Info about Surviving the Abyss:

Official game description:
Earth, 1976. The cold war is in full swing and you have been tasked to construct and direct a deep sea research facility working to perfect human cloning. Survive against the odds in the extremely unforgiving abyss maintaining oxygen, power, food, and much more to keep your crew alive. Discover and mine resources for construction, light your way in the dark, and expand into your surroundings to advance your research. Capture the diverse, highly-adapted flora and fauna of the deep, but beware: the darkness hides unexpected horrors, with only the light keeping them at bay.  
Lead a team of scientists conducting genetic experiments on local wildlife on the ocean floor.  
Keep your population sane, obedient and alive as you expand your base and discover the secrets of cloning and genetic research.  
Improve life and progress in your facility by researching advanced technologies.  
The fate of your crew is in your hands! Make crucial decisions through the event system.  
Ensure the survival of your crew by planning, placing and building essential infrastructure for manufacturing, research and life support.  
Expand and optimize your base and its available resources. Connect your buildings and mining facilities efficiently with tunnels and powerlines.  
Conquer the uneven terrain of the ocean floor with clever planning and vertical construction.  
Build light pylons and push back the darkness to expand your base.  
Secure resources far away from your main base by using exploration submarines and outposts.  
Prevent disaster by making sure power does not fail, together with life support and light sources.  
Your crew senses it, and so do you. Something is lurking at the edge of darkness, slithering and seething.  
Darkness is danger, light is safety. Do not turn off the light.

Release date: 5 Nov, 2024

Categories: Base Building, Survival, Resource Management, Management Simulation, Research and Discovery, Single-player Story, Atmospheric Horror


- Hardware Profile: No data
Feature extractions:
- Community Price: No data
- Playtime Metrics: No data
- Time-to-fun: No data
- Player Archetypes: No data


Below are summaries of things people say about the game per category.
Each point is assigned a weight that represents how often it is mentioned across all reviews.
What players like:
- Overall enjoyable and worthwhile (weight 0.99): Players generally find the game enjoyable and worth the price, especially after recent updates. Many appreciate the challenge and unique aspects, leading to a satisfying experience.
- Exceptional atmosphere and setting (weight 0.56): The game excels in creating a haunting and immersive atmosphere, often described as Lovecraftian or thalassophobic. The sound design, visuals, and overall mood contribute significantly to this unique and unsettling experience.
- Solid colony/city builder (weight 0.22): The game is recognized as a solid and engaging colony/city builder, offering a unique twist on the genre. Players enjoy the management challenges and the distinct mechanics compared to other sims.
- Innovative and engaging concept (weight 0.2): The core concept and premise of the game are highly praised for being unique, interesting, and well-executed. Players appreciate the fresh ideas it brings to the genre.
- Good visuals and graphics (weight 0.06): The game's visuals and graphics are generally considered good, contributing positively to the overall aesthetic and player experience.

Common complaints:
- Limited content and replayability (weight 0.69): The game suffers from a lack of content, depth, and replayability. The story is underdeveloped, exploration is limited, and there isn't enough variety or new mechanics to keep players engaged for long.
- Poor game balance and difficulty (weight 0.67): Players report severe balancing issues, making the game either too difficult, too easy, or leading to unavoidable death spirals due to resource scarcity. Specific mechanics like cloning and resource production are cited as problematic.
- Game feels incomplete/abandoned (weight 0.49): Many players feel the game is incomplete, unpolished, and has been abandoned by developers, leading to a lack of new content and updates. This significantly impacts the overall gameplay experience and replayability.
- Poor in-game explanations/tutorial (weight 0.45): The game fails to adequately explain its mechanics, leading to a steep learning curve and player confusion. The tutorial is deemed insufficient, leaving players without proper guidance.
- Weak/unsatisfying story and ending (weight 0.32): The game's story is often described as nonsensical, underdeveloped, or lacking. The ending, in particular, is frequently cited as unsatisfying, underwhelming, and rushed, leaving players confused or disappointed.
- Significant game-breaking bugs (weight 0.3): The game is plagued by numerous bugs, ranging from minor annoyances to game-breaking issues that can ruin playthroughs and progress. Some critical bugs have persisted for extended periods.
- Clunky UI/UX (weight 0.18): The user interface (UI) and user experience (UX) are frequently criticized for being clunky, unintuitive, and outdated. Specific issues include navigation difficulties, a frustrating save system, and a lack of quality-of-life features.
- Uninspired tech tree (weight 0.11): The technology tree is perceived as barren, lackluster, and uninteresting, offering few meaningful upgrades or game-changing technologies. Most research is considered useless or provides only minor side-grades.
- Difficult tunneling system (weight 0.06): The tunneling system is reported to be finicky and difficult to use, with issues related to placement and connectivity, making base expansion frustrating.
- Repetitive and unimpactful events (weight 0.05): In-game events are repetitive and often unsatisfying, primarily serving to increase difficulty rather than adding meaningful variety or story progression.
- Tedious resource management (weight 0.05): Resource management is described as a constant grind and a purgatory, consuming too much player time due to slow and inefficient resource nodes.

Gameplay feedback:
- Core Survival City-Builder (weight 0.5): The game is primarily a survival city-builder with a strong emphasis on resource management. Players must constantly balance essential resources like power, oxygen, food, and building materials to ensure the colony's survival and expansion, especially in the challenging early to mid-game.
- Cloning Mechanic & Management (weight 0.34): A central mechanic revolves around managing a secret underwater cloning facility. Players must create and manage clones, who serve as workers, while dealing with their limited lifespans, mutations, and the need to constantly produce new ones by gathering genetic material.
- Steep Learning Curve (weight 0.18): The game presents a significant learning curve, especially in the early stages, requiring players to make several attempts to grasp its mechanics. While challenging initially, the difficulty tends to decrease as players understand the systems and progress.
- Base Optimization & Control (weight 0.16): Players have significant control over base optimization, including the ability to shut down buildings to conserve power and oxygen. Strategic placement and network separation (e.g., for polluting buildings) are crucial for efficient resource management and air quality.
- Light as a Resource (weight 0.14): Light is a critical resource and mechanic for base expansion and resource exploitation. Players must strategically place light towers and outposts to illuminate areas, as building and resource gathering are restricted to lit zones. Outposts can also provide efficient power and oxygen.
- Anomaly Threat (weight 0.1): The 'Anomaly' serves as a key antagonist, both narratively and mechanically. It periodically attacks unprotected structures, adding pressure and difficulty, particularly from around Day 50 onwards.
- Linear Story Progression (weight 0.07): The game features a main story with a linear plot and defined objectives. As players progress, a central mystery unfolds, leading to twists in the later parts of the game.
- Tiered Food System (weight 0.07): The game includes a two-tier food system: low and high quality. While low-quality food is easier to produce, relying solely on it leads to malnutrition. High-quality food requires more resources and effort but is essential for colony well-being.

Performance notes:
- Late-game performance issues (weight 0.1): Players report significant performance degradation, especially in the late game or when expanding bases, with frame rates dropping severely even on high-end systems. This suggests the game is very demanding on hardware, particularly the graphics card.
- Stable performance for many (weight 0.1): Many players report stable performance and a lack of crashes, with some noting improvements after updates. The game generally runs smoothly for many users, even on older hardware at lower resolutions.
- Active patch development (weight 0.02): The developers are actively releasing daily patches to address issues and improve the game. This indicates a commitment to ongoing development and bug fixing.

Recommendations:
- Conditional recommendation due to bugs (weight 0.41): Many players express a conditional recommendation for the game, often citing its current buggy state or lack of polish as reasons to wait for improvements. While some find it enjoyable despite flaws, a significant portion advises against a full-price purchase.
- Niche appeal for genre fans (weight 0.18): The game appeals strongly to fans of specific genres, particularly colony simulation and base-building games with a survival or horror twist, often compared to titles like 'Surviving Mars' or 'Frostpunk'. However, it may not satisfy players looking for extensive replayability or a traditional city-builder experience.
- Anticipate future updates (weight 0.13): Players are generally optimistic about the game's future and express a desire for more content, features, and balance updates. Many recommend wishlisting the game and waiting for further development before committing to a purchase.
- Buy on sale recommendation (weight 0.12): A recurring sentiment is that the game offers better value when purchased during a sale rather than at full price. This suggests that while the core experience has merit, its current state or content volume doesn't justify the premium cost for many players.
- Satisfied with purchase (weight 0.06): A smaller group of players expresses satisfaction with their purchase, feeling that the game provided good value for its price and was an enjoyable experience.
- Limited long-term engagement (weight 0.04): Some players report a lack of desire to continue playing the game after an initial run, indicating that it may not offer sufficient long-term engagement or compelling reasons to return.

Other player notes:
- Desire for more content (weight 0.12): Players are highly optimistic about the game's future, expressing strong desires for more content, features, and continued developer support. Many hope for a sequel or significant expansions.
- Needs more polish (weight 0.12): The game is perceived as having significant potential but currently lacks polish and feels somewhat unrefined. Players are hopeful that ongoing early access development will address these issues.
- Active developer support (weight 0.11): There's a strong sentiment that the developers are actively engaged, listening to community feedback, and committed to updating the game, dispelling any notions of abandonment.
- Challenging resource management (weight 0.09): Resource management is a significant challenge, often requiring multiple restarts to achieve stability. Players desire better tools for monitoring and managing resources, and some find the difficulty too high.
- Unique concept and setting (weight 0.09): The game's unique underwater setting and cloning premise are highly praised, offering a fresh take on the city-builder genre. It's often compared favorably to 'Frostpunk' for its atmosphere and challenge.
- Atmosphere and sound suggestions (weight 0.04): Players desire more ambient sounds, radio channels, and a gloomier atmosphere, possibly with Cthulhu-like elements, to enhance immersion and danger.
- Missing autosave feature (weight 0.03): The absence of an autosave feature is a notable inconvenience, requiring players to manually save their progress.
- Miscellaneous historical/scientific facts (weight 0.03): These clusters contain various historical facts, scientific details, and speculative ideas about submarines, oceanography, and construction methods that are not direct feedback on the game's current state or mechanics.
- Positive player progression (weight 0.02): These points describe a player's personal progression and learning curve within the game, indicating a positive experience of overcoming initial challenges.
- Tunnel placement limitations (weight 0.02): Players desire the ability to place junctions and elevators on existing tunnel structures for more flexible base design.
- Genome usage visibility (weight 0.02): A quality-of-life improvement requested is the ability to easily see which genomes are currently in use within the base.
- Request for copy building (weight 0.02): A 'copy building' button or hotkey would significantly improve the efficiency of base construction and layout.
- Population crafting needs depth (weight 0.02): The choices involved in crafting the population could be made more engaging and impactful.
- Soothing music (weight 0.02): The game's music is highlighted as a positive aspect, contributing to a soothing and immersive atmosphere.
- High graphics card usage (weight 0.02): The game features beautiful visuals, but this comes at the cost of high graphics card usage and heat generation.
- Detailed environment (weight 0.02): The in-game environment is praised for its amazing detail, including active marine life like fish and crabs.
- Exploit found in mission (weight 0.02): A specific exploit was found where destroying and rebuilding a crane allowed for easy completion of the final mission.
- First impression review (weight 0.01): Some reviews are explicitly stated as initial impressions and not final assessments of the game.
- Nostalgia for beta testing (weight 0.01): A reviewer reminisces about past beta testing practices, which is not direct feedback on the game itself.
- Branded as hardcore (weight 0.01): The game is marketed as a 'hardcore experience,' setting player expectations for difficulty.
- Helpful community channels (weight 0.01): Helpful community channels exist for players seeking guidance.
- Balanced micromanagement (weight 0.01): The game is described as not requiring excessive micromanagement but also not being overly simplistic.
- Large monitor mentioned (weight 0.01): A reviewer mentions having a very large monitor, which is irrelevant to game feedback.

Emotions:
- Satisfaction (weight 0.24): Players expressed satisfaction due to significant improvements since early access, leading to a more polished and enjoyable experience. The game's unique atmosphere, Lovecraftian horror elements, engaging city management, and innovative clone mechanics were consistently highlighted as strong positive aspects, contributing to a sense of value and fun.
- Disappointment (weight 0.23): Disappointment stemmed primarily from the game's unpolished state, persistent bugs, and perceived abandonment by developers. Players felt the game had unfulfilled potential due to a lackluster ending, limited replayability, and a lack of depth in content and mechanics, particularly in the late game.
- Frustration (weight 0.21): Frustration was a common emotion, largely caused by unintuitive mechanics, severe balancing issues, and numerous game-breaking bugs. Players struggled with complex resource management, unclear progression, and poor UI/UX, leading to a feeling of being overwhelmed and unable to progress effectively.
- Enjoyment (weight 0.08): Players found enjoyment in the game's unique aesthetics, immersive atmosphere, and the challenging yet rewarding city-building gameplay. The core premise and the creepy underwater experience, especially after the 1.0 release, contributed to a positive and engaging experience.
- Excitement (weight 0.06): Excitement was generated by the game's unique concept, strong atmosphere, and perceived potential for future development. The challenging gameplay, horror elements, and intriguing storyline also contributed to a sense of anticipation and immersion.
- Hope (weight 0.03): Hope was expressed for future improvements, additional content, and quality of life updates. Players saw significant potential in the game and wished for continued developer support to address current issues and expand the experience.
- Anger (weight 0.02): Anger arose from the game's perceived unfair difficulty, feeling like an 'unpaid alpha test,' and design choices that led to unavoidable death spirals. Players felt abused by the game's mechanics, which caused discomfort rather than enjoyment.
- Confusion (weight 0.02): Confusion was primarily caused by unexplained game mechanics, unintuitive UI, and illogical system behaviors. Players struggled to understand how certain elements, like power connections or specific machines, were supposed to function.
- Joy (weight 0.02): Joy was experienced through the game's ability to hook players with its engaging gameplay loop and immersive ambience. The overall positive gameplay experience contributed to this emotion.
- Boredom (weight 0.01): Boredom set in due to slow game pacing and a perceived lack of new content, especially after reaching the end of the early access material. Players felt the game quickly became repetitive without fresh challenges or discoveries.
- Mild frustration (weight 0.01): Mild frustration was attributed to specific mechanics, minor bugs, and UI issues that, while not game-breaking, detracted from the overall smooth experience. Performance issues also contributed to this feeling.
- Interest (weight 0.01): Interest was sparked by the game's unique premise, intriguing setting, and innovative mechanics. Players were drawn in by the core concept of the game.
- Appreciation (weight 0.01): Appreciation was shown for the game's well-implemented resource management system and the challenging yet helpful tutorial. Players valued the game as a well-made city builder within a rare genre.
- Sadness (weight 0.01): Sadness was felt when players had to give a negative review, often due to the game ending too quickly or not fulfilling its perceived potential. This indicated a desire for the game to be better.
- Neutrality (weight 0.01): Neutrality stemmed from a lack of desire for replay, often due to perceived difficulty changes, a short story, and low replayability. Players felt the game offered little reason to return after completion.
- Desire (weight 0.01): Players expressed a desire for more exploration, larger enemies, and more engaging content. This indicated a wish for the game to expand its scope and depth.
- Surprise (weight 0.01): Surprise was experienced due to the game's unexpected polish and enjoyment, especially when compared to its early access state. The gameplay and atmosphere also contributed to this positive surprise.
- Anticipation (weight 0.01): Anticipation was felt regarding the game's potential for addiction and its unfulfilled promise. Players looked forward to the game reaching its full potential.
- Accomplishment (weight 0.01): A sense of accomplishment was achieved by successfully learning from mistakes and thriving in subsequent restarts, particularly in mass producing humans and resources. This highlighted the rewarding nature of overcoming challenges.
- Concern (weight 0): Concern was raised regarding late-game balance issues, indicating worries about the game's long-term playability and fairness. This pointed to potential problems in the game's progression.}