Walking simulators are something I really enjoy as they can focus mostly on the story, characters, and atmosphere. Sadly, it's also a big gamble as sometimes the story can be great, but the gameplay is awful or the story is awesome, but the ending sucks and pretty much makes the entire experience not worthwhile. The Chinese Room is notorious for its walking simulators, being almost exactly that, and this game is a spiritual successor to Dear Esther which looked great but was forgettable.
The game puts you in a small rural British town of Shropshire where there doesn't seem to be anyone around. All you know is to follow a ball of light floating around and it guides you around the town to activate cut scenes of the main characters talking about what happened at that moment. You will see the aftermath such as a wrecked car, a turned-over box, bloody rags, etc. There are no actual character models as they are just whisps of light in the shape of people acting things out on screen. This can make the game aggravating to play and pay attention to. A game with literally zero gameplay outside of an action button, and doesn't have any characters on screen better be damn good right?
As you walk around and follow the ball of light you will sometimes hear a numbers station playing on a radio or a telephone ring. These are extra tidbits of stories you can listen to. Each part of the town focuses on a specific character, but sadly I was often lost as to who was what as there were no faces to put to any of the voices. Once you see a cutscene play out your ball of light will stop and wait, sometimes. There were quite a few glitches in the game in which the ball of light would get stuck in the ground, not continue on, or just disappear somewhere never to be found. I had to restart the game to get the ball back on track.
Major cutscenes that actually advance the story are triggered by grabbing a ball of light and moving it left and right until it explodes. This was originally an excuse to use the then-new DualShock 4 touchpad. Here it's just a mouse drag and feels pointless. You know you are done with an area when you get a ball of exploding light that takes a few seconds to trigger. After this cutscene, the area goes dark and you follow a trail of lights on the ground to the next area. This is all there is to the game. It's pretty to look at, even today. The game uses CryEngine so it looks awesome and holds up well, but it's still forgettable. There's nothing memorable about a realistic-looking generic old English rural town.
I did eventually get into the story towards the end. However, the game just ends on a pretentious note and I felt deflated and annoyed. I really hate endings like this. This was four hours I will never get back and I won't take anything away from this game at all. No interesting gameplay, no memorable visuals, and no exciting story. The voice acting is great, but that's about it.
Sadly, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture is a game I've avoided for a decade and there's a reason for that. I knew that this game would be very forgettable and a waste of time. I enjoyed the idea of this strange apocalyptic infection that's passed around through phone and radio waves, but there's no pay-off in the end. That also doesn't take into account the aggravatingly slow walking pace that most people won't be able to put up with. Even if it was two times faster it would be more tolerable. It feels like you're crawling. That would be fine if there were more visuals to look at but there aren't.
The game puts you in a small rural British town of Shropshire where there doesn't seem to be anyone around. All you know is to follow a ball of light floating around and it guides you around the town to activate cut scenes of the main characters talking about what happened at that moment. You will see the aftermath such as a wrecked car, a turned-over box, bloody rags, etc. There are no actual character models as they are just whisps of light in the shape of people acting things out on screen. This can make the game aggravating to play and pay attention to. A game with literally zero gameplay outside of an action button, and doesn't have any characters on screen better be damn good right?
As you walk around and follow the ball of light you will sometimes hear a numbers station playing on a radio or a telephone ring. These are extra tidbits of stories you can listen to. Each part of the town focuses on a specific character, but sadly I was often lost as to who was what as there were no faces to put to any of the voices. Once you see a cutscene play out your ball of light will stop and wait, sometimes. There were quite a few glitches in the game in which the ball of light would get stuck in the ground, not continue on, or just disappear somewhere never to be found. I had to restart the game to get the ball back on track.
Major cutscenes that actually advance the story are triggered by grabbing a ball of light and moving it left and right until it explodes. This was originally an excuse to use the then-new DualShock 4 touchpad. Here it's just a mouse drag and feels pointless. You know you are done with an area when you get a ball of exploding light that takes a few seconds to trigger. After this cutscene, the area goes dark and you follow a trail of lights on the ground to the next area. This is all there is to the game. It's pretty to look at, even today. The game uses CryEngine so it looks awesome and holds up well, but it's still forgettable. There's nothing memorable about a realistic-looking generic old English rural town.
I did eventually get into the story towards the end. However, the game just ends on a pretentious note and I felt deflated and annoyed. I really hate endings like this. This was four hours I will never get back and I won't take anything away from this game at all. No interesting gameplay, no memorable visuals, and no exciting story. The voice acting is great, but that's about it.
Sadly, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture is a game I've avoided for a decade and there's a reason for that. I knew that this game would be very forgettable and a waste of time. I enjoyed the idea of this strange apocalyptic infection that's passed around through phone and radio waves, but there's no pay-off in the end. That also doesn't take into account the aggravatingly slow walking pace that most people won't be able to put up with. Even if it was two times faster it would be more tolerable. It feels like you're crawling. That would be fine if there were more visuals to look at but there aren't.
7 Comments
@RedBackLogged
I appreciate the feedback. For the ball of light thing. I don't know what else to say. That's pretty nitpicky. It's a ball of light. An orb of vision. A wandering disembodied voice. Not sure what to make of that.
There aren't any spoilers in the review. Mentioning the alien infection is told to the player at the beginning. It's also hard not to spoil anything when the only thing the game has is its story.
I did discuss the graphics just fine. I don't know what else to say. I mentioned they're created in the CryEngine and they look fine even today. They are just forgettable and there is nothing special about them.
I will complain about the gameplay in any game. I mentioned there aren't any puzzles which a lot of adventure games have. Even most "walking simulators" have puzzles of some sort.
I feel like you didn't read what I was saying and skipped around a lot. I feel like this review is fine and reflects exactly how I felt at the end of the game. I'm sorry you disagree. It's a pretty forgettable and boring game even for walking simulator standards go. I even setup the reader's expectation in the beginning that I'm a fan of these types of games.
I appreciate the feedback. For the ball of light thing. I don't know what else to say. That's pretty nitpicky. It's a ball of light. An orb of vision. A wandering disembodied voice. Not sure what to make of that.
There aren't any spoilers in the review. Mentioning the alien infection is told to the player at the beginning. It's also hard not to spoil anything when the only thing the game has is its story.
I did discuss the graphics just fine. I don't know what else to say. I mentioned they're created in the CryEngine and they look fine even today. They are just forgettable and there is nothing special about them.
I will complain about the gameplay in any game. I mentioned there aren't any puzzles which a lot of adventure games have. Even most "walking simulators" have puzzles of some sort.
I feel like you didn't read what I was saying and skipped around a lot. I feel like this review is fine and reflects exactly how I felt at the end of the game. I'm sorry you disagree. It's a pretty forgettable and boring game even for walking simulator standards go. I even setup the reader's expectation in the beginning that I'm a fan of these types of games.
1) Here's my two cents- after you first describe it, there's no need to repeat the exact same phrasing because the reader already knows what you're talking about. It's a ball of light; subsequent terminology can just be "the orb" "the sphere" "the ball" "the globe" "the pearl" "the glob" etc... If there was another object, I'd understand the need to be specific, but that doesn't appear to be the case in this game.
2) Mate, come on- don't be like that. There most definitely were spoilers, and your second sentence there even admits it. I agree it's impossible to criticize a story without going into specifics, hence why BL gives the option to tag a review as spoiler-filled.
3) Okay, and if I'm an average joe who knows squat about the CryEngine, what does it being in the CryEngine tell me? Nothing. There's no discourse about the art style, use of color, lighting (no the ball doesn't count), texturing, how it compares to other post-apocalyptic settings, etc...You touch briefly on the environmental storytelling with some of the object placement, but don't flesh it out.
4) A walking sim is explicitly a subgenre of the Adventure Game that focuses on exploration. The term was literally coined as a derogatory reference to the primary gameplay because all other gameplay is diminished. Complaining about the lack of sufficient gameplay in a genre that deliberately doesn't focus on that is the equivalent of complaining about a Mario game not having a grand story. It's fine to want more stuff in a title, but to expect something that is out-of-place in the genre is bizarre.
Also, please enlighten me which walking sims you played had puzzles because I've played five and not run into a single one that had puzzles (unless you count opening combination locks as a puzzle)- Gone Home, Dear Esther, Layers of Fear, Close to the Sun, and Firewatch.
Your review is less than 700 words- of course I read it in full. I haven't even played this game, so I certainly have no stake in whether you like or dislike it. My problems were purely with the construction of this review not your opinion, and while I admit I came across as a prude, everything I said holds weight. If you can't take criticism, you'll never improve as a critic, and you most definitely have the potential to be a good one.
2) Mate, come on- don't be like that. There most definitely were spoilers, and your second sentence there even admits it. I agree it's impossible to criticize a story without going into specifics, hence why BL gives the option to tag a review as spoiler-filled.
3) Okay, and if I'm an average joe who knows squat about the CryEngine, what does it being in the CryEngine tell me? Nothing. There's no discourse about the art style, use of color, lighting (no the ball doesn't count), texturing, how it compares to other post-apocalyptic settings, etc...You touch briefly on the environmental storytelling with some of the object placement, but don't flesh it out.
4) A walking sim is explicitly a subgenre of the Adventure Game that focuses on exploration. The term was literally coined as a derogatory reference to the primary gameplay because all other gameplay is diminished. Complaining about the lack of sufficient gameplay in a genre that deliberately doesn't focus on that is the equivalent of complaining about a Mario game not having a grand story. It's fine to want more stuff in a title, but to expect something that is out-of-place in the genre is bizarre.
Also, please enlighten me which walking sims you played had puzzles because I've played five and not run into a single one that had puzzles (unless you count opening combination locks as a puzzle)- Gone Home, Dear Esther, Layers of Fear, Close to the Sun, and Firewatch.
Your review is less than 700 words- of course I read it in full. I haven't even played this game, so I certainly have no stake in whether you like or dislike it. My problems were purely with the construction of this review not your opinion, and while I admit I came across as a prude, everything I said holds weight. If you can't take criticism, you'll never improve as a critic, and you most definitely have the potential to be a good one.
@RedBackLoggd
I do take criticism fine. There's just not much to talk about with this game. I can understand a massive game like Skyrim or Fallout when there's so much to talk about and I just glanced over things then that would be on me. I did forget to mention the part about you saying those couple of sentences were worded oddly. Yes, that is correct. I've had a lot going on this month and I actually write these for my own gaming website and then post them here. Sometimes I paste an older draft that wasn't proofread as much without realizing it. That's on me.
Repeating the same phrasing is something I'm working on. It used to be even worse if you can imagine that. There are times I get interrupted a lot or end up with writer's block. Not every review is like that.
I still feel there isn't much to talk about with the visuals. They are plain, generic, and really nothing to touch on. If you look at my review for Scorn I go on and on about how the art and visuals are breathtaking and otherworldly, for example. My last sentence in that paragraph " There's nothing memorable about a realistic-looking generic old English rural town." That's all I felt there was to say. The graphics do hold up well technically today, but that's about it. Overall, this game is just unremarkable. I'm surprised you chose THIS review to nitpick. I do appreciate that you care enough to give this much feedback.
To be honest, I'm just another gamer. I'm not a professional critic, I don't get paid. I've been writing these for over 15 years for fun to just get my opinion out there. I don't feel my review should be valued over others. If you think this game is a 10/10 I won't argue with you. Games objectively have things good and bad with them, but enjoyability is always subjective. I adore PS1/PS2 era horror titles despite how objectively bad they are, but I like the charm and atmosphere they provide. Some people may not get that.
As for walking sims that have puzzles there is The Talos Principle, The Witness, Manifold Garden, The Turing Test, Quern, the entire Myst series, Superliminal. That's just to name a few. These are also essentially walking simulators with puzzles as you don't jump, platform, shoot, or anything else. They do exist.
Thanks for the feedback. I will continue to improve and really make sure I'm not pasting an older draft here from my site. I will also watch the phrasing a bit more.
I do take criticism fine. There's just not much to talk about with this game. I can understand a massive game like Skyrim or Fallout when there's so much to talk about and I just glanced over things then that would be on me. I did forget to mention the part about you saying those couple of sentences were worded oddly. Yes, that is correct. I've had a lot going on this month and I actually write these for my own gaming website and then post them here. Sometimes I paste an older draft that wasn't proofread as much without realizing it. That's on me.
Repeating the same phrasing is something I'm working on. It used to be even worse if you can imagine that. There are times I get interrupted a lot or end up with writer's block. Not every review is like that.
I still feel there isn't much to talk about with the visuals. They are plain, generic, and really nothing to touch on. If you look at my review for Scorn I go on and on about how the art and visuals are breathtaking and otherworldly, for example. My last sentence in that paragraph " There's nothing memorable about a realistic-looking generic old English rural town." That's all I felt there was to say. The graphics do hold up well technically today, but that's about it. Overall, this game is just unremarkable. I'm surprised you chose THIS review to nitpick. I do appreciate that you care enough to give this much feedback.
To be honest, I'm just another gamer. I'm not a professional critic, I don't get paid. I've been writing these for over 15 years for fun to just get my opinion out there. I don't feel my review should be valued over others. If you think this game is a 10/10 I won't argue with you. Games objectively have things good and bad with them, but enjoyability is always subjective. I adore PS1/PS2 era horror titles despite how objectively bad they are, but I like the charm and atmosphere they provide. Some people may not get that.
As for walking sims that have puzzles there is The Talos Principle, The Witness, Manifold Garden, The Turing Test, Quern, the entire Myst series, Superliminal. That's just to name a few. These are also essentially walking simulators with puzzles as you don't jump, platform, shoot, or anything else. They do exist.
Thanks for the feedback. I will continue to improve and really make sure I'm not pasting an older draft here from my site. I will also watch the phrasing a bit more.
Sorry mate, I just don't agree with that principle- that a smaller game deserves less attention/detail than a larger one. It's true you'll inherently have less to say given that there's less to talk about, but to not even try is disrespectful to the devs.
All good, we all make draught errors.
Well I'm definitely glad to hear that and hopefully my advisements contribute to that growth.
Well then, I would hope you read other reviews and take this as another point to grow on. It doesn't matter if you're doing it in other reviews- any review you put out there could be someone's first encounter with your work and consequently the basis for their first impressions, and first impressions are unfortunately everything in this day-and-age. Consistency is the key to quality.
I don't know why you keep thinking my comments have anything to do with your verdict- I couldn't care less if you like or dislike a video game I've never even played. None of us get paid here- we're all doing this for fun. That's not an excuse to half-ass the criticisms for a game which hundreds of people put hours of effort into constructing, nor to outright spoil the experience to newcomers potentially interested in the title.
....you're joking. Not a single one of those games is a walking sim. I don't know what lax definition you're using as a walking sim, by definition, is a game primarily about walking. All those you listed are puzzle games, an explicitly different genre revolving around enigma solving. If a walking simulator is primarily about puzzle solving it is NOT a walking simulator b/c you're throwing in a completely different genre element as the dominant gameplay. I'm not even trying to be a gatekeeper- not a single professional outlet, indie or mainstream, labels those walking sims.
Since you've shown a willingness to accept feedback, I'll refollow you. You're certainly one of the most consistent/passionate reviewers on this site, hence why I was disappointed to see this schlock published under your name.
All good, we all make draught errors.
Well I'm definitely glad to hear that and hopefully my advisements contribute to that growth.
Well then, I would hope you read other reviews and take this as another point to grow on. It doesn't matter if you're doing it in other reviews- any review you put out there could be someone's first encounter with your work and consequently the basis for their first impressions, and first impressions are unfortunately everything in this day-and-age. Consistency is the key to quality.
I don't know why you keep thinking my comments have anything to do with your verdict- I couldn't care less if you like or dislike a video game I've never even played. None of us get paid here- we're all doing this for fun. That's not an excuse to half-ass the criticisms for a game which hundreds of people put hours of effort into constructing, nor to outright spoil the experience to newcomers potentially interested in the title.
....you're joking. Not a single one of those games is a walking sim. I don't know what lax definition you're using as a walking sim, by definition, is a game primarily about walking. All those you listed are puzzle games, an explicitly different genre revolving around enigma solving. If a walking simulator is primarily about puzzle solving it is NOT a walking simulator b/c you're throwing in a completely different genre element as the dominant gameplay. I'm not even trying to be a gatekeeper- not a single professional outlet, indie or mainstream, labels those walking sims.
Since you've shown a willingness to accept feedback, I'll refollow you. You're certainly one of the most consistent/passionate reviewers on this site, hence why I was disappointed to see this schlock published under your name.
@RedBackLoggd
Well, I learned something new. Thanks! It seems there's a consensus online that those games I mentioned are walking simulators, but the argument against them is that walking simulators are passive experiences. I found many threads of people thinking even Portal 2 is a walking sim, but even I think that's too inaccurate. Some even thought Scorn was a walking sim despite getting weapons and barely having combat (as bad as it is). The term "passive experience" clicked for me and that cleared things up.
I honestly don't get feedback for my reviews so all this came as a shock initially. I figured most people skim by it or ignore it altogether. I have taken all of this feedback and changed some of my process moving forward.
Well, I learned something new. Thanks! It seems there's a consensus online that those games I mentioned are walking simulators, but the argument against them is that walking simulators are passive experiences. I found many threads of people thinking even Portal 2 is a walking sim, but even I think that's too inaccurate. Some even thought Scorn was a walking sim despite getting weapons and barely having combat (as bad as it is). The term "passive experience" clicked for me and that cleared things up.
I honestly don't get feedback for my reviews so all this came as a shock initially. I figured most people skim by it or ignore it altogether. I have taken all of this feedback and changed some of my process moving forward.
Yes, passive experience is a pretty apt way to describe them, though I'd argue that's maybe going a little too far- certainly games like Gone Home and Firewatch had levels of interaction, even if you were following cue cards. But that's a debate for an other day.
If I could venture a guess, it's probably because you don't follow anyone back. Why? You have over 40 followers yet haven't had the courtesy to return the favor? Do you even comment on others' reviews? One thing I've found is engagement begets engagement- if you interacted with even half of the people you're following, they'll reciprocate in kind. It's nice to build an ecosystem of interactivity as that's the only way any of us are going to standout in this blog.
If I could venture a guess, it's probably because you don't follow anyone back. Why? You have over 40 followers yet haven't had the courtesy to return the favor? Do you even comment on others' reviews? One thing I've found is engagement begets engagement- if you interacted with even half of the people you're following, they'll reciprocate in kind. It's nice to build an ecosystem of interactivity as that's the only way any of us are going to standout in this blog.
RedBackLoggd
10 months ago
1) I hate to be that guy, but did you do any proofreading before publishing this? The following sentences were constructed so weirdly: "Sadly, it's also a big gamble as sometimes the story can be great, but the gameplay is awful or the story is awesome, but the ending sucks and pretty much makes the entire experience not worthwhile"; "The Chinese Room is notorious for its walking simulators, being almost exactly that"; "A game with literally zero gameplay outside of an action button, and doesn't have any characters on screen".
2) Consider consulting a thesaurus- you literally use reuse the phrase "ball of light" seven times, three times in one paragraph. It reads as uncreative.
3) Your review is strewn with spoilers yet not marked with an appropriate tag. I won't report this since I generally like you as a critic, but you really need to mark it accordingly.
4) You're complaining about the gameplay in a walking simulator?
5) No discussion at all about the graphics or sound outside of a vague mention that the visuals are not memorable, which tells me nothing as a reader. This game had hundreds of engineers work on it, and to not even acknowledge them as a critic is wrong.