feel free to watch this review in video form<<< click me

I liked Sonic Frontiers.

It's the first 3D Sonic game I've liked since Unleashed, Colours and Generations.

There's stuff I don't like and stuff I do like—but overall, I was left with a generic, insipid, yet enjoyable experience.

Movement, traversal, speed, exploration and combat are all things I loved about the game.

Simply moving around is a blast and very gratifying.

Traversing the open zones at breakneck speeds is exhilarating and Sonic Team even implemented sliders that allow you to tweak how The Hedgehog controls.

But of course, even with tighter and customisable controls, in good old sonic fashion, platforming still manages to be quite jank at times.

Despite this, the idea to allow the player to play around with the blue blur so that he feels exactly how you want him to feel is excellent and should be featured in every Sonic game moving forward.

I must add that the majority of my playthrough was also modded to improve the game's physics, alongside adding a few quality-of-life changes.

I recommend anyone playing on PC to do the same, honestly makes the game 100x better...

(note doing so can break certain parts of the game)

The exploration is decent; it's no Scorsese, so don't expect elder scrolls or breath of the wild levels of mystery, wonder or intrigue, but it's there nonetheless.

I was honestly expecting the combat in Frontiers to be broken and bankrupt so it turning out to be one of the better aspects of the game was a very pleasant surprise.

Although this is still a Sonic The Hedgehog game, so don't expect the combat to be fully realised or thought out.




The game was in need of some innovation, and I wasn't surprised by any of the game's mechanics.

It simply took what we've come to expect from the open-world formula and threw Sonic into the mix.

This left Sonic Frontiers feeling quite unexceptional.

A passable, middle-of-the-road, run-of-the-mill, uninspired hodgepodge of a game.

It's mediocre

Regardless, Sonic Frontiers is still a fun game; its mediocrity at times is overshadowed by its ability to entertain.

Though, I'd like to talk about what I believe to be Frontiers' most significant flaw.


I constantly found myself getting bored during longer play sessions, long being like 40 minutes to an hour.

Because when put in a pot and reduced, Sonic Frontiers boils down to:

Open Zone > Run Around > Encounter Puzzles, Enemies & Collectibles > Cyberspace > Chaos Emeralds > Final Boss

Rinse Repeat

You must suffer through this gameplay loop five times over with no alterations. There is nothing to shake up this formula other than the next hyper-realistic, beautifully dull environment for you to repeat everything you had done previously.

And each time, it becomes more and more monotonous.

Cyberspace is also repetitive, easy and forgettable; no thanks to there being only four level themes.

There's absolutely no flair and no character to be found in these stages, which is rich since they took the layouts from past sonic stages only to suck the life out of them.

While playing this game, I had this what-if scenario playing out in my head, what if all of Mario Odyssey looked hyper-realistic, like the ruined kingdom.

Absolutely nothing to contrast one kingdom from the other.

Alas, Sonic Frontiers.

Now don't get me wrong, I think the game is beautiful, and it runs like freaking butter (at least on PC)

Nonetheless, Frontiers could've benefitted from not being afraid to be Sonic.

From not being afraid to be unique and true to itself.

Breath of the wild was a clear inspiration for this game.

But what made breath of the wild great was its willingness and eagerness to be authentic to its identity, to be a genuine Zelda experience that just happened to find itself in an open-world environment.

And I feel like if Sonic Team realised this, the game would've had the variety; it's severely lacking.

We would've had environments, enemies and a story that's distinctive and faithful to the character.

Also, the story is trash.

It took itself way too seriously and came off as cringe and simply uninteresting.

Every time a cutscene began to play, my eyes rolled right into the back of my head.

All in all, there's a lot of fun to be had with Sonic's latest endeavour.

And don't get it twisted; I enjoyed playing Frontiers, and you will too.

But as if trapped in a chamber, the game is plagued by an echoing gameplay loop, and by the third island, I was exhausted and keen for the game to end.

Sonic Frontiers is a good game.

It isn't bad; it isn't great.

It's just good.

But if anything, Sonic Frontiers is, without a doubt, a step in the right direction and, hopefully, a step towards a brighter future for the blue blur.

Thanks for reading ~

If you're questioning my playtime, I played the game over on Game Pass

Here's my video play-through of Scorn as proof that I played the entire game

TLDR: All style, no substance... Had fun and found the game somewhat entertaining. Scorn is Mesmerisingly beautiful and Bafflingly grotesque, with many thought-provoking and raw moments, but ultimately the game is Disappointing with a final act that feels like a drag.

>>>not worth the asking price—cannot recommend, wait for a price reduction<<<

To put it simply, Scorn is a game I and many others have been waiting to play for over six years, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't have high expectations (perhaps too high)

Is Scorn a 'bad game'? No; it's mesmerising and beautiful, Baffling and Grotesque, thought-provoking and raw, but ultimately disappointing and lacking in many areas of the game.

I wanted more of a lot of things and less of certain things (if that makes sense, lol)

I still had a ton of fun, as you can see from my YouTube video, but as the game progressed, I realised that I yearned for something more than what I got.

Ironically, the game started dying as soon as the parasite latched itself to the player character, with each act becoming more and more tiring as the game drew towards its "climax", or lack thereof.

The ending had a laughable "boss fight", or should I say "boss fights", plural, as you have to fight the same thing three times over, followed by a very questionable game-play mechanic that plagues the final moments of the game. Ebb Software's decision to even feature such a cumbersome mechanic is insane to me, especially when said feature killed me by design and put me back about half an hour when I was right at the end...

If I'm to be honest, the final two hours of Scorn felt confused and unstructured compared to how confident the first two hours were.

It's as if the devs didn't know where to go anymore, leaving us with a dull, dissatisfying and cliched end result...

•▣◈▣•

I'm not one for comparisons, but I could not help but think about SOMA whilst playing Scorn; for one, they're relatively similar to one another, and they're both games that rely heavily on atmosphere.

SOMA had a very involved story, an overarching plot that was impossible to miss, something that Scorn lacks but could've benefited greatly from.

Again, Scorn has atmosphere. It has that. But there's nothing to tie all that atmosphere together. There's no story. There's Nothing. You don't know what's going on.

Games don't have to focus on story; many do without; however, what they lack in one department, they have in another.

We know Scorn doesn't have game-play that carries the experience; the shooting is not great, It's not bad, but it's not great.

Play Doom, play Dusk, play any other shooter in the same vein and find yourself having a better time than you would be playing Scorn. It simply isn't the game you play if you want to have a fun FPS experience.

Does Scorn have puzzles that could potentially carry the game? No. The puzzles are tedious and cumbersome at best. So it's not on the level of a Portal or a Witness.

Okay, so game-play is lacking, and the puzzles are lacking.

What's left?

Atmosphere.

But does it have anything to tie all that atmosphere together?

No.

And that's where I have to compare Scorn to a game like SOMA, a game that also lacks interesting game-play; it's literally a walking simulator entirely relying on its atmosphere and story.

However, unlike Scorn, SOMA has something to link to that atmosphere. Something intriguing. The story is there. There's a reason for me to want to keep playing. There's a reason for me to be engaged.

SOMA was carried by its story and atmosphere alone, and because of it's masterful execution, it's one of my favourite Horror Games of all time.

I wanted to know why I was 345ft below sea level. I wanted to know why my character suddenly became a machine.

Every single creature, robot, and enemy, had a back story. The game had an overarching plot, something that Scorn refused to give me despite having such a fascinating setting.

>>>I implore everyone to look into Scorn's Art-book if you have the time; people have even started making videos on it that you can watch; trust me, this game and its world had so much more to offer; it's such a shame—Diving Into the Art-book shows you how extensive the world of Scorn was and how vast the game's hidden story/lore is, so I'm perplexed as to why it wasn't explored in greater depth throughout the game.
I can understand the power of being implicit and the beauty of subtlety, but to have the talent that wrote and realised this world go to waste for nothing feels a little ridiculous, especially when it could've elevated the game to greater heights<<<

I wanted to know more about the game world. But Ebb Software refused to tell me. And at the end, where it felt like I was getting somewhere; I was finally going to be given answers. The character just dies. And you're left with nothing...

Now I feel I must add that I'm a huge fan of unhappy, bleak, depressing endings—I love writing fiction. If you were to read any of my 'works' (if you can call it that), you'd see that I'm twisted and sick in the head, lol. I kill off my characters at every given opportunity and prefer an ending with consequence and weight.

That being said, I don't think having a vague or unhappy ending means a story is necessarily good by default or isn't allowed to be criticised just because it goes against the grain or subverts one's expectations. I feel that to successfully pull off a sad ending, it needs to come as a result of a decision; it must feel "earned" by the plot, not inevitable. Stories with neatly assembled plots and character arcs are gratifying, even if their endings aren't happy ones.

Scorn, for one, doesn't even feature a story lmao; it's super vague by design, to its detriment; in my opinion, I don't think it has a good unhappy ending at all. The whole game was based on something pointless from the start, and the protagonist was doomed to fail; how can that work? Tragic endings, for me, must come with a glimmer of hope and/or feel earnt; as a writer, your work, whether happy or unhappy, uplifting or depressing, must feel satisfying to the reader, watcher or player.

Scorn has no substance. It doesn't have the game-play, it doesn't have the puzzles, and it doesn't have the story; it only has the atmosphere.

Ebb Software are undoubtedly talented and have an endless ocean of promise; hopefully, they'll take the feedback they've been given, both positive and negative and grow, creating something even more significant in the future.

Thanks for reading.