[strike]Simple Increment[/strike] I mean [strike]The Billion Clicker[/strike] I mean The Googol Clicker isn't really a proper game, it's just a lazy 2D browser/Flash-tier "number incrementer" game where the object of the game is to increase the in-game currency by clicking, and sometimes buying things that increase the rate at which your currency/score goes up. It's an incredibly shallow game loop, to the point you might as well just run a program that does "i=i+1; print i" and watch the numbers go up automatically, and just watch it. You'd get the exact same outcome. If this sounds completely mindless, you're not wrong.
And, in a massive failure to comprehend the basic truth about gaming, it's a pure text only interface. I guess they missed the memo, but gaming is primarily a visual medium. That means it has to look good if it's going to compete for gamers attention.
From a technical perspective, the game doesn't meet basic minimum requirements that most PC gamers expect as standard. It's from a known Russian asset flipper, which also should be enough to let us know this isn't really a sincerely made, professional game, it's just another cash grab. It's exactly the same game as the clicker games such as "Simple Incrementer" published by "Pelmeni Games", most likely a shell account for this Russian asset flipper.
There's no option to change the resolution and no useful graphics tweaks. There's no way to ensure this is running at the native resolution of your display. There's no guarantee this game will look right on any PC as a result of this hamfisted design decision.
The game interface is just text boxes/dialogs and features no imagery at all, the kind of thing you expect to see in browser/HTML games from the 1990s. While that might be fine for the 1990s, gaming has evolved a lot since then, the ATI Rage became mainstream in 1996... it's 2024, and that kind of thing just won't fly anymore, it's just not visually up to scratch.
For gameplay purposes, because the user interface for this game is mostly just 2D static text... it might as well be a web page. It's functionally no different from a browser game. And we all know, Steam isn't here to compete with Chrome and Firefox. If the game can be done in a web browser, it's just not rich or compelling enough to appeal to serious gamers on PC.
These technical defects push this game below acceptable standards for any modern PC game.
The game never really caught on with the millions of gamers on Steam, with a very low peak player count close to launch, and then just a handful of players launching this game every couple of days. This is undoubtedly caused by factors such as those raised in this review. It's always helpful with buying decisions to consider how popular and successful the product is, and unfortunately while this did accumulate a few participation trophy reviews, overall, people just aren't using it.
So, should you buy this game? Is this one of the best of the 100,000+ games on Steam?
The Googol Clicker is relatively cheap at $3 USD, but it's not worth it. Given the defects and quality issues with the game, coupled with the unrealistic price, this is impossible to recommend. This is also competing with over 11,000 free games available on Steam, many of them far better than this paid product.
[quote][b][url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/marketing/profile]Profile Features Limited![/url][/b]
Valve have marked this game as "Profile Features Limited" at the time of this review. This is usually caused by poor sales figures and low community acceptance for the game (to date). Until this status changes, this game will not give you +1 to your Game Collector badge count, appear in profile achievements or any other Steam meta-accomplishments, nor can it be displayed in some profile showcases. If these factors are important to you, it may be worth holding off before buying this game.[/quote]
