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.

Old School Musical

Old School Musical is a rhythm game from 2018, parodying retro games from, well, I'm not 100% sure, but probably before the turn of the millenium.
Gameplay-wise, the controls are simple, even for a rhythm game. There are 4 buttons, and you have to either tap or hold the buttons as the notes approach. I must say I generally prefer it when the notes approach from the same direction, not from 4 different directions like they do here, but it's a minor complaint. The screen will occasionally be occluded, adding to the difficulty of the game.
Story-wise. Well, I don't know what much to say about the overarching story, but it's a comedy of two brothers being transported between different retro game worlds and playing out a short parody segment in each world. Most of the action happens in the background as you're playing the rhythm game, which is a bit of a shame, as you don't really have time to look away from the notes. It doesn't really make the game worse, but it's just a bit sad to see the effort put into the background action go to waste.

As for what I think about it... It's okay, I guess? From a game standpoint, it doesn't do anything unique, so I can't really recommend it from that. If you're a big fan of retro games, then maybe it'll provide entertainment seeing those games represented. The action in the background is the best part of the "story", but you don't really get to look at it much.
Overall, it's not bad. If you're looking for another rhythm game to play, and like the thematic of this one, go ahead. I'm still not a fan of rhythm games, so I didn't like it myself.

Warborne Above Ashes

It's no secret I'm always on the lookout for any new MMO that isn't just a singleplayer RPG with added netcode. So much so that I'm willing to give almost anything a try. It is a bit of a sad state of affairs that Warborne Above Ashes is possibly the best such MMO to release in recent years, even though I can't in good conscience say it's even a good game.

Warborne prides itself as a 24/7 PvP MMO. Open world, dynamic battles, no story. From the way it describes itself it sounds more like Planetside, except with top-down MOBA-esque combat, but the reality isn't quite there.
There is definitely a large PvP presence in the game, and indeed you may be attacked anywhere on the map, but that's rarely actually the case. Most of the game is PvE, clearing various camps, loose enemies, bosses, or dungeons. That's not all the possibilities, and there's a ton of different content. It's actually quite amazing they have so much at launch. The reason this is most of the content is because this is the way you earn exp, levels, and most importantly, resources. While PvP can theoretically give much more of all of those, then in reality there has to be a losing and a winning side. The losers don't get much exp, and actually get some of their hard-earned equipment looted by the winners, forcing them to go back to PvE to re-earn that equipment. Not to mention you respawn at your base which is usually not next to where you died.

While slightly misleading, that's not the problem. PvE is fine. There are some questionable choices. Like your weapon deciding 3 of your skills and 1 passive, while your drifter (hero, character, whatever you call it) only deciding 1 skill and passive, which really kills the fantasy of "playing a character". Some of the mechanics are also awkward. Like the basic attack (which for some reason is your main source of damage, even on casters) stops attacking every time you move, forcing you to click it again. But these are not core gameplay issues. I think the core gameplay is fine, and would make for a great game, but there are just so many quality of life of problems. Were it just that, I could be apologetic, and say "oh, it just launched, they'll fix it", but I played the playtest half a year ago, and virtually nothing has changed. I'm not sure where they got the resources to make so much content in the first place but then not fix anything in half a year, and that makes me worried if they ever will. There is definitely potential here, and I believe every problem they have is relatively easily fixable, but if they won't do it, then it will remain a bad game.

But let's go through some of these problems and explore things you can do in the game while we're at it.

  • I'm in Europe, and they enthusiastically launched 3 servers for it. This is a problem because 1 server got really full, and the remaining 2 had only a fraction of the players. Had they dynamically opened up a new server as the first filled, they would have ended up with one really full, and one reasonably full server, but now two are ghost towns while the first is...
  • The first is so full that some factions don't have room anymore (more on that later), and all the content in the beginner areas worth doing is completed. Loot is shared, which is good, but that means you have 50 people swarming a small camp, 3 minutes of travel and waiting time, 15 seconds of combat, and everyone gets pennies. The day-by-day increasing level cap does help with players, who have more time, not leaving everyone else in the dust, but it locks half the map out for the first ~20% of the season.
  • There is passive mining. Your income depends on where you place your base (which can be attacked). This would be a great idea of encouraging risk vs reward, but for some reason the areas don't always get more rewarding as they become more dangerous. Not just that, there just isn't enough room for everyone who wants to get a spot in those areas. This gets so bad people will grief their own team by blocking the good spots with other buildings before a base can be placed there, and it's literally a fraction of a second before you lose a spot because someone got ahead of you, and now you're stuck with worse passive income (of a very important resource) for the whole season. This is both bad map design and unnecessary inter-faction friction.
  • Player numbers decide who wins and who loses. Both in small battles and the overall season. At the small scale, while groups of 10+ will show up on the minimap, allowing anyone to avoid zergs, the common friend group of 4-6 people will still get unexpectedly run over by 8-9 people cheesing the radar system. It's just generally difficult to practice PvP anyways, since losing takes such a big toll on you. So it's really unfriendly towards casual players unless you are only running around in zergs. And that's the other problem - that most people are basically not allowed agency. With such a focus on numbers, a smaller warband (guild) just can't compete with the 300-person ones claiming the whole map. You'll either be a disposable pawn to a zerg, or you'll lose out on rewards from being in a successful group. Individual performance just isn't rewarded that much. Add to that faction hopping to move to the winning side, and the end of a season is ruined too.

Honestly, I've prattled on enough. There are more problems to highlight, more stuff to talk about, but you get the picture. The combat is fine, not great. The core ideas in the game are good. But there are so many little problems that mount up to form this huge pile of garbage that it stinks up the whole game. And worst of all, they show no signs of resolving those problems. I will probably check back in a month or so to see how many people stick around for the next season, as well as if they're doing anything to clean up the game now that it's launched. I might return to play the game if they do, but as it stands now, I'm not hopeful and as such can't recommend the game, even if you like this genre.

Astroneer

I think Astroneer was the oldest game still on my wishlist, at almost 9 years old. I even had an early blog post talking about it, back when I was still making weekly posts about whatever. Well, I finally got around to it. Sort of.

I'm going to keep this "review" short. I didn't effectively play the game. I've had a very poor run, quite disliking every "open world survival craft" game I've tried with the exception of Terraria, and I can assume that's because that was more combat and less crafting oriented. So I already went in, not expecting anything.
The problem is that when you're already thinking that you might not be in it for the long haul, the worst thing they can do is make getting into it be a chore. And that's exactly what they did. The main manu was already difficult to figure out, opting for half-cryptic icons instead of text, but starting a new, default game, was easy enough. Now, I would think that I don't care much for tutorials, but Astroneer is sorely lacking one. They had some basic introductory missions telling you what to do, but not how to do it. I need a resource or an item. Where do I get it? No idea. The inventory system was trying to be immersive with things slotting into your backpack, but gosh was it difficult to understand what was where, and the amount of actions needed to pick up a single thing was far too many. Worst of all was the camera, which did not follow your mouse, but had to be explicitly positioned. For a game in this genre, where I need to build and connect things, this too was too many actions just to be able to see the areas I wanted to interact with.

After about an hour, I was thoroughly angry with how difficult it was to get anything done, so I just quit. I don't really know what most of the crafting, gathering, and exploration was going to be like, but I can't imagine it would've outweighed the terrible experience I was going to have getting through it. Many negative reviews apparently touch on this, but I'm amazed that it's not a problem for more people. So, yeah, a rough starting experience is why I don't want to play it. It's still one of the highest rated survival crafting games though, so if you like the genre, give it a try. If the UI and controls haven't put you off after an hour, it'll probably suit you just fine.

SNKRX

I don't remember why I decided to put SNKRX on my "anticipated" games list. It's a nice action roguelike... shooter. Almost like a survivors-like, now that I think about it, but since it's from before the genre got popular, it doesn't really feel like it.
It's a very simple and minimalistic game - you buy from a selection of 3 characters, they get added to your character snake, and then automatically cast their ability whenever they can. Getting duplicates makes a single character stronger, while getting different characters of the same class makes every character in the class stronger (much like in auto-battlers). You then proceed to control your snake of units on a small arena, killing spawning waves of enemies. Every several levels you also get to choose a passive upgrade.

I think the general description of it doesn't sound too exciting. On paper, it is pretty generic, and even not on paper, it's not a deep game or one with a lot of content. In fact, you will probably complete your first run in an hour or so, and by then you will have seen all the game mechanics. For some, that might be a place to stop, and I couldn't fault them for not thinking this game to be good enough in that case. From there, each next completed run makes the enemies stronger, but also increases your maximum snake size by 1. For me, I found the core game mechanics to be so good, so well polished, I spent around 18 hours on it, getting all the achievements.

Personally, I would definitely recommend it, as I even put it on my favorite games of all time list, although at not a high position. The lack of content and ambition in wanting to make a larger game is definitely the biggest factor holding this back from really being great. Still, if the idea of Snake + TFT sounds good and you like action roguelikes, give it a try. You can probably complete it and still have plenty of time for a refund if you don't feel like completing it 10 more times like I did.

Niche - a genetics survival game

I remember winning Niche as a "special" prize in a short game development contest because we made a game that involved breeding rabbits with some amount of genetics attached. It's one of the oldest games still on my backlog. I was already looking through Steam games back in 2016 when this released and had initially skipped over it, as it didn't seem like the type of game I'd enjoy. But after getting it for free, I figured I might as well try it, as the review score wasn't so bad.

Well, nearly a decade later, I did try it, and I should have stuck to my original assessment that the game wasn't for me. Niche is about controlling a pack of animals, traveling from island to island, each with its own ways of getting by, and encountering new animals along the way that you can breed with. Animals die of old age quite quickly, so not only do you have to spend time gathering food, you also have to spend time producing offspring. These offsprings inherit (about a dozen out of several dozen possible) genes from their parents, and this shapes both their apperance and capabilities. Some genes may be better for some tasks and getting by on some islands, but as you have to keep moving forward, you have to keep evolving. Also inbreeding generally kills you rather fast, but there often isn't a large selection of suitable mates.

While the genetic system is well-developed and could be used to make something interesting, the rest of the game is really boring. There are basically no animations and the whole game is just clicking on tiles to do stuff. A lot of clicking, especially as your pack gets bigger. You're never really making exciting decisions, nor making meaningful progress towards some genetic perfection. You're just getting by.
I could understand that maybe fans of this genetics-based gameplay find something here, but if you're not here for that feature alone, then I really can't recommend it.

Three Fairies' Hoppin' Flappin' Great Journey!

While the reviews for Three Fairies' Hoppin' Flappin' Great Journey! were less than good, I saw something unique in this game. At first glance, it looks just like a retro turn-based RPG. Pixel art graphics, units take turns choosing actions, choosing targets... The usual. But it's not quite turn-based. There is a timer running for each character at all times, and you can only select your action once the timer has finished. Of course, just because you're selecting your action, doesn't mean the enemies will wait for you. You'll quickly fall behind, as the enemy just manages to think instantaneously and keep attacking, while you're fidgeting around in the menus.
But that's where the automated tactics system comes in. You can use building blocks to make a decision tree on which action each character should take as their turn comes. This puts you on equal footing with enemies, who evidently do the same. Not only that, it also dramatically speeds up combat and eliminates the tedious repetition.

Honestly, this sounds great on paper, and I would probably love to play a well-made game with such a system. Sadly, this game is not well-made. It has a lot of spirit in it. A lot of innovation and rarely seen mechanics. And I love all that. But it's not well-made.
The most obvious issue is the translation. While you're not forced to read too much story, it is unskippable, and the translation is far worse than any current automated tools can manage. Half the things said are gibberish, and you can read as much from what they're saying as from their facial expressions. So following along in the story is quite arduous.
Secondly, the menu navigation. It wouldn't be so bad if it was just the menus, but the automation system also has to be built on a grid, and doing so with only arrow keys and a select and back button is an absolute nightmare. This is aggravated by not being able to just save as many tactics as you want (some options for that do come, but it's not enough and quality-of-life shouldn't be an in-game unlock, no matter how novel the idea is).
And thirdly, the automation system isn't deep enough. I know making it be straight up programming would be too daunting, but it at least needs input fields instead of 7 different options duplicated for self, enemy, and friendly HP, to name one example. Conditionals also don't offer enough freedom to optimally use your characters. Sure, this makes it a puzzle to design a good system within the working limits, but the game clearly expects you to change your tactics around regularly, and doing so with the aforementioned painful menu system is not fun.
There's other small issues as well, like missing drop tables, but they weren't integral to me dropping the game.

Overall, I had some really fun moments discovering new systems and watching my dumb team of fairies turn a losing fight around without any input from me. I would again say that I love the idea of the game, and would play something like it, but just... not it itself. So, I wouldn't recommend it myself, but if you have the patience to deal with the three problems I listed, then you have yourself a 50+ hour RPG with very unique mechanics. I certainly haven't played anything like it, so I couldn't recommend any alternatives. I hope more games like this get made.

Vagrus - The Riven Realms

Vagrus - The Riven Realms is a narrative-heavy RPG about trading and surviving in a post-apocalyptic fantasy world. You lead a caravan of people from city to city, encountering events along the way and managing your supplies, morale, and other indicators. There are a lot and lot of stats and knobs to turn for both your entire caravan as well as individual, more important members of it, yourself included. Death and disaster are ever-present, and there will be a lot of setbacks.

The game is focused significantly more on making decisions than fighting battles. In fact, the combat system is rather small and boring. While I definitely wouldn't call the decision-making side of the game small, I would still call it boring. Behind the large complexity of things to do, there doesn't seem to be a lot depth to it all. And this ties back to the game being heavily focused on the narrative, not the gameplay. From a story point of view, there are definitely a lot of different options to choose from, especially when it comes to the frequent and lengthy dialogue.

While reading everything is not necessary, I'm afraid it's the main virtue this game has. The worldbuilding is good, and I personally don't dislike the writing, but I can't say that at least the beginning of the overall story gripped me. Definitely not enough to keep me from leaving, but less picky people might enjoy it, especially on easy mode. But this is still a game, not a choose-your-own-adventure book, so much of the time is not spent on reading, but making these choices, which I found quite menial.

In the end, I don't like this kind of game. I'm pretty sure I could find many books in a similar setting with better writing and less forced interruptions to have to make decisions I don't care for. If you take out all the story, all the decisions you might make for roleplaying purposes, and just leave cold hard strategy, there isn't much to this game. A lot of boring decisions, leading to boring events. I think that even among games that try to blend worldbuilding, storytelling, and RPG / management elements, there are better options out there, so I can not recommend playing Vagrus.

ElecHead

ElecHead is a nice little puzzle platformer with one core game mechanic, and a lot of creativity around that core mechanic to build many interesting puzzles.
The rule is simple - anything connected to your head is supplied with electricity. This includes conditional platforms, elevators, traps, and even yourself, as you can throw your head to power things otherwise out of reach, or make sure you can cross certain areas without activating them.

There isn't really much to say. The game uses its one mechanic very well and manages to create new scenarios over and over again, letting you use old knowledge as well as figure out new ways to solve the puzzles given to you. The caveat is that it's short, at maybe only 3 hours, depending on how many collectibles you want to get. It's rather linear, but not entirely so, so missing a map is a bit of a bummer. Other than that, I have nothing bad to say about the game. It does what it set out to do incredibly well, even if what it set out to do isn't very ambitious. It reminds me a bit of VVVVVV, but not quite as good or long.

Overall, I think it's a worthwhile game for any puzzle platformer fans, even if it's a bit short. I'm not one of those people, so I can't personally recommend it, but I have to acknowledge that objectively speaking, it's pretty good.

Druidstone

Druidstone is another game that probably wouldn't live up to my wishlist standards today, but it did in 2019, and so here I am suffering for my past decisions.

I joke. It's not that bad. It advertises itself as a turn-based RPG or strategy game. It's not entirely wrong but I'm quite sure that most RPG or strategy enjoyers would not enjoy this game for those aspects. You control a small party and go through a series of missions, each requiring you to fulfill some objective and probably kill some enemies in the process.
The best part is that the levels are very handcrafted, and designed less like one would design an RPG, and more like one would design a puzzle game. You are expected to spend a lot time contemplating how to make your move, how the enemies are going to move, and how to beat the turn limit that most missions are on while also fulfilling as many bonus objectives as possible. There is a bit of power scaling through upgrading your abilities and passives, but at the core of it, none of your characters really change. This is important to keep the challenge of the puzzles, but this would also put off any RPG enjoyers.

While I was kind of expecting an RPG, I wouldn't even mind if this was a well-crafted strategy puzzle game, but it falls short. I find a lot of the character abilities bland, but even worse, I can't predict what enemies are doing. For an RPG, this would be fine, but for a puzzle game, I need to know ahead of time what the enemy can do against me, so I could plan for it. As it stands now, I have to complete each mission at least twice. Once to know what all the enemies do and what all the timed events and spawns are, and the other time to actually plan around them (if I still remember them accurately). This really does not fulfill the fantasy of being a brilliant strategist.

Overall, between low production values, boring combat options, and somehow managing to disappoint both RPG and puzzle game fans with their combat design, I don't really see any reason to recommend this. Whether you're looking for a turn-based tactics game or an RPG, there are many better options out there.

Dark Devotion

I'm gonna be brutal, it's been a while since I've played something as bad as Dark Devotion. The "Mostly Positive" reviews should have been a giveaway, but I decided to give it a try regardless.
I'm gonna be honest, I got less than 15 minutes into the game. And you may ask how I dare review the game based on such a short time, but I can confidently say that this is enough, based on how bad just about every aspect I experienced was.

So what are the problems I experienced during those 15 minutes? I can't rebind my controls, and the default ones are questionable at times. (R to pick things up? Why?) You can't really move backwards most of the time, just from one room to the next, which makes it a terribly linear experience. Might be fine, but not what I expected. Apparently there are platforming elements in the game, but there is no jump button? Even if there wasn't any focus on platforming, not letting me jump is a sin in a 2D sidescroller. The animations I encountered were kind of basic. I didn't even understand two of the times that an enemy had attacked me, but I had lost life. I had to crouch every time I wanted to pick something up. My bow could not be aimed. Stepping on/off a platform caused my character to rapidly jerk up and down.
It's just... everything gave off vibes that this was like a student project with cut corners and thoroughly amateur design and implementations.

I've already spent more time writing this than playing the game, so it's time to stop. There are so many more Souls-likes (if this qualifies for that title), and even 2D sidescrolling Souls-likes, that are available and better than this, that there is no reason to experience this. "Mostly Positive" isn't a high rating, but honestly, I feel even that might be generous given the review count and how bad it is.

Core Keeper

Core Keeper is a newer game I picked up because it got pretty decently popular at launch and in general received good feedback about being like 50% Terraria with a bunch of ideas from other great games mixed in, and because I finally figured out a way for my friends to get to play it.

As mentioned, Core Keeper definitely takes the most inspiration from Terraria, but is top-down instead of side-scrolling. It is a sort of survival crafting game, where you find higher and higher tiers of resources in the world and use them to craft better and better equipment and tools that let you tackle harder and harder challenges. It looks great, the combat is pretty fun, and there's a lot of content with several tiers of bosses and optional minibosses. Progression happens both through getting better gear, as well as leveling up your skills by using them and further specializing through a mini skill tree for each skill. About half the skills are for different combat styles, and the others are for mining, fishing, farming, cooking, etc. It starts off great, and on paper it is great, but the more I play it, the more I find things that annoy me.

I think the first thing that stuck out to me was how little this game cares for the environment and what you've built. To a degree, this is also true in Terraria, with end-game tools prioritizing reckless mining, leaving huge holes everywhere, it's much worse here. Many enemies and your attacks may destroy terrain. While this is immersive in terms of combat and seeing enemies tunneling along, it really sucks when enemies find their way into your base and destroy everything you've built and all your neatly organized chests, and also leaves the world rather ugly elsewhere with there just being progressively fewer and fewer walls to be found anywhere.
Secondly, I think this commits the same sin as many other survival games that want to have decoration options. It lets you find those decorations out in the world instead of letting you craft them. It's fine for rare decorations, but my inventory instantly gets full with all this junk as I explore. If I want to enjoy exploration, I have to delete all of it, leaving me with nothing to decorate my base with. If I bring it all with me, I also have to have tens and tens of chests just for these decorations. Aside from decorations, far too many other items are also found through drops, and in general inventory space and managing where everything goes is not thought through and a terrible experience.
And finally, just in general, Core Keeper tries to do too much. It picks these little mechanics from different games but fails to incorporate them properly into the core gameplay. There is automated mining and conveyor belts, but not enough tools to actually automate doing anything else. Farming works for plants, but there isn't much to do with them, because the other half of the food or potions you can make with them requires too much work from random fish drops or seeking out certain enemies. NPC housing is terribly undercooked, with no indication on how it even works, and you can just chuck them all into a single room with 10 beds in it. And there's many more cases like it.

I just think Core Keeper bit off more than it could chew and released without polishing all of its mechanics and how they influence each other. And I don't think it will ever get around to polishing everything. If you just want another Terraria that's pretty much worse in every single aspect, Core Keeper is still a fine game, because even at being only a fraction of what Terraria is, Terraria is just so good. I'll give it a partial recommendation, because fun can still be had with it, but honestly, I know I'm going to enjoy replaying Terraria for the 6th time more than I enjoyed playing this.

Blood Card 2

If I had to guess why I decided to give Blood Card 2 a try, then it's because I still like the idea of roguelike deckbuilders, and back in early 2021 when this was released, there weren't yet that many good ones. I don't think I'd pick something like this up these days, but I decided to honor my past decision by playing this regardless.

So, you pick a class, you pick a difficulty, and your goal is to work through a number of floors, each with a few columns of enemies. Defeating an enemy causes the column to shift down. At the end of one of the columns is a boss. Beat all enemies to win. Each turn you have energy, you have cards with energy cost, damage, and various effects, and you play them until you're out of energy or cards. Then the enemies attack you, and you lose health. Pretty standard stuff, with the exception that you don't explicitly have health. Instead, enemies steal cards from you and you lose when you run out of cards.
I played two full runs at the first difficulty (which was far too easy, but I couldn't play the harder one until I beat it, and even then I could only do so with the character I beat it with, which was a shame) and both classes had a strong synergy with this card stealing mechanic. One generated cheap cards that allowed him to pad his health pool but not clutter his hand while the other got strong buffs from enemies holding onto specific cards of hers. I would assume the rest of the classes were similarly designed around this mechanic, which I quite enjoyed.

Overall, the game design and balance were surpisingly good, given that this game has a very basic UI, and just about zero animations. I'm not very up-to-date with what this genre in general has to offer, but still, this felt a bit weak to me. If you care about graphics at all, then this definitely isn't a game for you. The gameplay wasn't bad enough to really point out something terrible, but I just didn't get a feeling of excitement while playing it. I think everything was just kind of made to be passable and good enough, and it kind of is. If you're just looking for another roguelike deckbuilder to play, this should have a good amount of content time-wise, but nothing about it really sticks out to me, and I wouldn't generally recommend it.

Record of Lodoss War-Deedlit in Wonder Labyrinth-

I played a game today that has a name that's a bit too long to write out. Let's just call it Deedlit in Wonder Labyrinth. It's from the Record of Lodoss War franchise, the origins of which I find too interesting to not share. Apparently it started in the 1980s as a series of "replay" novels of D&D games, which are basically just transcripts that have been edited and illustrated to be more appealing to read. So you'd just be reading about how some guys played a D&D campaign. Apparently it became popular enough that the author of these novels started a regular novel series. Several manga, anime, and games were also made based off of it. Most of all of this was before the turn of the century, but every now and then another something gets made. Deedlit in Wonder Labyrinth is one such work, focusing on the most popular character - Deedlit.

But enough about the backstory. The game is a rather linear metroidvania with some focus on action platforming. It's quite a basic implementation of the metroidvania genre, with little to set it apart. The 7 hour runtime doesn't leave for too many different abilities to be unlocked. You get better forms of jumping, which also help in combat, but most of the map unlocks through finding keys for locked doors (and the ability to breathe underwater, which was only used to access two areas). There is no stat or skill point allocation. You just get stronger with levels, and also get stronger weapons, which have only slightly different attack patterns and don't really change how you play. The main thing setting it apart is the spirit system, where you can switch between two elements. You are immune to attacks of the same element (and in fact gain energy for ranged attacks and spells from them). But enemies may also be immune to some elements, forcing you to make yourself vulnerable to land an attack. This forces certain fighting patterns, and is easily the best feature they have.

Sadly, it's about the only good non-standard feature they have. There's a whole system about how you gain spirit levels in the element you're not using when fighting, and lose them along with your HP when getting hit. At max spirit level, you passively regenerate HP, and quite quickly, while in that element. Well, it turns out that a super-aggressive playstyle allows you to deplete enemy HP fast enough and gain levels fast enough, that most bosses (and of course regular enemies) can be brute forced by just attacking them until your other spirit is full, switching to it, shooting ranged attacks at them until you're full health, and then going in again. I won multiple fights that I had no right to, because I outhealed getting hit by most hits the boss threw at me.
But perhaps it was necessary, as aside from not getting hit (which was quite difficult for not just many bosses, but also many standard enemies), there were few mechanics for counterplay. Most enemies did not use one of the two elements you could switch into. There were no i-frames, no blocking, no parrying. This made for a very tedious game of just beating each other until one of us ran out health.

Overall, while the game is pretty in terms of art, animation, and music, the gameplay, balance, and enemy design are lacking. Sadly, the latter are the more important parts of a game. At places, it feels unfinished, or some mechanics underutilized, but I would not have wished it to be longer. It didn't overstay its welcome due to being so short, even though it didn't have much interesting to do. The story, while present, was kind of cryptic and luckily not very prominent. Maybe it would have made more sense if I knew anything about the franchise.
I wouldn't say it's really a bad game, but I also wouldn't recommend it unless you're a big fan of metroidvanias, and don't mind that Deedlit in Wonder Labyrinth is short and doesn't have anything novel to offer in the genre.

HighFleet

HighFleet is visually a very interesting game. I was immediately drawn in by the very detailed UI, which tries to look like a real-life cockpit or control station, depending on what you're doing at the moment. In fact, the whole art style is great, fitting together well and giving the game a distinct look. It's overwhelming with tens of different knobs and buttons, but almost none are cosmetic - each serves a purpose.
But what is the game about? Well, there's a lot here, as HighFleet is actually kind of composed of multiple games. It tries to offer a pretty comprehensive simulation of all your activities as the commander of a fleet in a war. Navigating on a map, tracking enemy fleets, avoiding being tracked by enemy fleets, a bit of diplomacy, ship building, fleet management, and finally a sort of helicopteresque dogfighting simulator.

Now, what I said may already ring some warning bells, and if it does, you'd be right. The game tries to do a lot, and that doesn't work well. While everything looks good visually, each separate element of the game hasn't gotten enough attention to really make it deep enough to be enjoyable. For better or worse, the systems are complex enough, which fits well with the game's style, but this additional complexity doesn't translate well to extra depth. It doesn't help that the different types of gameplay are not from adjacent genres, but often quite distinct ones.

I sadly failed to enjoy any aspect of the game. None of it was terrible, but there was clearly a focus on presentation, not gameplay. I think I would have loved to see this level of detail focused into a single one of the multiple games offered. There are definitely good and unique ideas here, but ultimately the game tries to be too vast and ends up too shallow, and for that I can't recommend it.

Train Valley 2

I've always been a fan of trains, so making many little train networks in Train Valley 2 seemed right up my alley. I thought it would be like many other train games, about making a neat system that allows trains to efficiently run back-and-forth. Something like a simulation or automation kind of game. But oh boy, I was so wrong and disappointed.

Train Valley is instead a sort of action puzzle game, which is a combination of words I still never want to hear. You start with a limited amount of money, and your goal is to lay enough track with that money to get your trains running. There are different stations, each producing something, and most also consuming something, meaning resources need to be delivered there before they can produce anything. You gain extra money for each desired shipment delivered, and then use that to connect more places with trains, or buy more or better trains. You're graded on how fast you can satisfy all requirements, and how much money you have left over (plus some bonus tasks each level).
It sounds reasonable so far, but these train systems are terrible. Each station has a single point of entry, meaning only one train can come or go at a time. Further, with budget limitations as they are, and room being tight, there shall be no tracks which are traversed in only one direction. You are limited on trains and each is individually tracked, but they can freely teleport between stations. This really removed the illusion of any sort of travel being simulated.
Trains have no mind of their own, happily heading towards wrong stations and collisions. In fact, most of the game is not about what I described, but rather about the action part, which is managing these trains en-route. You have to keep an eye on every moving train as they approach each junction, and make sure the rails are going in the correct direction. The challenge is not solving a logistics puzzle, it's not being too slow at sending out trains while keeping an eye on all of them.

Needless to say, I hate it. I can't fault it for not being a simulation game, because that's my own oversight. But it's really bad for a puzzle game. The puzzle aspects are far too easy, and all the difficulty is concentrated in micromanaging trains. You can't even queue up actions, but sometimes have to intensely watch as a train reaches a station or crosses a junction to then send a new train or toggle the junction as soon as possible. I don't believe puzzle and action mix, and I wouldn't recommend this game to anyone.

Disco Elysium

Oh Disco Elysium, where do I begin with you. It won many awards and was even deemed game of the year by some places. I think it was in the top 100 of Steam's games for a while, before the drama between the owners and makers of the game happened. And it's by far the most well known game made by people in my country (well, the core team, at least). This is definitely one of the games I wanted to like before I even got into it, but none of the screenshots and nothing I'd heard about it had really gripped me.

Disco Elysium is a narrative-driven adventure game with quite a lot of player freedom. You could even call it a point-and-click game, with how much walking around, interacting with things, and trying every dialogue or interaction option there is. But there are also RPG elements, with skill points and equipment to enhance various skills, as well as a random element that determines many successes or failures. It is often through these skills that you are forced to take certain paths through the story, as others are locked by your inabilities. This adds quite a bit of replay value to what is already a 30+ hour game.
I'm not good at history, but the game seems to take place in the second half of the 20th century. There's a big focus on politics, and on the lives of people who are not doing so well for one reason or another. It also focuses on you, and trying to regain your memories after drinking far too much one night, all the while trying to solve a murder.

I have only good things to say about how this game is made. The atmosphere is excellent. The voice acting is great. The art is unique. The music is fitting. The writing really manages to portray different characters distinctly, and the voices in your head add a lovely touch of comedy. I can really understand why this game is so highly praised, and indeed, I can think of no other story-based game that does a better job as far as the game elements are concerned. And what I mean by that is that there are many story-based games which have gameplay between story segments, but that generally only detracts from the story. Here, all the gameplay is part of the story, and only serves to enhance it. And it does a stellar job.

Despite all that, I just don't care for the subject matter, and that is very sad for me. Maybe it was too slow? Too many side quests? But I'm not confident in those claims, as this is just my retrospective analysis. I think I ultimately dropped it a bit less than halfway through.
As it goes, I can't give a full recommendation for a game I myself didn't enjoy, but I will give it a partial one. I would recommend it for fans of interactive stories, if the historical and political themes are not a turnoff, and the slower pacing is not an issue.

Tails of Iron

Tails of Iron looks like it would be a bit like a side-scrolling Souls-like. But, really, it's more of a Metroidvania. Or perhaps not even that, and it's just a side-scrolling action RPG.
There is clearly some inspiration taken from these genres, with the game having a weight system, dodge rolling, blocking and parrying, and a slower, more calculated pace of combat. But I would say this is more general action RPG stuff, and it doesn't really have the core Souls-like features. The map is a series of interconnected rooms, but you don't really have that much platforming, or unlock that many new abilities and ways to progress to call it a Metroidvania. In fact, many systems are heavily simplified. There's no stamina, no level up system, fewer stats, differences in equipment are rather minor, and a few other such things.

At first, the game really looks great. The characters and environments fit very well stylistically. The narrator feels good to listen to. (Apparently it's Geralt from The Witcher, but I've never played it.) Combat does not devolve into spamming, but the lack of stamina is actually a welcome surprise. As a tradeoff, your dodge roll no longer makes you invincible, and enemies in general have 3 different types of attacks with different ways to not take damage from them. Yellow attacks can't be dodged through, as they will just hit you if you dodge into them, forcing you to either block or parry them. Red attacks can't be blocked (or parried), forcing you to dodge away from them. And other attacks don't have a color indicator, making them less telegraphed, but they can be both blocked or dodged. This sounded a lot worse to me at first, but it felt really good once I got into it. Infinite stamina meant I was never frustrated by it, and every time I got hit, I really felt like it was my immediate fault that could have been avoided with better reflexes or not spamming my own attacks.

But I feel like the biggest problem came with the bossfights. You see, they got a fourth type of attack, which was just "don't be near the place where I attack". It couldn't be blocked, and it wasn't as simple as just dodging through it. It required you to really know the bossfight, and where it was going to attack, which wasn't indicated. You just had to know. This made the fights really annoying, as the first several deaths no longer felt like your fault.
I would say that was the main reason I dropped the game, but looking back at it, it also just didn't have as much to offer as many similar games. It was pretty linear, there was little sense of progression, much less customization or specialization, and apparently the whole game was only about 8 hours, which is on the shorter side for games like this.

To sum it up, if you're looking for a simpler sort of side-scrolling action RPG, Tails of Iron might not be a bad choice. There are some fresh ideas here, it's rather polished and well-made, and I think that if re-doing bosses several times isn't going to be a problem for you, then the rest of the game is quite nice. There are no deep mechanics or character customization here, but it's a nice short RPG. Personally, I dropped it a bit too fast to feel comfortable recommending it, but it's far from bad.