FREEFLOW

⠀

It's an interesting concept for a game, I think it looks very similar to Karlson. I just have a few problems with it. The game has a few bugs that ruin the experience. For starters the camera tends to freak out whenever you are on or even just lighting moving into a wall. This makes the the character hard to control and can be a little frustrating at some points. The grapple gun is also a fun little gimmick but is extremely lack luster do to it being more of a liability than a utility. From my game play at least, it's better to avoid using it unless you absolutely need to. All in all it's a decent game and I will come back to it when and if updates roll out, I understand that the dev is new to game development and they did a really good job for a first timer. (5/10)

"FREEFLOW" is a very poorly made minimalist/low poly parkour style 3D platformer ripping off the theme of Portal to some extent (you're stuck in a facility with a crap AI), only this of course lacks portals, or, well, anything appealing. This is a 3D platformer from Temu. No, that's wrong, Temu wouldn't touch this, the quality is too bad. The game is deep in development hell and may never be finished... and given the lacklustre reception, there should be no motivation to do so. Nobody really wanted this. It not hard to do 5 minutes of market research and discover Steam has markedly better games. Nobody wants a worse version of literally hundreds of better games in the same genre. This game features very lacklustre minimalist "art" for graphics instead of anything remotely contemporary. I'm sure the "developer" thought this would come across as "artistic", but it doesn't, it comes across as "really lazy". Yes, contemporary 3D graphics take a lot of time and effort to create. That doesn't mean it's okay not to bother! Developers must try to understand that gaming is a visual medium, and gamers spend a lot of money on high end gaming rigs for a reason. And that reason is not so they can look at lazy, phoned-in half efforts like this. Now on to pricing and value for gamers. This is "free" enough (not every "free" game in the "free" section is truly free, there's usually some hidden price tag), at least you won't be expected to spend any more money after you download this, but just because something is free doesn't mean it's good, and the cost of a game is more than just financial, your time is valuable too. In terms of public reception, this failed. There's over 130 million unique gamers visiting Steam every month. SteamDB showed the game peaked at [b]only 7 concurrent players[/b]... this is a dismal public reception. This was so bad they couldn't even give it away. Bearing in mind that free games don't add +1 to your game collector count, should you bother adding this to your library and downloading it? What's the verdict? This is a "nope". While it won't necessarily cost you money, the time and hard drive space it requires could be better invested in one of the many higher-quality alternatives on Steam. [b]Note: Joke reviews[/b] As usual, with some of the worst games on Steam, all the comedians come out of the woodwork. The vast majority of the reviews for this game are joke reviews, mocking the game for just how bad it is. The comedians give us the usual "this game cured my cancer, saved my marriage, changed my life" story... sarcastic, but not useful if you want to know if the game is worth it. Because most of the reviews are humorous but also insincere and not reflective of the actual quality of the product, the positive review score for this game should be taken with a grain of salt. [quote][url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Response![/url][/quote]The developer has weighed in to inform everyone they didn't read the [url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Usage Rules[/url] for Steam "partners", or they deliberately ignored the part where Valve says: [quote]Though it may be tempting, not every review needs to be responded to. A developer response will frequently draw more attention than the original statement, potentially turning a small issue into a much larger community discussion. It's also not a good idea to use this feature to refute customer opinions. Your direct attention can be seen as validation or a defensive attempt to silence your customers.[/quote] The developer response here is simply disgusting. It's now evident the developer simply didn't care one bit about gamers at all, and they deliberately set out to abuse and violate the agreement they made when they published a game onto Steam Direct in Early Access. The first thing the developer wants everyone to know is that they are "The Main Character". You, as a gamer, don't matter. They breach Valve guidelines for developers just to complain about a fully accurate and informative review (with facts their ego doesn't like). It's evident from their attitude that they never created this product with gamers in mind. They did so to stroke their own ego. When developers, especially failed ones who would never be able to get a professional job in the industry, put themselves before gamers, we end up with garbage products like this. That explains how this trash ended up on Steam, but it doesn't excuse it. At least we finally got to meet The Main Character, and nobody else matters. The developer admits they didn't hire a team of talented staff to produce the game and tried to do the whole thing on their own, instead. This is a lot like boarding an airplane, and halfway through the flight, having the pilot come out and serve peanuts. It's going to end in disaster. It requires a team of competent people to do a complex job properly, and that's not what has happened here... another explanation for the poor quality of this game. The developer even admits this should never have been published because the quality is far too low and they knew it. They published it anyway, to deliberately harm and pollute Steam with garbage. Why? Ego. This guy is The Main Character, remember. Disgusting attitude. Here's where it gets so much worse. The developer, knowing they made a commitment to finish and publish this garbage, [b]then deliberately violated that agreement by working on a completely different game.[/b] Valve should step in and take action against developers who deliberately and harmfully act in bad faith. Nothing in the developers pointless breach of Valve guidelines changes any of the objective facts of my review. My review stands unaltered. I cannot recommend this game to anyone.

i can see the vision. as someone else making a similar game, i can respect the effort put in. BUT.... this isnt very polished. the movement is janky, the art is a bit weird, BUT I SEE THE POTENTIAL. hearing the voice actor, i can see this is a kids passion project, so you know, kinda difficult for me to cirtisize. the game is also fun to play btw

Don't get me wrong, I think this game has merit, but there is a significant amount of room for improvement. The environments have very little detail, the ground is almost entirely untextured until 7 levels into a 9-level game, and the grappling hook mechanics simply do not function. Despite movement speed being mostly uncapped, momentum gained from swinging has a significant dropoff. By rapidly clicking at the ceiling, you can begin flying and skip most (if not all) of the game. All of the voices, and I believe the mechanics themselves, were generated by AI and haphazardly thrown in, seemingly without any playtesting. I think with a lot of re-doing, it could be good, in a similar way to how a ROBLOX game could be entertaining for an hour or so, but if you're looking for something that contends with the platform genre, you wouldn't find it here.

GOOG FOR WILE WATING FOR KRALSNO OR WATEVR

its so addicting for a free game and its kinda like karlson but better, i love machanics for the game and im in a rush so this is all i got, overall its a W game

The physics are so bad in this. It's like your character is a bouncy ball on ice in zero gravity