The goal of /r/Games is to provide a place for informative and interesting gaming content and discussions. Submissions should be for the purpose of informing or initiating a discussion, not just with the goal of entertaining viewers. Memes, comics, funny screenshots, arts-and-crafts, etc. will be removed.
Game Information
Game Title: Alone in the Dark (2024)
Platforms:
-
PlayStation 5 (Mar 20, 2024)
-
PC (Mar 20, 2024)
-
Xbox Series X/S (Mar 20, 2024)
Trailers:
Publisher: THQ Nordic
Review Aggregator:
OpenCritic - 66 average - 48% recommended - 49 reviews
Critic Reviews
AltChar - Asmir Kovacevic - 75 / 100
Alone in the Dark, a remake of the beloved 1992 classic, endeavours to narrate a gripping horror story. However, while it excels in certain aspects, it falls short in capturing the essence of true horror.
AnaitGames - Víctor Manuel Martínez García - Spanish - 5 / 10
Pieces Interactive recovers the master lines of the 1992 original to create a reboot that fails to revitalize its proposal.
Atomix - Aldo López - Spanish - 75 / 100
I would not recommend making your purchase instantly, because in its first days it costs $60 USD, and the truth is, it is not worth it no matter how much it has decent elements. If you want to try Alone in The Dark, I suggest waiting for a discount after a few months or just being patient in case by some miracle they add it to Game Pass.
BaziCenter - Hamed MohammdPor - Persian - 6 / 10
Alone in the Dark is a collective of issues and fails to impress or add anything to the genre. It is hard to revive the beloved series, but the previous attempts and the final package here all signal that Alone in the Dark should remain a nostalgia.
Bazimag - Bahram Bigharaz - Persian - 6 / 10
The latest attempt to revive Alone in the Dark is not considered a weak title but a disappointing one that failed because of incompetence or maybe even low budget. A title that can be enjoyed in some parts and even considered respectable, but in the end, due to the strange decisions of the creators and their inability to develop, it could not be a title worthy of the name of this series.
COGconnected - Jaz Sagoo - 84 / 100
Alone in the Dark is an impressive reimagining that successfully revitalizes the franchise. Instead of leaning into the action elements that have become more prevalent in the genre, Pieces Interactive respects its DNA by opting to focus on the puzzle aspect of the adventure. As a result, the game carves its own niche which will lure fans of the genre. Although the action segments feel a little rigid and dated, the conundrums are well thought out and a highlight of the experience which helps to make this a must for horror addicts.
Capsule Computers - Admir Brkic - 8 / 10
While this reimagining of the 1992 cult classic is lacking on some fronts, it makes up for the superb and unsettling atmosphere sprinkled throughout the whole game all while being a strong love letter to the original.
Cerealkillerz - Steve Brieller - German - 8.2 / 10
In conclusion, the Alone in the Dark Remake offers a compelling blend of detective intrigue, film noir atmosphere, and horror elements. While the narrative, graphics, and sound design excel in creating an immersive experience, shortcomings in gameplay mechanics, particularly in combat and stealth sequences, detract from its overall impact.
Checkpoint Gaming - Charlie Kelly - 5.5 / 10
Alone in the Dark has fumbled once again, with this reimagining circling the drain to a pit of mediocrity. Though the game itself and the environments can be beautiful, it doesn't take advantage of its star-studded cast nor does it tell a story that is remotely sensical or engaging. Always offering just the bare minimum of staples for the survival horror genre and nothing more, it's sad to see the grand daddy of the genre be a shell of its former self. Maybe Alone in the Dark should remain exactly like its namesake.
Chicas Gamers - Álvaro Bustío - Spanish - Unscored
Adapting a classic like Alone in the Dark to modern times has been a very tough gamble, improving a timeless classic and a precursor to what for many was the horror genre of the 90s is something very difficult, so we can't help but applaud trying. Unfortunately, we have to say that they have tried to innovate so much that the idea of what they should have really focused on, being alone in the dark, has been diluted. Far from being a bad game, it entertains, but it has completely lost its essence and does not give the real feeling of being a survival horror as its original was, but rather a simple action game.
As if this were not enough, it needs a good polish, since we have experienced quite a few situations where we have been forced to restart the game because the character has gotten stuck between two elements of the scenario. Fortunately, the game allows recording at any time and this is easily corrected by loading the nearest checkpoint with all the objects taken up to the time of saving (and there are checkpoints every so often!).
The game has a Deluxe edition that includes comments from the director, a 20s-style sepia filter and, most interestingly, the possibility of playing with the skins of the original 1992 characters! By the way, finishing the campaign with one character took us around 8 hours, so if we want to do it with both it will easily take us about 12 hours (the second round will be faster because we will already know what we have to do and where to go). And finally, mention that by completing some sets of collectibles in the second and third game you can unlock different endings or alternative scenes, a good incentive for the curious and that will further extend the duration of the title.
Cultured Vultures - Jimmy Donnellan - 7 / 10
While it has plenty of rough edges, Pieces Interactive's take on horror royalty is the best the series has been in decades.
Those looking for a third-person action shooter may lose patience with Alone in the Dark. However, those looking for a traditional survival horror experience, one with its PS1 roots still slightly visible, might be reminded why they fell in love with the genre to begin with. The main takeaway though, is that Alone in the Dark is finally back, playing to its strengths, and catering to those who’ve missed it.
Digital Trends - Giovanni Colantonio - 3.5 / 5
Alone in the Dark is the confidently silly horror remake the 1992 classic deserves.
Digitec Magazine - Cassie Mammone - German - Unscored
"Alone in the Dark" is a successful survival horror game. As a fan of the genre, I am pleased about a few sensible modernizations such as the simplified inventory management and the interactive map. I can overlook most of the old problems, such as the unspectacular shooting sequences.
Duuro Magazine - Krist Duro - Recommended
Although the performance of the two main actors is bad, the setting, the story, the weird gorgeous locations you get to visit and the gameplay make it worth your time and money.
EIP Gaming - Dylan Graves - 8.5 / 10
Alone in the Dark has such a fantastic pulp horror aesthetic that it makes up for very lackluster gameplay. Stand out performances, a clear reverence for horror, and some great writing make it work. Though it might not quite be worth the price...
Enternity.gr - Stylianos Almpanidis - Greek - 6.5 / 10
Fans of the original game will feel nostalgic, but if they look at the leaps that have been made in recent years in terms of development, their fervor will quickly subside.
Entertainium - Gareth Brading - Worth your time
Alone in the Dark is a slightly more campy form of horror compared to Resident Evil, with its focus on occult magic and otherworldly monsters over evil megacorporations unleashing deadly bioweapons. The performances and story of this remake kept me engaged, but weren’t groundbreaking. That said the atmosphere was strong throughout and included a number of moments which felt genuinely unnerving, although nothing as terrifying as Resident Evil Village for example. As a tribute to its original namesake, Alone in the Dark certainly lives up to being the best game in the franchise since The New Nightmare in 2001.
Eurogamer - Vikki Blake - 2 / 5
Great ideas and a storied history are mired in mediocre combat and a disappointingly unpolished delivery.
Evilgamerz - Dutch - 8 / 10
Pieces Interactive has chosen the Unreal Engine 4 and that choice has turned out very well. The environments are detailed and stylish. The characters generally look convincing and the facial animations are also convincing enough. It's not at the level Naughty Dog is at, but certainly good enough. It's a shame that the animations of the monsters are less convincing. They often feel a bit clumsy, which does not improve the tension. Of course we can't forget to mention the soundtrack. Musician Jason Köhnen creates the perfect oppressive atmosphere with his jazzy music that is needed in Alone in the Dark. At no point does the music miss the mark, and that's great. Developer Pieces Interactive has created a beautiful game with the reboot of Alone in the Dark. You will not easily come across a game that exudes so much atmosphere and constantly keeps you on the edge of your seat. The convincing characters, the beautifully designed Derceto Manor and the oppressive atmosphere make it an exciting adventure. And although the horror element of the dream world is the least exciting, the tension of walking through the enormous mansion makes a huge impression. The puzzles are varied and challenging enough to make you stop regularly to think. Add to this the excellent acting of Emily and Edward and you can say that the return to Derceto Manor is more than successful.
GAMES.CH - Olaf Bleich - German - 80%
Quote not yet available
GGRecon - Tarran Stockton - 2.5 / 5
The game certainly gets better as time goes on, and the story is well-told enough that it's worth experiencing for survival horror fans. However, it comes with the caveats that the overall gameplay leaves a lot to be desired, and its survival horror contemporaries just do a better job on nearly every front.
GameLuster - Jess Clayton-Berry - 8 / 10
If you liked the Resident Evil 2 remake, you will easily enjoy Alone in the Dark which makes for a solid survival horror game.
Alone in the Dark is a B-class game that can be compared to projects like Daymare: 1994 Sandcastle and Song of Horror. But it can't even come close to the legendary original.
GameSpot - Mark Delaney - 4 / 10
This reboot of a long-dormant horror franchise doesn't do enough to justify digging up the dead.
Gameffine - Subhasish Das - 80 / 100
‘Alone in the Dark is an impressive reimagining of the original 1992 game, enhancing the premise in every conceivable way. It boasts a stellar cast, whose performances bring the story’s beats to life. The unlockable secret endings significantly enhance its replayability. Its highly customizable difficulty settings make it accessible to a broad mainstream audience. Minor issues such as clunky gunplay and movement can be easily overlooked given its superb atmospheric immersion and ambient soundscapes.
Gamer Guides - Chris Moyse - 77 / 100
Alone in the Dark serves up a classy and confident slice of old-school survival horror, all sliding puzzles, creaking floorboards, and long, dark shadows. Though it lacks the grander scope of its Shock & Gore contemporaries, this quaint tribute to yesteryear impresses with its kooky cast, strong atmosphere, and vintage ‘ghost story’ vibes. Crucially, Alone in the Dark finally fans have a new adventure they can be proud of.
GamesCreed - Jay Claassen - 4.8 / 5
Alone in the Dark is definitely turning out to be a masterpiece that needs to be experienced by new players and those looking for a blast from the past. Between the world and character design, along with the brilliant voice acting, you’re in for a hell of a ride while possibly running for your life at times.
GamingBolt - Shubhankar Parijat - 6 / 10
There are bright spots here that genre veterans can and likely will latch on to, but Alone in the Dark feels a bit too rough and unpolished in areas that are too critical to the experience to ever be able to truly meet its full potential.
GamingTrend - Henry Viola - 70 / 100
Alone in the Dark plays more of a moody psychological thriller with a heavy emphasis on puzzles rather than a traditional survival horror experience. That combined with the plethora of technical issues hold another remake of an original masterpiece back from reaching its true heights.
God is a Geek - Chris White - 7 / 10
Alone in the Dark is a faithful take on the original, with some smart puzzles and a charming Southern tone despite some frustrating combat.
IGN Spain - Rafa Del Río - Spanish - 8 / 10
After several installments that have failed to do justice to the Infogrames classic, Alone in the Dark returns in a new episode somewhere between a reboot and a remake. An original story with an all-star cast that modernizes the classic and offers a new starting point for this mix of Lovecraft and intelligent humor.
Alone in the Dark is back, but ultimately falls short of the expectations.
NoobFeed - Mariella Deadman - 92 / 100
Alone In The Dark is a loving remake, as well as an epic stand-alone. Even if you have not played the original, this is well worth a play. The scares are effective, and the tense nature of the game can’t be expressed enough; you will be terrified every time Dercito changes into something more sinister. The stealth elements aren’t perfect, and some of the movement and gunplay need some tweaking, but overall, the story is amazingly told with complex characters and a stunning narrative.
NookGaming - Andrew Camac - 8 / 10
While not a complete triumph, falling down in the same places as many other survival horror titles, and a rather iffy last act to boot, there is still so much to fall in love with in Alone in the Dark (2024). It is a must-play for horror fans and would also make an excellent pool to dip your toe into if you're new to the genre, with the fantastic options on offer to make the game as accessible or as masochistic as you need it to be
Alone in the Dark (2024) is exactly what this dormant series needed after the deathblow that was Alone in the Dark: Illumination. It sticks to what made the series famous with classic horror clichés, hammy acting, a great atmosphere, and an engrossing mystery. It's not only a fantastic stand-alone title, but is in the upper echelons of reimaginings, leaning on the original title where it counts, but not enough to make it a crutch. It adds its unique ideas to further the experience and gives gamers a true dark-fantasy horror that would please any avid fans of Lovecraft.
PC Gamer - Alexander Chatziioannou - 76 / 100
Unsettling and narratively ambitious, this is the best Alone in the Dark game since 1992.
Press Start - James Berich - 7 / 10
Alone In The Dark is an ambitious reimagining that does little to differentiate itself from the games it's inspired by. While it's clearly taking inspiration from both Resident Evil and The Evil Within to be a survival horror powerhouse, the flat feeling combat and timid horror elements stop it from standing above the games that inspired it. Despite this, a unique take on the story and the strong setting makes it well worth a look for horror fans.
Prima Games - Patrick Souza - 8 / 10
Alone in the Dark is a perfect example of how to reboot a series without deviating too much from original source nor shying away from a new direction. If you're looking for some spooky vibes, you found them.
Push Square - Liam Croft - 6 / 10
There are too many flaws at the heart of Pieces Interactive's Alone in the Dark reboot for a blanket recommendation, but anyone with a love for classic survival horror gameplay should - after a few post-launch patches at least - find a relatively worthwhile experience. The combat sections are awful and there's very little to actually spook you, but the puzzle-solving gameplay at the game's core shines. For that alone, it'll find just enough of an audience ready and willing to love it.
Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Jon Bailes - Unscored
Returning to its interwar period roots, Alone in the Dark successfully reworks and expands the original game's scenario and characters, but its exploration, puzzle solving and combat largely stick to now familiar survival horror routines.
SECTOR.sk - Matúš Štrba - Slovak - 8 / 10
The new Alone in the Dark game is slow and the action is secondary. There are a lot of puzzles and you have to read journals, notes and clues to solve them. You'll enjoy the atmosphere, the intelligently written story, the two well-crafted perspectives, the great music, and just the puzzles. Want to shoot zombies in the head and not strain yours? Find something else.
Spaziogames - Domenico Musicò - Italian - 7.2 / 10
Due to the clumsy and imprecise combat system, as well as the outdated graphics, Alone in the Dark fails to relaunch the series among the big franchises of the survival horror genre.
Stevivor - Steve Wright - 3.5 / 10
While true fans of the franchise might get a kick out of seeing a new take on an old story, Alone in the Dark is a tonal and functional mess that frustrates more than it entertains.
The Games Machine - Gabriele Barducci - Italian - 7 / 10
Alone in the Dark is, unfortunately, a missed opportunity. Despite an absolutely fascinating aesthetic and artistic structure, the game encounters terrible technical problems, so much so that it affects the performance of the game itself in terms of gameplay mechanics.
TheGamer - Andrew King - 3 / 5
Alone in the Dark is, interestingly, a more communal game than I tend to expect from survival horror. You're frequently running into the other inhabitants of Derceto. I enjoyed talking to them, though the writing isn't especially good, but the game never really delivers on its title and all that company prevents it from ever really getting scary. This is a solid enough retread if you've played through Dead Space and the Resident Evil remakes and want more. But it won't bring many converts to the genre. We'll have to settle for being alone, together, in the dark. Which sorta defeats the entire point when you think about it.
Alone in the Dark is brilliant and ticks all the boxes for me. The setting, storyline, characters, gameplay and puzzles are fantastic. If you enjoy a mix of combat and puzzle solving with a horror vibe running through it, you certainly need to pick this game up.
Tom's Hardware Italia - Giulia Serena - Italian - 7.5 / 10
The team at THQ Nordic has managed not only to bring Alone in the Dark back to life, but to breathe so much new life into it that it has become a stand-alone work perfectly in keeping with the modern era and, at the same time, with a noir-like charm that only games of yesteryear had.
WellPlayed - James Wood - 5.5 / 10
Alone in the Dark marks a fine attempt at contemporary survival horror mechanics but is completely adrift with an incoherent narrative, dull design, and baffling tonal choices.
WhatIfGaming - Rizwan Anwer - 8 / 10
Alone in the Dark is a strong return to form for the series that helped kickstart the survival horror genre. Its excellent atmosphere, strong mystery, and largely engaging combat design lend to a satisfying and thrilling experience. Some of the character work feels underdeveloped, and a few design choices don't always make sense, but Alone in the Dark is worth the scares, and offers a decent amount of replayability for multiple playthroughs.
XboxEra - Jesse Norris - 8 / 10
Alone in the Dark has come a long way from its initial showings. Clever writing, great performances by its two leads, and solid gameplay come together to give the franchise a new life.
Sadly, I fear the pitch of “it’s fine” isn’t enough to save this
The lack of marketing alone buried this game, crazy how they delayed this so it doesn’t compete with Spider-Man 2 and Alan Wake 2 and then completely not market it. Particularly when they spent enough money to hire David Harbour and Jodie Comer.
Hell, I wasn't even aware there was a new Alone in the Dark until seeing this review thread.
I wasn’t aware the game was coming out this month until a few days ago.
I think there was quite a bit of marketing and the whole haunted house thing for youtubers which was honestly very well done. So atleast on youtube space i think they did fine.
There was a good amount of marketing last year which is wayyy earlier than the release date but no marketing close to the release date lol. I mean the game got delayed though but still. I wonder if they spent all their marketing budget last year and nothing was left for close to release lol.
i’d bet most were expecting this to be hot garbage so this reviews might actually help the game (and probably will to a certain extent)
Not included in the current thread's average but Gamespot and Eurogamer gave it a 4/10. I don't think "better than people expected" is going to stick.
Compared to the last couple of Alone in the Dark games, even a middling game is a massive improvement.
It's not like the market for this game is die hard Alone in the Dark fanboys that would be fine with it being not as awful as previous games. The market is survival horror fans in general cause the IP itself isn't strong.
Mhm I still remember the game that came out for the 360, interesting ideas, not so great execution
Hey there guys! Is there new Game plus in here?
It has a 62 on OpenCritic and a 65/64/64 on Metacritic. With how gamers treat reviews and just the general nature of game reviews anything under a 70 is hot garbage, heck generally getting a score in the 70s is bad for a lot of games.
I mean at the end of the day the only opinion that matters is your personal one when it comes to a game but with the scores it has it pretty much makes it impossible for the game to succeed since now the only people who will likely consider getting this game at full price are Alone in the Dark fans who have been waiting for a new game or hardcore fans of the 3rd person survival horror genre.
Yup I'm sure we'll hear from the "I only play 9's and 10's" crowd soon.
I think the AAA market is shrinking pretty quickly, with the rising cost of developing these kinds of games. I think AA and indie will become a pretty huge market in the coming years.
And then people will play the 9's and 10's AA games... There is no reason to play a 7's those days unless it provide something unique.
It annoys the shit out of me that so many people would allow a number to determine whether they try a game that looks interesting to them... With services like gamepass and aggressive sales, taking a chance on a video game is lower risk than ever and I find the most interesting games are a little divisive.
I think the issue is less people trying it and more people buying the game at the launch price of $60, which is generally when most games make most of their money. It is harder to get people to take a chance on a $60 game with such bad reviews, which is more compounded by that fact that this is a shorter game (~10 hours) and in a more niche genre.
I'd imagine most people who were interested will now wait to play it until the game has some deep sales or comes to GamePass. I'm sure there are some people who will not even consider the game now (the type who only want to play 9/10 type games) but those people are a lost cause anyway.
What's funny is I'll review games that I'll give maybe a two-star on, but it doesn't mean I didn't like the game. I might've enjoyed playing it, but it was just overall lacking or not my cup of tea.
It's hard to tell people they should try a game that has such a low rating, but I don't consider 70's hot garbage.
Hell, 50 should be average.
An average of 66 is ‘hot garbage’ these days. Reviewers hand out 8s and 9s like free candy. It’s insane
I remember in the early 2000's when getting a 10 from Gamespot was a cause for celebration
Yeah those i dont really trust and most of it points them on how well does it run on the system and if there are crashes / bugs in it. Hell Forspoken got 8 out of 10`s ...
Indeed, gaming journalism is at it peak. Soon enough our A.I. overlords will say what games we should buy and you will like it!!!
Editors for major publications tend to add points to reviewer scores in order to not burn bridges. Not saying it’s the case here, but those review scores could be lower in reality.
The other hot garbage games weren't even the same genre so the comparison is a bit moot
It is hot garbage. Look at the IGN and Gamespot reviews
I just knew about it because I'd played the Prologue some time back.
Well yea, when there's been like 20-30 way better games released in the past 2-3 years its fair to say an average game that was already niche is going to probably be DOA.
I will probably try it out if it goes on one of the sub systems or drops to 20 or 30 bucks.
Original AitD was the second video game I ever played so I think I will like it for nostalgia alone. With that being said the reviews paint a picture of a game with good atmosphere, challenging puzzles, ok story and terrible combat - which for me sounds good enough.
so...true to the original?
yes :D
i liked it
Glad to hear it! Especially since I really love it so far (and Im near the end of first playthrough) and Im kind of puzzled by low scores.
people like to jump on bandwagons im glad you arent that way
Being a fan of survival horror jank in the likes of Deadly Premonition 1&2 and The Sinking City, I have little trouble saying that this is one of my most anticipated games of this year.
Yeah. I watched GmanLives's review earlier today and he seemed to like it a lot. My tastes usually align with his.
RagnarRox also gave it a pretty positive review. I am definitely picking it up sooner rather than later.
Same, I have a soft spot for eurojankers like this.
I do still want to try it out. I like survival horror and the setting looks appealing.
Yeh, am gonna get this. Not at full price though, when it hits something like 30-35 bucks.
Does anyone play Deadly Premonition for the survival horror aspect?
Maybe the first one since the 360 version has some low budget, RE4 rip-off charm but definitely not the second one.
Having a glance through some reviews it seems like a lot of the more moderate ones appreciate the game for what it is (a lower budget return of an old and messy franchise) whereas a lot of the more critical ones are held up on comparisons to recent AAA games like Resident Evil and Alan Wake 2. I'm not saying that games should get more leeway simply for having a lower budget but I don't like it when reviewers are hung up on using other games to bash on a new one.
I think a lot of the problem is price.
If these AA titles were priced reasonably, I think people would give much more leeway. But saying “it’s jank, but fun” sort of carries a more negative connotation when it’s the same retail price as the critically lauded and commercially successful Resident Evil 4 Remake.
Lower it down to $30-40 and I think people would temper their own expectations a lot more and the game would see more success in the long run.
This sadly keeps me almost entirely off the AA shelf anywhere even near release. If a budget was 10-20% of the AAA games, and a game looks and feels it - I'm not paying AAA minus 10 eurobucks.
I understand their logic, predicting significantly lower sales than the big guys, but as a consumer their logic doesn't matter to my purchasing decisions.
AA game budget is going to be a lot higher than you think.
AA games also realises they have a much smaller potential audience due to IP strength and lack of marketing. They need high initial price to help recoup costs.
AA games won't have as much/any in-game DLC to help lower initial buy-in.
Basically your AAA blockbuster games are more expensive to produce, but they expect sales in the millions (instead of thousands) AND they'll expect a good chunk of their audience to buy-in at $100+ (DLC / premium editions).
Like you said, it’s just how market scaling works. It’s why mom and pop stores tend to cost more than Amazon and big box retail.
I don’t mind supporting smaller studios, if the content is good I would rather them have my money anyway.
The same factors don't really apply to games as they are a digital good...
I mean, I like a lot of the AA stuff and if I feel like it's gonna go on sale really quick after launch but I want to play at launch regardless, I'm more inclined to buy a $40 game than a $60 one.
I know what I'm getting into and I'm happy to pay $40. $60 for something that isn't AAA is where I get crabby.
Definitely price. If this was $49.99, I would think it would fairer reviews and expectations would be checked.
I bought my Digital Deluxe edition for 76AUD (~50USD?) from Greenmangaming.
Maybe some of the publishers or key sites were anticipating less than stellar sales also, but a launch discount of 30% off was enough of an incentive for me.
Hell, I would have jumped on it.
This is why I don't think price should factor in to reviews. And really, I doubt it really does because these reviewers get these games free anyway but a game like this will be on deep discount in a matter of months so critiques for a cheaper game at a premium price will become outdated and irrelevant quickly. The games should be reviewed on their own merit regardless of the market pricing, which is out of the devs hands anyway and not reflective of the game they made. I know this is not the common line of thought with gamers but no other art is critiqued that way.
I don’t think it consciously factors in, but it is a subconscious factor nonetheless.
The point of a review is to evaluate the worth of the product and whether it’s worth spending money on. The price that’s being spent is a factor here, or at least should be IMHO.
Problem though is that every company is going to view there AA game as a AAA game worthy of that price. Another problem to is that to some consumers when they see the game start at a lower price they still won’t want to spend the money on a “lower quality” game.
Given that AAA is now $90+ (cad) quite often I think 60 might be the new 40 in many ways.
If $60 USD is the new $40 with games then I see the amount I purchase falling drastically.
Games are becoming way too overpriced without enough in them to actually demand such a sum
I feel with the financial hole Embracer is in can they afford to price this game at $40?
With the prevailing sales culture going on it will be 40 bucks in a matter of weeks imo.
While I agree with the gist of the comments in this chain that it would've been better priced at 49.99 on release, it's a different environment now and consumers are savvy enough to wait for a sale.
Exactly how I'm thinking. This game doesn't scream 60€ value to me but at 30 or 40 I would most likely pick it up.
The price point for AA games need to be much lower than it is, some publishers does this well while others clearly think a small 10€ price cut is enough.
That's totally fair, but I guess depends on the context, a troublesome thing for "souls-like" fanbase to deal with, for example (no, literally nothing will be like Dark Souls or Elden Ring, please be reasonable) -- I wasn't expecting this to be on par gameplay or budget wise to something like RE4make, which is undoubtedly going to be what it is (consciously or subconsciously) compared to the most, ad nauseum.
As long as it isn't as woefully jank as something like The Sinking City was, I can appreciate it for what it is -- so I'll definitely be giving this a shot tomorrow.
They're not "using other games to bash on a new one", it is to be expected and also the job of any reviewer to compare a game to the contemporaries in its genre. Comparison is how we are able to judge what is good and bad in the first place. If this were the one and only horror game in existence, people would probably be very stoked about it, just like Pokemon Scarlet/Violet would be absolutely incredible if no other Open World games existed. But that is not the reality we are living in.
Do you have specific examples?
All of the reviews I've seen so far deduct points for its boring and janky combat.
Which, from the several hours of footage I've seen, seems accurate. Enemies just mindlessly run at you and there's no weapon or skill progression so there's no real difference in the combat gameplay you're doing at the beginning of the game vs. the end.
Granted, Alan Wake 2 wasn't some kind of combat masterpiece but the combat was kept spare and inserted at key moments to increase your tension. The majority of shadows you encounter aren't actual enemies.
That is good thing, there is not that can kill tension faster than repetition. Alan Wake seems to understand that at least.
After playing it for a few hours I can agree that the combat is janky and offers little motivation to want to continue with any kind of combat in the future, but it is interesting how you can use different melee weapons to attack, and if you don't want to rely fully on a gun, toss a nearby molotov cocktail.
But yeah, there are limited ways to combat enemies, and despite it not being a focal point, it does get a bit boring when coming across them.
Hardly any of them mentioned its lower price point either.
I'm going to see what the Deck performance is like before I buy
Not really a lower price point in Australia. 99 bucks here on the ps store
Holy shit really?
I paid 76AUD for the deluxe edition on PC :/
Sony still taking us for a ride on their digital store I see.
People have limited budget (or time, I don't even dare looking at my Steam backlog anymore) so it's not exactly unfair to tell readers they should spend their money on better games.
It does feel bad for a smaller studio which was not given the budget/time/resource to make a game able to compete against the big juggernauts, but ultimately a review is meant for potential customers, and they should know whether it's worth their time.
I mean, that’s just the reality of games raising a standard, no? A game can be scary and fun on a low budget. I don’t necessarily think criticism should be held back on the account of budget. I don’t particularly see a lot of them bashing when making comparisons.
I never expected this to review well but it's still something I'm very curious to try at some point, I'll just treat this as an AA horror game akin to the old Alone in the Dark titles rather than go in expecting something like modern Resident Evil. Will probably take the plunge when it goes on sale.
Same. Hoping we'll see more AitD games going forward.
It has the writer of SOMA & The Dark Descent behind it.
I therefore have to play it myself because Soma only has a MC score of 84 despite being one of the best written horror games I have ever played.
I'm in the same boat. I would give my firstborn to the writer of Soma.
I wish more people played SOMA. That story is an absolute 10/10.
Horror movies/shows/games usually don't affect me but SOMA messed me up for days. Legit one of the most disturbing and thought provoking pieces of media I've ever seen.
If you enjoy reading or listening to audiobooks then I can highly recommend Blindsight by Peter Watts, SOMA was heavily inspired by the book. The books is absolutely fantastic if you love dark and thought provoking sci-fi about philosophical questions and conscience.
Peter Watts has even released the book for free on his own website.
Just a warning, don't read the synopsis on Wikipedia as it contains a large amount of spoilers.
I was so triggered by these thoughts I had to grab everyone in my family and tell them about the shocking moral findings of this game. They were like "wtf are you on?". But they just don't understand. I understand. They weren't down there, in the ocean, locked in a rubber room full of rats...
I'm gonna trust you and will play soma