That’s pretty hilariously bad, especially as the only reason I read the review was out of disbelief that it might be a sequel to the 1992 game.

TL:DR

"…the gaming industry isn’t a charity, and people deserve to know what they’re potentially spending their hard-earned money on. Here’s what you need to know: the problem with Flashback 2 isn’t merely that it is buggy, sometimes to a hilarious degree. Instead, the main issue is that even if the bugs weren’t present, it still wouldn’t be worth its current price tag. "

…huh, I thought “Flashback 2” was released years ago, but that one seems to have been a remake/re-imagining of sorts of the original. And that one was pretty bad as well, it seems.

And wasn’t Fade to black more or less a sequel to Flashback as well? Seems like the Flashback sequels/remakes are fairly cursed… weird.

I do have fond memories of the original, though. Kinda disappointing there isn’t really a worthwhile follow up to it.

Create a post

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
  • 1 user online
  • 64 users / day
  • 327 users / week
  • 848 users / month
  • 3.13K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 4.49K Posts
  • 28.9K Comments
  • Modlog