izigame.me

I am disappointed to have to give this game a negative recommendation, as I loved EQ Studios' previous game, The Painscreek Killings, and was highly anticipating this game from its announcement. My feelings towards the game are mixed, and I did have a reasonably good time playing it; however, the issues I have with it are too strong to gloss over with a positive recommendation. Let's dive into it:
To start, I really like the concept of this game, though its execution was a bit bungled. It was made clear early on that the game would be less narrative-heavy compared to Painscreek, but any mystery automatically requires a "story" behind what happened. Each case file presents us with a vignette, a snapshot of what is going on in these people's lives, told exclusively through environmental story-telling. This is something that EQ Studios excels at in both this game, as well as in Painscreek, and within each "story," I was able to discern information about who these people were and what was going on in their lives at the time the incident occurred, even if said information wasn't always relevant to the case at hand. However, exclusively relying on environmental assets to tell each story caused two different issues to arise. Firstly, the "removal" of 30% of scene evidence--a game component meant to elevate the difficulty--means that we also lose 30% of the story-telling mechanic, leaving gaps in the case's plot that are only capable of being filled by our own logic jumps or through the exam questions. Unfortunately for us, the exam questions often are entirely unrelated to the major plot points, or even things an investigator would find relevant, so after solving the case, we never get closure or answers on what happened if it isn't tied to answering the exam questions correctly. As a result, solving the mysteries is less rewarding because, as any true crime or mystery fan can attest, the biggest reward is finding out what really happened and why. The game is inconsistent in providing us true, satisfying answers as to the why in many cases, and, thus, we are left only with our inferences and a desire to know more.
I would like to speak more on my frustration with the exam questions, as well as the general set up of the game as a virtual reality "exam" for a potential investigator. I should note that, following The Preliminary Trial and The Missing's first scenario, I stopped reading the exam questions until I had fully examined each scene. I wanted to form any opinions naturally and consider all evidence as equally important without any leading from the nature of the questions asked, thrusting myself into each situation as blindly as possible. (Note: I still would have preferred to have been briefed on each crime scene prior to investigating it, as even investigators or first responders going into a scene will have basic preliminary information from dispatch as to the nature of what to expect or what kind of incident may have occurred.) Anyway, while examining the scene, I tried to figure out what happened, as well as how and why it happened and by whom, but, often, the questions asked were irrelevant to these fundamental questions. That's not to say that the questions weren't interesting and, at times, pretty tricky as pure logic puzzles, but for the branding as a "scene investigator," it felt unusual to be answering questions that would more likely be seen on an LSAT instead of as part of a criminal investigation. If someone looked at the questions first and was solely motivated to answer them, they wouldn't even have to figure out the larger context of the scene for some of the scenarios. As a final note on this topic, it really took the wind out of my sails to basically brute-force trial and error some of the questions rather than feel like I had truly relied on my INDUCTIVE skills (as a philosophy grad, it drives me up the wall to consistently see inductive and deductive reasoning confused) based on the evidence I examined. This frustration was only further elevated by trying to ferret out which precise wording I needed to use to answer questions, as there were several times that I answered a question correctly, only to think I was mistaken because the value I input wasn't perceived as correct. (There was also a bug where answers I typed in disappeared or reverted to previous inputs.)
Lastly, I feel that there is a rather large discrepancy in the production quality of all the scenarios, or rather that one of the scenarios is so polished and exemplary that the remaining ones feel rough-edged in comparison. Of course, I am talking about The Missing. Had I written my review at the conclusion of finishing The Missing, I would have pressed the recommendation button so hard that it broke. As the first "real" scenario after the tutorial level, it set the bar astronomically high and then the rest of the game came across as half-baked afterwards. Even if it had been unlocked further into the game, it still would outshine the others against the game's favor. I genuinely wonder if it was worked on in a relatively good (meaning good cashflow) part of development before the second(?) crowdfunding occurred. The Kickstarter page reveals a 12 Elements of a Crime Scene guide that was used to develop the game, and upon reflection, none of the levels really seem to fully encapsulate all twelve elements, though The Missing comes close. The Missing feels like the kind of quality I would expect from EQ Studios, and the remaining scenarios, while certainly compelling, never quite hit that same benchmark. There are several reasons as to why this may be the case, such as the fact that all three scenarios in The Missing are interconnected. I am disappointed in the length of the game as well. With the tutorial level technically counting as one of the five case files, there are only four fleshed-out case files, and the last two only have one scenario each, rather than three. The concept of The 4th Floor was neat--you couldn't pay me to live there--but still eclipsed by The Missing. I was really into Bloodbath, and I have to give major props to the devs for the attention to detail with the bullet types and the trajectory, but I was bummed that it only had one scenario. I really would have liked to see more large-scale crime scenes of that nature. The final case was also really interesting, but I remain eternally puzzled by the motive. I simultaneously want more of the game through DLC, because it was a fun experience even with the mid-tier scenarios, and want it to be shelved so EQ can focus on their next project, which I pray is like Painscreek and The Missing. If the entirety of Scene Investigators was like The Missing, I would be a happy woman.
With my biggest compliments and criticisms aforementioned, I will summarize the remaining points below:
Pros:
- Great attention to detail in environmental and evidence design
- Lovely graphics
- Atmospheric music
- Good difficulty (difficulty ranges heavily between levels)
- Engaging mysteries
- In-game note-taking
Cons:
- User interface was clunky and buggy (I used both a controller AND mouse/keyboard at the same time to navigate it)
- Lighting/textures on levels was inconsistent (I was running the game at the max graphics settings flawlessly; there were just times that the flashlight was literally useless at illuminating the environment)
- Occasionally difficult to select the correct item
- Interactivity with items was simultaneously streamlined (to the point of being frustrating) and excessive
- Quite a few bugs
Again, I really hate to give it a "do not recommend" rating, especially for a game that I genuinely enjoyed despite my mixed feelings, but I do not think it is worth it at full-price with the flaws I highlighted above. If you get it on sale and go into it with the considerations that other reviewers and I have mentioned, you'll probably have a fun time.