52 Games Challenge 2026!!!

[kashell]

55. Crow Country

Inspired by Telly, I got back into this and cleared it without much trouble (3.5 hours) and a having a guide handy for when I got lost. I needed a palette cleanser after the long Trails through Daybreak II. The throwback, janky polygons meshed well with the modern controls and storytelling. The story was compelling, too. I wanted to learn more from the start and things got revealed at a nice pace. I kind of wish there was more narrative or information about the origins and monsters. There was stuff provided but not enough for me. The twist at the end caught me by the surprise!

[dhaabi]

29. Still at the Table || Browser || 07.30.2026



More and more often, I'm finding myself playing game jam projects. Anything that interests me usually gets logged into a list to reference later as games I may want to play, resulting in a relatively long backlog of its own. So as I skimmed through some of the more popular entries submitted to yet another recent game jam, Still at the Table caught my attention for its more serious intepretation of the event's "spin to win" theme. But this time, I decided to try it sooner than later.

To be brief, Still at the Table is a narrative adventure game about the protagonist being confronted by his girlfriend Jessica in regards to his gambling addiction and the tolls it's had on their shared relationship. There's a clear focus on communication, but the game's gimmick is that players cannot outright select dialogue responses. Instead, he must gamble by using a roulette wheel that determines the conversation flow. So what this means is that the player's dialogue choice being triggered is entirely dependent upon whatever segment the roulette wheel stops at. And whether or not the player bets successfully on that same segment determines whether they earn or lose money. Of course, money is to be used on upgrades and actions that raise the chance of triggering the player's desired dialogue choice each round.

Yet, while the game's system seems compelling at first, it's rather static and with limitations that become apparent as the playthrough continues. When starting the game, players select of the three protagonists to choose from, each with their own personality type. However, personality types seem to not matter at all, for Jessica's dialogue follows the same script no matter which character is selected. From what I've observed, her dialogue only changes depending on which of the three dialogue response types is selected: Admit, Deny, or Question. Meanwhile, there is a health system of sorts that corresponds to any amount of money still withheld. One unit of health is removed once all money is lost, but then a small amount is returned back to the player allowing them to continue. This alone is too forgiving, but what's worse is the rate of failure. I actually don't know what occurs when depleting all health because the rate of success is set too high. It's a decision that directly conflicts with the great risks and low expectation of winning with gambling altogether. Concerning the act of gambling itself, I found no reason to bet high amounts. Part of this relates to the high rate of success previously mentioned, but it's still easily achieveable to gain what I'm presuming is the more positive end outcome to the game without actually spending any of the protagonist's earnings. So whether the player places low or high bets, there just aren't any stakes in the choices made or outcomes occurring.

Of course, players are free to play choosing any character response they deem fit. Since the three playable protagonists are supplied with one simple defining personality descriptor, players can roleplay to adhere to that specific trait—even if it's a response that may seem counterintuitive to the outcome players are trying to reach. Ideally, this sort of depth would be built into the game to differentiate three starting paths, but it's a shortcoming of the game's development limitations. Without this sort of approach, characterization is exclusive to Jessica only, and this negatively impacts the player's relationship with the protagonist they control. Of course, this style of play comes with a huge disclaimer, being the game's random nature.

From a conceptual point-of-view, Still at the Table is certainly interesting. Unfortunately, though, too many of its elements bear little importance. When a player's bet is unfavorable, the only adverse effect is money being lost. Assuming most players approach the game with the intention of mending the couple's relationship, a lost bet can still benefit the player since even simple response choices aren't always straightforward regarding what sort of effect they'll have on the conversation direction. Meanwhile, I'm not exactly sure what the game is arguing for with its gameplay mechanic. That the protagonist has become fully resigned to their gambling addiction to the extent that even their own thoughts and actions are wholly dictated by chance? That in relationships, we can't guarantee outcomes no matter what we ourselves do and say, because ultimately a relationship is built upon two parties? Maybe there's no greater depth beyond the mechanic itself. Should meaning exist or be wanting to exist, I think that a better approach to the game's gambling system would be for it to relate to Jessica's words and not the protagonist's. Were it modified that way, neither what the player selects or what the protagonist actually says would change; instead, Jessica's dialogue that was previewed before the player's placed bet would change, therefore making the protagonist's selection nonsensical and maybe even detrimental in that moment instead of what otherwise had been positive. It's just some idea, but it's an alternative to what's currently ineffective.

Despite what I feel are some of the game's mechanical shortcomings not being as successful as they could have been, Still at the Table proves to be effective through its presentation, though it's without its own faults. For games completed within a short time window, sound work tends to be underdeveloped or lacking altogether. However, I was surprised that voice acting—and competent voice acting, at that—is present for Jessica's somewhat lengthy dialogue. Unfortunately, though, the sound design altogether is especially problematic. For some reason, there is a deliberate distorted sound effect added. At the same time, there is a visual CRT filter that can be toggled on or off, and I thought that the distortion was related to it at first but actually isn't. Needless to say, this static and sound clipping is considerably unpleasant and detrimental to the gameplay experience. Going back to the filter, it's ultimately inadequate as it elevates no other aspect present. There's nothing implied while playing to suggest that we're viewing the game itself from a monitor, so its inclusion is questionable at best and disruptive at worst. Looking beyond these effects that impair the game at large, the game's core visuals are simple but nicely designed within a single-screen frame. Static character portraits are positioned at a corner which function fine for the game's scope, but simple animations that illustrate in-the-moment emotions would have been effective.

Having reached the end of my thoughts, one may conclude that my experience playing Still at the Table was poor. But this is far from the truth. Ultimately, the submitted game build experiments with a certain mechanic and system in a novel way, but it's perhaps not successfully implemented given the strict time limitations for development. This doesn't mean that the game is bad, though, as I can easily envision it being expanded upon and iterated as a more premium campaign without superfluous elements. The focus of game jams is to spend a short amount of time to test out ideas to see what works and what doesn't. That goal was definitely met, and the result is that Still at the Table exists as a unique final product.

[kashell]

56. Astalon: Tears of the Earth

I have a few grievances with this game that I'll review eventually. But, they're not worth getting into here because overall I had a really good time with this. The inspirations from Dragon Quest, Castlevania III, Link II and a few more I'm probably missing came together in a unique Metroidvania/Rogue-Lite. After getting 100% map and item completion, I think I can put this one away for a while. The first boss in Boss Rush Mode is probably the worst boss in the game. The other mode I unlocked was fun to dabble with for a bit, but it's nothing like say Julius Mode or Richter Mode from golden-aged Castlevanias. If you don't mind some frustrating initial struggles, then I highly recommend this because it scratches multiple genre itches.

[supremeusername]

33. Shift At Midnight | 2026 | PC | 7/27:



     Working a dead-end job in the middle of the night, your goals are to ring up customers, restock the shelves, and get a phone call every so often by a boss who's purpose is to make you feel even more miserable. Oh, and there's also a flesh-eating monster that will try to murder you every night if you make one mistake.

     That's essentially Shift At Midnight for you, but I did leave out some details. It reminds me of Papers Please where you have to thoroughly look over every customer in line to see whether or not they are legit. Any detail that's missing, such as a customer wearing baggy clothes when the real person hates baggy clothes, will tell you that they are an imposter. You can also have two other chumps join you in this game as well (the dev pushed lobby sizes up to 6 people, though not the intended way to play).

There's also an endless mode once you do beat the regular game, though you're not missing much. The regular game gives you pretty much everything to see in the roughly 4 hours it takes to beat it. You also start getting repeat customers in this endless mode, so there's not much replayability after the main game is over with. Maybe I've just been comfortable with most of these 10-ish dollar co-op indie games feeling never-ending in replayability. I kinda wish there was a little more content: some more randomization with the customers and other enemies to face when you mess up a shift would be nice. Me and my mates did have a lot of fun, but it's only worth playing with the right group. Grade: C+

[supremeusername]

34. DJMAX RESPECT V | 2020 | Clear Pass: S19 | PC | 7/29:



     I don't know if I should've counted this, but screw it -- I played a fair amount to justify this as a 'completion'.

     DJMAX RESPECT V is quite possibly the best rhythm game I've ever seen grace the Personal Computer. There's so much content and even more ways of playing said content. Almost every song has 4 different charts to choose from. You can play a chart that uses only 4 keys to using every finger on each hand to push through the 8B charts. A wide variety of music is available to pick from, each accompanied by its own background music video. You can customize chart placement, speed that notes come in at, different UI for charts that can be earned from beating challenges or from the shop. There's a competitive Ladder Mode, an Air Mode which lets you and others around the world play the same song and chat simultaneously, missions, and so on. I'm gushing a bit, but it's like the Pandora's Box of rhythm games to me.

     Now let's get to the main part of the review. DJMAX RESPECT V has a battle pass. Yes, game with 20-something DLC packs also has a season pass on top of it. There's 30 tiers to unlock over the course of one season -- usually around 3 months. Everything unlocked from the pass consists of customization options for either your profile or your in-game experience. You also get a shuffling grab bag of songs from the various DLC packs and a couple of exclusive songs that can only be played via. the battle pass (or 'Clear Pass' as the game calls it). I see it more as a way of supporting the developer if anything.

     The thing is: DJMAX RESPECT V will have sales going on for both the base game and DLC. Older DLC packs (say, 2 years or older) will always be 65%-80% off MSRP. You can get the base game with 3 DLC packs for about $20 and be set for a while. There was one refresh of the Clear Pass tracklist where I owned most of the songs already, so it was kind of a waste for me. The next refresh however, I was able to play through songs from DLC I didn't own, which led me to purchasing them off Steam because I enjoyed the music that much. I can't really rate something like this, but thought I'd just share my thoughts anyway. Probably not something I'd do again given the time commitment, but I got my money's worth. Grade: N/A

[kamikazekeeg]

29 - Pokemon: Pokopia (Switch 2026) - BEAT - This was a wonderfully chill return to Nintendo and my first game on the Switch 2.  I had a choice of games with that bundle deal, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, and Pokopia, but after Palworld kinda fell apart, I still had a craving for a general crafting/build game and I thought this could work.  Also it seems like the only good Pokemon games anymore are the ones that aren't made by Game Freak lol

It's basically Animal Crossing meets Dragon Quest Builders.  I was never a big fan of Animal Crossing, at least the newest one on Switch, it came out at a time that everyone needed it, but that was such a half-assed game.  This does some of that general idea, being able to build homes for Pokemon that you can then decorate while also decorating your own home, but you get more of an adventure vibe.  You get multiple different zones, all with many unique things to find and do, you have a story to figure out where the humans went and to understand what happened to the world, it's very nice.  There's no threats, no danger, you can fall from height and splat as a Ditto, which is a great concept, the idea of being able to change into different Pokemon and use different abilities is great and the Ditto forms are very cute.

I really don't have many complaints, it's all handled very well.  I think the only thing I don't like is that certain things can take so long to build.  A lot of the smaller stuff is like 10 minutes, or can be an hour, but some buildings will just be like "Tomorrow" and it'll be tomorrow.  I'm not sure if it's actually 24 hours or what, I think it's less, but I don't love that stuff.  It  makes more sense in Animal Crossing because it's trying to be much more of a management game than this one.  Otherwise it's pretty good.

I still have stuff I want to do, you eventually get your own zone to free build in, I'll spend some time doing that while finishing out the rest of the things to earn and I got the DLC, so I have a full other zone to do next, so I'm gonna be playing for awhile longer.  Definite recommend on this game if these sort of games are appealing to you.

[telly]

Game 17 – Silent Hill 2 (PS5) - 11 Hours

First, let me say that if you’re an experienced SH2 vet, and you were expecting this game to simply be an HD remaster of the original, take that idea and throw it out the window. Pretty much everything from the original game has been altered in some way. This includes the combat, the camera angles, the music, the sound design, the voicework, the script, story elements, bosses, monster AI, weapons, the puzzles, the level design… it's pretty difficult to find something that wasn't altered with this remake. To start this review off with a blanket statement, to me it feels like the developers, when taking the base game of Silent Hill 2 as it was presented, first took every inch of this game and tried to “improve it” without really considering whether or not that change was going to be good for the game as a whole.

I don't think all the changes are bad though. Certainly, the game looks much better graphically. There are a few hiccups here and there, with some motion blur, some textures that don't load properly, and a few glitches - like one time where I got stuck in the floor in the prison. Overall, the game's graphics bring forward a more modern take on the OG game, while still retaining a very creepy and disgusting sense of dread and fear. I also really enjoyed all the redone puzzles, almost all of them were either brand-new puzzles or the existing ones were altered in some way, and they were fun to experience. I liked that the second apartment building was shifted to a nightmare apartment which matches the way that the hospital is done. Lastly, I think the sequence in between the hospital and the Historical Society was more interesting and more streamlined than it was in the original.

The biggest and juiciest change in this remake is the redone combat and camera design which is where I feel very conflicted about the decisions made by Blooper Team. The original Silent Hill 2 is not a game that focuses on combat, and it solely doesn't use combat to build an atmosphere of horror. Certainly, the combat is a part of what makes the game scary, but the horror to me comes from a carefully crafted combination of music, camera angles, sound effects, and visual design. In the remake, combat has been brought to the forefront, and it overpowers everything else in the game. Playing the remake felt like ordering an old favorite dish, but when the dish comes out, it's been covered in hot spicy pepper. It might not be a bad flavor, but it's certainly overpowering everything that made the original great. When I think back to my experience playing it all I can think of is combat, not the environmental design, not the sound, not the atmosphere. It was just fighting because it was Non. Stop.

This shift in spicyness is also contributed to by the camera, which is now directly behind James as opposed to the detached/fixed angle camera that was in the original. The camera makes the combat feels much more visceral and personal - almost like you're backing up James in the fight - whereas in the original it almost felt like you were watching him from a long distance. There are also no more fixed camera angles to enhance the effect of the game’s atmosphere and provide a cinematic experience that complements the gameplay. To accompany the change in camera angles, the monsters are far more aggressive and fast, and to compensate for that you have a dodge button now… It feels like the gameplay was really trying to emulate Resident Evil, both with the camera and combat. These are changes that to me shift the soul of the game into a different type of horror that doesn't match with what the original was trying to achieve.

On that note, I think it's also important to mention the other gameplay changes that feel directly ripped from other AAA games (particularly the Last of Us). Searching through drawers and cupboards constantly to find health and ammo… moving dumpsters and bookcases to squeeze through windows are narrow gaps… these things were not in the original, and while this is the standard for a survival horror adventure game, again it doesn't feel like it belongs. Instead of taking in the environments for what they are, I found myself more focused searching for items and fighting, which changes the vibe in a way that doesn't fit with the original. Secondly the game is almost three times as long as the original. most of the editions don’t really add all that much other than more of the gameplay (which I did enjoy) but I questioned why the additional gameplay needed to be there. By far the biggest offender is after the big reveal in the hotel, where the game forces you down another long maze-like section with fighting and puzzles. This totally ruins the emotional impact of the previous scene because your focus gets pulled right back in on exploring and fighting, when it should be focused on the story at that moment.

The other very peculiar changes were the addition of new story elements, and the altering of story progression. Personally I didn’t feel like any of them worked particularly well. Unlike the graphics, or gameplay, the story is something that you have to really consider if what you're adding is going to improve the overall experience. The first example of this is when you meet Maria for the first time and now she's the one that takes the lead leading you to the next location in the game. But they just kind of forget that she's supposed to do that, so after you leave the park area, she follows you behind like before. Her and Angela have some additional dialogue options with James but they don't add anything to the story.

Lastly I think where I get very critical is the game's voice acting and voice direction. I do not feel like the voice actors adequately captured the soul and the intention behind the characters. The remake steamrolls through all the subtleties in the original voicework, and just creates a very bland uninspired voice direction - particularly with the main protagonist James. He was the worst out of the new voice actors in my opinion, as he mumbles and stumbles through all of his lines. He has about as much personality as a wet tissue paper, and has maybe a quarter of the personality of the original James. Maria was not much better, coming off as way to sensual, way too early. Again like with the rest of the game, it just felt like they were trying to change things for the sake of change, without really considering if maybe the original delivery of these voice lines was actually the best way to convey the emotion in the game. I think the real problem is that the engine in this game does not do a good job of facial expressions, and because the camera is so up and personal, it really sucks the soul out of these characters as you stare into their lifeless expressions as they recount their lines.

Let me be clear though - I'm not saying that this game is a bad horror game - far from it. It's certainly a scary game, one of the best that I've played in a long time. I think the things that stood out to me the most was a very clear shift in soul, with the changes in the combat and camera - a move away from the game that I fell in love with because of its unique take on horror at the time – the remake just feels more like every AAA horror game that’s been released over the past decade, even though it is very good in that regard. I'll fully admit that I am incredibly biased because I have such a strong emotional connection to the original game, so I definitely recommend that you play it for yourself, and you may not find that a lot of these things bother

[dhaabi]

Game 17 – Silent Hill 2 (PS5) - 11 Hours

I'm glad you finally got around to playing the game. If there's just one thing I took away from your review, it's the status of remakes and their relationship to the game they're recreating.

To be upfront, I feel as if most games that receive remakes aren't deserving of them. In far more instances than not, the source material is more than adequate. The only argument I really support for the idea of game being remade is the greater accessibility is allows, but that could easily be mitigated should the original game simply be re-released or, at most, adjusted slightly so that it performs sufficiently on modern hardware. An example of what I mean regarding the latter is with instances when the original game incorporated hardware functions that aren't supported anymore, such as dual screen or motion control support.

With all that said, remakes exist, and my personal opinion on the matter won't change that fact. But it's not as if I completely avoid them either, and I generally think the ones I've experienced are of various levels of being fine. For a remake like Silent Hill 2, it's obviously been substantially altered—and I think that's okay. After all, why would I need to play a reproduction that's largely identical to its source material when that original game still exists? For a remake to be overly the same just seems like such a bland play experience because it will almost always pale in comparison to what it's replicating. So with examples like Silent Hill 2 where a considerable amount of creative liberties were taken so that something new is permitted to form its own identity, at least the opportunity is provided for audiences to engage with the narrative and gameplay in different ways, find details they may like more, and even re-contextualize what they like about the source material and may even appreciate more strongly now. And it's easy to see that you were able to do that last act in particular, perhaps more easily too since you played both games back-to-back. Like I said at the start, I find that most remakes don't need to exist, and that opinion extends to Silent Hill 2. But I appreciate that Bloober Team made an extensive effort to bring change, even if I personally don't find all those changes to be successful.

If most fans of the series were to be honest, then they'd admit that a remake was almost never going to reach the same heights that the original game claimed. It's a near flawless product of its time that really doesn't need to be improved. Needless to say, the remake isn't.