Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Yes, I like it a lot. SOMA is one of the best sci-fi horrors. I don't despise historical periods but I prefer modern and future periods way more.
In fact, SOMA was their best game so far with an amazing and really deep story, and the numbers prove it.
SOMA: 95% - Overwhelmingly Positive after 33,000 reviews!!!!!!
Rebirth: 77% - Mostly positive after 6,500 reviews
Bunker: 93% - very positive after 5,000 reviews
Dark Descent: 95% - Overwhelmingly Positive after 17,000 reviews
They should really return to sci-fi after two games set in the past.
If not...what then? Another game set in the 1900s? Or 1800s? Or 1700? Really? Sigh...
You are simply a sci-fi hater, that's all.
It's how i've enjoyed the games so far.
Hmm, horror set in a stone age? 9000 years ago, for example.
No, that would be weird. We would not have any familiar points of reference.
No known cities and places exist at that time. No familiar locations, no familiar countries.