Alone in the Dark: The Trilogy 1+2+3

Alone in the Dark will always be an important game, being basically the grandaddy of survival horror games. You control either Edward Carnby (who would go on to become the face of the series) or the forgotten Emily Hartwood, heading to the Dercetto mansion to investigate a mysterious suicide. Trapped inside, and under attack by nightmarish creauters, you must solve the mystery of the manor to get out alive. The gameplay of Alone in the Dark is very archaic by today's standards. You must go in and out of the menu constantly to switch between the actions your character can do: fight, search, opening and closing doors and jumping (which is as terrible as it sounds). Added to controls of the tank variety, it will require some patience of you. The strongest aspect of the game is its atmosphere, leaning into the Cthulu mythos. The puzzles are surprisingly logical for the most part, with hints for their solution available throughout the mansion. The enemies themselves are puzzles, while some requiring a certain weapon or item to destroy them. Really, all the staples of the genre are here. While many games would go on to improve it greatly, one must pay respect to the one that laid the groundwork. The sequels (and Jack) are sadly inferior. While there are some improvements to the gameplay, the "horror" aspect gets thrown out the window, leaning more into the fantasy adventure. The puzzles also become pretty obtuse as the series advances. The whole series expects some trial and error but it gets very annoying by the end. A reminder that fancier graphics and mechanics do not necessarily make a better game. The soundtrack is killer in all 4 games. The voice acting is terrible to make up for it. I would recommend this bundle if you like older games, can tolerate dated gameplay, and are interested in the evolution of the survival horror genre. If you are just looking for another horror game to play, I'm sure there are more modern options that will be more apealling to you.

It was the first horror game I've played. And I'm not gonna fool you: it practically created a genre, and in 1992 it was graphically revolutionary. But it's a hard game (like every single other game at the time, remember that PC gaming was more concentrated, with a smaller/hardcore public). So before you buy it, consider that you'll have no clue of what to do. I mean it. Derceto mansion is a sandbox, so'll you solve puzzles in a non-linear way: there are no maps, documents that tell you what to do or other characters. Every object has a purpose, so when you pick up a big pot of rotten soup, keep in mind that it may save your life. This also applies to enemies and 'enviromental' hazards, which can be outsmarted in some interesting ways. You'll have tough time playing this game, but if you do it alone in the dark, you'll discover why a creepy story and unforgiving gameplay made this game such a legend. -SIDEBAR- You didn't expect it to be easy, right?

(bonus if you get the title reference without googling.) AiD is a hard game to review. It created the survival horror genre, and deserves mad props for that. However, the primitive control scheme is epic, unreservedly, bad, and 20 hours practice will still leave you flailing. The graphics are mind-numbing ugly...except they kinda work for the game. Not at all perfect, honor it for swinging for the fences, and having a wonderful Lovecraft inspired story. Also a seminal PC game (yes I mean seminal in the original sense)

I had always heard that Alone in the Dark was the grandfather of my favorite genre (survival horror), but I had never given any thought to playing it until I saw it so cheap here on GOG. Let me just say that it was worth the money. Since the package includes all 3 of the original Alone in the Dark games, I'll metion each seperately: Alone in the Dark: It's definitely earned it's title as "The Grandfather of Survival Horror". So many tropes that later appeared in Resident Evil and Silent Hill started in this game. Not only that, but I was surprised to find that the voice acting was decent (something rare for older games), and the controls were bearable (something rare for Survival Horror). On top of that, it's genuinely interesting, and the puzzles usually aren't TOO difficult or nonsensical. 10/10. Alone in the Dark 2: Alright, this one is a bit sillier. It's lost the Lovecraftian theme in favor of pirates. However, the combat has been polished, and the controls are much better than the previous game. The whole game carries an atmosphere of whimsy and fun, something most can appreciate. It's not as good as the first, but it's fun. 9/10. Alone in the Dark 3: I didn't like this one as much. The controls and combat were just as they were in AitD2, but it's just not as good. It lacks the disturbing solitude and darkness of the first game, and it doesn't have the fun of the second. Not only that, but the puzzles are really, REALLY ridiculous. I had to consult the walkthrough multiple times because I didn't know that I had to use a playing card on a tombstone to activate an elavator, or use a bottle of ammonia on a door in order to not get impaled. However, it does redeem itself by featuring a boss fight with a cyborg-ghost-cowboy. Play it if you like, but don't feel shameful if you have to look on the internet for a solution. 6/10. All in all, though, definitely worth your 6 dollars. You won't regret it.

Without this trilogy, the Survival Horror genre would not have looked like it does today. We have Alone in the Dark 1 + 2 & 3 to thank for that.