The existence of this game is an inevitability. It's practically a monument to what the genre has become... and it's horrible.

Before the review: a history lesson.

Rogue. Classic game about exploring dungeons and managing the items collected as resources, incidentally permanent death. The game was old, so of course death was permanent. This game has inspired many games. Hack/Nethack, Moria/Angband, ToME, etc.

From here we get Diablo. Originally criticized for being a real-time Rogue-like, as though doing such a thing was "against the rules," but the end result was good. Dark atmosphere, magical items, permanent character modification through shrines and books, resource management, etc. It nails the Rogue theme while being a real-time game instead of turn based. It's funny comparing the response to that game's release when nowadays "Rogue-like" has nothing to do with Rogue. Even games like Diablo are considered their own genre...

But that's because people are taking about Diablo 2. Diablo 2 is the game which primarily defines the "Diablo genre." Unlike Diablo 1, Diablo 2 focuses more on loot treadmills and unique character class features. The game is designed entirely around the core principle of "character advancement." Eventually the game developed a ladder system, used by Diablo 3, and used by Path of Exile for their mini-expansion release schedule. The idea was to get people to play forever by experiencing progression over and over.

Diablo 3 takes this one step further by completely distancing itself from what made the first game good, and instead redefines itself as an action game instead of a horror, resource-management game. While Diablo 3 does have interesting decisions you can make to make your character interesting and unique, the designers later decided to let go of this feature of the game that still existed in Diablo 2. Instead it pretends to give you this feature, while actually forcing you to use only the "item sets" that exist if you want to "compete" at the same level as other players. I could write a book about this topic, but we're talking about Hero Siege here.

To finally review Hero Siege, it would be like if you took Diablo 3, and continued the trend of homogeneity and simplicity one step further. Items and classes are so streamlined that basically all you do is equip items with bigger numbers, and level up your health and damage. It goes on forever.

You don't get to decide what systems you utilize to do damage, or be defensive. At least even Diablo 3 got a dodge roll in the console port. Games like Path of Exile and Grim Dawn, which are more keen to remain similar to Diablo 2 have this complex system based on the concept of "damage trinities." Fire Emblem is known for using this method to force the player to make tactical decisions instead of brute forcing your units. Certain types of strategies are weaker and stronger against other encounters. Finding ways to design your character to have as many strengths as possible and as few weakness as possible is what makes a game like Path of Exile and Grim Dawn good. Strip all of those features out and you get Hero Siege.

This game is mindless and bad. I would not pay more than $1 for this.

If this game presented itself as a bullet hell game like Enter the Gungeon this review might be different. However, unfortunately it utilizes the same psychological trap of loot treadmills and false agency to convince you that the bland random generation and chaotic gameplay is unique and rewarding.

Don't play this game.

The existence of this game is an inevitability. It's practically a monument to what the genre has become... and it's horrible. Before the review: a history lesson. Rogue. Classic game about exploring dungeons and managing the items collected as resources, incidentally permanent death. The game was old, so of course death was permanent. This game has inspired many games. Hack/Nethack, Moria/Angband, ToME, etc. From here we get Diablo. Originally criticized for being a real-time Rogue-like, as though doing such a thing was "against the rules," but the end result was good. Dark atmosphere, magical items, permanent character modification through shrines and books, resource management, etc. It nails the Rogue theme while being a real-time game instead of turn based. It's funny comparing the response to that game's release when nowadays "Rogue-like" has nothing to do with Rogue. Even games like Diablo are considered their own genre... But that's because people are taking about Diablo 2. Diablo 2 is the game which primarily defines the "Diablo genre." Unlike Diablo 1, Diablo 2 focuses more on loot treadmills and unique character class features. The game is designed entirely around the core principle of "character advancement." Eventually the game developed a ladder system, used by Diablo 3, and used by Path of Exile for their mini-expansion release schedule. The idea was to get people to play forever by experiencing progression over and over. Diablo 3 takes this one step further by completely distancing itself from what made the first game good, and instead redefines itself as an action game instead of a horror, resource-management game. While Diablo 3 does have interesting decisions you can make to make your character interesting and unique, the designers later decided to let go of this feature of the game that still existed in Diablo 2. Instead it pretends to give you this feature, while actually forcing you to use only the "item sets" that exist if you want to "compete" at the same level as other players. I could write a book about this topic, but we're talking about Hero Siege here. To finally review Hero Siege, it would be like if you took Diablo 3, and continued the trend of homogeneity and simplicity one step further. Items and classes are so streamlined that basically all you do is equip items with bigger numbers, and level up your health and damage. It goes on forever. You don't get to decide what systems you utilize to do damage, or be defensive. At least even Diablo 3 got a dodge roll in the console port. Games like Path of Exile and Grim Dawn, which are more keen to remain similar to Diablo 2 have this complex system based on the concept of "damage trinities." Fire Emblem is known for using this method to force the player to make tactical decisions instead of brute forcing your units. Certain types of strategies are weaker and stronger against other encounters. Finding ways to design your character to have as many strengths as possible and as few weakness as possible is what makes a game like Path of Exile and Grim Dawn good. Strip all of those features out and you get Hero Siege. This game is mindless and bad. I would not pay more than $1 for this. If this game presented itself as a bullet hell game like Enter the Gungeon this review might be different. However, unfortunately it utilizes the same psychological trap of loot treadmills and false agency to convince you that the bland random generation and chaotic gameplay is unique and rewarding. Don't play this game.