The latest gaming sensation, 'Horses,' has taken the internet by storm despite being deemed a censorship nightmare. But do its fans truly appreciate what makes this game special? Or are they just blinded by its anti-establishment credentials?
One thing is certain - 'Horses' doesn't deserve all the praise it's receiving. This narrative horror game's infamous ban from Steam and Epic Game Store may have catapulted it to bestseller status on GOG.com, but beneath its bizarre charm lies a messy, often unfunny experience.
At its core, 'Horses' is an awkward exploration of themes that should be treated with more gravity. The game follows Anselmo, a hapless farmhand stuck in a bleak narrative that only marginally holds together due to the developers' heavy reliance on slapstick humor and low-brow comedy.
Yes, there are some genuinely dark moments when the humor falls flat, leaving players feeling uncomfortable rather than uneasy. When juxtaposed against the explicit content - or should I say, the 'unexplicit' content? - of its graphic sex scenes with horses, these situations only serve to remind us that our expectations have been thoroughly subverted.
But as much as we might be entertained by some of 'Horses'' quirks, the real issue lies in how little agency players are given. Our protagonist's decisions are predetermined from the start, leaving us stuck with the consequences rather than truly experiencing them.
All this makes me wonder - did gamers join the bandwagon solely because they wanted to support an underdog title that'd 'never say die'? Or was there something more profound at play? After playing it myself, I realized that some aspects of 'Horses' feel like a desperate attempt by its creators to stand out from the crowd.
Regardless, one thing is certain: 'Horses''s message about dehumanization and exploitation has been somewhat obscured. The game now finds itself relegated to platforms with much lower visibility than Steam, an outcome many would argue is unjust.
While I applaud 'Horses' for pushing boundaries, its execution left a sour taste in my mouth. It's a game that desperately needs to grow up - fast. For all the noise surrounding it, let's try not to forget what truly matters: whether or not games are 'art'. And right now, I'm still waiting for an artist who can show me that.
One thing is certain - 'Horses' doesn't deserve all the praise it's receiving. This narrative horror game's infamous ban from Steam and Epic Game Store may have catapulted it to bestseller status on GOG.com, but beneath its bizarre charm lies a messy, often unfunny experience.
At its core, 'Horses' is an awkward exploration of themes that should be treated with more gravity. The game follows Anselmo, a hapless farmhand stuck in a bleak narrative that only marginally holds together due to the developers' heavy reliance on slapstick humor and low-brow comedy.
Yes, there are some genuinely dark moments when the humor falls flat, leaving players feeling uncomfortable rather than uneasy. When juxtaposed against the explicit content - or should I say, the 'unexplicit' content? - of its graphic sex scenes with horses, these situations only serve to remind us that our expectations have been thoroughly subverted.
But as much as we might be entertained by some of 'Horses'' quirks, the real issue lies in how little agency players are given. Our protagonist's decisions are predetermined from the start, leaving us stuck with the consequences rather than truly experiencing them.
All this makes me wonder - did gamers join the bandwagon solely because they wanted to support an underdog title that'd 'never say die'? Or was there something more profound at play? After playing it myself, I realized that some aspects of 'Horses' feel like a desperate attempt by its creators to stand out from the crowd.
Regardless, one thing is certain: 'Horses''s message about dehumanization and exploitation has been somewhat obscured. The game now finds itself relegated to platforms with much lower visibility than Steam, an outcome many would argue is unjust.
While I applaud 'Horses' for pushing boundaries, its execution left a sour taste in my mouth. It's a game that desperately needs to grow up - fast. For all the noise surrounding it, let's try not to forget what truly matters: whether or not games are 'art'. And right now, I'm still waiting for an artist who can show me that.
and forgot to look at the game's actual quality. It's like when you're so excited about a concert, you don't even notice the opening act is playing half-empty crowd 
. But seriously, if 'Horses' is gonna make its message about dehumanization clear, it needs more substance behind it. I mean, who gets to decide what's funny and what's not? 
And as for agency in a game, that's like having a conversation where you're not even allowed to say your own thoughts 
. It's all about creating an experience, not just shocking people for the sake of it.
. But yeah, I agree with the author - it's all surface level stuff, not really digging into any heavy themes. And don't even get me started on the agency thing... it feels like the devs just wanted to make a "edgy" game and didn't put too much thought into making a good experience. As for why people are so hyped about it... maybe they just wanna support an underdog title? 
. I mean, I get it, it's weird and all that jazz, but is it really special? From what I saw, it just felt like a bunch of stuff thrown together without much thought to actually having a good story or gameplay. And don't even get me started on the whole "anti-establishment" thing - yeah, it's just an excuse for some people to say they're cool because they played a game that's kinda weird 
.
.
. Give me a good story and gameplay any day over this mess 
.
I gotta say, I was hyped when I saw Horses was making waves but after playing it myself... underwhelmed 
The game's got some weird vibes going on, like it's trying too hard to be edgy and subversive 
The lack of agency for the protagonist is a major letdown 
. I think some people might've jumped on the bandwagon because they wanted to support an underdog title, but what really matters is if it's good art or just a gimmick 
. Anyway, what really gets me is how little agency you have as the player. It feels like they're just winging it (pun intended, since there's horses in the game 
. And yeah, the whole Steam thing is pretty shady... feels like they were trying too hard to be edgy 
. And don't even get me started on the "dark humor" - it's just uncomfortable 
. The whole thing feels like a publicity stunt to me 
.
. yeah, i think most ppl jumped on this bandwagon cuz it was an underdog story, but thats not enough reason to give it praise 
. anyone who thinks this game is "art" needs to take a step back & reevaluate their definition of the word 
anyway i think we shd stop giving this game all th attention nd focus on games thats actually got talent 
. and dont even get me started on the lack of agency , its like they just threw some weird stuff together and expected us to eat it 
. anywayz, if u want an 'underdog' title that'd 'never say die', there are plenty of other games out there that actually deliver 
.
. It's like they took a bunch of random stuff from different genres, threw it together, and hoped for the best 
. Maybe its fans aren't just blind to its issues, maybe they're actually passionate about something bigger - the idea that games can be a force for change. I think the game's execution might've been rough around the edges, but at least it's trying to tackle some heavy themes 
. I'm just glad we're having this conversation about what makes a game 'good' - that's gotta be important, right? 
. And like you said, the game's message gets kind of lost in all the noise around it 
.
but like the devs relied too much on slapstick humor and not enough on making it actually scary or thought provoking 
and yeah i think some people just jumped on the bandwagon cuz its an underdog title 