Seneste anmeldelser af Rivatonic

A solid start for a new open world survival game. Realistic without being bogged down, with some nice features you don't see that often in these games.
A long way to go before it's great, but no glaring problems.

Check out my First Impressions for more:
https://youtu.be/t_BjcAhy6oA

Something might be wrong with this game. Like...technically.

I have a powerful processor and graphics card, but this game TOPPED IT OUT. Like Task Manager said it was using 99% of my graphics card. I've never seen that before. The card fans were going CRAZY, and the only other game that I've had cause that is the high-end Spider-Man Remastered on max settings...rendering a whole New York... And this game did it in a small, dark basement on minimum settings.
Even Red Dead 2 doesn't push my card that much.

I have no idea what is wrong with this game, but every time I try to run it my graphics card cries in protest.

I have to assume something is just so badly optimised that it mistakenly pushes my hardware to its limit.

Beware.

First off, this is a positive review because I don't regret buying this game...despite all the bad stuff I'm about to say.

1. The system by which this game is available is terrible.
Despite being 'Hitman 3', it is impossible to buy Hitman 1 or 2. Instead they took both games off the market to add to this one. Presumably that is the excuse they took to jack the price up massively...or it was just always that high. I'm not sure.
From what I understand, owners of the previous 1 and 2 games got screwed over by this move. Including people who had bought DLC for them.

2. The way this game is playable is very bad.
Not only do you have to agree to an ADDITIONAL End User License Agreement to actually play this game, it has this Always Online system that means losing internet connection cuts off the majority of the content. There is a 'Play Offline' mode, but it disables challenges...which are the means by which new content is unlocked.

3. The Hitman 3 content itself is very poor.
Hitman 1 is a spectacular game. The perfect Hitman experience. Massive sprawling levels, beautiful environments, varied and interesting targets.
Hitman 2 is mostly the same, but veers into less interesting 'plot-driven' missions in the second half.
Hitman 3 is entirely these 'plot-driven' missions. Two or three out of the...seven? levels in the Hitman 3 campaign don't feel like Hitman at all, and they started really pushing some odd gimmicky moments. Things like 'use your camera to hack this', so big camera icons clutter the map. Or 'shortcut doors' that are illogically locked from one side using a weird immersion-breaking full-door lock, which MAY stay unlocked on all future playthroughs? Or keycode doors with a 4-digit code that doesn't change between playthroughs; almost impossible to hack past until you know the code, then you can always pass.

4. Paying the massive price for this game doesn't get you everything.
Despite acting like a classic 'GOTY edition' type thing, claiming to be the definitive experience, there is still DLC on top of the massive sale price. Two levels are unplayable without the DLC, which does represent a distinct percentage of the levels in this game.
It's also not clearly explained in the actual DLC store pages what you get. This led to numerous people being confused when they bought the 'wrong one'.

Overall, this game is the quintessential Hitman experience. The gameplay (aside from the gimmicky clutter added in 3's levels) is refined to a very sharp point. It took the genius that was Hitman: Blood Money and built it so much bigger and better. Tools, variety, weapons, more than 3 buttons to control it... It has it all.
Where it falls down is EVERYTHING ELSE.

I've always lived by the value system of 'if I play something for one hour per £1 I spent on it, it is worth it'. I spent £58.50 on it, and it took me 59 hours to beat the story. I still have hours and HOURS of additional content to play like alternate starting locations, new equipment, escalations, arcade, etc.
By my usual value system, this game is worth it. I do not regret buying it.

What I regret is that my purchase is implicit approval of this company's terrible business model, and this game's terrible playing model.

I really, REALLY wanted this adaptation to be good. I'm a big fan of the Spirit Island board game, and I'd played it numerous times on Tabletop Simulator too.

In a lot of ways, this adaptation is amazing. It does some very cool things like a 'preview' button to see where the invaders are building or blighting, full automation of the fiddly bits of the game, and is said to act as 'the ultimate rules lawyer' due to the board game's developer having a hand in this.
I would praise this adaptation to everyone I know, except for two things...

1. This launched with no multiplayer.
That's right. This official adaptation of a co-operative board game...launched with no multiplayer. You could still play as multiple spirits - and other players could technically control them - but it was only ever via one screen, passing control around.
When I got sent a free key for this, I contacted the devs asking for additional keys to do multiplayer games. That's when they told me it didn't support online multiplayer due to 'budget constraints'. Apparently it was a stretch goal on their crowdfunding campaign.
For an adaptation of a multiplayer board game...multiplayer was a stretch goal...

Although the game has now been updated to add online multiplayer, the fact that this happened just over TWO YEARS after it launched makes me very concerned that they have the wrong priorities.

That brings me to...

2. The multiplayer is INCREDIBLY clunky.
Due to the lack of proper multiplayer in this game, I have had a very difficult time promoting it to my friends and family (and I tried HARD). Now that it finally has multiplayer, I got the chance to try it. Simply put, it feels incredibly clunky.

This is a game where you can have up to 4 players (potentially up to 6 if the adaptation gets the same expansions as the board game) all managing their growth, their powers, they innate powers, their presence, and keeping an eye on what invaders are doing. It's a busy game.
So why exactly, in the multiplayer, is only one player allowed to do something at any one time? I played with one other person, and we kept finding ourselves unable to act because the game was focusing on the other person and what they were doing. And it didn't exactly explain that this was happening... We thought it was lag at first, before realising it was probably when the other player selected a growth option, or played a power card.
It really feels as if they didn't adjust the game's operation to account for another person doing things... It was still working on the assumption that players neatly took turns, like the way they had to play the 'hot seat' multiplayer prior to the update.

There's also a very slow 'voting' system. Due to different players potentially having different opinions on things like 'where things should be placed' or 'what order to do ravaging', there's a voting system. Essentially each player selects where they think it should go, and an option chosen at the start of the game decides who gets their way.
It feels VERY stilted. Aside from the fact that you have no idea what's going on unless you have the large tooltip on the right hand side visible.
Frankly I don't know how this could have been done better, but this way felt very...robotic.

Then we had the bugs. Things like a Fear Card saying 'each player can move one explorer', then only allowing one of us to do so before moving on. The Command Beasts card was horrifically buggy... Again it stated 'select an option for each beast', then only allowed a single beast to do anything.
If it would allow anything at all.
We had to quit a game (and there's still NO SAVE FUNCTION for the board game that can take hours to play) because the Command Beasts power said 'Use', but did nothing when clicked. The other player couldn't even SEE the Command Beasts power.


The bottom line is that the multiplayer aspect of this multiplayer board game adaptation feels begrudging. They didn't think it was important enough to make a core feature, and they didn't try very hard to implement when they finally added it.
As a vessel for single player Spirit Island, this game is fantastic. As an adaptation of a co-operative multiplayer board game, this game is awful.
Make of that what you will.

This is the best rougelike deck builder I have ever played. Just straight up.
I've played several, but not a single one compares to the flow and feel of NotFM. The art is beautiful, the mechanics are fluid, the difficulty curve is very solid, but VERY fair. There is so much detailed lore hidden just below the surface, and I find it fascinating.

The biggest problem with this game is the translation; originally a Chinese game, I think, the phrasing, punctuation, grammar...all of it is rather janky. This is usually not a problem, but sometimes it can make understanding the actual effects of stuff a bit tricky.

Nonetheless, I cannot recommend this game enough. This game is worth so much more than is charged for it. I also recommend getting all the DLC, simply as a way to support the developers. The variety of classes is great, the three gamemodes are all fun, and I rank this game among my all-time favourites.

I genuinely suspect I'm missing a big portion of this game. As in I feel it's there, but I can't find it. It's got to be there, right? A game that sells for £15.99 CANNOT just be two relatively short scenarios AND NOTHING ELSE. Two relatively short scenarios that are designed to force you into playing quickly, due to frustrating limiting mechanics.

I beat both without ever using 2/5 kinds of dice in the game. I literally saw no use to them, when I had bigger problems. Maybe they make it much easier, but when you only have 12 dice maximum, and there's already too much RNG in getting the faces you want, why the hell would I change dice in my pool into other kinds that can't do the things I need.
Plus, when you add a new dice type to your pool, you get a new class to try and keep happy. That just seems like WAY too much trouble.

So yeah. Best as I can tell, there are two levels in this game. DLC adds one more, but screw that. There is no freeplay, no stress-free mode, no larger world to play in. You play in the tiny world, facing the exact same frustrating enemy, with different games differentiated by slightly randomised terrain locations.
Granted you unlock modifiers (that all make it harder, I think), and different 'rulers'. Dunno if they'd add enough variation to make it...y'know, fun. I unlocked one other ruler and I doubt he'd make much difference in the long run.

The gameplay in this is so cluttered, with so much going on and so little that actually makes it clear, with so many buildings, techs, dice types, and terrains...but there's absolutely sweet FA to do with it all. Peasants and soldiers can beat the first level on their own, just peasants can beat the second.

Stunning.

I thoroughly enjoyed this game.

Beautiful pixel art graphics, funny characters, fairly solid mechanics, engaging story.

Stealing flesh from the recently (or long) deceased has never been so fun.

I try to be nice to little, cheap indie games. I'm also trying to be less critical in general.

That said, this was terrible. I played like 12 minutes and gave up.
It's not been proof-read, the controls are janky and awkward, the options are almost non-existent, and level 11 was literally undoable.
After about 20 tries (and deaths) due to the wonky physics on the objects and player, I managed to get to the exit...and the thing blocking it barely budged. I tried walking at it, I tried jumping at it. I have no idea if there was anything else I could do, because there is no way to check controls.

I consider it a mercy not to release the First Impressions video I recorded.

A game with impressive pixel-art about watching random strangers in their homes, at work or just...out. This is the only ‘voyeurism simulator’ I’ve ever heard of, and it’s an interesting concept. The name of the game refers to interacting with the people you observe; ‘feeding’ the ‘monkeys’.
Very early on it struck me as somewhere between Orwell for the privacy invasion and research elements, and Papers, Please for the money management, higher controlling power and the subtle moral choices. Well...they’re not very subtle. In fact they hit you in the face with it. A lot.
Aside from the overly mouse-based mechanics, the interface is simple enough to understand. What makes this game fascinating is, unsurprisingly, the voyeurism.


You start by getting four random ‘cages’ (their term for the unmovable camera angles through which you observe), although I played through about six times and had the same combinations popping up a lot. I expect it’s partially random, partially set. You can buy more as the game progresses...by which I mean you must buy more or lose. That’s sort of one of my biggest issues, but we’ll come back to that.
Through your hidden cameras you can watch anything from an old man in a nursing home, to a happy family, to a wind turbine where literally nothing happens. I won’t spoil anything specific in the views, because they’re the entire point of the game. What I will say is that I was very disappointed by how much was in this. Granted, there are an impressive number of possible ‘cages’ (I think a total of 46), but this is an illusion. Only maybe half actually have anything interesting to see, and those always have the same one interesting thing.
See, the pixel-art is pretty and well done, but I don’t expect it’s easy to make. Because of this, there are only short loops in most views, and even the ones with dialogue use the same animations each time. Don’t expect this to be watching a family have dinner, watch TV, chat about their days, play a game of Monopoly, then do something censor-worthy... They’ll do one, maybe two of those things and disappear off-camera for long periods between. Each view is a contained story that either plays itself out or waits for you to intervene.
And that brings us back to that issue from before.


The game is quite short. Presumably to account for the relative brevity of the individual views’ stories, the game takes place over a couple of weeks and you have to move quickly to get stuff done in time. You have to keep buying more views, doing menial jobs to afford it, as well as paying for food and rent. It’s either inspired by Papers, Please, or...nah, it’s almost certainly inspired by Papers, Please.
There is also no infinite mode, or way to slow things down. You have the set ~15 days, then game over. No matter what. Restart and hope you get different (or the same) views next time. This can be disappointing when you want to see the end of a little story arc and run out of time. Also due to the short length of the individual stories, when the story is done, the view stays there...showing whatever is left...until the end of the game. A lot don’t give you any aftermath except through newspaper articles.
Speaking of which, the newspaper talks about this great political turmoil and intrigue going on in the world...but it has no effect. It’s set dressing. I guess the point is that you’re just some bored, lonely weirdo who wants to watch strangers, but not being able to affect anything gives the game a rather isolated...nihilism, almost, that makes it feel incomplete. At least in Papers, Please it served to justify the increasingly strict border rules.


I mentioned earlier that this game is very obvious with its moral choices. It’s...actually very obvious with almost everything.
Turning one last time to Papers, Please, the moral choice in that was unspoken; do you help some stranger at the border, or do you feed your family tonight? In this, you’re straight up given a plant that ‘feeds off love and good vibes’. The plant flowers if you’re nice and withers if you’re not. The plant has no effect except as a ‘karma monitor’ of sorts. You’re also bombarded with blatant moral choices that have no effect on gameplay:
Will you steal your neighbour’s package? Why not. They never come looking for it.
Will you lend your friend money? Why bother. He never helps or hinders you.
The moral choices in the individual stories (and whether or not to intervene) can be a lot more powerful, but they all feel so mechanical if that makes sense. Even your landlady is just immensely rude for no reason and with no way to respond. It all hits you over the head with your character being ‘some loner weirdo who no one likes’.


As a ‘voyeurism simulator’, I’m not sure this works. The things you can see are too limited, short and predictable. I will state once more than the pixel-art is really quite beautiful at times, and impressive all the time, so maybe it’s worth playing just for that.
I’ve 100%ed it, as I am wont to do, but now I’m done with it and will probably not think about it again. Except two of the stories...those rather got to me.

https://youtu.be/KeN2zg73FcY

Oof. This is a bad one.

The title is too long to type out, so I'll just call it Hotel Lisbon.
Hotel Lisbon is a retro pixelart point n click adventure detective game. It's also a 'comedy' game, jam-packed with 'jokes' and 'funny dialogue'. In case the sarcasm isn't coming through, this is one of the least funny games I've ever played.

Before I get to that particular bag of knives, I'll mention a few other bad things.
It's quite buggy and is full of errors. I had a few times when the 'camera' was too far to one side, leaving the game events and even text boxes half off the screen. Also about half the times I launched the game it launched in a tiny weird stretched box with game art around it. No idea why.
It has a fair few typos and spelling errors (saying 'loose' instead of 'lose' five times in a row is too many to be a typo), and the writer(s) displayed a fundamental lack of understanding about even the most basic punctuation. Sometimes sentences would just have '' in the middle of them. Again, no idea.

Anyway. On to the big thing. This 'comedy' game is horrifically unfunny.
The writing is almost universally bad, frequently swinging and missing even the easiest jokes. It would then continue to tell them long after any snappiness was gone, even if they'd been voiced. Alongside these failures it tells such incredibly bad jokes (some of which are deliberately bad, but frankly it's hard to tell which ones).
Almost all of the female characters in the game are named Maria. All but one or two, I think.
If it had been every single one, that would have been a joke. It would have been a bad one, but it'd be a joke. As it is it just seems like they couldn't be bothered to think of more names.
It repeatedly fumbled 4th wall breaks, had flatly unfunny recurring gags (like characters laughing raucously at literally ANY mention of money), and...and had a knock-knock joke where the punchline was just the word 'cancer'.
I mean seriously. What the f*ck.

I hate the art style too. A lot of work clearly went into it, but that doesn't make the character designs any less hideous.

Bad game. Don't buy it. I think there's a sequel/prequel? Another game in the hallowed Detective Case & Clown Bot series.
Don't buy that either.