TELETEXT is an unusual retro puzzle game that runs as a bit of an imperfect simulation of ancient 1970's era Ceefax/Teletext, and for you young kids out there, in the age of analogue TV, they used vertical blanking buffers to piggyback text information along with the video broadcast. If you had a television set that could interpret that information, you could use your remote control to read those pages of text, typically simple information like news, weather and sports, and even play some simple games.
This puzzle game copies the look and feel of Teletext (to some extent) and you're challenged to read through the pages and uncover gaps and things that aren't quite right, leading you to hacking into the system (I'm pretty sure Teletext wasn't something you could hack to that extent, really), making this perhaps a bit more like Pony Island than anything else, only not quite as weird.
It's interesting that they recaptured the look and feel of Teletext, but at the same time we do need to take a little step back and consider that this is a for-profit game on Steam competing with the giants of the genre. I know that it looks dated on purpose, but the reason for the game looking bad isn't as important as the fact it does. And the puzzles themselves really aren't all that great.
Let's go into why a mildly clever idea doesn't work out to a great investment for your average PC gamer.
From a technical perspective, the game doesn't meet basic minimum requirements that most PC gamers expect as standard.
There's no option to change the resolution and no useful graphics tweaks. There's no way to ensure this is running at the native resolution of your display. There's no guarantee this game will look right on any PC as a result of this hamfisted design decision.
The game interface is mostly just text boxes/dialogs and features mostly static, barely animated 2D pixel images, the kind of thing that could easily be done in Adobe Flash. While that might be fine for the 1990s, gaming has evolved a lot since then, the ATI Rage became mainstream in 1996... it's 2024, and that kind of thing just won't fly anymore, it's just not visually up to scratch. For gameplay purposes, because the user interface for this game is mostly just 2D static text/images... it might as well be a web page. It's functionally no different from a browser game. And we all know, Steam isn't here to compete with Chrome and Firefox. If the game can be done in a web browser, it's just not rich or compelling enough to appeal to serious gamers on PC.
The controls can't be customised because the game has such a dumbed down, simplified interface that it's just point and click stuff like a browser/Flash game. The fact that the interface is this dumbed down might be seen as a problem in itself, however... this is a fairly shallow experience if you're the kind of gamer that likes to play games with deep, rich control schemes and interaction. You'll get none of that here.
Some of the defects in the game can be attributed to the choice of using the Clickteam Fusion construction kit - the "No-Code" construction kit that "Anyone can make games with!!". Including, you know, people who aren't game developers. Which is a problem. This is a very poor quality toolset sometimes used by amateur developers as it's free (so they don't have to pay for GameMaker Studio) and doesn't require advanced game development skills, but unfortunately has very limited capabilities (it's arguably worse than GameMaker Studio). Just as you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear, you can't make a great video game if you use a terrible engine. So it's inappropriate when amateurs try to use these for profit, without any actual, real game development effort taking place. This doesn't result in products that have any real meaningful value for gamers.
These technical defects push this game below acceptable standards for any modern PC game.
The poor quality of this game is reflected by how many people spent time with it. At the time of this review, SteamDB shows the all-time peak player number was only 3 players. This is a remarkably low number, and now, the only player activity occurs once or twice a month, presumably someone loading it up to see what it is then quickly uninstalling it. Considering there's over 120 million gamers on Steam and well over 100,000 games for gamers to choose from, the overwhelming lack of interest in this low quality game is to be expected.
So, should you buy this game? Is this one of the best of the 100,000+ games on Steam?
TELETEXT has the far too high price of around $4 USD, it's not worth it given the defects and shortcomings with the product, especially considering the sheer number of completely free, much higher quality games on Steam. This is also competing with over 11,000 free games available on Steam, many of them far better than this paid product.
[quote][b][url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/marketing/profile]Profile Features Limited![/url][/b]
Valve have marked this game as "Profile Features Limited" at the time of this review. This is usually caused by poor sales figures and low community acceptance for the game (to date). Until this status changes, this game will not give you +1 to your Game Collector badge count, appear in profile achievements or any other Steam meta-accomplishments, nor can it be displayed in some profile showcases. If these factors are important to you, it may be worth holding off before buying this game.[/quote]
[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 doesn't seem to know that there's a free edition of ClickTeam Fusion. That's incredibly embarrassing. I'd link to the free version here but I don't want to encourage any other McDonalds employees from being delusional enough to think they can escape getting my burger order wrong so ClickTeam can magically make them Rockstar Games overnight. Imagine blowing cash on the (frankly worthless) "developer" edition that's still not capable of producing video games of any level of quality at all, when you could do it for free.
The developer seems to think dragging and dropping things around in ClickTeam turns one into an actual real game developer. It doesn't, any more than me loading up Microsoft Flight Sim makes me a pilot. Anyway, you don't have to take my word for it, the court of public opinion has spoken... loudly. The peak player count for this game was only 3 people, and it only ever hit that lofty high once. It's an objective, abject failure, and being slapped together with ClickTeam Fusion is undoubtedly a contributing factor.
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.
