Info about Garshasp: Temple of the Dragon:

Official game description:
The mighty mythological hero, Garshasp, travels into distant lands in search for the secrets hidden in the temple of the dragon, unaware of the hidden dangers and creatures awaiting him in the cursed lands.  
You play as the mighty Garshasp in this hack and slash expansion pack for the original “Garshasp: The Monster Slayer” game taking place before the original story.
Key features
------------
*   Deep hack and slash combat system with various combo moves  
*   Cinematic in-game camera following the epic journey  
*   Fantasy mythological world filled with ferocious monsters from ancient literature and Persian Mythology  
*   Epic environments  
*   Mythology based story

Release date: Sep 24, 2012

Categories: Hack and Slash, Action-Adventure, Third-Person Action, Fantasy, Persian Mythology, Platforming, Puzzle Solving, Cinematic Presentation

Feature scans:
- Steam Deck: score 50; verdict: Playable with friction; tinkering or workarounds may be needed; summary: The reviewed feedback shows a playable but friction-heavy experience on Steam Deck. The strongest issues are rigid controls and poor camera behavior, followed by missing PC-side resolution and control-remapping options and in-game bugs. Positive evidence is limited but notable: controller support is praised as a highlight, suggesting the game can be played with a gamepad. No evidence was found for Proton Experimental toggling, touchscreen launcher navigation, anti-cheat failures, unreadable UI, or launch failure, so the score remains in the tinkering/friction band rather than the broken band.

- Hardware Profile: No data
Feature extractions:
- Community Price:
  - Community fair range: $1.00 - $3.00
  - Reasoning: The reviews strongly reject the roughly $5 asking price as unreasonable and note that the game is only acceptable when obtained in a $1 bundle. The very short completion time is cited as poor value, while even the positive review only justifies the game after 4 hours of play. This suggests the community fair base-game price is well below $5, likely in the $1-$3 range.
- Playtime Metrics:
  - Game completion: 2.0h
  - Story completion: 2.0h
  - Session length: 1.0h
  - Endgame: 0.7h
  - Reasoning: Completion reports cluster around 2 hours: one review says 1.5–2 hours to beat, another says 2.5 hours total, and another says 1 hour 40 minutes. Because the game is a short linear story-driven brawler, these same reports indicate story completion at roughly 2 hours. Endgame is reported as the final boss taking more than half an hour in one review and about 40 minutes in a translated review, so endgame is about 0.67 hours. Session length is supported by a reviewer who had only played for about an hour; I set sessionLength to about 1 hour. Confidence is moderate because completion times vary and session evidence is limited.
- Time-to-fun:
  - Summary: Reviews report tedium, bad camera angles, and repetitive combat from the start, with only fleeting positive moments; no evidence shows a reliable point where the game becomes fun.
  - Stance: Never clicks
  - Anchor: N/A
  - Time to anchor: N/A
  - Friction: Bad camera angles with no camera control; Boring story and voice acting; Repetitive and occasionally frustrating experience; Tedious tasks; Invincible mechanic and spamming A to kill bosses becomes boring
  - Unlock drivers: N/A
  - Conditions: N/A
- Player Archetypes:
  - Deep-Sale Bundle Scavenger (deep sale)
    - Motivation: Cheap, low-risk entertainment: picking up short action games only when they cost almost nothing in a bundle or a steep discount.
    - Playstyle: Buys in bundles or waits for 90%+ discounts, samples the game for an hour or two, judges it instantly, and moves on without finishing or chasing completion.
    - Experience: mixed
    - Purchase stance: deep sale
    - Labels: N/A
    - Reference games: Sally Face
  - Hack-and-Slash Genre Loyalist (buy)
    - Motivation: Getting more combo-driven action in a familiar mold and following this series the same way they followed its inspirations.
    - Playstyle: Plays straight through the campaign in a few hours, focuses on combo strings and enemy encounters, and tolerates bugs, short length, and rough presentation as long as the action core works.
    - Experience: veteran
    - Purchase stance: buy
    - Labels: die-hard Castlevania fan
    - Reference games: Castlevania: Lords of Shadow; Garshasp
  - Disappointed Sequel Critic (no buy)
    - Motivation: Measuring whether the sequel lives up to the previous game and delivers polished, substantial content.
    - Playstyle: Rushes the campaign to completion in about a hundred minutes, then judges camera, voice acting, puzzles, story, and length against the predecessor.
    - Experience: familiar
    - Purchase stance: no buy
    - 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:
- Fun despite flaws (weight 0.49): Many reviewers find the game fun despite its flaws, with some calling it a guilty pleasure or enjoyable for what it is. It is often described as fun and quite enjoyable, even if not perfect.
- Puzzles improved from predecessor (weight 0.25): Reviewers note that the puzzle element is slightly increased compared to the first game, with more puzzles and some interesting logic puzzles. The puzzles are appreciated for requiring thought and varying gameplay.
- Good graphics and environments (weight 0.24): Graphics are considered good for its time, with cool environments reminiscent of Ico and a consistent graphical style. The art and animation are also praised.
- Controls and gamepad support (weight 0.24): The game controls are generally okay or decent, with combos and tight controls. However, there are some issues with button prompts, and playing with a gamepad improves playability.
- Fun combat praised (weight 0.23): Many reviewers highlight combat as the best part of the game, calling it enjoyable and fun. The combat engine, combos, and sword moves are specifically mentioned as strengths.
- Improved over first game (weight 0.22): The sequel is seen as more polished, better paced, and more confident than the first game. It adds more dialogues, notes, collectibles, and new enemies, making it a superior experience.
- Story and theme engaging (weight 0.22): The game has a good or decent story with a rich deep storyline inspired by actual mythology, and a compelling concept with a cultural backdrop different from common mythologies. The thematic direction and distinct identity are noted.
- Varied gameplay elements (weight 0.19): The game tries to vary gameplay with different puzzles, platformy bits, and non-stop action. The level design is good and keeps the linear game interesting by never moving through the same path twice.
- Budget title worth it (weight 0.15): Reviewers appreciate the game as a budget title, feeling it is worth the purchase and more than happy with it. It is often described as a good value for the price.
- Inspired by other games (weight 0.1): The game contains plenty of references from other games and is reminiscent of Prince of Persia. It also reminds of Ico on PS2 in terms of environments.
- Music and audio mixed (weight 0.09): The music is described as okay, with the credits music being a highlight for some. Voice acting is top-notch according to one reviewer.
- Character and enemy design (weight 0.09): Somewhat interesting monsters and new enemies help keep fights interesting. Garshasp's hair is always waving around, which is a minor visual quirk.
- Developer passion evident (weight 0.08): The developer actually played his own game, and the initiative of the creator is noticeable. Dead Mage's cool logo and name when the game starts are also mentioned.
- Humor from bad cutscenes (weight 0.07): The game is very funny due to bad cutscenes and an accidentally hilarious intro. This unintended humor adds to the experience for some players.
- Atmosphere is best aspect (weight 0.07): For some, the atmosphere is the best aspect of the game, with forest and castle settings contributing to a strong mood.
- Cinematic presentation (weight 0.04): The game has a more cinematic presentation compared to its predecessor, enhancing the overall experience.
- Nice dragon at the end (weight 0.03): The dragon at the end is specifically mentioned as a nice touch, adding a memorable finale.
- Teaches jumping mechanics (weight 0.03): The game teaches jumping out of obstacles, which is a basic platforming skill integrated into the gameplay.

Common complaints:
- Poor camera controls and angles (weight 0.45): The camera system is widely panned for being unresponsive, poorly positioned, and lacking mouse-look. Many players report no ability to control the camera manually.
- Extremely short game length (weight 0.34): The game can be completed in under two hours, with some finishing in about an hour. This is far shorter than expected and even shorter than the first game.
- Bugs, glitches, and crashes (weight 0.31): Players encounter numerous bugs, glitches, and random crashes during gameplay. Some characters get stuck in objects, and overall stability is poor.
- Terrible voice acting quality (weight 0.27): Players widely report that the voice acting is awful and ruins immersion. Many note it sounds computer-generated or poorly synced with cutscenes.
- Bad controls and sluggish combat (weight 0.25): Controls are described as bad, mediocre, or horrendous. Combat feels clunky due to unresponsive movement and attack mechanics.
- Low framerate and poor performance (weight 0.23): Framerates are miserable, with frequent drops and struggle to reach 60 fps even on high-end PCs. The game often runs at 15-25 fps regardless of settings.
- Overall poor game quality (weight 0.17): Reviewers describe the game as awful, badly made, and an insult to players. Gameplay is often called trash and not worth playing.
- Annoying and drawn-out final boss (weight 0.16): The final boss fight is described as annoying, needlessly drawn out, and not enjoyable. There is effectively only one boss with zero difficulty.
- Bad cutscenes and writing (weight 0.14): Cutscenes are frequently described as hilariously bad, thrown together, and a freak show. The writing and dialogue are heavily criticized.
- Feels like a demo or beta (weight 0.14): Players say the game feels like an unfinished demo or beta rather than a full release. It gives the impression of an old tech demo with bad design.
- Not worth the price (weight 0.08): Many feel the game is not worth the asking price, calling it a cheap product. The short length and poor quality contribute to this sentiment.
- Only one weapon available (weight 0.08): The game offers only a single weapon type, severely limiting combat variety. This contributes to repetitive and shallow gameplay.
- Lack of resolution options (weight 0.08): Players complain about the inability to change the resolution. This limits accessibility and customization for different setups.
- Minimal and uninteresting story (weight 0.08): The story is criticized for being minimal and lacking interest. It fails to engage players or provide a compelling narrative.

Gameplay feedback:
- Action-Adventure Platforming Combat Mix (weight 0.34): The game is repeatedly described as an action-adventure title blending platforming, combat, and puzzle elements. Some also mention on-rails sections and comparisons to God of War.
- Garshasp Sequel Prequel Expansion (weight 0.24): Clusters indicate this is a sequel or prequel-addon to Garshasp: The Monster Slayer, with a standalone DLC taking place before the original. It is part of the Garshasp franchise.
- Hack-and-Slash Combat Style (weight 0.22): Combat is described as hack-and-slash with rolling mechanics, similar to brawlers. The game is often labeled a third-person action brawler.
- Simple Puzzles Noted (weight 0.18): Puzzles are described as very simple or varying but simple, including spike floors and towers. They are present but lack complexity.
- Play as Persian Warrior Garshasp (weight 0.08): The player controls the mythological hero Garshasp, a Persian warrior. This character-driven perspective is a key aspect.
- Orb-Based Health and XP (weight 0.08): Blue orbs restore health, red orbs grant XP, and green orbs increase max health. This system is noted in multiple reviews.
- Camera and Difficulty Challenges (weight 0.08): Gameplay includes combat, movement options, and camera angles that contribute to difficulty. These elements are frequently mentioned together.
- Final Boss Annoying Gimmick (weight 0.07): The final boss fight is considered annoying but beatable, with some calling it a gimmick fight. This feedback highlights a negative but manageable conclusion.

Performance notes:
- Severe framerate and optimization issues (weight 0.3): Players consistently report very low framerates, severe FPS drops, and poor optimization regardless of settings or hardware. Examples include 15-25 fps, 21 fps on low-end graphics, and struggles for 60 fps on a beast PC.
- PhysX installation and launch problems (weight 0.11): The game does not start after installation without repairing the PhysX Legacy Patch, and some reviewers note it requires PhysX installed to launch. One reviewer reported no crashes after a fix.
- Poor performance at low settings (weight 0.08): Several reviewers note laggy performance even on low settings and performance drops under 30 FPS outside action sequences. This suggests optimization does not scale well with lower settings.
- Trojan found in executable (weight 0.05): A reviewer reports that executable files contain a Trojan. This is a serious security concern.
- Long loading times (weight 0.04): One reviewer mentions long loading times as an issue. This can contribute to overall poor user experience.
- Buggy on low-end hardware (weight 0.04): One reviewer notes the game is buggy on low-end hardware. This aligns with other reports of poor performance on such systems.
- Anti-aliasing hurts performance (weight 0.04): One reviewer specifically reports that enabling anti-aliasing makes performance worse. This is a specific but notable optimization issue.
- Worse framerates noted (weight 0.04): One reviewer simply states worse framerates, likely comparing to expectations or previous experiences. This reinforces the widespread framerate complaints.
- First part performance comparison (weight 0.04): One reviewer notes that the first part ran at 20-60 fps regardless of settings, implying the current game performs worse. This provides a relative benchmark.

Recommendations:
- General negative recommendation (weight 0.51): Many players cannot recommend the game and advise avoiding it entirely. The feedback consistently expresses strong dissatisfaction.
- Purchase only at deep discount (weight 0.32): A recurring theme is that the game is only worth buying at a very low price or during a deep sale. Several specify thresholds like under $1 or 0.10€.
- Playable under specific conditions (weight 0.18): Some suggest playing only if you get it for free, in a bundle, or if you are very bored, high, or drunk. Others mention performance depends on having a decent PC.
- Mixed recommendation for fans (weight 0.17): Recommendations are conditional, aimed at those who liked the first game or are strongly attached to the series. These players might enjoy it on sale but should not expect major improvements.
- Positive experiences exist (weight 0.16): A minority found the game totally worth it and recommend it, sometimes citing the story or creator's initiative. Some suggest checking it out if on a budget.
- Niche appeal for certain players (weight 0.07): The game may appeal to those interested in lesser-known mythological settings or experimental action titles, or as a tribute to classic slashers, provided expectations are kept in check.
- Advise deleting from library (weight 0.04): One user specifically advises deleting local content and removing the game from the library, indicating a strong negative stance.
- Sarcastic alternative suggestion (weight 0.03): One review humorously suggests that buying gum and blowing balloons would be more fun than spending money on this game.

Other player notes:
- Extremely short game length (weight 0.49): Many reviewers report the game can be completed in roughly 1.5 to 3 hours, with some finishing it in under 2 hours. This makes it far shorter than the previous game in the series and the original Garshasp.
- Worse than previous Garshasp (weight 0.32): Compared to the first Garshasp game, this one is considered worse, falling short in depth and length. Reviewers find it sloppier and less confident, noting that the predecessor was not that bad despite its flaws.
- Unfavorable God of War comparisons (weight 0.28): The game is repeatedly compared to God of War as a bad imitation or clone, often described as an awful version with all positive aspects removed. Reviewers question the point of copying an already exhausted franchise and call it a God of War for those who cannot afford it.
- Low price and bundle availability (weight 0.24): The game is often sold at a very low price, such as in a $1 bundle or at a discount of 3TL. Some reviewers note it costs around $5 USD, which is considered a farcical price for the quality.
- Developed by Dead Mage (weight 0.19): The game is developed by Dead Mage, a small Iranian studio, and published by Digital Dragon. It is noted as the second project from this studio and a cheap indie first effort.
- Comparisons to other action games (weight 0.18): Reviewers compare it to Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Dark Souls, Tomb Raider, Shadowman, Oblivion, and Runescape, generally finding it far worse. These comparisons highlight its shortcomings in the action-adventure genre.
- Compared to Prince of Persia (weight 0.15): The game is frequently compared to Prince of Persia as a genre benchmark, but described as a poor man's version. Reviewers suggest the original Prince of Persia games are better alternatives in the same genre.
- Compared to Darksiders as bad copy (weight 0.14): Reviewers compare the game unfavorably to Darksiders, calling it a bad copy. It is also mentioned alongside God of War as a poor imitation of established action games.
- Lack of settings and features (weight 0.13): The game offers no graphics or sound settings, no achievements, and no Steam cards. It also lacks Spanish subtitles, which some players find disappointing.
- Feels like DLC expansion (weight 0.12): Many reviewers feel the game is more like a DLC or expansion rather than a standalone title, and would have been better released as such. Its very short length and lack of depth contribute to this perception.
- Short expansion not worth it (weight 0.11): The game is described as a very short expansion that is not worth more than 1 euro. Its brevity and lack of content make it feel overpriced even at low costs.
- Prequel to Garshasp: The Monster Slayer (weight 0.1): The game is a prequel to Garshasp: The Monster Slayer, but it is considered a prequel to a badly designed original game. Comparisons to Monster Slayer are generally unfavorable.
- Very low player count (weight 0.08): The peak player number was only 11, indicating a very small player base and rarity on PC. This reflects the game's niche status and low popularity.
- Mixed language voice-over and subtitles (weight 0.07): Cutscenes mix English and Russian dialogue, and the game has English voice-over only. This inconsistent localization may be jarring for some players.
- Runs on Windows 8 x64 (weight 0.07): Some users report no problem installing or running the game on Windows 8 x64, though others had to launch it from Windows. This suggests mixed compatibility experiences.
- Music and art book included (weight 0.07): The music is okay but does not fit the game's mood, according to one reviewer. An art book is included with the game, which some might find a positive addition.
- Persian mythology setting appreciated (weight 0.04): The game draws inspiration from Persian mythology, offering a cultural backdrop that is refreshingly different from more commonly explored mythologies in gaming. Some reviewers appreciate this unique setting.
- Rating does not reflect quality (weight 0.04): One reviewer notes that the game's rating (25%) does not reflect its actual quality. This suggests that the low score may be due to review bombing or other factors beyond gameplay.
- Older game from 2012 (weight 0.04): The game is an older title from 2012, which may explain some of its dated design and technical issues. Its age is noted as a contextual factor in reviews.

Emotions:
- Disappointment (weight 0.32): The game falls far short of expectations set by its predecessor, with a very short length, shallow narrative, and lack of content. It suffers from poor voice acting, weak gameplay mechanics, technical issues, and an overall lack of polish, feeling like a tech demo rather than a complete game.
- Frustration (weight 0.29): Players are frustrated by persistent technical problems, including poor camera controls, frequent bugs and crashes, and severe optimization issues. The clunky controls, bad camera angles, and game-breaking bugs make the game nearly unplayable and cause repeated losses of progress.
- Boredom (weight 0.07): The game suffers from repetitive combat with limited enemy variety, monotonous platforming, and a lack of engaging story or challenge. Boss fights are drawn out, and the overall experience feels tedious and uninteresting.
- Amusement (weight 0.05): The game provides unintentional entertainment through hilariously bad cutscenes, ridiculous character designs, and laughable voice acting. Writing a negative review was even considered the most fun part of the experience.
- Enjoyment (weight 0.04): Despite its flaws, the game offers enjoyable combat, fun puzzles, and over-the-top gameplay that is worth playing. Some players find it fluid and fun, especially considering its budget nature.
- Annoyance (weight 0.03): Annoyance stems from frustrating boss fights, especially the final boss, and camera issues that cause unintended deaths or walking off cliffs. The camera moves at the worst moments, adding to the irritation.
- Disgust (weight 0.03): The game is considered trash due to terrible graphics, awful voice acting, and even trojan viruses in executable files. The voice acting is so bad it makes players want to throw up.
- Relief (weight 0.03): Players feel relief because the game is mercifully short, they didn't have to fight a dragon, or they got it cheaply in a bundle or sale. It spares them from further disappointment or financial loss.
- Anger (weight 0.03): Anger arises from the game being an insult to players, lacking options menus, having cheating and unbalanced bosses, and persistent bugs that were not present in the first game. The overall experience feels unfair and poorly handled.
- Dissatisfaction (weight 0.02): Dissatisfaction is caused by the inability to change resolution, unnecessarily hard and unenjoyable gameplay, and a complete lack of recommendable features. The game fails to meet even basic expectations.
- Confusion (weight 0.01): Players are confused about the game's purpose or story, and limited mouse controls without camera control add to the confusion. The lack of clarity makes the experience disorienting.
- Shame (weight 0.01): The game is seen as a shameful unfinished fragment compared to the original, failing to live up to its legacy. This brings a sense of embarrassment for the series.
- Tolerance (weight 0.01): Despite being buggy, the game is still considered playable and fun by some, showing a degree of tolerance for its flaws. They can overlook the issues and enjoy it.
- Regret (weight 0.01): Regret is felt after spending time on this game, especially following the first part, as it fails to deliver a worthwhile experience. Players wish they had not invested their time.
- Mild disappointment (weight 0.01): The game is prevented from being spectacular by bugs and design glitches, leading to mild disappointment. It had potential but fell short due to these issues.
- Affection (weight 0.01): Despite being a budget title with glitches, some players adore the game, overlooking its flaws. They have a soft spot for its charm or unique qualities.
- Accomplishment (weight 0.01): Finishing the game, despite its poor quality, gives a sense of accomplishment. It feels like an achievement to endure and complete it.
- Nausea (weight 0.01): Excessive camera swirling causes physical nausea in players, making the game uncomfortable to play. This motion sickness detracts from the experience.
- Dislike (weight 0.01): Bad voice acting is the primary cause of dislike for the game. It detracts from the overall quality and enjoyment.
- Satisfaction (weight 0.01): Satisfaction comes from solid combat and platforming mechanics, making the game enjoyable. It delivers a decent experience in those aspects.}