Despite the controversy surrounding its release, indie game "Horses" fails to meet the lofty expectations of its own bold ideas. Banned from Steam and then briefly available on other platforms, the game's narrative about subjugation, slavery, abuse, sex, assault, religious trauma, and subjugation is marred by poor storytelling, pseudo-intellectualism, and a lack of depth.
Players are tasked with helping out with chores on a farm where the "horses" – human beings in chains – are forced to wear horse head masks. The game's attempts at surreal horror and intentionally grotesque aesthetic fall flat, with poorly designed characters and awkwardly delivered dialogue that often feels like a plot device rather than an organic element of the story.
Critics have largely overlooked the game's numerous instances of sexual assault, instead focusing on the controversy surrounding its release. However, these moments are handled clumsily, failing to elevate the game beyond a shallow commentary on sexual repression. The game never truly confronts the trauma caused by these events and instead relies on them as a plot device.
The debate over "Horses"' delisting has highlighted a larger issue in the gaming industry – the fragility of developers' economic security due to the concentration of platforms controlling access to players. This imbalance creates structural issues, not just because platforms enforce rules, but also because there are so few viable alternatives.
In conclusion, while "Horses" needs to be defended against censorship, it is a bad game that should be examined on its own merits rather than as an example of the industry's willingness to tolerate adult content. The real question is why we care about this game at all – and how we can have more meaningful conversations about its failings without resorting to defensiveness or finger-pointing.
Players are tasked with helping out with chores on a farm where the "horses" – human beings in chains – are forced to wear horse head masks. The game's attempts at surreal horror and intentionally grotesque aesthetic fall flat, with poorly designed characters and awkwardly delivered dialogue that often feels like a plot device rather than an organic element of the story.
Critics have largely overlooked the game's numerous instances of sexual assault, instead focusing on the controversy surrounding its release. However, these moments are handled clumsily, failing to elevate the game beyond a shallow commentary on sexual repression. The game never truly confronts the trauma caused by these events and instead relies on them as a plot device.
The debate over "Horses"' delisting has highlighted a larger issue in the gaming industry – the fragility of developers' economic security due to the concentration of platforms controlling access to players. This imbalance creates structural issues, not just because platforms enforce rules, but also because there are so few viable alternatives.
In conclusion, while "Horses" needs to be defended against censorship, it is a bad game that should be examined on its own merits rather than as an example of the industry's willingness to tolerate adult content. The real question is why we care about this game at all – and how we can have more meaningful conversations about its failings without resorting to defensiveness or finger-pointing.
. I'm not saying the game doesn't deserve some love for being bold and trying new things, but at the same time... let's be honest, some of that stuff in the game is just super uncomfortable to watch 
.
. We can't just focus on "it's edgy" or "it's pushing boundaries" without actually thinking about how that affects the player experience. And, like, yeah, the gaming industry does need to figure out its economic security issues and platform control thing ASAP 
.
AND THE CHARACTERS FEEL SO... ONE-DIMENSIONAL. AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THOSE HORRIBLE SCENES - THEY'RE NOT EVEN CONFRONTING THEM IN A WAY THAT'S GONNA MAKE YOU THINK, IT JUST KINDA SITS THERE AND IS LIKE, "OH YEAH, THIS HAPPENS TO PEOPLE" 
.
I'd rather have an honest conversation about what went wrong with the game instead of just defending it or tearing down others who criticized it 
It's like they phoned in the whole thing and expected us to just go along with it.
It's time for some real change in this industry, not just defending a bad game. 
the game's got some wild ideas but they're not executed well at all and the writing is cringeworthy lol what's worse tho is how the devs r still profiting off this mess 
and we stumbled upon this amazing hidden cafe that serves the best avocado toast I've ever had 
. I mean, have you ever tried putting pickled jalapeños on your toast? Game changer! And can we talk about how underrated indie games are? I mean, "Horses" might be a mess, but it's still trying to tackle some heavy stuff and that takes guts 
. But seriously, the gaming industry needs to figure out a way to support devs without relying on one or two major platforms 
. And don't even get me started on the handling of those sensitive topics - it's just not done well at all 
. I think we need to have a more nuanced conversation about what games can and should tackle, rather than just defending or censoring them based on convenience 
.
... it's like they took every problematic trope and mashed them all together into one big ugly mess 
. And don't even get me started on the farm thing – I mean, who thought that was a good idea? 
"
And don't even get me started on the gameplay – it felt like I was stuck in some kinda weird limbo.
. The way they handled some of the more sensitive topics... not great, mate. They're so caught up in trying to be edgy and deep that they end up just feeling shallow. And don't even get me started on how cringeworthy some of the characters are 
anyway, i think you hit the nail on the head when you said we need to have more nuanced conversations about games like this without getting all defensive about 'em.
The game's trying too hard to be edgy, but ends up feeling like a mess. But honestly, who needs this kind of content in a game? Can we just have some fun and not worry about checking our feelings at the door? 
it's like devs were trying too hard to be edgy and thought "controversy" was the same as "good game". the whole concept sounds super interesting but like, poorly executed, you know? 
. The game's problems go beyond just its poor storytelling or lack of depth; it feels like it's missing a fundamental understanding of what makes games actually good 
and yeah, def not worth playing 
wanna see devs take risks but also put in effort