The Emperor has no clothes ...
As you may have seen, the graphics are so dated that you can count the pixels by eye. The much bally hoo'ed "battles", purported to conjur the essence of something of EPIC importance and struggle, seem to me to be comprised of nothing more than, "Hold Shield Button .... " "Wait for a two frame attack animation ... " "Counterstrike .... (repeat) ... Oh, goodie! .... I killed another giant from the rodent order, apparently ... since the pixel count allows for no further narrowing of the animal's classification, and even less in the way of skill; even if it's of the "keyboard dexterity" type, with which we are all so familiar.
This game falls prey to the classic problem with all adventure games: they all proceed along the same basic path: "Go there, to get that, so you can use it to defeat this, which will enable/empower you to go to the next level.
While this may "simulate" life in a very simplistic way, after a few games and many hours playing, one is left with less satisfaction than a game of TETRIS, which is really about advancing difficulty alone. That is not to say that adventure games aren't worth while ... nor do I claim that other expressions of art are not similarly confined. I happen to be a fan of THE BLUES, for example, which is often criticized for being TOO derivative. The difference here is that the presentation is SO sparse that it can only hope to reveal its fundamental greatness, or its shortcomings. For me, THE BLUES is a great form of art, and a structure that allows emotional and musical expression. This game, on the other hand, is a lot of holding down mouse buttons and looking at your watch.
Also, much was said about the SPRITES that you click on as they ascend to the top of the screen and then disappear. When I actually did this, I didn't feel rewarded, I felt cheated.
Really? Click, click, click .... an ethereal sound and it's gone. Why? Click on some bushes comprised of 20 or 30 pixels and they pulse to a different color ... and? Am I missing something? I'm reminded here of one of my favorite comedians, Ricky Gervais, hosting the Golden Globes. "Do you want to go and see "Cher," in concert?
Ricky: "No ..."
Why Not?
Ricky: "Because it's not 1975."
Nor is it 1985, when this game could've been relevant and highly rated, before the thousands of adventure games came out that met AND exceeded such parsimonious expressions of art and fantasy.
So, why is it good now? It isn't ...
If this game were designed by a 12 year old kid, or had some similar backstory that justified the ridiculously outdated graphics, or DID actually amaze me with the uniqueness of the gameplay, or even did as promised and transport me to another world of beautiful sites and sounds, I would be happy with it.
As it is, I wondered whether the reviewers were stoned, when they played the game. Or maybe they were friends of the creator, rather than just gamers swept away by the originality of a game that transported them to another world, and by gosh if the primitive graphics didn't actually ADD to the game's appeal. After all, I've never seen a greater disparity in the rating from the reviewer and the people who play it.
So ... maybe it is just a case of those with experience who know more than those who just "dabble" in gaming entertainment. Perhaps this is a gem that can only be appreciated by those with a finely honed sense of quality and discernment. Well, in my humble opinion ...
Not so ... in fact, I found nothing in this to like. Something to waste time while waiting at an airport ... if you don't have a laptop that can play SKYRIM ... or nearly ANY other game with a "9" rating.
To me, this game was a "2" ... too little technology, too much tinkling sound, too much hype, and delivered next 2 nothing.
Or maybe it's really a Picasso, and I'm a fool ... (?) I think I could draw a few stick figures and hang them in a museum ... that doesn't make me Picasso.
Rating -- Lame 2 out of 10