
Survive an intense 5-minute challenge in Per Aspera Test, a nostalgic horror game reminiscent of the PlayStation 1 era. Run, decide, and confront stressful challenges. Run, breathe, think fast - can you handle it? Share results with friends and find out who's the best!
Revenue comes from in-game items and microtransactions, which our price-based model doesn't estimate. Copies below reflect the player base, not paid sales.
Media

About
Genres
Stats
Languages: English**languages with full audio support
Reviews
⠀
PlayStation 1 dönemini anımsatan nostaljik bir korku oyunu olan Per Aspera Test'te yoğun bir mücadelede hayatta kalın. Koşun, karar verin ve stresli zorluklarla yüzleşin. Koş, nefes al, hızlı düşün; üstesinden gelebilir misin?
Press F to die.
Related
Related
Trends
Concurrent players on Steam, sampled daily since tracking started.
[h1] Per Aspera Test [/h1] [h3] Positives: [/h3] + Retro feel + Ok sounds + A tad creepy + Its free [h3] Negatives: [/h3] - Goofy looking monster - Graphics looks quite ugly - Not a lot of variation in the level - You cant hear if the monster is close to you or not - The game is over in under 5 minutes [h3] Conclusion: [/h3] I cant recall any PS1 games being this bad, but graphics wise its there. There is nothing here of any worth, so this game you can just skip. [h1] Total Score: 3/10 [/h1]
Пойдёт
The game may be short, but it's also very enjoyable. I hope you'll create more interesting products in the future.
"Per Aspera Test" is a short, pointless jumpscare simulator where you're in like a basement or something and a really low quality "monster" chases you around and jumpscares you. There's thousands of these low effort jumpscare amateur games on Steam and this is one of the worst. The game is quite short, and can be run through in just 5 minutes. The lack of content here makes it hard to suggest it's worth spending the time to add to your library and download. The "game" here is of a pretty low technical standard. The implementation is basic minimum effort stuff, more like a weekend project rather than a serious, professionally made product... and it's bad even compared to most amateur made games. An experimental piece... and the experiment is "Can I spend on Steam Direct and then call myself a game dev?" While that $100 spend on Steam Direct probably made the developers feel good about themselves, we have to ask why this kind of thing is good for gamers. It isn't. In terms of visuals, this features fairly low quality low poly 3D graphics which will deter a lot of gamers, understandably. Gaming is a visual medium, and while some developers struggle with creating high quality visuals, failing to do so is a disservice to gamers. It's very difficult to recommend bad looking games. 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. Even as a free game, this couldn't find an audience. With a peak of [b]only 2 players[/b], it's clear the Steam community took one look and walked away. They literally couldn't pay people to spend time playing this. Given that this free game won't increase your game collector count, is it worth your time to add it to your library? Nope. This isn't worth downloading. There's no financial cost up-front, but you'd still be spending your time and a little hard drive space on a product that's far from the best. There's thousands of better alternatives on Steam.
☀️
Momentum
Pace estimated from the game's recent review growth (our daily snapshots) at its own sales-per-review ratio — a momentum signal, not booked sales.