Info about Mr. Prepper:

Official game description:
**Mr. Prepper** is about being prepared. You know something is wrong. The risk of a nuclear war is in the air and you need to get ready for what's coming. Struggle for your freedom and deal with the authoritarian government in this survival crafting game.  
\- **Build** an underground **shelter**;  
\- **Craft** machines and facilities that can keep you alive: farms, greenhouses, tools, vehicles, etc.;  
\- **Trade** with neighbors, give them what they need, get what is useful to you;  
\- **Explore** atmospheric locations, scavenge materials and items you could use;  
\- Make a **plan** – something radical needs to be done;  
\- Meet other rebellious characters, complete **quests** for them and help each other in the opposition to the regime;  
\- Outsmart the **secret police** – they don't want you to be prepared, they want you to stay controlled.  
**Mr. Prepper** is a guy living in a country which once had been the land of the free, but its new government has changed everything. Obey, stay in your lane, and love the President – otherwise, the secretive and all-powerful Agency will take interest in you. Mr. Prepper has decided to defy this and get out of this delusion of life. The only way for him to hide his plans and doings is to build an underground shelter and construct a machine that will help him get out. But for that, he will need materials, time, and secrecy. Help him succeed and break the status quo.  
**
*   Craft  
*   Trade  
*   Explore and scavenge  
*   Complete quests  
*   Survive  
*   Defy the government
**

Release date: Mar 18, 2021

Categories: Survival, Base Building, Crafting, Resource Management, Trading Simulation, Quest-driven Progression, Story-driven Gameplay, Single-player


- Hardware Profile:
  - Summary: Players on low-VRAM Windows machines report significant lag and lack of optimization, while those with 8-11GB VRAM experience crashes and overheating despite still recommending the game.
  - Sample size: 21 (4% coverage)
  - Audience skew: Review sample is mostly Windows-based.
  - Windows <8GB VRAM (negative, 12 reports): Game runs poorly with lag and optimization issues, especially late game.
  - Windows 8-11GB VRAM (mixed, 5 reports): Frequent crashes and overheating occur, but players still recommend the game overall.
  - Caveats: 21 of 542 reviews expose hardware metadata.; Review sample is mostly Windows-based.
Feature extractions:
- Community Price:
  - Community fair range: $10.00 - $15.00
  - Reasoning: Multiple reviews indicate that the $15 launch price is considered fair value for the content, while $20 is frequently judged overpriced. A few positive reviews accept $20, but the majority of sentiment points to $10–$15 as a reasonable base price range supported by sale prices like $5.99 being seen as a steal.
- Playtime Metrics:
  - Game completion: 100.0h
  - Story completion: 20.0h
  - Session length: N/A
  - Endgame: N/A
  - Reasoning: The 100-hour completion claim provides a clear gameCompletion metric. The 20-hour main quest claim is the most explicit storyCompletion value, though other reviews suggest 5-15 hours for a quick clear. The 50-hour no-rocket report shows that story completion extends well beyond the main quest if players diverge. No reliable sessionLength or endgame hours were found.
- Time-to-fun:
  - Summary: The game has a difficult early phase that resolves after a few hours, leading to an engaging mid-game period before potential late-game repetition.
  - Stance: Clicks after
  - Anchor: After a few hours of play
  - Time to anchor: 3h 0m
  - Friction: slow start; tedious tutorial; unintuitive mechanics; boring resource gathering; poor UI; slow progression pace
  - Unlock drivers: time investment; unlocking new areas; unlocking machines and recipes; progression rewards; accumulating money
  - Conditions: enjoy methodical micromanagement; tolerate slow start; willing to push through early game; appreciate gradual progression; not expecting action-heavy gameplay
- Player Archetypes:
  - Survival Management Enthusiast (sale)
    - Motivation: Enjoyment of methodical base building, resource management, and crafting systems within a survival setting.
    - Playstyle: Methodically plans base layout, manages resources daily, optimizes routes for efficiency, and engages in crafting progression.
    - Experience: mixed
    - Purchase stance: sale
    - Labels: survival enthusiast
    - Reference games: Fallout Shelter; This War of Mine; Sheltered; Beholder; Beholder 2
  - Grind-Weary Player (no buy)
    - Motivation: Initially interested in the premise, but becomes discouraged by excessive grind and lack of variety.
    - Playstyle: Attempts to progress through objectives but encounters tedium from repetitive grinding and poorly balanced mechanics, often leading to frustration or abandonment.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: no buy
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: N/A
  - Achievement Hunter / Optimizer (sale)
    - Motivation: Drive to complete all achievements, speedrun, and optimize gameplay loops.
    - Playstyle: Focuses on completing achievements, optimizing game mechanics, and grinding efficiently to unlock every milestone.
    - Experience: familiar
    - Purchase stance: sale
    - Labels: achievement spam brain; speedrunner
    - 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:
- Gameplay is fun and addictive (weight 0.44): Players consistently report that the game is enjoyable, engaging, and addictive, with creative and relaxing gameplay. The high frequency of positive feedback indicates a strong overall satisfaction with the core experience.
- Difficulty balance is well-tuned (weight 0.1): Reviewers appreciate that the game strikes a good balance between challenge and relaxation, neither too hard nor too easy. This makes it accessible while still offering depth.
- Story is engaging and charming (weight 0.1): The storyline is described as enjoyable, captivating, and entertaining, with a charming ending. Players find the narrative compelling and a key part of the experience.
- Content variety and depth (weight 0.1): The game offers many different ways to play, with numerous details, tasks, and features. a large amount of content keeps players engaged and provides long-term value.
- Strong value for money (weight 0.09): Many players feel the game is worth its price, especially when discounted. It provides a worthwhile experience that justifies purchase.
- Relaxing and low-pressure experience (weight 0.08): The game can be played calmly, with a laid-back style and minimal punishment. This makes it appealing to those seeking a relaxing gaming session.
- Deep crafting system (weight 0.08): A detailed and thoughtful crafting system is praised, offering depth and complexity. Players appreciate the options and satisfaction from crafting.
- Appealing game concept (weight 0.08): The overall concept is praised as cool, great, and appealing with significant potential. This foundational appeal attracts players to the game.
- Easy to learn mechanics (weight 0.07): The game is simple to control and easy to learn, though it still offers mastery for experienced players. This lowers the entry barrier.
- Pleasant visual style (weight 0.07): The game has a visually pleasing aesthetic that is often compared favorably to other titles. Its graphics style is considered pleasant.
- Good game length balance (weight 0.05): The game length is considered well-balanced, neither too long nor too short, and offers long-lasting gameplay. This keeps the player engaged without overstaying.
- Satisfying resource management (weight 0.05): Resource management is a praised system that is both great and satisfying. Players enjoy this aspect of the gameplay.
- Immersion and replayability (weight 0.05): The game has intriguing aspects that make players want to return and continue playing. It is immersive and provides a strong desire to explore more.
- Bunker building feature (weight 0.05): Players can build a nice bunker under their house, which is a fun feature. This adds an interesting element to the game.
- Good graphics quality (weight 0.05): The graphics are described as pleasant, unique, and very good. The well-drawn graphic style enhances the overall experience.
- Enjoyable base building (weight 0.05): Base building is considered enjoyable and fun, providing a creative outlet for players. This feature contributes to the overall fun.
- Constant engaging activities (weight 0.05): The game constantly provides activities and smooth flow, making it addictive and encouraging daily play. This keeps the player hooked over time.
- Unique and creative premise (weight 0.05): The game stands out with a fairly unique premise and concept, offering an experience that is hard to find elsewhere. This uniqueness adds to its appeal.

Common complaints:
- Excessive grinding required (weight 0.21): Players consistently report that the game demands excessive grinding, making progression feel tedious and time-consuming. The repetitive nature of grinding is especially noticeable in the early hours and late game, leading to frustration.
- Clunky and frustrating controls (weight 0.21): Controls are widely criticized as clunky, unresponsive, and difficult to master. Specific issues include cumbersome navigation and a one-click-at-a-time system that hampers gameplay fluidity.
- Boring and dull gameplay (weight 0.17): Many reviews describe the game as boring, slow, and unengaging, with low replayability. The lack of excitement and stimulation makes it difficult for players to stay interested.
- Linear story lacks depth (weight 0.14): The story is very linear, offering no side missions and minimal freedom, which reduces replayability and depth. Players find the narrative uninteresting and the game's structure too restricted.
- Repetitive gameplay patterns (weight 0.14): Players note that the game becomes highly repetitive over time, with later stages involving doing the same three activities for hours. This repetition extends to running, clicking, and other actions, contributing to player fatigue.
- Poor user interface design (weight 0.12): The UI is described as ugly, clunky, and unintuitive, causing eye strain and inconvenience. Users find the interface difficult to navigate, which negatively impacts the overall experience.
- Slow start and pacing issues (weight 0.11): The game's opening hours are slow and tedious, with players doubting their purchase due to the lackluster beginning. This slow start is a common complaint that affects the initial impression.
- Incomplete and unpolished game (weight 0.08): The game is seen as unfinished, with many rough edges and underdeveloped elements. A lack of polish and incomplete features reduce its appeal and leave a negative impression.
- Frequent loading screens (weight 0.07): The game suffers from many loading screens that appear every few minutes, and the loading times are slow. This interrupts gameplay flow and contributes to the overall tedium.
- Lacks manual save and pause (weight 0.05): Players are unable to manually save or pause the game; saving only occurs automatically when the character sleeps at night. This forces players to adhere to a specific schedule and prevents flexible play sessions.
- Lacks atmosphere and soul (weight 0.05): The game fails to create tension or atmosphere, and players say it lacks soul. The overall feel is missing, making the game feel flat and uninspired.
- Limited and weak tech tree (weight 0.05): The tech tree is short and weak, offering limited progression options for players. This limits depth and reduces long-term engagement.

Gameplay feedback:
- Survival genre with management (weight 0.23): The game is widely recognized as a survival simulation and management title, featuring mechanics like food, stamina, and resource scarcity. Players navigate a dystopian world as a prepper, balancing survival tasks with story-driven objectives.
- Resource management and gathering (weight 0.2): A core gameplay loop involves gathering and managing resources such as electricity, fuel, food, and tools. Players collect materials from multiple locations like forests, mines, and deserts, which fuels progression.
- Base building mechanics (weight 0.18): Base building is a central feature, allowing players to construct and upgrade their shelter. This includes both the physical structure and functional modules that support survival.
- Detailed bunker construction (weight 0.17): A major component is constructing and customizing an underground bunker, with room-by-room building and development. Players can arrange floors and systems to create a functional living space.
- Farming for food production (weight 0.16): Farming is integral, involving crop cultivation, resource collection, and processing. It serves as a steady source of food and materials, often enhanced by automation and management systems.
- Trading and market system (weight 0.14): The game includes a trading and barter system, allowing players to exchange items and resources via a market or mail order. This facilitates acquiring rare materials and fosters a connected world.
- Story-driven campaign (weight 0.13): Despite being labeled a survival game, the main focus is narrative progression, with a main quest line and story campaign. Players follow a structured journey rather than pure sandbox play.
- Quest-based progression (weight 0.12): Progress is heavily tied to completing quests, which involve finding objects, interacting with the environment, and solving puzzles. Quests gate content and unlock new features.
- Side-scrolling survival crafting (weight 0.12): The gameplay is presented in a side-scrolling view, blending survival, crafting, and base-building. This perspective is common in games like This War of Mine, providing a unique feel.
- Automation mechanics (weight 0.12): The game includes automation systems for farming, production, and resource collection. Late-game automation helps streamline repetitive tasks and manage complex operations.
- Multi-zone exploration (weight 0.12): Players explore distinct zones like forests, mines, and deserts, each offering unique resources and challenges. This variation encourages strategic planning and resource allocation.
- Plant growth and watering (weight 0.12): Farming focuses on plant growth, requiring watering and light management. Automated watering systems reduce the burden of manual care.
- Rocket construction goal (weight 0.12): The core objective is to build and launch a rocket to escape the dystopian town. This mission provides long-term motivation and ties to the main storyline.
- Crafting with recipes (weight 0.11): A detailed crafting system uses recipes to create items, tools, and food. Crafting is essential for progression and player customization.
- Similarities to This War of Mine (weight 0.1): The game is often compared to This War of Mine for its side-scrolling, shelter management, and survival atmosphere. It uses a similar perspective but with different themes and mechanics.
- Scavenge and craft loop (weight 0.1): The loop revolves around collecting raw materials and crafting useful items, selling or using them. Scavenging is a key way to obtain resources and expand gameplay.
- Underground bunker personalization (weight 0.09): Players build a multi-story underground bunker under the house, preparing for nuclear explosion. The bunker's depth and layout are up to player choice.
- Bunker management game (weight 0.09): Beyond survival, the game emphasizes serious bunker management, including energy maintenance and resource allocation. It is a management-heavy simulation.
- Day cycle and calendar (weight 0.09): The game operates on in-game days, with a day/night cycle and calendar. This time system affects resource availability, scheduling, and sleep-saving.

Performance notes:
- Frequent crashes and freezes (weight 0.18): Multiple reports indicate the game crashes, freezes, or exits unexpectedly, sometimes completely freezing the machine or causing progress loss. These crashes can occur during gameplay, loading screens, or save file loading.
- High hardware demands (weight 0.1): Despite simple gameplay, the game is not well optimized and demands high system resources, overheating graphics cards and causing shutdowns on some systems. Players report high CPU and GPU usage, even at low settings.
- Loading screens dominate gameplay (weight 0.09): On weak hardware, loading screens appear more often than actual gameplay, leading to frequent and slow loading. Players describe waiting through many loading screens, which significantly hampers the experience.
- Late-game building lags (weight 0.08): When building many structures, crafting with upgrades, or during late-game progression, the game becomes very laggy and resource-intensive, sometimes dropping to single-digit frame rates. This affects endgame content significantly.
- DLC causes performance drops (weight 0.07): Specific DLCs, such as 'Скотный двор' and Uranium Plan DLC, cause permanent FPS drops and crashes. Players report reduced frame rates and instability when using these expansions.
- Positive performance on low-end PCs (weight 0.04): A few players report the game runs smoothly on not-top-of-the-line machines, with no lag and low PC requirements. This suggests performance varies greatly depending on hardware and configurations.
- Mac compatibility issues (weight 0.02): The game fails to run on Mac computers by the time players reach the farm, indicating a serious compatibility problem for Mac users. This prevents some players from progressing beyond early stages.

Recommendations:
- Buy only on sale (weight 0.19): A common recommendation is to wait for a sale or discount before buying, as the game is considered only worth the price when discounted. Some reviewers suggest waiting for a good sale or picking it up at a low price point.
- Not recommended by reviewers (weight 0.18): Multiple reviewers advise against purchasing the game, citing issues such as bad decisions, hidden rules, crashes, or lack of content. The general sentiment is negative, with some stating they cannot recommend the game.
- DLC not essential (weight 0.11): Some reviewers say that buying the DLCs is not essential, though a few recommend them for decoration or extra features. The DLC content is not considered necessary for the main experience.
- Recommended for survival fans (weight 0.1): The game is recommended for fans of survival games, with some suggesting it is strongly recommended if they can tolerate drawbacks. The resource gathering and base building aspects are highlighted.
- Not for grind haters (weight 0.1): The game involves heavy grinding, and reviewers point out that it is not suitable for those who dislike grinding or expect a story-oriented game. It is recommended for players who don't mind or enjoy grinding.
- For base building fans (weight 0.09): The game is recommended for players who enjoy base building and resource grinding, as well as constructing walls and managing resources. This suggests a focus on construction and management mechanics.
- Recommend to specific audiences (weight 0.08): The game is recommended to niche audiences such as those who like trading, farming, building secret projects, and being searched by the government. It is also good for people who want to feel productive, paranoid, and powerful.
- Try prologue or demo (weight 0.05): A few reviewers recommend trying the prologue or demo to see if the game suits you, as the initial hours may be risky. This suggests uncertainty about the game's fit for some players.
- Micromanagement heavy (weight 0.05): Reviewers note that the game involves heavy micromanagement, which may be a downside for some players. It is recommended for those who enjoy management and planning, but not for those wanting direct action.
- Not for everyone (weight 0.05): Reviewers note that the game is not for everyone, with some saying it may be a good fit for those who think they'd enjoy it. It has niche appeal and may not suit general players.
- Short days and difficulty (weight 0.05): Some reviewers mention that the game has short days and may be punishing, and others advise using an always-run option. They also recommend reading a beginner guide to avoid frustration.
- For patient players only (weight 0.05): The game is recommended only for patient players who like survival and building, as it requires long-term progression and may not suit those seeking a quick experience. Some reviewers see it as a slow burn.
- Not for doomsday theme (weight 0.04): Some reviewers are disappointed that the game does not deliver on its doomsday/nuclear shelter theme. They caution that players attracted by that theme may be let down by the actual gameplay.
- Technical issues on Mac (weight 0.04): Reviewers warn to avoid the game on Mac due to issues, and one mentions crashes on that platform. This is an important platform-specific warning for potential buyers.
- Language option positive (weight 0.03): One reviewer appreciates the Japanese language mode, and another values the game's positive joke and tone. These small features add to the game's appeal for certain audiences.
- Not for physical disability (weight 0.02): The game involves quick-time events that could be challenging for players with physical disabilities. As a result, reviewers do not recommend it for such players due to accessibility issues.

Other player notes:
- DLC presence and impact (weight 0.4): Players frequently mention the game's DLCs, including Animal Farm and Project Uranium, with some saying they add content and narrative but others feeling they are unfinished or required. The DLCs are a major topic, affecting both perceived value and gameplay experience.
- Gameplay uniqueness and theme (weight 0.2): The game stands out for its unique theme and gameplay, combining strategy-survival with political satire and conspiracy elements, like escaping government and building a bunker. This is often seen as a positive differentiator.
- Translation and localization issues (weight 0.19): Multiple reviews mention translation problems, including AI-translated text, errors, and incomplete localizations, especially for Japanese and Korean. However, some note that certain translations, like Russian, are complete, and a Japanese bug was fixed.
- Comparison to Fallout Shelter (weight 0.17): Many reviews compare the game to Fallout Shelter, noting differences in user input, activities, and control of a single character. This comparison is a common reference point for describing the game's mechanics and scope.
- Game length variability (weight 0.17): Reviews report a wide range of completion times, from 5 to 100 hours, with most mentioning 15-30 hours. The content length is seen as moderate, but some note it becomes repetitive after a certain point.
- Pricing and sales (weight 0.14): Players mention purchasing the game on sale or at a discount, and some criticize the price as too high for the content. Fair pricing on sale is a common positive point.
- Comparison to This War of Mine (weight 0.14): Several reviewers compare the game to This War of Mine, with opinions split: some say it's a reskin with reduced content, while others note differences in survival challenges and level design. Pricing is also compared unfavorably by some.
- Indie studio and quality (weight 0.12): Reviews often mention that the game is from a small indie studio, describing it as fun and functional, with the main game being higher quality than its DLCs. This context is used to frame both expectations and praise.
- Achievement system concerns (weight 0.12): Feedback highlights issues with achievements, including low completion rates and a patch that automatically granted achievements, which some see as a scam. Other achievements are for specific challenges.
- Post-game and replayability (weight 0.1): Feedback notes that the game has low replayability, lacks endgame content, and can be completed in a single playthrough, though there is a second playthrough mode and achievements that encourage replay.
- Publisher and developer (weight 0.09): The game is identified as being published by PlayWay S.A. and developed by Rejected Games, with players noting the developer responds to bugs but also focuses on DLCs over polishing the base game.
- Technical performance issues (weight 0.08): Some reviews report optimization problems and resource-intensive requirements, while others note that initial performance issues were patched. This is a mixed area of feedback.
- Demo and prologue experience (weight 0.08): Players compare the demo or prologue to the full game, with some saying the demo is more fun and loses interesting content in the full version. The demo is available for free.
- Development history and updates (weight 0.08): Players note the game has been in development for 5 years and has been around long with content updates, but one update was a repost. This history affects expectations.
- Sequel expectations (weight 0.07): Some players express hope for a sequel, including as an FPS, with more customization and quality-of-life features. This suggests the game's premise has potential but leaves room for improvement.
- Save system and mechanics (weight 0.05): Reviews mention the save system is tied to sleeping in a bed, and some note the lack of auto-save for instant saving. This affects the gameplay flow.
- Platform-specific support (weight 0.05): There are specific mentions of Mac platform support issues, while other localizations are complete. This affects a subset of players.
- Survival mode absence (weight 0.04): Some players note that the game lacks a survival mode, which is a requested feature. This is a specific gap in gameplay options.
- Mobile clone perception (weight 0.04): The game is noted as intentionally looking like a mobile clone but not a mobile port, and reviews clarify it's not from mobile, addressing a common assumption.

Emotions:
- Frustration (weight 0.22): Players expressed frustration due to numerous bugs, crashes, and freezes that cause loss of progress and force reloads. The gameplay is further hampered by clunky controls, poor UI, and a grindy, repetitive loop that makes progression feel tedious and unintuitive. The lack of clear guidance and specific technical issues, like overheating and memory overflow, compound the overall sense of being stuck and unable to enjoy the experience.
- Disappointment (weight 0.1): The primary cause of disappointment is that the game does not fulfill its advertised premise of a deep, open-ended, post-apocalyptic bunker survival experience. Instead, it offers a linear story that often ends abruptly, with systems that feel basic, shallow, and lacking in meaningful depth or customization. This is further compounded by several bugs, poor translations, and a lack of developer support, leading to a sense of wasted potential.
- Enjoyment (weight 0.09): Players found enjoyment in the core gameplay loops of base-building, crafting, and resource management, which are described as satisfying and fun, particularly in the early and mid-game. The engaging story, quirky characters, and the unique fantasy of living a double life as a prepper added significant charm and entertainment value. The game's calm, problem-solving nature proved to be a good way to pass the time and was often praised for being more engaging than expected.
- Satisfaction (weight 0.07): Satisfaction was derived from the rewarding feeling of designing and expanding an underground shelter, leading to a self-sufficient bunker with complex, functional systems. The game's steady sense of progression, engaging resource management, and balanced challenges provided a pleasant and motivating experience. A sense of accomplishment from completing a well-made and interesting game, which offered good value, also contributed to this feeling.
- Boredom (weight 0.05): A major cause of boredom was the game's highly repetitive nature, which becomes particularly noticeable in the late game, often described as a grind with a lack of new content. The gameplay is dominated by tedious, monotonous tasks such as resource gathering and micromanagement, which, combined with a slow pace and lengthy tutorial, led to a loss of engagement. A lack of variety and challenge, along with long and uninteresting story segments, also contributed to the feeling of the game becoming a slog.
- Frustrated (weight 0.04): This emotion was heavily driven by technical issues, including frequent bugs, crashes, and game freezes that caused a loss of progress, as well as poor optimization that led to lag, especially in the late game. The frustrating experience was further compounded by clunky and unresponsive controls, poor UI, and a significant amount of grinding required. Many players also felt the game failed to meet their expectations of being a spiritual successor to 'This War of Mine', adding to their frustration.
- Disappointed (weight 0.04): A central theme was the game's deviation from the expected post-apocalyptic survival genre, focusing instead on a storyline about earning money and building a rocket rather than an immersive survival. The game is also criticized for having very low replay value, a limited tech tree, and a lack of meaningful content, especially given its price. This feeling was exacerbated by a perceived lack of long-term fixes and the story being padded with 'bloated' content.
- Excitement (weight 0.03): Excitement was generated by the game's surprising and engaging plot twists, as well as a tense and compelling gameplay loop centered on the paranoia mechanic and the risk of being caught by inspectors. The strong premise, an addictive core loop of exploration, crafting, and preparation, and the promise of building and fully preparing a bunker contributed to a sense of high anticipation. Many players were also excited by the fact that the game's quality far exceeded their initial expectations.
- Interest (weight 0.02): The primary source of interest was the game's unique and engaging blend of themes, where players must manage a base, forage for resources, and maintain appearances for an inspecting government agent. This constant juggling of tasks, alongside a compelling and goofy storyline, was able to keep the routine engaging. The underlying intrigue of the game's premise and story captured players, offering a unique feel not easily found in other games.
- Annoyance (weight 0.02): A key source of annoyance is the lack of a manual save feature and issues with inventory management, which make progression and item sorting difficult. The player experience is also hindered by a low framerate, numerous loading screens, and a slow pace that is aggravated by constant napping. These issues, along with UI problems that prevent interaction, and the irritating sound effects, contribute to a sense of being held back by the game's design and technical limitations.
- Amusement (weight 0.01): Amusement came primarily from the game's successful and unique blend of dark, dystopian themes with a strong undercurrent of humor. Players found genuine comedy in the absurdity of situations, such as hiding cabbages and a generator from an inspector or building a nuclear reactor in a basement. The game's parodic and self-aware tone, including the funny and relatable way the character moves and its parodies of real-world locations, provided a lighthearted, comedic layer to the gameplay.
- Confusion (weight 0.01): A major cause of confusion is the lack of a clear story and protagonist motivation, leaving players unsure of the narrative purpose. This is compounded by poor quest guidance, which leaves players bewildered about how to find items or complete objectives. The game's sudden tonal and gameplay shift from building a bunker to escaping on a rocket also added to the confusion, leaving players wondering what the ultimate goal was.
- Anger (weight 0.01): A significant trigger for anger was encountering game-breaking bugs that cause the game to become unplayable or to not save progress, especially when these bugs remain unfixed. The inability to continue building a bunker after finishing the scenario and the loss of hours of progress due to unreliable saves were also major points of anger. This was further fueled by design choices like the poorly balanced zombie tower defense minigame, poor voice acting, and a sense that the player's time was not respected.
- Annoyed (weight 0.01): The player's annoyance was primarily caused by a painful and awkward tutorial that makes a poor first impression, and overall clunky gameplay. Specific late-game activities, such as daily mining trips, are seen as tedious, and the recipe interface is poorly designed, requiring cumbersome mouse hovers. Bugs that lead to a loss of progress and items, as well as a hint system that is hard to see, further contributed to the frustration and a sense of being disrespected.
- Appreciation (weight 0.01): This positive feeling stems from an appreciation for the game's well-adapted simple music, which effectively supports the mood, and the thoughtful design of a short day cycle that is convenient for play in short sessions. Players value the originality of the indie concept and the developers' commitment, evidenced by realistic and achievable achievements and the inclusion of Russian localization. The unique gameplay friction is praised as a rare quality in modern games.
- Bored (weight 0.01): Boredom is a direct result of the game's monotonous and repetitive core loop, which often involves running and clicking without any significant variety. The sense of tediousness is heightened by the daily routine of buying, selling, and setting traps, which lacks a sense of achievement. The large amounts of end-game text and the quick onset of repetition caused the experience to become dull and uninteresting within a short period of time.
- Engagement (weight 0.01): The player's engagement is fueled by the strategic planning required for both the current and next day, considering factors like agent arrivals and weather, and the addictive nature of the gameplay loop. The strong narrative, which kept the player motivated with a desire for a sequel, and the constant tension of preparing a bunker while hiding from the agent, were key factors. The game's captivating story and atmosphere successfully drew the player into its world.
- Satisfied (weight 0.01): Satisfaction is derived from the game meeting and even exceeding the player's expectations, especially with the addition of the DLCs, which are praised for being well-balanced and adding to the game's longevity. The sense of rewarding progression, watching a player's underground base expand, and the successful farming of crops and selling ores contribute to this feeling. The game is considered a good overall experience with positive reviews for its graphics, story, and gameplay.
- Happy (weight 0.01): The feeling of happiness is tied to the game's high replayability and the player's eagerness to continue playing. Positive feelings are also derived from an appreciation of the story and quests, and the enjoyment found in discovering efficient resource and money farming strategies. The game's balanced difficulty and engaging systems lead to a rewarding and enjoyable experience that makes the player happy.
- Admiration (weight 0.01): Admiration for the game stems from its well-crafted nature, with players calling it an excellent and relevant project and a 'gem' with a charming and compelling experience. The game is praised for being immersive and wonderful, with its ability to evoke feelings similar to classic adventure games. Some players rate it as one of the best they have ever played, highlighting its high quality and the skill of its design.}