Thomas Scott is yet another asset flip/construction kit template copy+paste from serial Russian shovelware asset flippers, Dnovel/FreeAnimals_Software/Trinity Project. These guys (or just one guy flipping accounts to mislead gamers) do nothing but copy asset store assets and game tutorials, fill out a few things/stamp out basic levels using the construction kit templates, and dump them on Steam and into DailyIndieGame bundles as cash grabs. Trying to get paid for someone else's game templates, assets... at best, this is shovelware, at worst, it's a scam/cash grab.
Today's "effort" from these guys is Thomas Scott, and it's a garbage asset flip slapped together with the godawful Cocos2D game development engine. Trinity Project have copied + pasted the same template onto Steam multiple times as "LP", "Rotatex" and so on, there's numerous versions of this same game on Steam, all cash grabs. As a game, it's terrible, of course.
A choice was made to use obsolete, decades old retro pixel/MSPaint "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.
The implementation here is of such poor quality, the developer couldn't work out how to make the game display in fullscreen, it only runs in a window.
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.
Some of the defects in the game can be attributed to the choice of using the Cocos Creator/Cocos2D game engine/toolset. 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.
For those reasons, this is below acceptable standards, and has no real merit or value as a genuine, sincerely made PC game.
Copying templates from construction kits doesn't need any talent or professional game development effort, and results in shallow, low quality shovelware like Thomas Scott. The status of this thing as nothing but an asset/template flip/cash grab is cemented by the "developers" prior history of asset flip/construction kit copy+paste jobs, the fake/compromised Steam accounts they used to write fake reviews (all with the same broken English), the laughable $1 USD USD price tag for this garbage, and they way they dumped it into DailyIndieGame bundles immediately at launch. There's no serious value, substance or merit here worthy of consideration from PC gamers. I can't recommend it to anyone.
[quote][url=https://mmofallout.com/valve-bans-titles-for-review-manipulation/]Warning: Review Manipulation![/url][/quote]
This game features a number of fake positive reviews from accounts known to be in the business of review manipulation/paid reviews. They're all written in either Russian or broken English, appear at almost exactly the same time, very shortly after the game launched on Steam, all have a direct Steam purchase of the game, and the accounts are used consistently to write fake reviews for asset flips and other cash grabs/scams. The "Positive" review score on this game should be disregarded due to this blatant, unethical review manipulation. This is done to deceive and scam gamers into paying for a bad product.
Thomas Scott is relatively cheap at $1 USD, but it's not worth it. Given the defects and quality issues with the game, coupled with the unrealistic price, and the questionable ethical nature of the developer and/or their associates (as outlined above), this is impossible to recommend.
