In Between is not always a fun game. It's an interesting game, really interesting, full of moments that get your mind working, pulling themes in to the gameplay. It's an aspect of the game that brings to mind Braid, too few games find or even try to find a way to let their narrative affect their gameplay.

It’s maybe underselling things a little bit, but In Between is a puzzle platformer, you have to get from the start point to the level's exit. To do that you have to flip gravity, walking on the ceiling, flinging yourself from one wall to another. The difficulty comes in what's put in your way, be that spikes, blocks, or environmental effects, which is where the narrative comes in.

In Between deals with terminal cancer, or at least deals with dealing with terminal cancer. You're essentially playing through someone coming to terms with their fate, their mortality. Each set of levels is themed around one of the 5 stages of grief. Without wanting to spoil too much, 'denial' sees you avoiding a closing darkness, kind of like a Mario level that's constantly pushing you forward. The developers have found reasons for introducing mechanics to the levels, you're soon encouraged to face down the darkness, push it back, and depending on your perspective, either face or push back the truth.

Which brings me to 'anger'. In anger you have to make your way across the winding levels, altering gravity, while avoiding giant red balls of anger. It's at this point I noticed the game starting to become a bit more ruthless with its difficulty. You'd solve the puzzle of the level, work out how to traverse its obstacles, only to die on a spike placed a pixel away from your safe landing zone. It's not that the other levels aren't difficult, but 'anger' feels needless, almost cruel. I've started to wonder if it's deliberate, if it's recreating the feelings you would experience when going through that stage, why's it happening to you, it's unfair, it's cruel.

Or I'm over thinking things.

Either way it's a dangerous game for In Between to play. There's a lot of points where In Between just isn't that fun, where the more frustrating parts of the game drag it down. You don't always get enough time to properly see the task in front of you, meaning it takes repeated attempts to even start to figure out what's being asked of you, often having to redo difficult sections just to get the opportunity. It's why falling to a simple spike is such a killer, and why, despite knowing what the game would lose I did start to pine for a checkpoint or two.

There's nice touches, or 'nice' touches, where when you die the background of the level cracks, showing what's behind, as though it's you scarring, your defences cracking, or the truth breaking through. The story can be very affecting, small instances, ideas it brings forward, not just a man facing death. It can also be a little maudlin, and the script heavy handed. While the narration performance isn't bad by any means, the choice of making it gravely does make it sound a little teenage comic book at points.

What In Between deserves credit for is the wealth of ideas it brings to the table. No two levels are the same, mechanics are tossed away before they're overused, and the 5 concepts evolve over their levels. It's got striking looks, a good soundtrack, and well handled cut scenes. And if you do get too stuck, it gives you enough leeway to skip a few levels and still make progress

Ultimately, despite some misgivings I'd still recommend In Between. It's certainly got enough challenge for puzzle fans, but at the same time its themes and how it ties them to its gameplay makes it incredibly interesting for those looking for something different. It's a rare thing. There's a few too many moments where I wasn't having fun, but In Between will stay with me for a while, it will be brought up in conversation, it's definitely worth your time

Bitparade: http://bitparade.co.uk/article.php?id=3831

In Between is not always a fun game. It's an interesting game, really interesting, full of moments that get your mind working, pulling themes in to the gameplay. It's an aspect of the game that brings to mind Braid, too few games find or even try to find a way to let their narrative affect their gameplay. It’s maybe underselling things a little bit, but In Between is a puzzle platformer, you have to get from the start point to the level's exit. To do that you have to flip gravity, walking on the ceiling, flinging yourself from one wall to another. The difficulty comes in what's put in your way, be that spikes, blocks, or environmental effects, which is where the narrative comes in. In Between deals with terminal cancer, or at least deals with dealing with terminal cancer. You're essentially playing through someone coming to terms with their fate, their mortality. Each set of levels is themed around one of the 5 stages of grief. Without wanting to spoil too much, 'denial' sees you avoiding a closing darkness, kind of like a Mario level that's constantly pushing you forward. The developers have found reasons for introducing mechanics to the levels, you're soon encouraged to face down the darkness, push it back, and depending on your perspective, either face or push back the truth. Which brings me to 'anger'. In anger you have to make your way across the winding levels, altering gravity, while avoiding giant red balls of anger. It's at this point I noticed the game starting to become a bit more ruthless with its difficulty. You'd solve the puzzle of the level, work out how to traverse its obstacles, only to die on a spike placed a pixel away from your safe landing zone. It's not that the other levels aren't difficult, but 'anger' feels needless, almost cruel. I've started to wonder if it's deliberate, if it's recreating the feelings you would experience when going through that stage, why's it happening to you, it's unfair, it's cruel. Or I'm over thinking things. Either way it's a dangerous game for In Between to play. There's a lot of points where In Between just isn't that fun, where the more frustrating parts of the game drag it down. You don't always get enough time to properly see the task in front of you, meaning it takes repeated attempts to even start to figure out what's being asked of you, often having to redo difficult sections just to get the opportunity. It's why falling to a simple spike is such a killer, and why, despite knowing what the game would lose I did start to pine for a checkpoint or two. There's nice touches, or 'nice' touches, where when you die the background of the level cracks, showing what's behind, as though it's you scarring, your defences cracking, or the truth breaking through. The story can be very affecting, small instances, ideas it brings forward, not just a man facing death. It can also be a little maudlin, and the script heavy handed. While the narration performance isn't bad by any means, the choice of making it gravely does make it sound a little teenage comic book at points. What In Between deserves credit for is the wealth of ideas it brings to the table. No two levels are the same, mechanics are tossed away before they're overused, and the 5 concepts evolve over their levels. It's got striking looks, a good soundtrack, and well handled cut scenes. And if you do get too stuck, it gives you enough leeway to skip a few levels and still make progress Ultimately, despite some misgivings I'd still recommend In Between. It's certainly got enough challenge for puzzle fans, but at the same time its themes and how it ties them to its gameplay makes it incredibly interesting for those looking for something different. It's a rare thing. There's a few too many moments where I wasn't having fun, but In Between will stay with me for a while, it will be brought up in conversation, it's definitely worth your time Bitparade: http://bitparade.co.uk/article.php?id=3831