Alone in the Dark: Inferno Review

Burning crusade.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

Developers rarely get a second chance with console games, unless you count sequels (and that would take all day), but when a port is lagging several months behind they sometimes get another half-chance. No one can argue Alone in the Dark needed an update, despite its successes, and Eden Studios has done a valiant job. The problem is that the game didn't need tweaking so much as Eden back at the drawing board.

The Xbox 360 version certainly had an intense atmosphere and memorable set-pieces as you took control of Edward Carnby for a hellish night of demonic discovery in Central Park, burning monsters and searching for the truth about your past, and it encouraged inventive problem-solving in a way that marked it out from the survival-horror herd. But far too much of the time you found yourself fighting the fiddly controls, a largely terrible camera system and probably the most borked driving mechanics in any game of this generation. Throw in some dreadful signposting and an inexplicably drawn-out root-burning section towards the end and it was a game to inspire delight and fury in almost equal measure. No wonder, then, that most people couldn't be arsed. To give Eden its dues, the team took the worldwide mauling in the right spirit and set about fixing as many of the problems as possible for the game's belated PS3 release.

The first and most crucial change is the ejection of the misguided dynamic camera system. Instead of lurching around searching for the most atmospheric view, the camera now lives behind you by default so you can see what's going on at all times. With full manual camera control also assigned to the right stick, the difference is vast, and immediately the game feels more polished and enjoyable. Everything from environmental interaction to combat is more assured and less likely to work against the player, while little tweaks such as running by default, rather than having to hold a button, are just common sense. On the rare occasions you need to walk, a gentle push on the left analogue stick does the job. It's the simple, standard and intuitive third-person system with which we're all comfortable.

'Alone in the Dark: Inferno' Screenshot 1

This is what happens when you cry someone a river. Not nice.

Combat used to be painful too. Enemies would overwhelm you, often appearing out of sight to knock your weapon away before meting out punishment that you were ill-equipped to handle. Even when you did manage to batter one of them to the floor, the clunky process of dragging them into fire to kill them off for good was neither intuitive nor, in some cases, even possible because of the restrictive way the dragging mechanic worked. This time, however, not only do enemies take fewer hits to go down, but it's also easier to manoeuvre enemies wherever you like, so they stop waking up by the time you've got them facing the right way. Even the innovative-but-clunky inventory system is improved. You still have to reach into your jacket pockets and rifle through the contents, but you're no longer expected to continually change the torch batteries. Cycling through with the d-pad is also a smart move, and far more accurate than fumbling around with the analogue stick.

One of the biggest improvements has been in the driving sections. In its original form, the game was as unhelpful as possible, with spongy handling and an array of objects to snag you at every opportunity. On at least three occasions you could - if you weren't careful - end up playing the same scripted section over and over until you got lucky or gave up. With the words of enraged gamers no doubt ringing in its ears, Eden has not only changed the handling, but implemented checkpoints to eliminate some of the repetition. It'd be generous to say the driving's a pleasure, but to give you an idea of the difference it makes, something that took me about 50 attempts on the 360 was done in two on PS3. So rather than get bogged down in game rage over a three-minute section, you're allowed to make progress and enjoy the unfolding narrative.

Sadly that doesn't mean there aren't still problems. The unforgivably drawn-out section where you're expected to burn loads of evil roots remains, and still requires an iron will and an unreasonably persistent nature to get through. Eden has at least given this bit some context by introducing the concept earlier, but you still have to crawl around Central Park for hours (with generally limited resources) doing it and it's by far the least enjoyable element of the game, even though it has its moments. It's doubly upsetting because the chapter that follows is probably the best of the lot, throwing a sequence of intriguing puzzles into the mix in a tense finale.

Ultimately the game's inability to tutor players renders it clunky. Properly introduced, it might have met with a warmer reception, and this patched version does little to remedy that. It's easier to forgive the problems that remain, but you still have to accept that you'll be thrown in the deep end a lot, and that a layer of polish is still absent. Giving players the ability to experiment both in a combat and puzzling sense was always going to be risky.

'Alone in the Dark: Inferno' Screenshot 2

I never noticed how cool Edward's boots were until now.

More often than not though, Eden succeeds, and once you get to grips with creating Molotov cocktails, shooting bottles in mid-air, and using aerosol cans as makeshift flamethrowers, it hardly seems to matter that shooting itself is so ineffective. This is a game where fire is your key ally, and overarching niggles aside, it's worth experiencing for all the interesting, innovative ideas it brings to a characteristically staid genre - not to mention the rich ambience and often sublime set-pieces. While it doesn't quite boast the polish or the consistent narrative intrigue of Siren: Blood Curse, its willingness to stray from genre conventions bodes well for the future.

7 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy

Comments (36) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • bad09 #1 3 years ago

    I actually like the driving bit on 360 it was addictive as hell!

    I really want to like this, I never got far in the 360 version but thought had potential and was thinking about getting this "improved" version. Truth be known though I can't even be bothered to try the PS3 demo and there is far better games to spend my cash on in the coming months - maybe when it's like £15 2nd hand. Sorry Eden...
  • JonFE #2 3 years ago

    I have a recently purchased, still wrapped x360 version on my self, waiting to be played with improved controls and forgiving driving sections. Hopefully the patch Eden promised won't take long.

    It's nice of then to take criticism at heart and try to improve their game :)
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/08 @ 07:21
  • the_dudefather #3 3 years ago

    does it have an ending now, besides.. the 5 second long 'RAR I'm satan' bit then blackscreen without a boss or anything
  • 3william56 #4 3 years ago

    /wonders how Rich Leadbetter will swing this one in favour of the 360 version...
    "B*gg er the camera, controls and checkpoints, FEEL THE FRAME RATE"
  • 3william56 #5 3 years ago

    It is good that they did their best to address the problems of the original, but it still begs the question how such a broken game got released onto the poor unsuspecting 360 massive in the first place.
  • space_ace #6 3 years ago

    how? it's atari, mate
  • rotmm #7 3 years ago

    @3william56,

    And PC crowd.

    As for the Leadbetter comment, I suppose if the 360 version gets patched to support the same improvements as the PS3 version, then it's back to an equal playing field. But it's interesting that you don't feel poor or stuttering framerates are an issue. Maybe that's what Kaz meant when he said the next-gen stutters when Sony say it does?
  • makeamazing #8 3 years ago

    Played the demo again last night and it did take me a few turns to complete the driving section... still it was fun and though alittle clunky wasnt too bad. Still not sure if i will get this yet.
  • mingster #9 3 years ago

    So not as good as AITD on the PC from 1992 then?
  • Darren #10 3 years ago

    So despite the fact that the 360's camera and controls were so bad that other sites and magazines gave this game sub-5/10 scores but this "improved" PS3 version, that fixes both of those issues, still scores the same as the 360 version! Yeah, real logic at work there, EG! ;)

    Played the PS3 demo and the game is still crap IMO. With the likes of the far superior Siren: Blood Curse available on the PS3 at half the price, you'd be far better off buying that for a slice of survival horror. It's more atmospheric too and isn't plagued with screen tearing like this game. Like Lost, another 7/10 score travesty, Alone in the Dark is overrated on EG IMO... the game was just never that good in the first place.
  • bad09 #11 3 years ago

    It wasn't THAT bad Darren :)
  • kangarootoo #12 3 years ago

    Seems like its shifted into rental territory. Good to see the quality getting revisited in such a determined way. Even if the final outcome was stilla bit below par, its good that they bothered (even if they will have just been driven by a desire to make a better return on the investment).

    This is bound to get patched on the 360 quickly, so how about everyone feel either happy or benign about this. There is no bad news here, other than the bad news the voices in your head tell you.
  • Greebo #13 3 years ago


    "So not as good as AITD on the PC from 1992 then?"

    1992?? Feeling old now. First game to inflict fear, that trapdoor opening in the first room was very scary!
  • Bohnsen #14 3 years ago

    It's easy to bash a somewhat clunky game, Darren. But AitD really had a lot more going for it, than one might see by playing the demo bit. There were some really original set-pieces, great puzzles and stand-out moments, that were really really memorable. So memorable in fact, that all of the sub-5-reviews just don't do it justice.

    bye,

    Alex
  • JonFE #15 3 years ago

    @Greebo:

    I still got shivers from those dogs bursting in from the corridor window :)
  • chris_ace #16 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 11:55:13 13-12-2011
  • Darren #17 3 years ago

    @bad09 - No but it was utterly mediocre and forgettable... I'm so glad I had a chance to play it at my cousin's and didn't actually pay money for it. If I had I'd have been gutted to be honest.

    With all the other great games out now and in the next two weeks that makes this game comparatively crap IMO even if it isn't actually sub-par as such. It was just technically inept and clunky on the 360. :p

    If somone is looking for a quality survival horror game on the PS3 then they'd be better advised to buy Siren at £20 or the superb Dead Space, failing that wait for Resident Evil 5 next March... only consider Alone in the Dark: Inferno as a last resort...
  • mingster #18 3 years ago

    Yeah i think the original '92 version was probably the first game ever that made me jump in places.
    The dogs bursting through the window i remeber too.
    Plus the camera angles and control screen for a fully 3D game where excellent from what i remember.
    How come 15 years later the control and camera is worse?
  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #19 3 years ago

    I'd pay for a Live/PSN re-release of the 1992 Alone In The Dark. Given that the original Reisdent Evil has been remade several times for different consoles now, it'd be nice to go back and revisit the original genesis of survival horror.

    Ah, the good old days, when Alone in the Dark was wierdo French Cthulu-esque horror rather than an American monster movie.

    Edit: Indulging my selse of nostalgia a bit, I found this. A bit small? That 320*200 * 256 colours is the actual screen resolution it was in . Seems hard to believe these days.
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/08 @ 09:56
  • Tomo #20 3 years ago

    Alas I got to the dreaded roots bit on my 360 version and gave up. I got over the borked controls but forcing me to run around a park and burn lots of things over and over again was enough. They really should have sorted that out. It's just a cheap, cheap way of making the game longer.
  • BadBoyBonner #21 3 years ago

    Quite liked the first driving section through the city (even though it took about 6 attempts) - as for the ones with the bats lifting your car - good job I missed the TV when throwing the joypad in gamer-rage.

    I am still sure that the bats ability to lift the car was only put in because the driving was so broken i.e.

    "The car gets stuck on scenery and you can't die, how can we get round that?"

    "Easy, instead of coding it properly lets throw in some bats that lift the car in the air and then drop it!"

    "Genius! - That just shaved us about a month off the deadline."

    Never mind the borked driving - what about that black shit on the floor that reacts to light - or doesn't when it feels like it and kills you!

    Pissed me off far more than the driving - even my old school arcade playing mentality was being stretched to the limit. Luckily there was a skip - as after about my 200th attempt I had to admit defeat. What a shower of shit the black stuff is - adding nothing to the game.

    6/10 at best from me - great atmosphere, poor implementation - unsure any of the changes could really push the mark up as I didn't really struggle with the camera or controls that much (once I realised you can fast swap inventory items with the shoulder buttons).
  • asphaltcowboy #22 3 years ago

    Are Eden patching the 360 version to bring it in line with this release? If/when they do, I will be getting it on 360...
  • OldRavenNL #23 3 years ago

    So when is the 360 getting the patch to make this game playable.
    I really enjoyed Alone in the Dark, but stopped playing because of the controls.
  • myiagros #24 3 years ago

    I'm intersted in this one for the january sales. I'd be willing to give it a try out at £15-20.

    I still like the idea of the coat inventory, combining items & fire propegation.
    Glad to hear of the swepping changes since the 360 release, but not quite enough to make it a day 1 purchase.
  • miiiguel #25 3 years ago

    I played it on the 360, enjoyed it. Realy.
    It "feels" like a '90s game, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It is a horror game, and succedes at delivering that feeling of deja vu.
    And it's short, so it was all over soon enough.
  • Cappy #26 3 years ago

    How on Earth does something as glitchy and broken as this get a score on the buy end of the marking scale?

    Alone in the Dark: Inferno is pure failure. If it's supposed to be a survival horror game it fails because the twitchy camera destroys any sense of stillness or atmosphere, you can't be scared because it's impossible when you're plonked into the middle of a failing piece of technology, you just can't forget that it's a game. If the gamer is there for the puzzles or adventure they'll have to contend with the worst controls I've experienced in years. Not forgetting the terrible graphics, the character damage system is pure comedy and the character models and environments are ugly and inept.

    I dread to think how bad the game was when it was inflicted on 360 owners, it establishes itself firmly at the bottom of the recent survival horror heap, below Obscure II even. Try the demo first if you're getting unnatural urges that compel you to buy this game.
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/08 @ 10:31
  • malteaserhead #27 3 years ago

    I think some people are going way overboard on how 'bad' this is.
    fwiw I didn't find anything that 'broken' in it (save a car chase or two) and the fetch quests at the end were just as horrible as anything Bioshock gave us.

    It just an average game. Just another droplet for the sea of averageness that is out there.

    Re-reading the x360 review is well worth it ;)
  • sneetch #28 3 years ago

    @JonFE
    "@Greebo:

    I still got shivers from those dogs bursting in from the corridor window :)"

    It was the kid zombie in the first hall for me. Sure, graphically it was about 20 polygons in total but still creepy as hell.

    Fantastic game but I'll never play it again, nostalgia is the better option. I'd love to see a remake.
  • MrE26 #29 3 years ago

    I picked this up cheap on the 360, played the first level then decided to wait for the patch. It certainly looks the part, it's just way to awkward to control as it is.
  • bad09 #30 3 years ago

    @ Darren

    Yeah I'd go with forgettable, It was OK and I did enjoy what I did play but it was forgotten very quickly, and your right releasing it now is a very bad idea as it will get shown up quite badly!

    "If somone is looking for a quality survival horror game on the PS3 then they'd be better advised to buy Siren at £20 or the superb Dead Space, failing that wait for Resident Evil 5 next March... only consider Alone in the Dark: Inferno as a last resort..."

    I agree with that (although you're forgetting SH: Homecoming for PS3 owners!), but I can't agree RE5 is survival horror mate, it's got more in common with Army of Two than Resident Evil from what I've seen :)
  • Aphexman #31 3 years ago

    so this is an improved version but yet scores the same as broken 360's version?
  • darc #32 3 years ago

    "More often than not though, Eden succeeds, and once you get to grips with creating Molotov cocktails, shooting bottles in mid-air, and using aerosol cans as makeshift flamethrowers"

    Just guessing having not played this, but is this not a list of spoilers in itself?
  • bad09 #33 3 years ago

    "Also, whoever called Dead Space a 'superb survival horror' is a fool. DS is about 0% horror, 1% survival, and 120% shooting shooting shooting."

    Play it on hard....
  • SimonM7 #34 3 years ago

    I love how the artwork for this game consistently looks nothing like the dude in the game. I thought that was reserved for western Megaman NES covers.
    Edited by 1 at 18/11/08 @ 21:20
  • bad09 #35 3 years ago

    @ twinberettas

    Wow, way to get your knickers in a twist pal, no offense was intended you sensitive little gamer you! Life is too short to get so upset, it just sounded like my experience of DS. :)

    Fair enough you played it on hard a lot of people have found hard too much, personally I had the arcade experience you described on normal and found it just as boring. However I'm finding Dead Space on hard changes the way you play and it becomes a more RE style hunt for ammo creeping around, scared of each encounter, making every shot count...you know that survival horror feel.
    Edited by 1 at 19/11/08 @ 08:45
  • krudster #36 3 years ago

    Innovative puzzles? Well, how about having to fashion sticky molotov cocktails, and tossing them onto the backs of scuttling creatures so that, timed correctly, they crawl back into their nest and blow everything up?

    I also enjoyede the fact that killing creatures can be done in so many different ways. Pour gas onto your ammo to create fire bullets and shoot them in the rift, or batter them with a pipe and drag them off to a bonfire, or just get your med spray out and fashion a makeshift flamethrower out of them. Or, of course, toss a bottle of fuel into the air and shoot it. Most, if not all of these things feel fresh and interesting. It's a shame if people didn't appreciate that Eden tried a lot of different things.