Info about Exit Ways:

Official game description:
DISCORD ⇨ ROADMAP
=================
About the Game
==============
This is the general motto of the Reclaimers. Immortal clones, who are beyond control of the concept of death.
They will reward you, provide you with quests and improve your reputation.
More friendly ballistics and damage system.
Put it wherever and however you want. No more prepared building slots!
The chests are expanding the storage space.
The experience you receive is defined by your actions.
Yes, no wipes!

Release date: Sep 7, 2026

Categories: Extraction Gameplay, PvPvE, Cooperative Multiplayer, Base Building, Crafting, Zombie Survival, Looter Shooter


- Hardware Profile: No data
Feature extractions:
- Community Price:
  - Community fair range: $5.00 - $8.00
  - Reasoning: The reviews consistently express that the game is not worth its current price due to server instability, bugs, and a saturated genre. One reviewer suggests that a discount and fixes could make it worthwhile, implying the community expects a lower price point. Given the current $11.69 price, a fair range would be below that, likely between $5 and $8, to reflect the game's unfinished state and competitive market.
- Playtime Metrics:
  - Game completion: N/A
  - Story completion: N/A
  - Session length: N/A
  - Endgame: N/A
  - Reasoning: The evidence shows that some players managed to play for a couple of hours, while others suggest an hour or two as a reasonable playtime. However, these durations are often spent on loading screens, queueing, or dealing with server and bug issues rather than actual gameplay. There is no clear data on typical session length, game completion, story completion, or endgame content. Therefore, all playtime metrics are set to null due to insufficient evidence.
- Time-to-fun:
  - Summary: Critical technical and UI issues prevent players from reaching any enjoyable content, leading to refunds and negative impressions.
  - Stance: Never clicks
  - Anchor: N/A
  - Time to anchor: N/A
  - Friction: Multiplayer won't launch; Player gets stuck in the abyss; Tutorial bugs requiring resets; Horrendous UI; Cannot join online play
  - Unlock drivers: N/A
  - Conditions: N/A
- Player Archetypes:
  - Social Squad Player (buy)
    - Motivation: To enjoy chaotic multiplayer sessions with friends and share the experience as a group.
    - Playstyle: Prefers teaming up with friends, engaging in chaotic lobbies, and tolerating early-access rough edges for social fun.
    - Experience: familiar
    - Purchase stance: buy
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: N/A
  - Extraction Shooter Veteran (buy)
    - Motivation: To experience a familiar extraction shooter loop with PvP hotspots and meaningful loot progression.
    - Playstyle: Focuses on PvP encounters, loot runs, and map knowledge, expecting genre-standard content and balance.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: buy
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: EFT; Grey Zone
  - Frustrated Early Adopter (no buy)
    - Motivation: Wants a stable, fair game but is currently blocked by technical issues, hackers, and poor developer communication.
    - Playstyle: Attempts to play normally but is repeatedly interrupted by bugs, cheaters, or bans, leading to abandonment.
    - Experience: mixed
    - Purchase stance: no buy
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: N/A
  - PVE Seeker (deep sale)
    - Motivation: Looking for a cooperative PvE experience, but the game only offers PvP, so they hesitate to recommend it.
    - Playstyle: Prefers solo or cooperative play against AI, and avoids competitive PvP encounters.
    - Experience: newcomer
    - Purchase stance: deep sale
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: N/A


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:
- Game has strong potential (weight 0.17): Multiple reviewers note the game has good bones and potential, describing it as pretty good and playable. The core experience is seen as promising despite any current issues.
- Developers actively improving game (weight 0.09): Reviewers mention that developers are currently working on the game and fixing issues, and that the team is transparent and keeps the community informed. This ongoing support is viewed positively.
- Engaging and involving experience (weight 0.08): The experience is described as engaging and involving, with players having fun during raids. The gameplay loop is enjoyable and keeps players interested.
- Stable and playable performance (weight 0.08): Reviewers report that server instability has ended and the game is playable with no game-breaking issues. The game does not lag, providing a smooth experience.
- Deep crafting and progression (weight 0.05): The crafting and progression system is deep and logical, with each scavenged part feeling valuable. This adds depth to the gameplay loop.
- Unique zombie EFT concept (weight 0.03): The idea of an Escape from Tarkov-style game but with zombies is highlighted as a distinctive and appealing concept. This unique twist attracts players.
- Tense extraction gameplay (weight 0.03): Resource runs keep tension high until the last second, with danger from zombie hordes and other players waiting at extraction. This creates thrilling and memorable moments.
- Satisfying base development (weight 0.03): Base development from an abandoned den to a fortified stronghold is satisfying. Players enjoy the progression and customization of their base.
- Meaningful survivor rescue rewards (weight 0.03): Saving survivors gives tangible bonuses, making the act of rescue rewarding. This encourages players to engage with the survivor system.
- Good weapon feel in training (weight 0.03): Weapons feel good in the training ground, indicating solid gunplay mechanics. This is a positive sign for combat gameplay.
- Bunker lighting praised (weight 0.03): The lighting in the bunker is good, contributing to the atmosphere and visual quality. This detail is appreciated by players.
- Resource efficiency returning to base (weight 0.03): Returning to base does not consume resources, which is a convenient feature. This reduces frustration and encourages exploration.
- Encountering live players is fun (weight 0.03): Running into live players is described as funny-scary, adding an element of unpredictability. This player interaction enhances the experience.
- Recommended to friends (weight 0.03): The game is recommended to friends, indicating overall satisfaction. This suggests players are willing to endorse the game to others.
- Killing zombies and players (weight 0.02): One player mentions killing zombies and a player, highlighting the combat variety. This shows the game offers both PvE and PvP elements.

Common complaints:
- Game unplayable at release (weight 0.74): Many players describe the game as broken, unplayable, or not working from the start, citing crashes, freezes, and inability to progress. This indicates a fundamentally unstable product at launch.
- Widespread bugs and glitches (weight 0.72): Players report numerous bugs affecting gameplay, including zombie hitboxes, spawning issues, movement glitches, and progression blockers. The game is described as a 'buggy mess' with many flaws.
- Server issues at launch (weight 0.47): Multiple clusters report server overload, downtime, and unavailability at release, preventing players from joining or finding games. This was a widespread problem affecting many users.
- Matchmaking and queue problems (weight 0.26): Matchmaking is broken, with long queue times, failed matches, and players being kicked. This prevents players from entering games and disrupts the experience.
- Settings and UI issues (weight 0.25): Players cannot change or save settings, and the UI is buggy and unintuitive. This affects usability and accessibility.
- Developer incompetence and neglect (weight 0.24): Players criticize the developers for releasing an unfinished game, ignoring issues, and being unresponsive. This has led to a loss of trust and negative sentiment.
- Lack of content and maps (weight 0.22): Players note low player counts, small maps, and a lack of content, making the game feel empty and repetitive. This is a common complaint among reviewers.
- Poor controls and movement (weight 0.17): Movement feels clunky, slow, and unresponsive, with issues like high gravity, camera shaking, and bad aiming. This negatively impacts the core gameplay experience.
- Tutorial and progression bugs (weight 0.15): The tutorial is buggy, items are not received, and progress resets, preventing players from learning the game and advancing. This is a common early-game frustration.
- Poor performance and optimization (weight 0.14): Players experience low frame rates, lag, and crashes, making the game difficult to play. Performance issues are severe enough to render the game unplayable for some.
- Visual and audio glitches (weight 0.13): Players encounter black screens, missing textures, and audio issues, which break immersion and can make the game unplayable. These are common technical problems.
- Spawn and extraction issues (weight 0.12): Players spawn on top of each other or near extraction points, leading to unfair deaths and a chaotic experience. This undermines the extraction shooter design.
- Game feels like a scam (weight 0.11): Some players believe the game is a scam, citing the use of store assets, lack of content, and poor quality. This is a strong negative sentiment.
- Netcode and hit registration problems (weight 0.11): Netcode is poor, with players being shot through walls, rubber-banding, and hit registration issues. This makes combat feel unfair and frustrating.
- Account and login problems (weight 0.1): Some players, especially in China, cannot register or log in, preventing them from playing at all. This is a significant barrier for a portion of the player base.
- Co-op and party system broken (weight 0.09): The party system is buggy, with invites not working and matchmaking with friends taking too long. This hampers the co-op experience.
- Game economy and crafting poorly designed (weight 0.09): The economy and crafting systems are not well thought out, with loot being useless and money only buying guns and bullets. This limits player progression and choice.
- Bot AI and difficulty issues (weight 0.09): Bot AI is too easy, and zombie behavior is buggy, making encounters either trivial or frustrating. This affects the overall challenge and immersion.
- Unbalanced gameplay and weapons (weight 0.08): Weapon balancing is poor, with some weapons being ineffective and others overpowered. This leads to frustrating combat encounters.
- Lack of single-player and PvE modes (weight 0.07): The game is online-only with no PvE mode, forcing players into PvP. This is a design choice that some players dislike.

Gameplay feedback:
- Online-only with no single-player (weight 0.11): The game is online-only, with the storage system being the only offline feature. There is no single-player mode, and other players are always present on the map.
- Game is extraction shooter (weight 0.09): Multiple reviews describe the game as an extraction shooter, specifically an Extraction PvPvE shooter similar to Escape from Tarkov. This genre definition is central to player expectations.
- PvP-focused gameplay (weight 0.08): The game is described as PvP only and essentially deathmatch, with lobbies and rounds. This indicates a strong competitive multiplayer focus.
- Includes co-op and base building (weight 0.08): The game features a co-op mode and includes base building, crafting, and progression systems. These elements add depth beyond pure PvP combat.

Performance notes:
- Severe performance issues (weight 0.15): Players experience frame rates dropping into the teens on high-end rigs, and the game lags even during simple tasks like tutorials and raids. This points to widespread optimization problems affecting gameplay.
- Loading and connection errors (weight 0.13): Players encounter trouble loading in, connection errors when loading into a map, and black screens when loading a map or entering a match. These issues often require multiple exits and re-entries to resolve.
- Lack of optimization (weight 0.11): Several reviews explicitly state that optimization is non-existent or zero, and that the game has no optimization at all. This is a core complaint that underlies many other technical issues.
- Crashes on settings changes (weight 0.09): Changing graphics settings or volume causes the game to crash to desktop, and repeated crashes occur when trying to load back in. This makes adjusting game options unreliable and frustrating.
- Lobby and map lag (weight 0.08): The lobby lags and the game freezes on the first outing, with lag lasting for about three minutes in some cases. This disrupts the overall experience even before or at the start of matches.
- Inability to adjust settings (weight 0.04): Players cannot change FPS or resolution, which limits their ability to improve performance. This is a significant usability issue, especially for those with lower-end hardware.

Recommendations:
- Do not buy the game (weight 0.24): Many reviewers strongly advise against purchasing the game, citing it as a waste of money and time. They recommend saving your money and avoiding the hype.
- Wait for fixes before buying (weight 0.13): Reviewers recommend waiting until bugs are fixed and the game shows promise for updates before making a purchase. This suggests the game is currently in a poor state.
- Refund the game (weight 0.11): Several players suggest refunding the game until it becomes worth playing, indicating current dissatisfaction with the product. This advice is repeated across multiple reviews.
- Not worth current price (weight 0.08): Players feel the game is not worth its current price, with some suggesting it would be worth trying only if free. This indicates a value-for-money concern.
- Positive for specific audiences (weight 0.07): Some reviewers recommend the game for fans of similar titles like EFT or Grey Zone, and for those who enjoy zombie apocalypse or community-building themes. This indicates niche appeal.
- Trust negative reviews (weight 0.03): One reviewer explicitly advises trusting the negative reviews, reinforcing the overall negative sentiment. This suggests that the criticism is credible and should be heeded.
- Play with friends for fun (weight 0.03): A reviewer suggests getting a squad together to enjoy the game, implying that the experience may be better with friends. This could mitigate some negatives.
- Buy with caution (weight 0.03): One reviewer advises buying with caution, suggesting that the game has potential but also significant drawbacks. This is a more balanced recommendation.
- Avoid enriching developers (weight 0.02): A reviewer warns against letting developers profit from the game, indicating distrust or dissatisfaction with the developers. This is a strong negative signal.

Other player notes:
- Early access with limited content (weight 0.15): The game is an indie early access release with only three maps and a lack of content, described as pre-alpha. Players feel it is not ready for release.
- Negative comparison to Tarkov (weight 0.13): The game is frequently compared to Escape from Tarkov, with reviewers noting it falls short of that standard. It is also compared to other extraction games and deathmatch modes.
- Discord communication issues (weight 0.09): Developers shut down communication in Discord, closing text channels because they cannot take criticism about the game not being ready. A reviewer was banned for expressing an opinion.
- Compared to Roblox game (weight 0.09): Reviewers say the game feels like a Roblox game or a basic Roblox mode, implying low quality graphics and gameplay. This comparison is used to criticize the overall experience.
- Developers criticized as lazy (weight 0.08): The developers are described as lazy and embarrassing, with some reviewers suggesting the game appears to be made by AI. This reflects frustration with the game's quality and progress.
- Compared to other bad games (weight 0.08): The game is compared to other Early Access trash and bad games, including The Day Before, which was less of a scam. This highlights the perceived low quality.
- Language and translation issues (weight 0.08): The game does not allow changing language, and the translation is described as the worst seen. The menu is in Russian, which is problematic for non-Russian speakers.
- Servers fixed after issues (weight 0.07): Servers were fixed after initial problems, but this does not fully mitigate the negative impression. The community on Discord is hostile towards developers, but also defends them for bugs during early access.
- Transparent development team (weight 0.06): The development team is transparent and communicates with the community, and they are working on fixes. This is a positive aspect mentioned by some reviewers.
- Small team of three developers (weight 0.06): The game is developed by a team of three developers, and it is their first game. This context is used to explain some limitations, but also to criticize the release state.
- Price increased after wishlists (weight 0.06): The price increased after the game accumulated 50,000 wishlists, which some reviewers see as a questionable business practice. This is mentioned in the context of early access.
- Low price point (weight 0.05): The game is sold at a low price point, costing 10 bucks. This is noted as a positive factor, but it does not compensate for the game's shortcomings.
- Game delayed by a week (weight 0.05): The game was delayed by a week, which may have contributed to community frustration. The community was eagerly waiting for the game.
- Cheap Flash game feel (weight 0.03): The game is described as a cheap Flash game with basic animations, reinforcing the low-quality perception. This is a common criticism in the reviews.
- Account registration issues for Chinese gamers (weight 0.03): There is an issue with account registration for Chinese gamers, which is a specific technical problem that affects a portion of the player base.
- Developers need better management (weight 0.03): Reviewers suggest that developers need to manage the situation better, especially regarding communication and server stability. This is a general call for improvement.
- Development time of 2.5 years (weight 0.03): The game took 2.5 years to develop, which is seen as insufficient for the current state. This is used to question the developers' efficiency.

Emotions:
- Frustration (weight 0.57): Players are overwhelmingly frustrated by severe technical issues at launch, including long loading times, server errors, matchmaking failures, and crashes that prevent them from entering matches. Many also cite broken settings, poor optimization, and a lack of developer responsiveness, making the game feel unplayable and wasting their time.
- Disappointment (weight 0.15): Players are disappointed by the game's unfinished and buggy state, especially after a long development period, with server problems, lack of content, and poor gameplay mechanics. The absence of a single-player mode and the overall raw quality contribute to a sense of letdown.
- Anger (weight 0.09): Anger stems from the perception that the game is a cash grab, with players paying for a broken product and encountering bugs, hackers, and server issues. Some also express anger at being banned from Discord for voicing opinions, adding to the sense of unfair treatment.
- Hope (weight 0.02): Despite the issues, some players see potential in the game's core concept as an EFT-like zombie experience, believing it has good bones and could improve with community feedback and more development time.
- Understanding (weight 0.02): A few players show understanding for the small team of three developers who are overwhelmed by a large player influx, acknowledging the challenges they face.
- Disgust (weight 0.02): Disgust is driven by the belief that the game is a scam and by the horrendous UI, which detracts from the overall experience.
- Satisfaction (weight 0.02): Players find satisfaction in the base-building and crafting systems, which offer deep and logical progression, making each scavenged part feel valuable and rewarding.
- Enjoyment (weight 0.01): The core gameplay loop provides enjoyment, keeping players engaged despite other issues.
- Amusement (weight 0.01): Players are amused by funny-scary encounters with live players, which add a layer of entertainment to the game.
- Involvement (weight 0.01): The engaging experience so far fosters a sense of involvement, drawing players into the game world.
- Respect (weight 0.01): Respect is given to the development team for their transparency and communication, which is appreciated by players.
- Annoyance (weight 0.01): Annoyance arises from server overload at release, which prevents players from joining the game and disrupts the experience.
- Concern (weight 0.01): Concern is raised by the dev team's response and communication shutdown, worrying players about the game's future.
- Gratitude (weight 0.01): Players express gratitude for the game's creation, appreciating the effort put into making it.
- Fun (weight 0.01): Players who managed to get into games are having fun, indicating that the core experience can be enjoyable when it works.
- Shocked (weight 0.01): The low price of the game, at $10, shocks players, possibly exceeding expectations for the cost.
- Discomfort (weight 0.01): Discomfort is caused by motion sickness from the color scheme, head/weapon bob, and jerky video, making the game physically unpleasant to play.
- Regret (weight 0.01): Regret is felt due to a bad co-op experience, leading to dissatisfaction with that aspect of the game.
- Uncertainty (weight 0.01): Uncertainty arises when the game boots with a 'game not found' error, leaving players unsure of how to proceed.
- Confusion (weight 0.01): Confusion is caused by the menu being in Russian, which is not understood by many players, hindering navigation.}