Scrambler

[quote][b]Note: Dead Multiplayer game[/b] This game contains no meaningful single player content. There are no formal online matchmaking servers - the only multiplayer on offer is local co-op or Steam Remote Play Together. This game cannot be played as intended.[/quote] "Scrambler" is a pointless console-esque 3D platformer/twin stick shooter hybrid that comes across like a student project or something, given the mediocre (but not completely awful) visuals combined with the incredibly shallow premise and gameplay. This is just a procedurally generated twin stick wave survival shooter... no content and no real motivation to play it. This game relies on multiple players to work properly, but the developer couldn't work out how to do any netcode or proper online matchmaking. Steam's "Remote Play Together" tries to make up for this glaring shortfall, but PC gamers just don't crowd around a single PC in the living room anymore. This glaring shortfall may be caused by shortsightedness or just lack of competence from the developer, but whatever the reason, the lack of proper online features for a multiplayer only game disqualifies this. This looks a lot like it was designed for consoles, but released on Steam instead by mistake. While this is on PC, it has all the hallmarks and deficiencies of a console game, from the clunkier than needed control scheme to the less than cutting edge graphics. There's 10's of thousands of PC games on Steam, and PC gamers deserve only the best. This might not appeal to many gamers due to the lack of PC-centric design. It's unclear why this never made it to the video game console appliances it seems to have been designed for. Despite not being in Early Access, it's obvious this is an incomplete product. Developers have an obligation to deliver complete, not partially done products to gamers, that shouldn't be controversial. Whatever the excuses may be, it does no service to gamers for incomplete products polluting Steam like this. It makes it harder for gamers to find complete games, and it makes it harder for ethical developers who do the right thing to find their audience. On the important subject of visuals, this features fairly low quality stylised/cartoony low poly 3D graphics. It comes across as the kind of thing you see on mobile phones and Nintendo games, which will deter a lot of PC gamers, understandably. Gaming is a visual medium, and to be considered one of the best games on Steam, the graphics have to be some of the best on Steam. That's not happening here. The developer chose not to do the job of a real game developer and create meaningful bespoke levels, narrative based gameplay progression and so on. Instead, they decided that "Procgen IS content!" and lazily tried to use procgen algorithms to create infinite, samey, repetitive, soulless levels, because that's a lot less work. As a result of this poor decision, the game gets tired and repetitive almost immediately. Developers must learn that procgen is a terrible substitute for creating real content. It should not be used as "ez-mode" for content creation, as the developer tried to do here. Next is pricing and what value this has 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 4 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. All other issues aside (any of which would disqualify this from being worth your time), this is a game that relies on other players for it to be viable, and because there's not enough players, it's not viable. I can't recommend anyone downloads this, it's basically dead.