Alone in the Dark 3

First playthrough review time. Alone in the Dark 3 is another entry in the early survival horror series and keeps a lot of the same basic setup as the earlier games. You still move through areas, look for items, solve puzzles, and deal with enemies along the way. The controls and fixed camera style are the same kind used in the older games, so movement can feel slow compared to modern titles. This time the setting is different, moving away from closed buildings to a desert town. That change gives the game a different mood, with open streets and abandoned places instead of tight indoor areas. Combat shows up more often here, and weapons play a bigger role since resources are still limited. The mix of exploring and fighting is more noticeable than before. The controls and camera can make things harder than they should be, especially when trying to move quickly or react in certain situations. You also have to deal with the usual puzzle and item searching to progress. Overall, it still follows the same old style as the earlier games but shifts more toward action and a different setting, while still keeping the same basic structure as before.

Alone in the Dark 2 pivoted the fledgling franchise into comedy after the original game made a remarkably admirable attempt to scare the hell out of early-90s gamers. It wasn't a good experiment, mixing fast-paced shooting with base mechanics that simply were not suited for it, while throwing out the atmosphere that the original game was so influential for. Christiane Sgorlon's Alone in the Dark 3, once again developed by Infogrames, can be seen as somewhat of a course correction in this regard, focusing less on action and reorienting towards puzzle-solving and atmosphere. Unfortunately, Alone in the Dark 3 can only be seen as an incremental success in this regard. While it is, without question, far less frustrating to actually engage in combat (although hardly ideal, this was never the franchise's strong suit), the puzzle design is far worse. The back of the box states that one can "enjoy up to 70 hours of gameplay," which is rich considering the game's runtime amounts to maybe three if you know what you're doing. This is what I like to call "Blockbuster rental design", where the developers deliberately make a game harder than necessary to force players at the time to make a purchase. It feels as if every room has a puzzle and so many of them absolutely reek of the worst moon logic known to man. Given how prominently the game advertises the strategy guide, I didn't feel much shame in reading a walkthrough and was consistently astounded by how asinine the solutions often were. There are some interesting ideas here, such as when Edward Carnby is transformed into a leopard and must find a way to transform back into his usual mustachioed self. While I do prefer this to being gunned down in a microsecond by zombie pirates, I sincerely think these supernatural cowboys should just play checkers or something. The writing (handled by Hubert Chardot and Christian Nabais) isn't much better, although it isn't nearly as try-hard as Alone in the Dark 2 could be. Alone in the Dark 3's premise holds potential; a Hollywood Western turned into a living hell by spirits of the American Frontier, murdering the crew and kidnapping the lead actress. The fundamental problem with Alone in the Dark 3's storytelling is much the same as Alone in the Dark 2's; the worldbuilding (the primary means through which the story is conveyed) attempts to mimic old Western serials, much like how the prior title was a facsimile of pulp pirate stories. Unfortunately, compared to the descent of a man into madness that the original Alone in the Dark conveyed so well, these pastiches take me out of the seriousness of the story. I simply do not buy the concept, comparatively. It doesn't help that the game pitifully tries to tie the game's narrative into former games (antagonist Jed Stone is the offspring of Pregzt and Elisabeth Jarret), at some attempt at relevancy within a trilogy people had stopped caring about some time ago at that point. The sole redeeming point is that the game looks fairly damn good for the time. It's clear Infogrames' art department had cut its teeth on the prior games, as the backgrounds are the most detailed they've ever been. 3D elements blend in better than previously, especially in the Native American lava area, where the jagged rocks and bubbling lava blend fairly seamlessly with the three-dimensional pillars. I love many Western films, so of course I'm partial to the game's art direction, which is executed very well. Every scene seems suffocatingly musty, as if dust is the environment's second skin. Weirdly, Carnby's model seems less detailed than the previous game, but it's hardly a big deal. Unfortunately, the original score, a fairly consistent highlight of the series up to this point, is weak here. Frédéric Mentzen's score is not bad by any means, but it is flat and uninteresting. There are admirable attempts to match the Western theming, but it never feels properly creative, rather stock, as if taken from a pre-existing library. This part I found especially disappointing, as even Alone in the Dark 2 impressed with a well-composed, albeit ill-fitting soundtrack. While visually memorable and temporarily immersive, Alone in the Dark 3 fails to live up to its promising concept by doubling down on selling strategy guides. While no longer subjecting you to frustrating combat, I would not suggest tackling the game without a walkthrough unless you intend to spend "up to 70 hours" bashing your head against the wall. A great graphical presentation and art direction don't stop the game from feeling like a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ drag. The lackluster script and boring score don't help things. Alone in the Dark 3 might not be as bad as its immediate predecessor, but there is frankly a reason it is forgotten.

I gotta be real here... this really has not aged well at all. I think it's better than the second, at least to start, but all the atmosphere, spooks, and solid tension and pacing of the first game are STILL not back again here. And to boot, be prepared to just get smoked and die arbitrarily like in the second with its focus on some of the clunkiest combat DOS has ever seen. Also one of the puzzles has you interacting with objects on walls you can't see? This game sucks :(

至此，三部曲全部通关

Imagine the clunky controls of the first two games. Now add a cowboy hat, remove atmosphere, and multiply the confusion. That’s this game.

Тоже самое, что и с 1 и 2 частью. Главный челлендж в не во врагах, а в освоении управления. Исключительно для фанатов данной франшизы, хотя сеттинг Дикого Запада и смотрится интересно. Для нынешнего комьюнити представляет сугубо историческую ценность, можно взять, если Вы коллекционируете игры, либо фанатеете по DOSовским тайтлам.

Минусы: Всё. Плюсы: У этой говномешанины из пикселей, жопного управление(даже для 1995го) и идиотского использования предметов есть ОДИН жирный плюс. Некие люди из Японии посмотрели на неё, выкинули всякую хyесосину и явили миру шедевральную Resident Evil.

👍

Alone in the Dark 3 to gra, która najbardziej oddala się od tego, czym seria była na początku. To już nie jest horror niewiedzy ani kosmicznego lęku. To próba połączenia survival horroru z westernową stylistyką i otwartą akcją — pomysł ciekawy na papierze, ale problematyczny w praktyce. Klimat i atmosfera: Akcja przenosi się do miasteczka duchów na Dzikim Zachodzie. Zamiast: •rezydencji pełnej sekretów, •zamkniętej, klaustrofobicznej przestrzeni, dostajemy: •szerokie lokacje, •ulice, •kopalnie, •otwarte budynki. I tu leży główny problem — strach się rozmywa. Horror działa najlepiej, gdy ogranicza gracza. Alone in the Dark 3 robi odwrotnie: daje przestrzeń, światło i widoczność. Niektóre momenty nadal potrafią być niepokojące, ale są to raczej pojedyncze sceny, a nie stałe poczucie zagrożenia. Fabuła i lore: Historia opiera się na konflikcie z nadnaturalnym złem związanym z miasteczkiem Slaughter Gulch i powracającymi bytami z innych wymiarów. Teoretycznie nadal mamy: •elementy okultyzmu, •rytuały, •obce istoty. W praktyce jednak: •narracja jest bardziej dosłowna, •motywy są tłumaczone wprost, •znika lovecraftowska tajemnica. Gra przestaje sugerować — zaczyna wyjaśniać. A to w horrorze niemal zawsze działa na niekorzyść. To już nie opowieść o rzeczach, których nie da się pojąć. To historia o złym bycie, którego trzeba powstrzymać. Rozgrywka: Jeśli Alone in the Dark 2 przesuwało serię w stronę akcji, to trójka robi to bez wahania: •jeszcze więcej strzelania, •jeszcze więcej amunicji, •jeszcze mniej powodów, by unikać walki. Zagadki są: •prostsze, •bardziej mechaniczne, •często pełnią funkcję „blokady” postępu, a nie elementu świata. Gra momentami przypomina surową, technicznie niedoskonałą strzelankę z kamerą stałą, co nie było jej pierwotnym przeznaczeniem. Oprawa techniczna: Silnik wyraźnie dobija już do granic możliwości: •animacje są sztywne, •kolizje potrafią frustrować, •kamera często walczy z graczem. Stylistyka Dzikiego Zachodu jest ciekawa, ale nie zawsze czytelna wizualnie. Brakuje kontrastów światła i cienia, które wcześniej budowały napięcie. Dźwięk i muzyka spełniają swoją rolę, ale rzadko wspierają atmosferę grozy. Częściej są neutralnym tłem. Znaczenie historyczne Alone in the Dark 3 to: •koniec klasycznej trylogii, •przykład, jak łatwo zgubić tożsamość serii, •dowód, że więcej akcji ≠ lepszy horror. Gra nie jest katastrofą, ale jest wyraźnym sygnałem, że twórcy nie do końca wiedzieli, czym Alone in the Dark ma być dalej. Podsumowanie: To najsłabsza część trylogii pod względem: •klimatu, •spójności, •poczucia grozy. Jeśli: •kochasz jedynkę za jej duszną atmosferę, •doceniasz dwójkę jako ciekawostkę, to trójka będzie raczej obowiązkiem z kronikarskiego obowiązku, a nie przyjemnością. To gra, którą warto znać, ale niekoniecznie gra, do której chce się wracać.

Alone in the Dark 3 con i suoi poligoni spigolosi e i controlli ormai datati rimane un titolo che sorprende ancora oggi se si ha la pazienza di entrarci dentro. Questa volta ci ritroviamo nel selvaggio west, un’ambientazione che già di per sé rompe con i toni gotici e pirateschi dei capitoli precedenti e che dona al gioco una personalità tutta sua. Si respira polvere, si sentono i saloon, e soprattutto si incontrano nemici sempre più legati all’azione che all’horror classico. La cosa che ho notato di più, passando dal primo capitolo fino ad arrivare a questo, è come gli sviluppatori abbiano voluto sottolineare il senso di progressione. Nel primo Alone in the Dark eri sempre dentro quella villa, un grande labirinto gotico da esplorare e padroneggiare. Nel secondo invece già si intravedeva la voglia di spostarsi e variare le ambientazioni. Ma è qui, nel terzo, che questo concetto viene preso di petto: non si torna mai indietro, si abbandonano le aree per sempre, e questo dà una sensazione di avanzamento, di viaggio. Non c’è più solo la casa che diventa familiare col tempo, ma una serie di luoghi che si attraversano come tappe di una storia. Da un lato perdi quell’effetto claustrofobico e di padronanza totale dello spazio, dall’altro guadagni varietà e un ritmo più scandito. I combattimenti sono anche più marcati che nei predecessori. Non siamo ancora ai livelli di un action game moderno, ma si sente che l’enfasi è posta sullo scontro diretto. Certo, i controlli non aiutano e la telecamera spesso fa disperare, ma il senso di pericolo è lì, più concreto che mai. Questa scelta rende il gioco forse meno raffinato dal punto di vista del mistero e dell’enigma, ma regala un’energia nuova, quasi pulp, che lo differenzia dagli altri due capitoli. Dal punto di vista tecnico oggi è innegabile che sia invecchiato, ma i fondali prerenderizzati e l’atmosfera western-horror funzionano ancora. È un’ambientazione insolita per un survival horror, e proprio per questo resta impressa. C’è qualcosa di affascinante nel vedere streghe e pistoleri fantasma convivere in un contesto che non ti aspetteresti mai. Alone in the Dark 3 non ha la purezza del primo, né l’assurdità piratesca del secondo, ma si ritaglia uno spazio personale. È il capitolo che segna la voglia degli sviluppatori di sperimentare con le ambientazioni e con la struttura, e che ti accompagna in un viaggio dove ogni area nuova porta qualcosa di diverso. Non è solo nostalgia, è ancora oggi un piccolo pezzo di storia videoludica che sa intrattenere. Se vi piacciono le radici del survival horror e non vi spaventano controlli rigidi e difficoltà d’altri tempi, prendetelo e giocatelo. Perché merita.