Aphelion Review Summary

While its stunning graphics, engaging story, and praised soundtrack shine, repetitive gameplay, frequent crashes, and unresponsive climbing controls hold it back.

Excellent graphics praised: Players consistently praise the graphics and visuals, often using terms like 'beautiful', 'stunning', and 'top-notch'. They specifically mention detailed characters, landscapes, and environments, as well as impressive cinematics and animations.

Soundtrack highly praised: The soundtrack is frequently cited as a major positive, with comparisons to Interstellar and Hans Zimmer. Players describe the music as masterful, cinematic, and effective at setting the mood and enhancing emotional moments.

Story engaging and well-received: The story is widely regarded as engaging and interesting, with players praising its ability to hold attention and evoke emotion. Many note that the narrative is well-written and becomes more compelling as the game progresses, and that it lives up to the reputation of DON'T NOD's previous titles.

Voice acting applauded: Voice acting receives strong praise from multiple reviewers, who call it 'outstanding' and 'excellent'. Players appreciate the quality and delivery of the English voice cast, often noting it alongside the game's music.

Characters well-liked: Players like the characters, finding them engaging, likeable, and well-developed. The two protagonists are highlighted as interesting with distinct personalities and perspectives, leading to incredible moments.

Gameplay is repetitive: Multiple clusters consistently describe the gameplay as repetitive and monotonous, with an overemphasis on climbing and a lack of variety in mechanics. This is the most frequently cited issue across the feedback.

Game is buggy: Several clusters report a raw and buggy experience, including crashes, glitches, clipping errors, and general instability. These technical issues significantly harm the overall playability and polish of the game.

Input lag issues: Both climbing and general movement are plagued by unresponsiveness and jank, with specific mentions of inputs being recognized inconsistently. This affects both platforming and combat scenarios.

Climbing controls unresponsive: A dedicated cluster highlights that climbing controls lack responsiveness, fluidity, and precision, often leading to unintended falls and frustration. This is a specific and recurring issue during climbing phases.

Characters lack depth: Characters are universally seen as flat, shallow, and underdeveloped, lacking the depth and background needed for players to form attachments. This weakens the emotional impact of the story.

Climbing dominates gameplay: Climbing, swinging, and traversal are the dominant gameplay mechanics, mentioned in 41 reviews. The game is perceived as a climbing simulator with parkour and grappling elements.

Stealth gameplay is significant: Stealth sections and sneaking mechanics are consistently highlighted across multiple reviews. The stealth gameplay is a core part of the experience, often combined with path solving and exploration.

Two playable protagonists: The game features two playable protagonists with distinct gameplay styles. This dual-character narrative is a notable aspect of the game's structure and story.

Described as walking simulator: A subset of reviews characterizes the game as a walking simulator, emphasizing minimal action and a focus on narrative. This suggests that the gameplay is not action-heavy.

Gameplay is very linear: The game is described as linear and corridor-like, with a narrative-driven structure. This indicates that player agency in exploration is limited.

Frequent crashes and freezes: Multiple clusters report frequent game crashes, freezing, and lockups across different hardware and situations, including on pause menus, during startup, and at checkpoint reloads. Some describe these as engine-level issues that make the game unplayable or force relaunches.

Stuttering and inconsistent performance: Reviewers mention stuttering, lag, inconsistent frame rates, and low FPS even on high-end PCs and with DLSS enabled. Performance dips are noted in specific chapters and at high graphics settings, impacting gameplay fluidity.

Good optimization on some systems: Some reviews praise optimization, reporting smooth 60-140 FPS at 1440p with high settings and no crashes or frame drops. This contrasts with negative performance feedback, indicating variability across setups.

Graphical and animation glitches: Graphical glitches include animation distortions, stretched models, jagged shadows, and texture issues. Movement bugs cause clipping through walls and collision problems, especially during climbing sequences.

Stiff or stretched animations: Animations are described as stiff, and model animations can stretch in humorous ways, first appearing in the opening cutscene. This affects visual realism but not gameplay.

Recommended for narrative lovers: A consistent theme is that the game is recommended for players who prioritize story, narrative, and sci-fi themes over action. Many reviewers highlight the strong narrative and character-driven experience, making it appealing for story-focused gamers.

Overall negative recommendation: Multiple reviewers express strong negative sentiment, stating they cannot recommend the game due to numerous faults and a painful experience. This includes explicit warnings to avoid purchasing the game.

Comparisons to similar games: Reviewers compare the game to similar titles like The Invincible, Deliver Us Mars, and Banishers, both positively and negatively. Some recommend those alternatives over this game, while others see it as appealing to fans of those games.

Recommend with caveats: Some reviewers recommend the game with caveats, advising to set no expectations, decide for yourself, or stick with it past the first hour. This suggests a mixed experience that may grow on players.

Fix bugs before purchase: Several reviewers mention waiting for patches to fix crashes, animations, controls, or gameplay issues. This indicates technical problems that impact the experience.

Community fair range: $10.00 - $20.00.

Game completion: 10.0h.

Story completion: 7.0h.

Endgame: 2.0h.

Aphelion suffers from a slow, repetitive, and janky start, but many players report that the story and pacing improve significantly around the midway point, making it enjoyable for those who persist.

Friction: slow start; repetitive climbing and stealth sequences; janky controls and input detection issues; tedious walking and backtracking; bad checkpoint placement; crashing in early hours.

Unlock drivers: narrative engagement and mystery; improved pacing midway through.

Narrative-Driven Sci-Fi Enthusiast: Slow-paced exploratory walking sim with narrative-first focus, using assist options to smooth over gameplay rough edges. Motivation: Engaging sci-fi story and atmospheric world-building. Stance: sale.

Disappointed DON'T NOD Veteran: Analytical and comparative, evaluating the game against the developer's earlier narrative hits. Motivation: Expecting a polished narrative experience consistent with DON'T NOD's legacy. Stance: no buy.

Gameplay-Minded Critic: Action-oriented, expects tight controls and responsive platforming; compares to genre benchmarks. Motivation: Polished, frustration-free gameplay mechanics. Stance: deep sale.

The game experiences severe crash issues on high-VRAM Windows systems (12-15GB and 16GB+), while lower-VRAM configurations have mixed results, with the 8-11GB VRAM cohort performing well overall.

Windows 12-15GB VRAM: negative. Frequent crashes and instability dominate player reports, with many calling the game unplayable.

Windows 16GB+ VRAM: negative. Constant crashing and stability issues are widespread despite high-end hardware.

Windows <8GB VRAM: mixed. Reports are mixed: some praise optimization, while others complain of low FPS and clunky performance.

Steam Deck: User feedback highlights pervasive control issues (clunky, imprecise inputs) that could worsen on Steam Deck. The official Steam Deck status is 'Unplayable', though at least one user was able to run it. Performance is generally good but has late-game frame drops, raising concerns for handheld hardware. Overall, the game likely requires tinkering and may frustrate Steam Deck users due to controls and stability.

Linux and Proton: Linux compatibility is strong based on the limited user feedback. One user explicitly confirms the game runs very well on Linux, with only minor stutters. Another user played it on Steam Deck despite an official 'Unplayable' rating, suggesting workable performance. No reports of frequent crashes, Proton switching, or other Linux-specific friction.

External guides: The primary user frustration is the necessity of external walkthroughs for story comprehension and game completion, indicating insufficient instructional data within the game.

Compared to previous titles: Players often compare this game to other Don't Nod titles and similar narrative games, with many noting it does not surpass previous works like Life is Strange or Banishers. Some find the comparisons unfavorable, while others appreciate the studio's signature style.

Developer Don't Nod recognized: The game is identified as a product of Don't Nod, known for narrative-driven titles like Life is Strange. The developer's reputation and experience are highlighted as a key factor for players' expectations.

Mixed opinions on price: Opinions on pricing are mixed: some find the game worth its price and good value, while others consider it too expensive for the content. The overall sentiment leans towards adequate pricing, especially at launch or sale prices.

Game is relatively short: Players report the game's length varies between 6 and 12 hours, with most noting it is relatively short. This short playtime may affect perceived value and replayability.

ESA collaboration adds authenticity: The game was developed in collaboration with the European Space Agency and real astronauts, which adds to its scientific authenticity. This collaboration is praised for enhancing realism.