feel Impostor Factory wasn't as good as the two previous games. It almost feels a bit like a side story, as it is not centered on the two doctors anymore, and doesn't benefit from their chemistry and humorous antics. There is a bit of that between our two main characters this time, but I think the biggest change, and the biggest fault this time, is that the largest part of the game is this very linear, very dry and non-interactive telling of the main story. No breaks, no commentary, no interlude to break it up. Just laying it on us start-to-finish. And while it's still a good story, it doesn't hit as hard as past ones. This may in part be because the formula is clear from the two previous games, but even then, it would have been their responsibility to not make it feel like they're just following the cookie cutter formula that worked last time, just with fewer embellishments.

Despite the negativity, I'm by no means saying it's bad. It's still lovely, still emotional and sad, and I still very much recommend playing it (after finishing the previous two). It's just not as good as the absolute masterpieces that were To the Moon and Finding Paradise.

1bitHeart

I finally got around to the third and last of Miwashiba's games - 1bitHeart. They also make Alicemare and LiEat, the latter of which I rather enjoyed the story of. 1bitHeart is by far the longest of the three at 8-10 hours total, but also the least popular.

The game is almost entirely story-based, with you running around town, talking to a bunch of colorful characters, trying to make friends, and solve a mystery of a hacker taking over people's minds. The story's very lighthearted, definitely tries to be funny, and comes off as over-the-top and weird at times. Still, there's a charm to the eccentric behavior of just about all the characters, and it creates interesting dialogue of its own right. The art and music are enjoyable as well. Not amazing, but still good, and I have to give extra points for being rather distinct.
The game is divided into chapters, with each chapter starting with a phase of talking to just about every character, collecting useful (or not so useful) information, followed by an interrogation portion where you use the collected information to interrogate people and solve part of the mystery. Between chapters you can go around and talk to the characters around town some more. Sadly, due to the UI being very unclear, I was asked if I wanted to skip this phase, and I had no idea which of X and O were supposed to be yes and no, and I accidentally skipped it. Apparently you can take the time to increase your friendship here and play minigames, but I'm not sure if this ever ties back to the main story. Probably not.

I liked the unique setting and characters, but I can't really say the overall story was that gripping. It wasn't bad, but since I refuse to give any points for the nonexistant gameplay, I judge this entirely on its storytelling merit, and it just wasn't good enough. Again, it's not bad, and if the setting or plot sounded intriguing, you might enjoy it, but I can't really say I recommend it.

Peak

I got roped into playing Peak. It's a bit earlier after its release than I usually play games, but a good few months have still passed, allowing it to get in some updates. It's been a bit of a fad recently, and tauted as being a very good co-op game. Well, I'm perhaps a bit less enthusiastic about it.

Peak is a game about climbing a series of cliffs with various hazards. You're hurried on by a timer that slowly creeps up each cliff, but also by your hunger steadily rising. But going too fast might lead you into contact with one of the several hazards, inflicting you with heat, cold, poison, or worst of all, injury from falling. See, the challenge comes from having a limited stamina bar that drains while climbing and recharges if you have solid ground to stand on. But every problem that ails you detracts from that stamina bar. Injuries are a permanent penalty (though they can be healed with items), items have a weight, which also reduces your stamina, and most other status effects slowly or quickly go away, but for the duration still reduce your stamina. If you run out of stamina, you fall down, and if your maximum stamina goes negative, you pass out, causing you to die unless you recover on your own or with help from a friend. Aside from that, friends can help with an initial boost or pull you up the last stretch of a cliff. On the flipside, they can also steal your food or waste your items.

With how much hype the game got, especially on the co-op side, I was expecting a bit more. The game doesn't take itself very seriously, but it's also difficult enough that you can't really goof off unless you want to end your run very soon. Depending on your speed, a run can be 2-3 hours (why is the no pause button for such a long game?), and mistakes made early on may still have lasting consequences later, if you fail to find enough items to recover from them and also stay stocked up for the last and hardest levels. I was really hoping for both more cooperation and more use of items. Items may be powerful, but are rare and one-time use only, so aside from food, you're almost always just doing raw climbing, which isn't very varied or exciting. I guess I was expecting the cliffs to be more difficult, but have more aspects of using ropes or whatever and helping each other to reach the top. Instead, while having at least two players helps, the game is perfectly doable solo, and often with little to no items if you can plan your path well and keep your stamina up.

Did I like Peak? Would I recommend it? Not really. I didn't get the hype. It's an okay semi-casual party game, but I find it quite bare-bones on features, and not having enough real cooperation.

Wildermyth

Wildermyth is a turn-and-grid-based RPG where you control a group of adventurers over a campaign. You form parties of up to 5 characters and fight to reclaim the lands from whatever enemy is the main focus of the current campaign. There are 3 classes, with each class having a bunch of passive or active skills that can be chosen on level-up as well a variety of weapons and other equipment. Standard RPG stuff.
While the combat side doesn't really have much anything unique (wizards are interesting, by using and destroying terrain to fuel their spells), Wildermyth seems to pride itself on its story portions. Your characters age over the course of the campaign, and events that happen to them during the campaign affect them for the rest of their life. While the main story in each campaign is the same, there are a lot of smaller stories that get picked depending on the current state of things, as well as the personalities of the characters in the party. To me, the whole thing seems to be decently inspired by D&D, including that up to 5 people can play together in multiplayer.

To me, the multiplayer really helped in making the game bearable. Honestly, the combat, while not bad, is lacking innovation, and is rather low quality, with not even animations on the characters. The simplicity is firmly in the realm of board games, and I don't find that good in the slightest in a video game.
While the stories were interesting at first, they soon started feeling a bit disjoint. Truly procedural storytelling is very difficult, and Wildermyth does a pretty good job at it, but it still fails to bridge most parts of the story and make it feel like the things that happen really influence everything, instead of just having a single throwback event sometime later, if even that. Not to mention, after just two of the five campaigns, many story events start to repeat, lowering the enjoyability further. That was also where we stopped playing.

To be blunt, I wouldn't really recommnd it. There are actual board games that are better RPGs, and they have the advantage of allowing you to be physically together with people. I guess if you, for some reason, wanted all the drawbacks of a board game with none of the benefits (compared to a video game), except the pricy box, then maybe you'd like it. Judging by the reviews, a lot of people certainly did, though I don't understand why. I believe there are many better RPGs, both for playing alone and with friends.

Nodebuster

I was sick, so I didn't have the energy for most of the usual games I'd like to play. I just looked up the highest rated idle game that was out of Early Access that I wanted to play, and went ahead with that. That game was Nodebuster.

Immediately, I felt a bit bitrayed. Idler? Clicker? There is neither any clicking, nor can I go afk. Instead, I just attack the position around my cursor every couple of seconds, dealing damage to enemies there, and taking damage in return. Still low enough energy for me, I suppose. That's actually kind of the whole game. Geometric shapes spawn, drift across the screen like asteroids, and you gotta hit them and get upgrade currency for doing so. Survive long enough and a boss appears. Kill that, and you get to move to the next stage with new, but mostly just inflated stat-wise, enemies. Afer beating or failing a stage, you get to use your upgrade currency in a moderate size passive tree, but it's mostly just numerical upgrades. The game never changes.

Honestly, the game's polished for the low bar it tries to achieve, but I'm rather puzzled by this being one of the higher-rated "idle" games. It's incredibly simplistic, and I beat it in a single sitting. Sure, if you like idle games and want a new one to play, it's worth the time, and doesn't overstay it's welcome, but I can't really give it much praise for being good in any aspect. I guess I didn't dislike my time with it, so it gets a partial recommendation from me.

Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator

Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator is a name that's too long to write out every time. It's also a game about buying and selling organs. From the name, description, and the look of the UI, one would think that this is a deep game about trading. It definitely looks like more effort was put into the gameplay than the art. Sadly, upon playing it, I don't think that's the case.

The game revolves around the most basic rule of trading - buy low, sell high. You can either accept requests, buy organs from the market, and sell them to the people asking for them. Or you can use the stock market to buy organ stocks and then later sell them for a higher value. Same principle, but the stock market is easier to work with. Now, I didn't quite get to see what the goal of the game is, aside from making money, as after several in-game days of trading, that seemed to be all you could do. Sure, you get more requests and items to choose from as you complete requests, but fundamentally the game doesn't change, and it doesn't get any more interesting. You just accept a request, find an organ for cheaper than the request, and profit from the margin.

Admittedly, there are probably more advanced tactics with abusing NPCs and choosing what to buy and sell and when, but I found no real reason to interact with those. They're not explained, and it doesn't really feel rewarding figuring any of it out. The overall look and idea of the game is cool, but the execution is incredibly bare-bones and boring. I wouldn't recommend it.

The Magister

I remember Nerdook back from the Flash games era. I think I also remember rather liking his games. But we've come a long way since then, and sadly, the standards have risen. I feel like the quality of his games has not risen alongside those standards. I felt that with his previous games on Steam, and I feel this with The Magister.

The Magister is a rather short (a few hours long) murder mystery themed game that's actually more of a roguelike deckbuilder. In fact, you have two decks - one for combat, and one for talking. I will credit Nerdook for not copying the common formula for this genre. Instead, the two decks and the two game modes operate differently. During talking, you are on a turn limit and you accumulate points. You can spend those points either to make progress or to get more cards to make a stronger deck, just for that "battle". In the actual combat, you have a grid and a turn "timer". Cards have time costs, as does movement, but spending more time only delays when you next get to make your turn.

Honestly, maybe they should have used more common elements from existing games, because not only did I feel confused at times on how to play, I also really didn't enjoy what I was doing. The cards I played, the actions I took, none of them felt satisfying, especially compared to the combos I've come to expect from these kinds of card games. Combine that with the low production values common in an indie game and I had a pretty poor time.
Honestly, the game's not even highly rated on Steam, and even if you do like it, it's quite short. I think this one's a pretty clear failure and not something I could recommend.

Pyre

Ever since Bastion, I've been on a quest to eventually play through all Supergiant Games'... games. Their games have always been quite story-focused and innovative. Innovation means taking a risk, and doing so with every game is quite admirable. I'm glad it finally paid off with Hades, though I have not gotten around to it yet. Instead, today, it's Pyre.

Pyre definitely continues on having a focus on the story, more so than their previous games. The world this time around is some wasteland, where outcast criminals such as yourself have been exiled. Your goal is to participate in the Rites and win your way out of exile. The world and characters are very colorful, literally and figuratively, with a bunch of fantasy-races alongside our familiar humans. While far from fully voiced, the characters speak in a made-up language, which sounds oddly familiar, and adds a very nice touch. You get to, on occasion, talk to the various characters that make up your party. Your decisions, as well as the outcomes of gameplay matches, have consequences to the story. Whether these consequences reach far into the story or drastically alter its course, I was not able to tell. All in all, a lot of effort has been put into the worldbuilding, and I think the result on that front is excellent.
However, it's not all good. Many people coming to expect a game might find themselves spending more time reading, as if they were playing a visual novel. I would personally not object to that either, were the story and the writing excellent, but unlike the worldbuilding, they don't quite reach that level.

As for the gameplay, it's mostly a sort of 3v3 ball game. You control one character at a time, and your goal is to get the ball from the center of the field to to opposition's base. The ball can be run with, passed, and thrown. But while carrying the ball, you're vulnerable to other characters approaching you. If not carrying the ball, you can instead "shoot" at the enemies. There are some tricks for evasion, and different characters have different abilities, not to mention different attributes like speed or the size of their "aura" and attacks, allowing you to create your own team compositions depending on your own idea of a good strategy. The metagame - character level ups - also encourages you to not always pick the same team, even if you like them, offering nice variety.
The problem is mainly that I just don't like the gameplay. It's a kind of sports game, and it's just not something exciting to me. The boards are small, and the actions you can take are not very varied. It almost feels more like an arcade game. I'm also not terribly good at it, and losing doesn't just make you try again but furthers the story anyways, making the gaps between matches rather lengthy, and opportunities to learn to play well scarce.

I'd give it a partial recommendation. I think it's a fine game in theory, not really having much that would be universally considered a flaw, but in order to like it, you'd need to enjoy character interaction driven visual novels. Enjoying the mechanics of the high-action multi-character ball game, with a bit of party management on the side, is also important, but not as important as really caring for the story. If you're not into a lot of reading, I'd almost certainly stay away.

Everhood

I feel like I'm on a roll of rolling highly rated games which just don't appeal to me in the slightest bit. Everhood is the latest such victim. Again, a game I can only assume I added to my wishlist due to its overwhelmingly positive review rating. I can't remember, but I hope I've lowered the frequency at which I do this.

Everhood is a story-heavy rhythm adventure game. It seems there may be other minigames later on, but as far as I got, it was about jumping between 5 lanes to avoid incoming notes. While dodging every note is significantly easier than hitting every note, you're given only about 2-3 consecutive failures before losing the level. Worse still, the notes match the rhythm as the enemy fires them, not as they reach you, so you can't really use your ears for dodging them, bringing into question if this can be called a rhythm game at all.
As for what the story is about, I couldn't tell you. It was all some goofy abstract humor as far as I saw, and taking the happening events at face value seemed pointless. I didn't like it.

I mean the music is nice, I guess, but I will never play a game solely for the music (or the art). I found no fun in the gameplay, and no sense in the story, so I can't find a reason myself to recommend it to you. A lot of people say it reminds them of Undertale, which might also explain why I didn't like it. I can't say I made the connection myself.

Marie's Room

There are some things I look at when selecting a game, especially in terms of things that might hint that it's not going to be a good time. For one, free games tend to get more praise. This is somewhat surprising, as the low barrier of entry should mean more people who aren't as likely to like it will try it, but perhaps the bias from rating something highly because they didn't have to pay for it outweighs it? The other relevant thing here is that story games tend to be rated higher. I also can't quite explain this, but perhaps the group of people that likes games without much or any gameplay don't like leaving negative reviews? Well, games like Marie's Room reinforce these preconceptions in me.

It's a short free game rated at 93%, but it used to be overwhelmingly positive. I beat it in 30 minutes. You explore a room and recall the general life details of yourself (a girl) and your friend (another girl) during your teenage years. I found both the storytelling method as well as the story to be utterly unremarkable. In the rare case you would want to try it, I won't spoil it, but I've heard more interesting stories from real people I know. I mean, sure, in the context of a real story of a friend, it would be a very interesting tale, but in the context of a probably fictuous tale of someone I don't know about, it's garbage. Is that really the best they could come up with? And why do people like it?

I don't get it. It's not revolting, but it's boring. There is not a single memorable or interesting moment in the whole game. Free or not, there's so many better stories out there to read, preferrably not in a walking simulator or even a "game" format at all.

Grime

Grime is yet another Metroidvania Souls-like. That means it's a 2D (in terms of gameplay, not art) side-scrolling platformer with a focus on combat, but also a big interconnected map and backtracking. The usual. In fact, it's so usual that I quickly got bored of it. As I always say, if you're going to make a game in a genre that already has a lot of games, especially one that has a lot of good games, and you're not going to have some truly transformative innovation, then you have to make a really, really good game. Grime is definitely not a bad game, but in my short time with it, I saw very little innovation, and definitely nothing so good that it would keep me playing.

If anything, the biggest innovation I saw was the absorption mechanic. It effectively works as a parry, as you have to time it as the enemy attack is about to connect. This basically just instantly kills the enemy and consumes their essence, letting you collect them and become stronger. It also acts as a health potion once you absorb a few enemies. Of course, as the game goes on and enemies get tougher, you can't just absorb everyone anymore, at least not right away. Personally, not a big fan of parrying, especially as a mandatory game mechanic, so this little half-innovation isn't even a positive for me.

Personally, I wasn't a fan of the aesthetic, music, or anything else I saw either. Again, it's not a bad metroidvania, but with how much selection, and how many stellar options we have to choose from, I find it really hard to recommend it.

Lisa

I opted to let games that have been sitting in my library or wishlist for over 8 years cut in line for what to play next. I hope this won't come to bite me later if I can't keep up with playing through my backlog, but for now, there is only one such game.
For a game with over 10000 overwhelmingly positive reviews, perhaps the 15 minutes I gave Lisa were not enough. But between only picking this up because of its ratings, and literally everything I saw in those first 15 minutes being something I did not like at all, I didn't really think the game was going to do a 180 and become good, even if it did get better.

I understand Lisa is supposed to be a very story heavy game with some RPG elements and a large focus on dark humor. Personally, my initial feeling was that it was very abstract. Scenes just blinked at random intervals and constantly broke the continuity of the story, leaving me confused. The basic animations with little expression didn't help me understand either. I guess I hated the art style in general. Maybe that was part of the point - make the game look ugly, so you'd hate it, because it did feel like I was supposed to feel a resentment towards the game world. I'm not sure that's a great strategy to sell your game, but the reviews say otherwise. The combat system was some weird variation on the traditional turn-based RPG combat, and not only did it look confusing, it also looked unappealing. Any attempts at humor also failed to reach me.

Okay, so, listen. I only played for 15 minutes, so clearly my opinion isn't too relevant, but it was just as bad as it seemed in the screenshots. My personal opinion is that it's garbage, but if you want to follow the review scores like I did when I picked this up, I suppose I can't fault you for that either.

Chaos Zero Nightmare

Time yet again for a relatively timely review, as we'll be looking at another live service game. It's a gacha game by the name of Chaos Zero Nightmare, but it caught my attention due to being a roguelike deckbuilder. Not a novel genre by any means, but I can't say I've seen neither any live service games nor large studios attempt to tackle this genre. It's not large as far as major gacha games go these days, but still large in the grand scheme of gaming.

Instead of the gameplay, let's start with the gacha mechanics. It's basically a one-to-one clone of Genshin or other HoYoVerse games. Standard banners for characters and weapons, and then a rate-up banner for the new character and weapon. They give out a lot of pulls at launch, but generally the free-to-play income seems to settle around getting one 5* a month, which includes one rate-up 5* every other banner (about 6 weeks). Not too generous for a gacha game of its smaller scale, but luckily teams are composed of only 3 characters, and some 4* units are very good, so this shouldn't hamper your progression through the game.

For the gameplay, as mentioned, teams are composed of 3 characters, and each character has their own deck. All the decks are shuffled together, and the characters share most resources like HP, shields, action points, and card draw, but some self-buffs are only for the casting character. The enemies do not share any resources, and can be individually defeated. Most enemy actions also have a timer, ticking down by one each time a card is played. They will act the end of their turn unless the timer reaches zero, in which case they act immediately. It's an interesting mechanic, forcing to spend a little bit more time thinking about the order in which you play the cards, and which enemies you target first.
There are 5 elements in the game. Each character uses a single element, and each enemy is weak to a single element. Using elemental advantage deals 25% more damage, but also reduces the enemy's tenacity bar. Getting the bar to 0 will give an extra action point and increment their timer by 1, which is pretty powerful. This system seems to exist mostly to force team variety and to pull and invest in more characters, but I don't mind. It reduces the mental load of team-building, as you know 2-3 characters of the suitable element are usually best for a given stage. A healer / support might not need to match the element.
Additionally, your characters also receive mental damage, and may experience a mind break if they take too much. This is individual per character, and replaces that character's cards with 0-cost cards with a possible negative effect that you have to go through to recover the character. There is also an out-of-combat gameplay element around this mechanic.
While all this already gives replayability and progression for many hours and would be enough for a regular game, live service can't possibly stop here. There are several progression mechanics for upgrading the characters. One is of course copied from Genshin again, which is the daily farming of equipment with randomized stats. But the other, which you can repeat as often as you want, is the actual deckbuilding part of this game. See, content is divided into two - content where you build your deck, which usually means longer runs, and content where you come in with a pre-built deck, such as most of the daily farming, which is only a few minutes per run. During the longer runs, your characters start with their base deck, but evolve it over the course of the run, upgrading their existing cards, as well as finding ways to remove cards and add new cards which aren't specific to them at all. At the end, you get to save the deck for later use. There is a heavy amount of randomness here as well, so it's almost always possible to get a better run and improve on your decks, if you want to spend the time doing so.

While I can't possibly cover all the features of a gacha game, those are most of them. So, onto the negatives.
I found the story rather uninteresting and lacking plot hooks and events to look forward to, so I don't think that deserves any further mention. You can of course just click through it, but it's a shame nontheless.
The PC client is absolute garbage. Mainly the launcher, but the game itself is also heavily prone to crashing. I had no problems on mobile, and with the fully turn-based nature of this game, it does make for a pretty good mobile game, so if you're looking for a mobile-only game, this isn't a negative.
But by far the biggest problem is that the translation or localization quality is absolutely garbage. For most games, I would not mind, but card games are incredibly dependent on it being very clear what a card does. Even the best card games struggle with this, so you can imagine how bad it is when there are inconsistencies in terminology not just across cards, but even on a single card. I genuinely do not know what about half the cards do by just reading them. Sure, I can try them out in various scenarios and try to figure it out and memorize it for each card, but this is not fun. I feel like so much strategy and planning are stripped from me, and I'm left with just vibes. Again, this is fine if you just want to watch cute anime girls and boys beat the shit out of monsters, and play with your favorite waifus. But that's not the kind of player I am.
On that note, the game is pretty easy. I did not reach the very end, but I did not at any point struggle. Sadly, the game gates you from doing missions you probably aren't prepared for, which is a shame. Forced to do more boring content, never being challenged, even though harder content exists. That's a big negative in my book.

Overall, an intersting idea, but lacking in oh-so-many departments. There is some novelty in the roguelike deckbuilder mechanics, but it's going to feel very familiar if you've already played the genre. There is plenty of content, but this also includes a lot of grinding. Personally, the amount of randomness in the grind is a bit too much for me, and I would prefer more certain avenues of progression. But ultimately, the reason why I already dropped the game is because it is both too easy, and too unstrategic. Card effects are unclear, meaning you're best off just playing this on a more casual level. I can imagine this is completely fine for many players looking for a casual gacha game in some novel genre to them, if they don't usually play indie games. But for me, there's nothing here, and I can't recommend it.

Helltaker

At long last, once a game in the top 20, now the 31st top rated game on Steam, it's Helltaker! Fun fact, I noticed this was going to be my 667th blog post by complete coincidence, so of course I did the only rational thing and kicked the 666th post back by a slot, so that this could be number 666 as it was fated to be.
Did I know this was going to be an incredibly short and simple game that only reached its immense popularity because it was free and had attractive demon girls in it? Of course, but I still had to play it.

Helltaker is mostly a puzzle game. It's composed of 10 short levels. The first ones are rather simple, but a couple of the latter ones are actually very difficult for how small the board it. See, you move on a grid, kicking around skeletons and stone blocks, maybe going over some traps or getting a key on your way to seduce a hot demon girl. You're on a very limited budget of moves, and levels have just about one correct solution. The final level turns to an action game about dodging lasers instead, but that's very easy compared to the puzzles. If you want more content, there's more levels after the end, without the girls, sadly.

Listen, it's not gonna win any awards for being a good puzzle game, but it's honestly decent for what you pay. I definitely don't regret the hour I spent on it. The characters are charming, as brief as your interactions with them are, the music is bopping, and I will admit that if I had to choose any kind of monster girl, it would be a demon girl, so there's that.
Would I recommend it without the sexy demon girls? Probably not. But personally, all things considered, I'll give this a partial recommendation.

Star Apprentice: Magical Murder Mystery

I think I picked up Star Apprentice: Magical Murder Mystery due to the low barrier of entry (it's free), and the short playtime of it (1 hour). While I don't normally write about visual novels, I do believe this one spends more time on its bullet hell segments. See, the gameplay is about you trying to solve a murder, and you do that through dialouge. And by dialogue I mean you play a bullet hell game where you dodge bullets and shoot at words. While it says you have to find the contradiction in the words, they just kind of come one after another, and if you just attempt to say everything is a contradiction, it just won't let you until you're correct, so that's one way to cheat it. But they're not as difficult to find that you would need to resort to that.

It's a very linear story with no decisions. I found the culprit to be rather obvious from the start, but who knows, maybe you won't. Regardless, the bullet hell portions were decent (still no mouse movement, which I don't understand how every game fumbles). Not too difficult, not too easy. The final fight was difficult enough to take several tries, but not enough to be frustrating.

Overall, an enjoyable experience for an hour. It's nothing amazing on either the story or the gameplay side, but there's nothing bad about it either. If the genres are to your liking, give it a try, otherwise probably best to skip it.

Muse Dash

While it's a known fact that I'm not big on rhythm games, I simply had to try Muse Dash as the second most popular rhythm game on Steam (and the most popular in the last decade). I'm not really sure what I expected, but I don't really see what the hype is about.

I didn't play for very long, but it seems to me that Muse Dash is a simple take on the rhythm game genre, offering only 2 buttons to press or hold. You can also choose your character, which will give you some modifier to either make the game easier, or to get a better score.
Instead, the game puts a lot more weight on the aesthetics. Everything has a very cutesy and colorful anime aesthetic, and different levels even have different designs for "notes" you have to hit.
And finally, there is quite the staggering amount of music. Must be hundreds of tracks, and even I recognized many popular ones. They're all (or at least mostly) by Asian arists.

In some sense, I understand. If you're a fan of the anime aesthetic and love upbeat tracks of that category, then there's quite a lot here. But personally, while I fit those criteria, I still don't care for the game. It's just, for a rhythm game, it's just about the most basic one I've seen. And it even has annoying button mashing segments. I'd probably listen to many of these tracks while doing something else (if I didn't already have plenty to listen to), but tapping two buttons really doesn't increase my enjoyment here.

But don't take me too seriously. Rhythm games just aren't for me, and so I can't personally recommend the game. But you'll probably know if you're the kind of person to like this kind of game, so don't let me stop you.

Soulestination

At first glance, Soulestination gives off the vibe of an experimental RPGMaker JRPG. It might really be an RPGMaker game, I can't quite tell, but it's actually from China. This can be felt from the poor English translation. Luckily, this is a game-game, so not much reading is needed. Evidently, it's a "magic tower" game, which is a genre I had never heard of, but which should be much more popular in China. Imagine, if you will, those annoying mobile game ads where you have to choose which enemy to attack next, with each enemy having their power level below them. Their power level is compared against yours, and the higher one wins. Except it's a lot more complicated than that, turning what I thought was an RPG into a puzzle game. Allow me to explain.

Leaving aside special powers, each unit, including yourself, has HP, attack, and defense (you also have shields). Each turn, the attacker deals their attack in damage, reduced by the defender's defense. Units alternate their attacks until a winner is left standing. It's entirely deterministic, and for simplicity, the damage a unit would deal to you is listed as their "power". But the map contains a lot of power-ups for your attack and defense (and shields), as well as HP potions, which just stack your HP without limit. Each enemy also increases your "soul", giving you +1% attack and defense until you reach a cap, doubling the bonus for a single fight, resetting to 1, and increasing the cap. This creates a kind of cyclic power-up power-down loop.
The question the game asks you is what is the correct order to fight the monsters in order to take little enough damage to make it through everything? Do you break through difficult enemies right away to get your permanent stat upgrades stored behind them as soon as possible, or do you come back later so that they would not deal as much damage to you? Maybe you spend some consumables to bypass the fight? As someone very eloquently put it - it deconstructs an RPG with finite resources as a sequence of battles and item gathering with deterministic consequences.

Despite the poor translation and rather rough controls, basic UI, and everything else commonly associated with the lack of "budget", I was initially extremely interested in this game as a puzzle game. I tried the game on Hard difficulty, very carefully considering and calculating my path through the enemies. Did I mention you can infinitely use an undo button? I sure used that a lot. But time and again I hit a wall that I couldn't seem to get past by going back just 2, 5, or even 10 fights and trying another way. I soon grew frustrated at my inability to make progress. Sure, to an extent, this is what's called a "skill issue", but I also didn't ever have foresight into future rooms, which was a tad frustrating. Whatever the reason, it was too hard, so I lowered the difficulty to Normal. But now, another problem arose - it was too easy. Sure, I could keep meticulously planning the most optimal route through the game, but there was no longer any point.
I realized the game had an inherent snowball effect, where falling behind only made it easier to fall even further behind, and getting ahead only made it easier to get even further ahead. In the end, I was unable to find an appropriate level of challenge in the puzzle portion of the game, and sadly the rest of the gameplay or story elements were not interesting enough to keep me playing.

A bit of a shame, considering I was initially stricken with Soulestination. If there are any super-hard puzzle fans out there, then I would definitely recommend trying this game in Hard mode. I would only recommend it as a puzzle game, even on easier difficulties, not as an RPG, because that part doesn't seem nearly interesting enough. You can try the free demo and see if you manage to find an appropriate amount of difficulty. I hear the later levels get more and more creative with their level design and bossfights, assuming you're not grossly overpowered for them. Overall, this gets a partial recommendation from me.

The Riftbreaker

I was lured into playing The Riftbreaker by images and videos of massive hordes attacking a well-defended base. Mowing enemies down by the hundreds, thousands even, looks really cool, I have to admit. The same can be said for the overall art style of this game. Everything looks high-fidelity, and so it's really quite visually attractive. Sadly, behind the glossy exterior, there is little substance to be found.

Riftbreaker can be described as a base building tower defense game. Your goal is to defend your base from attacks while gathering resources, researching new technologies, and completing some objectives. While some people draw parallels with Factorio, the factory elements here are barely stronger than in your average RTS, which I would say this game more resembles. There is barely any logistics to speak of, with the exception of electricity and liquids, and production chains are nonexistant. The difficulty of the game comes from having insufficient resource income and free room. While the map has plenty of resources and room, defending your base (or multiple bases) becomes increasingly difficult as it gets larger. There's a wide variety of towers and weapons you can equip on your mech, which is your most powerful unit. Enemies can be resistant to a damage type, or can appear solo or in swarms, so different damage type, AoE, and single target weapons may all be desirable.

But as mentioned, it's pretty shallow. If you're missing a resource, you just put down another factory that makes it. No logistics means you can just put most things anywhere you have room. There is no point to using different tower compositions at the different parts of the base, so everywhere gets the same towers. How many towers? How much to expand? As much as you can. Really, if anything, the interesting part of the game is time pressure, again, like in an RTS, not strategy elements like I would expect from a base building or tower defense game, and I'm not a fan of this.

Overall, it's not exactly a bad game. The action part is well done and looks cool, which may be sufficient for fans of that. But I think that if you came looking for a good tower defense, or "Factorio with a larger emphasis on base defense", you will be sorely disappointed. Personally, I didn't like it, and I wouldn't recommend it.