Scorn

In 1917, French Dada artist Marcel Duchamp displayed his most recognizable work he titled "Fountain." It was a urinal he purchased and wrote "R. Mutt 1917" upon it. It's a lightning rod of discussion in art over a century later as it really brings up the question of "What is art? What can be art?" In reference to Scorn, I find Duchamp's presentation to some what relevant. That is to say, Scorn is unusual beyond its aesthetics and its merits as a game are questionable. I'd venture to even say it's a good game in so much that it was a memorable and enjoyable experience, but some will disagree and cite its simple gameplay and criminally short run. Scorn prompts you to ask "What makes a good game?" and I'm still left answering it. If it's something as simple as "it's fun to play" then I'm left to conclude that Scorn is, by definition, a good game. But, Scorn is short, it can be clunky, and it lacks much mechanical depth. These are all things that we admonish in game design. How can it be good? The truth is that Scorn presents an immersive horror experience that's less about jump scares, zombies, and chainsaw wielding maniacs and more about a creating a sense of foreboding and leaving the player feeling so very much alone in this bizarre and broken world. It leaves you asking yourself questions about the world, about what happened, and what your role in all of it was. You're confronted with a sense of isolation and hopelessness. Unlike Duchamp, Ebb Software's art department clearly expended a *LOT* of effort in crafting this game. This game looks incredible. Most will obviously point out the influence by H.R. Giger, but few will point out the even greater influence of Zdzisław Beksiński, a Polish artist who drew upon similar horrific themes. Together, the two influences complement this world perfectly which deals with the themes of sex, birth, death, decay, and existentialism. So, at the end of it all, I recommend Scorn. On sale. I'm not sure about full price.

As everyone has already pointed out, the game is an artistic masterpiece (provided you don't look too-too close, especially at moving objects). I stopped countless times while playing, moved the camera in a random position and found myself inside a Giger painting every single time. Even the weapons and puzzles are just an excuse to show off the artistic creativity. Totally recommended for Giger fans! That being said, the game itself is rather short and left me with the feeling that much of the content has been scrapped. I was promised a reactive world which implies moral decisions with consequences, but none of that was present. At one point I ran around for an hour looking for an alternate way to progress, but I had to accept that the game is in fact completely linear. The creatures you encounter are completely unaffected by your actions and exhibit a barebone mmorpg AI as they attack if you get close, otherwise follow a set path. If it does turn out that a lot more gameplay was planned but removed later, a future director's cut would be interesting to see. Otherwise I see the game as a walking simulator with little to no replayability besides revisiting some stunning locations.

(Originally played on Steam) Do you want a gripping first-person journey with amazing atmosphere, brutal combat, and immersive world design? Then go play Inner Chains, which released years earlier with less bugs, far more intuitive puzzle design, and an at least somewhat coherent narrative. Eight years and this game struggles to achieve baseline quality of life standards. Sure, some of the animations are great, and the art direction is well done, but it's all in service of an absolutely, dreadfully dull game. That's the real kicker - it's not just bad, it's boring. A game with a penal-bone gun should not be easily described as "boring" but here we are. It requires a ton of investment on your part to get anything out of SCORN, far more than anyone should need to in order to have fun. What's absurd is that many of these basic issues, like optimized area loading, level sign posting, basic player agency, UI/UX cohesion, etc. are the sort of things you should already know when releasing a game. It's profound to think that this project took nearly a decade and has seemingly learned nothing from half of the games industry's existence. So yeah, you want grim horror in a first-person world with shooting and/or puzzles? Inner Chains. Chronicles of Riddick. Penumbra. Alien: Isolation. Hell, you'd still get a stronger sense of otherworldly dread from Black Ops 1, because at least there the gameplay isn't a poorly executed mess that constantly pulls you out of the experience. This just isn't worth the price of entry, and leaves me wondering what the devs spent all their time and money on after all these years.

The game is mind-blowingly surreal. Every pace and scene is a lived through Giger artwork come to life. That is to say that is all there really is. You pace through the simple enough puzzles that while take a bit of trial and error, moving through a very short lived few mazes leaves you wanting so much more when you meet a very abrupt end. That being said, it isn't a bad approach and the execution actually pulls the atmosphere off perfectly, but $35 for this game I feel is pretty steep for having put a total of 8 honest hours into the game. As linear as the experience was with almost no combat to the game (that could of existed without it at all), and a couple puzzles and you get off the ride and go back to doing what you were doing with virtually no replayabilty. As somewhat unique as the game is, it again is just so short lived you feel robbed when it ends.

Love the art style and love walking sims, however, I quit about half an hour into the game.. Puzzles, for the sake of puzzles, goddamn puzzles. The game devs had to fill their artwork with playable content and they found the cheapest way of them all. I do not recommend this game, better watch walkthroughs on youtube.