SSS222: HyperSpace

SSS222: HyperSpace is a badly made 2D retro pixel vertical scrolling arcade bullet hell/shoot 'em up. There's a few bells and whistles like Discord integration which video games need about as much as pancreatic cancer. From a technical perspective, the game doesn't meet basic minimum requirements that most PC gamers expect as standard. A choice was made to use obsolete, decades old retro pixel "art" as a substitute for contemporary PC graphics. It's unclear if this is due to lack of budget or talent, regardless, the overall visual quality of the game is extremely low as a result. There's no options to change the resolution for the game or customise the graphics settings. There's no way for gamers to ensure this is running at the native resolution of their displays... there's no guarantee this game will look right on any PC as a result of this hamfisted design decision. There's no way for gamers to try improve the low quality graphics. Problematically, the play area is only a 9:16 aspect ratio box in the middle of the screen... while some UI elements are displayed outside this, it's apparent the developers here aren't familiar with video games and probably never played one before, or they would be aware most gaming PCs use a 16:9 display. The controls can't be customised, which will be an annoyance for many, but it can also render the game unplayable for differently-abled gamers. These technical defects push this game below acceptable standards for any modern PC game. SSS222: HyperSpace is relatively cheap at $3 USD, but it's not worth it. Given the defects and quality issues with the game, coupled with the unrealistic price, this is impossible to recommend. [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 somewhat dishonestly insists they made the game look bad on purpose by using trash pixel "art". We know this is dishonesty, because if the developer was capable of doing better, they would. Otherwise, this would be a sheer insult to gamers. It's 2022. The developer admits they are not an artist but they did their own art anyway. It's unclear why this is good for gamers. This is simply an admission of incompetence. The developer doesn't understand what a PC is, and has never seen a PC with an LCD display. The developer seems completely unaware of the concept of native display resolution. The developer does not understand why gamers must be able to ensure games work properly on their PCs... insisting that he is right and gamers must accept whatever he throws out. This is not the case, and this is a further insult to gamers. The developer admits this was intended to be a mobile game for mobile peasants. It's unclear why this garbage was inflicted on PC gamers. Steam is not a dumping ground for garbage that Apple and Google reject. The developer insultingly admits the game isn't even complete, as it is missing required features like control customisability... yet they launched the game on Steam outside of Early Access! This is clearly an intention to mislead gamers and scam them into paying for a knowingly incomplete product. This is unacceptable disrespect for gamers and is completely unethical. The developer seems unaware that I've played and reviewed over 7,800 games on Steam. Unsurprisingly this includes several thousand amateur games. This experience gives me a thorough familiarity with failed game developers and a clear understanding of indicators that show when a developer is sincere or when they're simply doing a cash grab by dumping pollution on Steam. It is incorrect to call this an "indie" game, as "indie" implies a degree of capability and qualification in game development which is not present here; this is simply an amateur project. The developer admits they failed to budget properly and didn't hire the correct number of staff required to produce a game of acceptable quality. Despite this, they published their failure through Steam Direct anyway. Most game studios avoid publishing failed products before the community can see them as this is damaging for their brand. It's unclear why the developer failed to follow this sensible example from actual, professional game developers. The developer doesn't understand the very simple concept that putting a price tag, even a cheap one, on something that's so badly made it's completely worthless, makes that price tag unrealistic. And don't take my word for it. Despite this being dumped into game bundles as a cash grab for a knowingly incomplete product, gamers completely rejected this. SteamDB shows the game only ever had two concurrent players, only two. Presumably the developer and their therapist. And that was when the game launched... now, nobody plays it. It gets launched once every few days, only for a few minutes, after which it is presumably quickly deleted. SteamDB doesn't lie, this is a failure. The analysis provided in my review provides comprehensive reasoning to explain this failure. But the developer has compounded this by showing they've put their interests before that of gamers, they've behaved unethically, and they've behaved in an insincere manner, making this nothing but a cash grab. For that reason, as well as the others I've already supplied, it's impossible to recommend this game, and the developers self incriminating response to my review only reinforces this position.

Giving the game a fair shot. So far, so good, actually. The graphics are pixels, which is a stylistic choice I like, simplistic enough that controller functionality isn't necessary, yet the power ups, unlockable customization options, and different mode options offer enough variety that the game doesn't get too repetitive, and can even offer a challenge. I'd probably sink a lot more time into this game if I still had a potato for a PC. I feel the movement can be a little sluggish at times, making quick sharp movements can be difficult, so I wouldn't call it flawless, but I would call it worth playing if you don't have the highest end PC and want a fun little time waster.

The sidebars look almost identical to the play area. They are even both animated. Just no.