Atomic Heart could have been the next BioShock

polygon.com:

Atomic Heartwears its BioShock influences on its sleeve. Both games place first-person adventure mechanics in elaborate utopias gone wrong. Both feature verbose, bombastic leaders dead set on making their grandiose dreams into reality; combat repertoires mix traditional weapons with in-game “magic” (instead of BioShock’s Plasmids or BioShock Infinite’s Vigors, we have Atomic Heart’s Polymers); a confused, amnesiac main character has mysterious ties to said leader, forming the narrative crux.

Yet, crucially, Atomic Heart fails to nail down what made the BioShock series — as divisive as it is — work: a keen laser-focus on a few central themes.

Instead of carefully weaving a textured dimension to its plot and gameplay, Atomic Heart developer Mundfish cast its net wide. And by embracing so much, it held onto very little. This lack of focus, whether intentional or not, on careful narrative threading in favor of paint bombs of set pieces results in a vague sketch of BioShock rather than a detailed reimagining. None of this is to mention the chum of its writing bloodying the waters of its world, or the incessant whining and unjustified antagonism of its unlikeable protagonist, all within a haphazard mess of levels that needed more editing, not more variety.

While my initial impressions of the game were (and remain) highly favorable, and I do recommend trying it on Game Pass — just not buying it — I cannot help but be underwhelmed by the consistency of the game’s inconsistencies. While the retro Soviet “aesthetic” is prominent, that bombastic, beautiful opening theme is abandoned in favor of occasional notes. It’s symphony more than solo.

This disease of diversity seeps into the bones of gameplay too. While Atomic Heart’s