Alone in the Dark

I would still enjoy this game without a star cast. It was buggy upon release as if they hadn't tested the game before. It has been updated but I still had an environmental bug that I had to reload a save from. If you're looking for a scary horror game this isn't that. It's more of a gothic horror suspense thriller! I enjoyed the puzzles, and only had to look up walkthroughs once or twice cause I couldn't figure it out. The combat is light, which I enjoy it not being a total shooter game. I like that they added New Game +. I think they nailed what they were going for, but the game deserved to be polished up a bit more. Characters feel clunky at times and the graphics seem lazy in some parts. I really enjoyed the Louisiana Southern Gothic feel of the 1920s-30s. Everyone says it's 1920s and I would agree but I found an item stating The Great Depression, which the market crashed in 1929. At the end of the day I think people are dwelling on that too much. Also yes the story switches between "reality" and "places" which I didn't find confusing at all. Its part of the story and is supposed to be whimsically off putting. Perhaps people don't enjoy an unreliable narrative which we get when playing as Emily. I will agree at times the building had people to talk to and then randomly at times felt vacant, whether or not that's intentional I'm unsure.

I did find the switch to "Egyptian vibes" confusing as it had voodoo elements at first, but it's a small detail to the story, so in the end it makes sense.

I will be playing this game again, and looking forward to additional titles being released.

This game oddly reminds me of (or plays similarly to) Resident Evil Village and The Last of Us, but feels below the bar those games set. I also felt like this game was a marketing fail, I'm just now hearing about it a year later.

In conclusion if the game had polished its graphics, and tested better before release I'm sure it would have been 10/10.

Alone in the Dark (2024) developed by a Swedish studio Pieces Interactive can't even be called a virtual game. De facto, this is an advertising product that at the end of the action tells you that you will learn all the secrets of Alone in the Dark in the next game. And what you've already gone through is a visual prologue. The scariest thing about AiD was not the dead and monsters, but soulless commerce.

AiD was frankly disappointing. New Orleans is not like itself. An unremarkable location can be attributed to any city in the South of the United States in the first half of the 20th century. The psychiatric hospital does not shine with plausibility and aesthetics, only the bathroom and bar elegantly made by the game designer occasionally remind that the action takes place in the 1920s. Because of the monotony of the environment, the Spirit of that time is not felt. The mission on the vintage steamer was the weakest and most shameful moment of the game. Players expected something remotely resembling BioShock Infinite from the horror world, but got a meaningless run from point «A» to point «B» with a dull shooting range consisting of stupid monsters controlled by artificial intelligence. I was pleased with the moment of transition from the American house to Egypt. The entrance in front of the tomb evoked flashbacks from the movie Mummy (1999) and the animated series Mummies Alive (1997), which amused nostalgia. But the tomb of the Pharaoh itself turned out to be another disappointment, made more primitive than the arenas from the game Unreal Tournament, which the brain memorized by heart.

The plot is interesting for the first 50% of the time, then it is flooded with garbage from other timelines, as a result of which the story turns into a farce, and the players get a scenario mess. The gameplay is dull and monotonous. Riddles are primitive and boring. Cheap casual games from the «Searching» genre, even despite the scarcity of two-dimensional graphics, can surprise and impress the player more than their expensive counterpart - Alone in the Dark.

93% of the characters are not charismatic, expressionless and quickly forgotten. Emily Hardwood which was copied from actress Jodie Comer fit well into the atmosphere of the 1920s, her image corresponds to that time. Emily Hartwood is a gumption, inquisitive, moderately brave (not a feminist caricature of a «Strong and Independent» woman), tactful, unopened Coquette a slight touch of pleasant (not too vulgar, but not feigned) sexuality. The character of Ruth Tallant is the opposite of Emily Hartwood, depicted grotesquely cliched with hypertrophied infantilism - a fake image of a «Starlet from the 1920s» created by an ignorant screenwriter. Ruth cannot be called a «Woman-Riddle» («Mystery Woman»), she does not have natural charm, but she has a naturalness, a weak realism, a trail of mystery stretches behind her. Ruth is an unfinished but interesting character.

Computer graphics have proven themselves well in the drawing of faces, facial expressions, clothes and in scenes related to the ignition of fire. Very realistic. Buildings, cars, interior, nature, are made on 3 out of 5 points and do not strike the mind with aesthetic beauty or subtlety of the image. AiD has in settings wide category of debugging the game of light and shadow, but the end result is not impressive. After playing with the sliders, the player gets a shadow depth weaker than in Deadfall Adventures from back in 2013. It would seem that a game with a difference of 11 years, with more technologically imperfect graphics, should be inferior to Alone in the Dark in everything... but the scene with the awakening of the mummy in a dark corner of the ruins of the temple looks more beautiful and realistic than that of his colleague from 2024.

Summing up, I was already going to give Alone in the Dark 3.5 points, but an unnecessarily naturalistic scene with a child forced me to deduct 1 point. I am not a prude and I perfectly understand the fashion for immoral realism imposed by HBO. But everything has its limits. In the game Outlast 2, the topic of victims of pedophilia was touched upon tangentially. But the developers were smart enough to show the evil of the lawlessness indirectly, without a naturalistic scene. In AiD, for the sake of HYPE, a cruel scene was shown, softening it only with a third-person view. The laurels of the scandalous bear from Baldur's Gate 3 are haunting the Swedes.

The result is 2.5 points out of 5. I do not recommend Alone in the Dark (2024). Will I wait for the release of the second part? It depends on which one. If it is made as mainstream by the Swedes as the first one, then NO. If the developers take the plot and atmosphere seriously, without chasing a large infantile audience, then commercial and artistic success awaits the sequel, and the gaming industry will be able to get another cult masterpiece into the hall of fame.

Solid story, good acting for the most part and a stellar setting! Absolutely loved exploring all the locations and the great detail put into those locations. Combat was a bit janky for me. Struggled especially against one small enemy that would consistently glitch under the floor on PC. Frustrated me greatly and is my biggest knock on this fun game.

I completed the Edward Carnby run in about 11 hours which is probably a bit longer than average. I encountered a few other glitches (like getting stuck on objects and walking on air instead of descending a stair case). Overall, I had a mostly good time and recommend this game to anyone who is a fan of old-school horror games as it has some good references to the original in here.

**Review of Alone in the Dark**

Having a long history with the Alone in the Dark franchise, it's fair to say my expectations for the latest installment were high, especially given my nostalgia for its origins. My first real encounter with the series was playing the Dreamcast version in the early 2000s, and I've always appreciated the blend of horror and adventure it aimed to provide. When I finally got my hands on the current version on PS5, I was eager to see how the series had evolved. Unfortunately, while it does offer some good moments, it ultimately falls short of its predecessors and similar titles in the genre.

The story revolves around Emily Hartwood and private investigator Edward Carnby as they delve into the mysteries surrounding Derceto Manor, searching for Emily's missing uncle, Jeremy. Right from the start, I felt a disconnect with the narrative. The plot veers into bizarre territory almost immediately, with characters popping in and out as the duo transitions through a disjointed series of locales, ranging from the streets of New Orleans to arid deserts. The shifts feel abrupt and confusing, and it's hard to invest in the storyline when understanding what's happening becomes a chore.

This installment markets itself as a survival horror game-a classification I agree with, though not entirely convincingly. The encounters with various monsters, including mutant skeletons and Swamp Thing-esque creatures, become repetitive quickly. While the enemies looked decent and had varied designs, their AI lacked depth; they mostly charged at you without strategy, resulting in encounters that felt more like an inconvenience than a challenge. Surprisingly, I found myself indifferent to many of the puzzles as well, often resorting to online guides for solutions. They tend to be pattern-based and lack the cleverness that keeps players engaged.

Weapons in the game-ranging from a revolver to a shotgun and a tommy gun-perform well in terms of animation and sound design. I gravitated towards the shotgun for its effectiveness. Post-patch, the availability of ammo seemed improved, which is certainly a positive note. However, the game lacks the feeling of progression one often appreciates in games of this genre. There are no upgrades to your abilities or weapons, causing encounters to feel somewhat stagnant and unrewarding.

Graphically, the game isn't particularly awful, yet the environments lack a sense of personality or atmosphere. It felt as though the design team focused on delivering a game rather than creating an immersive world. The character animation appears stiff at times, particularly during actions like climbing ladders. While the voice acting is acceptable, the lack of clarity in the narrative made it challenging to connect with the characters.

Alone in the Dark can be completed in around six hours, but it feels even shorter due to its lack of depth and engagement. There is only one major boss encounter that appears right at the end, further alienating players from building any connection with the challenges the story has to offer. I primarily played as Edward, and I had little interest in switching to Emily due to the narrative's disjointed nature.

Overall, Alone in the Dark feels like a missed opportunity. It holds some production value, but it fails to capture the magic that made early survival horror titles compelling. As it stands, this game earns a rating of 6 out of 10. It may be worth purchasing during a sale-perhaps when it dips to around twenty dollars. For now, those looking for a gripping horror experience might find better offerings within the genre.

I wanted much more than this. This is just buggy mess. Story isnt something special, bad graphic. Game is around 7-8 hours long. I really have hight hopes about this one. There are plenty graphical and sound problems. Sometimes game looks like it is from mid 00's. I played as Edward Carnby, probably the game is same as if you play as Emily. The ending of the game is similiar to RE 7 but the feeling at the end isnt same. For me only good thing in this game are locations. Alone in the dark series deserves much better game than this one. At the end my suggestion is to skip this game or if you are a big horror fan as I am, buy it on big sale.