The Alters

The Alters Review

Released: July 18, 2025
Updated: 2 months ago
4.2
Overall review score
261
Review evidence points
56
Scored features
33
Expert reviews

Bottom Line

Choose The Alters if you want a bold, emotional sci-fi survival-management game with replayable choices. Skip it if heavy stress, mature themes, resource busywork, or technical rough edges will outweigh the story for you.

Best for

Best for players who enjoy narrative-heavy survival management, tense time-and-resource decisions, and morally complicated sci-fi stories with replayable branching outcomes.

Not for

Not for players who dislike stress, resource juggling, repetitive gathering loops, mature themes, or games where technical rough edges can interrupt momentum.

Verdict

The Alters stands out for its unusual cloning premise, rich moral dilemmas, and a strong blend of base management, resource pressure, and character-driven storytelling. Reviewers repeatedly praised the narrative, voice acting, atmosphere, replay value, and the distinct personalities of Jan’s alternate selves. The tradeoff is that the same pressure making the experience memorable can also become stressful, repetitive, or cumbersome, especially during exploration and resource gathering. Technical reports also varied, from smooth performance and zero bugs to crashes, shader waits, and stuck characters. Overall, the evidence points to a bold, emotionally resonant survival-management game with some friction around pacing, polish, and busywork.

Feature Scorecards

Summary

56 reviewed features
  • Very positive 4.5-5.0
    21 (38%)
  • Positive 3.5-4.4
    20 (36%)
  • Neutral 2.5-3.4
    12 (21%)
  • Negative 1.5-2.4
    3 (5%)

Pros

Sort
  • 4.7
    19 reviews strong consensus
    narrative quality: 4.7, 19 reviews, strong consensus
    Narrative quality was one of the strongest areas, with many reviewers praising the story as compelling, thoughtful, philosophical, or emotionally resonant.
  • 4.8
    12 reviews strong consensus
    voice acting: 4.8, 12 reviews, strong consensus
    Voice acting was strongly praised across many reviews, especially Alex Jordan’s work differentiating the many Jans, with only one mild delivery caveat.
  • 4.9
    6 reviews strong consensus
    atmosphere: 4.9, 6 reviews, strong consensus
    Atmosphere was consistently praised as isolating, eerie, tense, symbolic, and thrilling.
  • 4.9
    6 reviews strong consensus
    emotional impact: 4.9, 6 reviews, strong consensus
    Emotional impact was consistently strong, with reviewers describing thought-provoking, personal, vulnerable, and resonant moments.
  • 4.7
    10 reviews strong consensus
    graphics quality: 4.7, 10 reviews, strong consensus
    Graphics were praised repeatedly, with reviewers calling the game gorgeous, detailed, good-looking, or visually distinctive.
  • 4.7
    8 reviews strong consensus
    originality: 4.7, 8 reviews, strong consensus
    Originality was strongly praised, with reviewers calling the concept unique, uncategorizable, ambitious, or unlike anything else.
  • 4.9
    4 reviews strong consensus
    value for money: 4.9, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Value for money was praised, especially around the $35 price and replayable mid-sized scope.
  • 5.0
    3 reviews strong consensus
    sound design: 5.0, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Sound design evidence was strongly positive, emphasizing exceptional audio, tension-building environmental sound, and fantastic sound design.
  • 4.8
    4 reviews strong consensus
    frame rate stability: 4.8, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Frame rate stability was generally strong, with reviewers citing consistent 60+ fps, 120 fps, or stable 60 fps with only occasional drops.
  • 4.4
    9 reviews low consensus
    character development: 4.4, 9 reviews, low consensus
    Character development was broadly praised for distinct, evolving Jans, though one reviewer felt the alters leaned into caricature.
  • 5.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    art direction: 5.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Art direction received strong praise for the alien planet, visual design, and Jan/Alter presentation.
  • 5.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    side character depth: 5.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Side character depth was praised in the reviews that addressed it, with the Alters described as distinct and fully realized.
  • 4.4
    11 reviews moderate consensus
    gameplay mechanics: 4.4, 11 reviews, moderate consensus
    Most reviewers praised the blended survival, management, and narrative mechanics as polished or inventive, though a few found the underlying gameplay basic.
  • 4.5
    5 reviews strong consensus
    fun factor: 4.5, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    Fun factor was positive, with reviewers describing the game as entertaining, a blast, hard to put down, or excellent from start to finish.
  • 4.5
    4 reviews strong consensus
    soundtrack quality: 4.5, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Soundtrack quality was praised for its synth mood, Piotr Musial’s work, and enjoyable/chill music.
  • 4.3
    9 reviews moderate consensus
    core gameplay loop: 4.3, 9 reviews, moderate consensus
    The core loop was often described as compelling, addictive, or well-designed, with one dissenting review arguing the hybrid systems failed to cohere.
  • 4.8
    2 reviews limited evidence
    environmental detail: 4.8, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Environmental detail was praised for adorable base rooms, dinky detail, and visually distinct alien landscapes.
  • 4.8
    2 reviews limited evidence
    innovation: 4.8, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Innovation was praised through the game’s unusual genre blend and standout sci-fi structure.
  • 4.3
    18 reviews moderate consensus
    replay value: 4.3, 18 reviews, moderate consensus
    Replay value was widely praised because alternate Alters, choices, endings, and remembered dialogue paths encourage repeat runs, though a few reviewers saw replay fatigue.
  • 4.5
    3 reviews strong consensus
    world-building: 4.5, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    World-building was praised for its strange sci-fi setting, cultural detail, and labor/corporate themes.
  • 4.3
    6 reviews low consensus
    performance optimization: 4.3, 6 reviews, low consensus
    Performance optimization was mostly praised on reviewed builds, though one PC review reported dreadful performance.
  • 5.0
    1 review
    controls responsiveness: 5.0, 1 review
    One reviewer specifically praised the controls on both controller and mouse/keyboard, with no conflicting control-responsiveness evidence.
  • 5.0
    1 review
    facial animations: 5.0, 1 review
    Facial animation evidence was positive, with one reviewer specifically praising how faces reflect current attitude.
  • 5.0
    1 review
    onboarding experience: 5.0, 1 review
    Onboarding was praised for introducing many systems without overwhelming the player.
  • 4.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    immersion: 4.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Immersion was strong but intense, with reviewers describing deep involvement and a claustrophobic, absorbing feel.
  • 4.3
    6 reviews strong consensus
    content variety: 4.3, 6 reviews, strong consensus
    Reviewers generally praised the variety created by survival, puzzles, exploration, branching side quests, and genre mixing, with one caveat about restrictive base building.
  • 4.3
    3 reviews low consensus
    animation quality: 4.3, 3 reviews, low consensus
    Animation quality was mostly praised for character design and subtle idle movement, though one reviewer found some animations rough.
  • 4.3
    3 reviews strong consensus
    map and navigation design: 4.3, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Map and navigation design was praised for clever fast travel and tense maze-like routing that reduced backtracking.
  • 4.2
    5 reviews strong consensus
    user interface design: 4.2, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    UI design was mostly praised as clean, tactile, and not intrusive, with some interface quirks noted.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    crafting system: 4.5, 1 review
    The crafting and production automation earned positive evidence for reducing food and essential-goods micromanagement.
  • 4.1
    9 reviews moderate consensus
    economy and resource balance: 4.1, 9 reviews, moderate consensus
    Resource balance was mostly praised for satisfying pressure and strong management hooks, though some reviewers found it irritating or overly punishing.
  • 4.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    character roster: 4.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    The Alter roster was mostly praised for distinct variants, though one reviewer felt not all Alters were equally useful or nuanced.
  • 4.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    level design: 4.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Level and map design were praised for dense, hand-crafted layouts and well-crafted act-specific maps.
  • 4.0
    5 reviews low consensus
    writing quality: 4.0, 5 reviews, low consensus
    Writing was mostly praised as authentic, human, or excellent, though one negative review called it shallow and another noted occasional creaking.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    enemy variety: 4.0, 1 review
    Enemy or hazard variety had limited but positive evidence, with anomaly variants helping keep exploration tense.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    handheld play suitability: 4.0, 1 review
    Handheld suitability had limited but positive evidence, with Steam Deck described as playable with decent image quality.
  • 3.9
    5 reviews moderate consensus
    menu usability: 3.9, 5 reviews, moderate consensus
    Menu usability was generally positive thanks to quality-of-life tools, though some reviewers found navigation old or menu-jumping cumbersome.
  • 3.7
    3 reviews low consensus
    protagonist appeal: 3.7, 3 reviews, low consensus
    Jan’s appeal was mixed: some found him more complete, plausible, and sympathetic, while one reviewer found him unpleasant.
  • 3.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    puzzle design: 3.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Puzzle evidence was mixed: environmental puzzles earned praise, but the probe-based resource puzzle was criticized as fiddly and low-value.
  • 3.6
    11 reviews low consensus
    exploration quality: 3.6, 11 reviews, low consensus
    Exploration divided reviewers: several found it atmospheric, tactile, or satisfying, while others found it basic, repetitive, or chore-like.
  • 3.5
    11 reviews strong consensus
    bug frequency: 3.5, 11 reviews, strong consensus
    Bug evidence was mixed: several reviewers saw minor bugs, glitches, or stuck characters, while one reported zero bugs and another saw more disruptive issues.

Cons

Sort
  • 2.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    grind level: 2.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Grind level drew negative evidence, with reviewers criticizing repetitive busywork and mindless material loops.
  • 3.3
    8 reviews strong consensus
    difficulty balance: 3.3, 8 reviews, strong consensus
    Difficulty balance was mixed: several reviewers valued the pressure, but others found the stress overwhelming or the economy hard for newcomers.
  • 3.1
    5 reviews strong consensus
    combat system: 3.1, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    Combat-like anomaly encounters were generally seen as simple or secondary; some found them fitting, while others called them weak or uneven.
  • 2.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    load times: 2.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Load-time evidence was mixed-to-negative because shader precompilation was called long or repeatedly required on launch.
  • 1.5
    1 review
    crash stability: 1.5, 1 review
    Crash stability was a major issue in one PC review, which reported frequent crashes around the Quantum Computer.
  • 3.3
    7 reviews moderate consensus
    pacing: 3.3, 7 reviews, moderate consensus
    Pacing was mixed, with praise for quick days and well-timed beats offset by complaints about cyclical acts, clocks, and difficult bad-end pressure.
  • 2.8
    2 reviews limited evidence
    movement feel: 2.8, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Movement drew mixed-to-negative notes, with one reviewer calling traversal cumbersome and another saying Jan could feel awkward or get stuck.
  • 2.0
    1 review
    age appropriateness: 2.0, 1 review
    Age appropriateness evidence points to mature themes, with one reviewer warning about substance abuse, suicide, and self-harm.
  • 3.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    accessibility options: 3.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Accessibility evidence was limited and mixed, with reviewers noting useful settings but also describing the overall accessibility approach as limited.
  • 3.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    save system reliability: 3.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Save reliability was mixed: one reviewer lost progress due to daily saves and crashes, while another appreciated nightly/location auto-saves.
  • 3.4
    4 reviews low consensus
    dialogue quality: 3.4, 4 reviews, low consensus
    Dialogue quality was mixed: some praised meaningful character conversations, while others found the script or conversations flat and stilted.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    progression system: 2.5, 1 review
    Progression drew criticism from one reviewer who felt unlocks mostly reduced earlier friction rather than adding exciting new capabilities.
  • 3.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    polish: 3.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Polish was mixed, with notes about lacking presentation and unskippable scenes despite otherwise strong execution.
  • 3.0
    1 review
    mission design: 3.0, 1 review
    Mission design received mixed evidence because one reviewer felt survival objectives and narrative goals could work against each other.
  • 3.0
    1 review
    visual effects quality: 3.0, 1 review
    Visual effects evidence was mixed-to-negative in one review because close-up scenes sometimes became pixelated.

Compared With Category Average

Compared with other Video Games, this product is above average in narrative quality, side character depth, facial animations, near average in replay value, core gameplay loop, below average in crash stability, load times, progression system.

Summary

56 compared features
  • Above average 0.4+ pts higher
    23 (41%)
  • Same as average within 0.3 pts
    21 (38%)
  • Below average 0.4+ pts lower
    12 (21%)

Largest category differences

Attribute This product Category average Difference
crash stability 1.5 3.3 -1.8
load times 2.5 4.0 -1.5
narrative quality 4.7 3.7 +1.1
progression system 2.5 3.9 -1.4
age appropriateness 2.0 3.4 -1.4
visual effects quality 3.0 4.3 -1.3
side character depth 5.0 3.7 +1.3
movement feel 2.8 4.0 -1.2

Consider This Instead

If you want better crash stability

Choose South of Midnight. It scores 4.8 vs 1.5 for crash stability, with a 3.9 overall score.

Compare

If you want better progression system

Choose Hades II. It scores 4.9 vs 2.5 for progression system, with a 4.6 overall score.

Compare

If you want better core gameplay loop

Choose Cronos: The New Dawn. It scores 5.0 vs 4.3 for core gameplay loop, with a 3.9 overall score.

Compare

Compared in Reviews

Products reviewers directly compared with this model, grouped into quick takeaways.

Alan Wake 2

  • Compared: musical sequence tone The reviewer favorably compares a musical number's energy to Alan Wake 2.

Fallout Shelter

  • Similar: management assignments The reviewer says the crew-assignment management recalls Fallout Shelter.

Frost Punk

  • Compared: challenging decision design The review references Frost Punk alongside This War of Mine as part of 11 bit's decision-making lineage.

FAQ

Is The Alters more story-driven or systems-driven?

Reviewers generally describe it as both: a survival-management game built around a strongly praised sci-fi narrative, moral choices, and relationships with Jan's alternate selves.

Is The Alters stressful?

Yes. Many reviewers highlight the constant pressure of time, resources, storms, and Alter morale; some loved that tension, while others found it overwhelming.

How replayable is The Alters?

Replay value is one of the most repeated positives. Reviewers point to different Alters, branching choices, alternate endings, and dialogue tracking as reasons to replay.

Does the exploration hold up?

Exploration is divisive. Several reviewers found the planet atmospheric and tactile, while others thought resource gathering, pylons, and traversal became repetitive or chore-like.

How good is the voice acting?

Voice acting is strongly praised, especially Alex Jordan's performance as multiple versions of Jan with distinct personalities, tones, and emotional registers.

Are there technical problems?

Reports are mixed. Some reviewers had smooth performance or zero bugs, while others cited crashes, shader waits, stuck characters, glitches, or visual issues.

Sample Expert Reviews We Analyzed

These are a few of the reviews included in our analysis.

Video Reviews

Article Reviews

Top Video Games to Consider

#1 Hades II
4.6

Good if you want fast, tactical roguelite combat with huge progression depth, striking art, and standout music. Skip it if repetition, resource micromanagement, or a less emotionally satisfying sequel story...

Pros: skill tree depth, dialogue quality

Cons: emotional impact, economy and resource balance

#2 Donkey Kong Bananza
4.5

Best for joyful destruction, dense exploration, and a charming DK-Pauline adventure. Skip it if camera quirks, frame-rate dips, easy bosses, or premium Switch 2 pricing are dealbreakers.

Pros: gameplay mechanics, world interactivity

Cons: economy and resource balance, enemy variety

#3 It Takes Two
4.5

Best for joyful, inventive co-op with a partner, especially on couch. Skip it if divorce themes, uneven story tone, or Switch visual compromises would distract you.

Pros: core gameplay loop, movement feel

Cons: character development, dialogue quality

#4 Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
4.5

Choose Clair Obscur if you want a story-rich RPG with thrilling timed combat, gorgeous art, and standout music. Skip it if poor maps, tight parry timing, or occasional bugs and...

Pros: monetization fairness, microtransaction impact

Cons: platforming precision, menu usability