Throweat Area

Инди-платформер с элементами головоломок и динамичным геймплеем. Плюсы: Захватывающий визуальный стиль — яркая и креативная графика; Разнообразие уровней — каждый уровень уникален и полон головоломок; Интуитивное управление — легко освоить базовые механики. Минусы: Ограниченное количество уровней — игра может быть пройдена быстро; Однопользовательский режим — нет мультиплеера; Некоторые баги — возможны технические недочёты. Итог: понравится любителям платформеров и головоломок. Захватывающий визуальный стиль и динамичный геймплей делают Throweat Area увлекательной, несмотря на ограниченное количество контента и возможные технические проблемы.

[quote][b]Note: Dead PvP game[/b] This game contains no meaningful single player content. There's no viably populated servers/active player population. This game cannot be played as intended.[/quote] This is a lazy collection of low quality low poly Unity assets dumped on a Unity PvP blueprint (I've seen this blueprint asset flipped a few times, the default player objects are just oblong capsules). Some (very little) effort went into some code to allow you to throw Unity assets at people or eat Unity assets for health, which nobody wanted in a contentless FPS arena. So, "Throweat Area" is a dead PvP game. Why did it fail? It's video game autopsy time! [i]Almost every PvP exclusive game on Steam fails.[/i] Only a tiny proportion of them "go viral". This game failed for many of the same reasons those others fail. The chief of which is the developer thinking that their game will "go viral" without actually creating any reason for it do so. Competition amongst PvP centric games is extreme, and there's only a finite player base to appeal to. This game failed to reach any kind of critical mass and died as a result. Let's go into some of the reasons this particular game failed to appeal to gamers, despite the zero up front cost. First and foremost, there's no meaningful single player content. The developer gambled that other players would be an acceptable substitute for adding storytelling, level design etc to the Game. They lost that bet. Without a huge community of players or single player content to add a lasting value to the game, the game dies. Developers must learn that other players are not an acceptable substitute for adding content to a game. The game graphics look better than you might expect, but that's just because it looks like some or all of them are "borrowed" from asset stores or wherever. Gamers can tell... and it comes across as insincere. Gamers don't like asset flips like this. There's also the old adage that those who lack the budget and talent to make their own game assets usually lack the budget and talent to do the rest of the job of game development properly, too. Now on to pricing and value for gamers. You're expected to pay up $1 USD to unlock content through DLC purchases. The game should not be considered completely unlocked until you empty your wallet for the developer. This is misleading and predatory pricing on a product falsely marketed as "free". In terms of public reception, this failed to appeal to the 130 million+ gamers on Steam. SteamDB showed the game peaked at just a dozen or so concurrent players, and now there's basically nobody playing it. Even though it's free. This is a dismal public reception, but it's easy to see why gamers rejected it. 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.