Metascore
55 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 19
  2. Negative: 5 out of 19
  1. Alone In The Dark truly horrifies me. How can such a big-budget title actually get to the stores with such unfriendly controls and gameplay glitches? The game is clumsy, completely linear and absolutely no fun to play.
  2. Hateful game. [Sept 2008, p.60]
  3. Almost - but not entirely - worthless. [Aug 2008, p.70]
  4. 35
    Nice visuals, great fire effects and valiant efforts at innovation don’t make up for boring combat, frustrating controls, poorly designed levels and a hackneyed story.
  5. Think about it: the developer built in a level skip. I recommend a cheaper alternative: the game skip. [Oct 2008, p.66]
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 100 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 50
  2. Negative: 22 out of 50
  1. AlexaL.
    1
    I don't recommend it. a total waste of time and money. @atari: I am very disappointed.
  2. JohnJ.
    1
    The game has an interesting story, and an good method of telling that story, unfortunately the game is completely ruined by the terrible, awful controls. They are so bad, that I honestly think Atari tested the entire PC version using the xbox controller. The major problems were: 1. Constantly being pulled out of first person view to get a better view of nothing. 2. Having to turn your character using the keyboard keys when holding a two-handed object such as an axe or a burning piece of wood. 3. Not being able to effectively use any of the objects you hold, if you stand in front of a door and attempt to bash the door in with a large object, you will swing it sideways and hit the wall, you always swing something the same way no matter what it is or what you are doing with it. Also, you can not swing something if it is on your left side, you have to pull it to the right using the mouse and then click to swing, why doesn't the mouse click just do that automatically (they the game doesn't inform you of this fact either). 4. Even at max settings, the game looks pathetic. Character textures look decent enough, but the far away textures and models (such as cars on the street far below you in the first level) look like they were rendered in Quake 3. The lighting is also terrible. In low lit areas, the game looks like it has an 8-bit color depth. A gray concrete floor will have swatches of green, blue, and orange swimming across it. Also, objects against a pitch black background will appear fully lit and objects in a partially, but still low lit area will appear pitch black as if texture-less. Bottom line, Atari failed to meet the minimum threshold of quality that any reasonable person would expect when purchasing this game. I gave it 1 point for installing without problems, running smoothly, and being entertaining for about 3 minutes. Other than that, the game is an epic failure. Full Review »
  3. JohnnyM.
    9
    Right from the beginning of the design of this game it was clear that those responsible were looking to skirt the boundaries of what (not just first-person) gameplay could mean. Far from the point-and-shoot-and-collect-ammo-from-the-fallen, this game forces you to think on your feet. Combining items in your inventory in the split second you've managed to avoid an attack, making quick decisions whether or not this is a fight you could win, for those who insist on interest and challenge in their games this is the real deal. Having played the game with only a mouse and keyboard, I agree to the criticisms of it being awkward... for the first five minutes. Through proper acclimatization (ie. actually taking time to figure out how the game works) it springs out at you from a genre dominated by the same old weapons, the same old regenerative health system, and lack of engrossing situation. As a gamer I looked at it tentatively, having paid too much to the critical feedback. I cannot say enough about this game to those looking for more from their game collection. Full Review »