Between Adventures IDLE Review Summary

A charming idle game with clear presentation and cute art, though slow progression, unbalanced numbers, and optimization issues hold it back.

Great idle game experience: The game is praised as a very cool and fun idle game that is enjoyable to have running in the background. It is well-suited for passing time and can be idled while working or doing other things.

Clear and organized presentation: The game is well organized, clear, and straightforward, with a cleaner UI and more comfortable interface after changes. The font was also changed, and text issues have been fixed.

Cute and appealing art style: The drawings and art style are described as cute, with a nice pixel art style and refined graphics. The visual quality has improved, and the characters are engaging to look at.

Satisfying idle progression: The idle progression is deeply satisfying, with visible progress when returning periodically and numbers increasing over time. Watching levels, attributes, and inventory fill up is satisfying, and resources accumulate over time.

Game has potential and direction: The game has potential and is interesting, with an overall direction that is okay and a foundation that is decent. The developers' vision for the game is liked, and the Early Access release is much different from before in a positive way.

Progression is too slow: Many players find leveling and skill progression excessively slow, with specific complaints about early game pacing and the time required to advance. This is a widespread issue affecting overall enjoyment.

Numbers are unbalanced: The game's numerical balance is frequently criticized, with early-game numbers being particularly problematic. This includes issues with hit rates, damage, and resource requirements, making progression feel unfair.

Game needs optimization: Players note that the game requires significant optimization and polishing, with many features feeling crude or unfinished. This is a general but persistent criticism affecting the overall experience.

Demo changes are unwelcome: The game has changed significantly from the demo, with pacing and core experience being worse. Players feel the changes were not communicated, leading to disappointment and frustration.

Combat is slow and unclear: Combat is criticized for being slow, with low hit rates and unclear purpose. Players find battles tedious and repetitive, with no meaningful combat skill progression.

Idle game with progression: The game is consistently described as an idle game where progress happens automatically over time, often compared to Melvor Idle and RuneScape. It can be played in the background and features a slow-paced, low-effort core loop.

Inventory and backpack management: Players manage a backpack or inventory system, which is a core part of the gameplay. This includes organizing items and dealing with quests and items.

Combat with quests and loot: The game includes combat, often tied to quests, and enemies drop equipment as loot. Combat is a central activity alongside gathering and crafting.

Crafting system for tools and potions: The game features a crafting system that allows players to create tools and potions. This is a key mechanic that supports progression and resource use.

Mastery and skill levels: The game has mastery levels and a passive skill tree, providing deeper progression. Mastery levels max at 99, and gathering items unlock at specific skill levels.

Mouse stutter hinders movement: A specific input issue causes mouse stutter, leading to slow and unresponsive character movement, which negatively affects control precision.

Game performance is smooth: Players report that the game runs well overall, indicating stable frame rates and minimal technical issues during gameplay.

Game not currently recommended: Multiple reviewers state they cannot recommend the game in its current state, with some leaning against recommending it and suggesting waiting for improvements. This reflects a general dissatisfaction with the game's present condition.

Mixed recommendations overall: While some reviewers give a straightforward recommendation, others suggest trying it at the price or recommend it for specific player types. This shows a divided opinion, with some seeing value and others not.

Wait for improvements before buying: Reviewers advise waiting a week or for more development before purchasing, as the game may improve over time. Some suggest refunding if it doesn't improve, indicating uncertainty about the game's future quality.

Recommended for idle game fans: The game is positively recommended for fans of idle games, with specific praise for the idle sub-game aspect. This suggests the game has appeal for a niche audience despite mixed overall reception.

Better to buy fully developed games: A reviewer suggests that money is better spent on fully developed games, implying the game feels incomplete. This aligns with other feedback about waiting for improvements.

The game is fun immediately, with players getting hooked quickly and finding the idle progression satisfying, despite some early grind and progression imbalance.

Idle Grind Enthusiast: AFK/idle play, focusing on resource gathering, crafting, and combat loot collection. Motivation: To enjoy the satisfying grind and progression of an idle game with a unique pixel art style. Stance: buy.

Early Access Skeptic: They may play but are hesitant, waiting for updates. Motivation: To play a polished, complete game without excessive grind or missing content. Stance: no buy.

Balance and Combat Critic: They engage deeply with skill systems and combat, testing mechanics. Motivation: To see a well-balanced and polished game where skills and combat are meaningful. Stance: no buy.

Frequent comparisons to Melvor Idle: Many reviewers compare the game to Melvor Idle, noting it as a high standard for the genre. Some find this game inferior, while others prefer its combat and progression.

Demo version was better: Several reviewers feel the full release is worse than the demo, citing changes in balance and content. The demo version is often referenced as a point of comparison.

Early access status acknowledged: The game is recognized as being in Early Access, with reviewers noting it is a work in progress. This context is used to temper expectations about current issues.

Developer responsiveness mixed: Some reviewers praise the developer for active updates and listening to feedback, while others criticize them for focusing on reviews instead of fixes. This creates a mixed perception of developer engagement.

Potential for future improvements: Many believe the game's problems can be fixed through updates, and its future depends on developer decisions. This suggests a hopeful but cautious outlook.