Growing up, I absolutely loved MediEvil on the PS1. The spooky yet lighthearted aesthetic really spoke to me as a child and would ultimately help foster a lifelong passion for the horror genre. So when I saw trailers for Gloomy Eyes from developer Fishing Cactus, I was instantly enamoured with the Tim Burton-esque vibes.
Drawing inspiration from the likes of Little Nightmares and Inside, Gloomy Eyes is a puzzle-adventure that stars two characters, Nena and Gloomy, who begin an unlikely friendship. Described as "self co-op", the game is strictly single-player, but you’ll be swapping between the two protagonists on the fly in an effort to complete each level, while voiced narration provides context and backstory.
The levels themselves are presented as spooky dioramas, and a quick press of ‘-’ will bring the camera all the way out so you can scope out the entire environment. It reminds me of Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, in a way, albeit with much larger levels and puzzles that often require a bit of backtracking. That’s a scary word for many, but each level here takes mere minutes to complete, even if you have to spend time traipsing around in confusion before figuring out what to do. It’s a breezy experience, one that can easily be polished off in just a few short hours.
Puzzles are pretty tactile in the sense that you're always interacting directly with the environment with objects found on the fly, and you’re often required to complete objectives with one character to open access for the other. Gloomy, for example, can’t stand the light, so you might need to shut off the power as Nena. Alternatively, Gloomy is adept at chucking rocks, so hurling one at certain lights knocks them in the other direction, freeing the way to proceed while blinding an enemy stalking Nena.
Exploring the environment, picking up items, and discovering how they interact with obstacles is satisfying, but it can often be quite tricky to make out certain details within the world. This is usually due to two key reasons: the fixed camera angle makes depth perception difficult, so you’re never quite sure whether certain pathways are actually accessible until you start venturing down them; and the game just looks a bit messy on the Switch.
The art design is wonderful, but the slightly blurry visuals and washed-out colours can look unpleasant at times. It’s a shame, because it looks a real treat on other platforms, so this is yet another instance of Switch players getting an objectively lesser experience. It doesn’t look much better on Switch 2 either, but it’s at least fully functional if you want to try it on Nintendo’s newer system.
Ultimately, disappointing visuals aside, there’s a lot to like here. It definitely falls into the ‘cosy horror’ sub-genre, with spooky yet charming aesthetics, haunting music, and engaging puzzle-solving throughout. With Halloween on the horizon, it could be the perfect little primer for younger gamers.
Comments 13
Thanks for the review and even more so since I've never even just heard of this game before - now that I know it exists first and foremost and considering that it's overall good, especially gameplaywise (of course still hope that they can eventually improve the visuals, even just on Switch 2 if it's not feasible on Switch), I'll eventually give it a try for sure!
I was looking at this on the eshop the other day, was very intrigued. Glad its not bad, will try it one day
Sounds a lot like "The Last Campfire" that I played on Apple Arcade. Only that game was very colorful. For only a few hours I'd pick this up on a subscription service but $25 for a few hours of dark blurriness is nuts. Do they know Silksong is only $20? 🤑
Edit: So, funny story, apparently The Last Campfire is also available on Switch. And it's "only" $15.
https://www.nintendo.com/us/store/products/the-last-campfire-switch/
@rjejr Silksong being only $20 has really screwed a lot of developers over. Team Cherry knew that the game would be a massive runaway success, so charging only $20 was feasible, even though it's a large game and took 7-8 years to make. But it's caused many consumers to question why other games offer less content for more money, when the reality is that 99% of indie devs don't have the luxury of the pull and previous success that Team Cherry had.
@Markatron84 Fortunately Nintendo is heroically charging more for their content than ever, bearing the brunt of consumer ire to build a brighter future for devs everywhere.
Rather globular eyes.
Glad there was not a voiced narration in Captain Toad.
Played and completed it over the weekend, mainly because the misses kept bugging me to. Be warned though it's a super short game and the puzzles are very basic in my opinion. Completed it in 3 hours and that's with collecting everything (which isn't much).
@cedarhyped Yeah but you had to realize Nintendo is also the only company that make exclusive games/contents nowadays. With PlayStation and Xbox games, you don't had to own a PlayStation or Xbox consoles to play those anymore hence why they could lower their prices. Nintendo still make exclusive games so you had to own their systems to play those. Also since those games are only exclusive to their platform, it only make since that they charge more for those.
Team Cherry was able to charge only $20 on Hollow Knight: Silksong cause the game is widely available everywhere: PC, Switch, Switch 2, Xbox One, Xbox Series S, Xbox Series X, PS4, and PS5. That's 8 platforms, for every one time Silksong sell on each of those platform they already earn $160, compare that to Donkey Kong Bananza which is $70 only on Switch 2. For every one time DK Bananza sell on Switch 2, Silksong sell 8 times on other platforms, that means if DK Bananza makes $700 (10 copies sold) on one Switch 2, then Silksong already made $1600 (10 copies sold per platform) across all 8 platforms. That's why Nintendo was able to charge as much as they could and why they will never dropped the prices.
"Cosy horror"? IMO, that's quite the oxymoron 🤔
@Serpenterror Astro Bot ... And some other exclusives I guess. I don't have a PS5 since I don't see the need for it when I have an Xbox Series X and Switch 2 and laptop, but would love to play those one day.
@AltCode It kinda makes sense. It's like "halloween" horror as opposed to "Ahhhh" horror. More Luigi's Mansion than Resident Evil 7.
@Markatron84 Yeah, it's a moment in time thing w/ Silksong, but it has been a thing for awhile now. PS3 had so many cheap indie games they came up with their own category of "mini" games $1.99 and less. I think everything Wiiware on Wii maxed out at $10. I understand inflation is a thing, not saying games should all be under $10 w/ a lot of $1.99 games, but inflation hasn't been 300% the past 15 years. I bought World of Goo 3 times for $10 or less, still haven't purchased WoG 2 b/c it's $30. 2 does not look like 3x more game than 1. This does not look like 40% more game than Last Campfire.
Everyone complains about $60 games all being $70 now, just $10 or 15% more, but nobody mentions that a lot of games that probably would have been $10 around 15 years age are $25 now. The $10 games didn't go up a few $ to $12 or $13, they doubled and tripled. And don't even get me started on $12.99 amiibo now costing $29.99 and $39.99. 🤑
Interesting that this same title released 5 years or so ago as a VR experience; as I recall it was basically 3 episodes of an animated tale (voiced in English by Colin Farrell!). Now they've made it into a puzzle game, although I wonder if it is the same story just with gameplay now, or a related story under the same name.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...