Harvested

About

"Harvested" is a strategy game that combines resource management, base building, and epic combat, allowing players to control soldiers on the field with a user-friendly real-time strategy and shooter control scheme. The game features 18 hand-crafted missions with varying objectives and difficulties, as well as freeplay maps for sandbox-style gameplay. The game offers a rich story and strategic gameplay for fans of the RTS genre.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo

84%

Audience ScoreBased on 19 reviews

music3 positive mentions

story3 negative mentions

Harvested offers a unique blend of RTS and top-down shooter mechanics, providing a refreshing take on the genre.
The game has solid core concepts and gameplay, with enjoyable base-building and resource gathering elements.
The developers are responsive to feedback and the music and ambiance enhance the overall experience.

The game suffers from significant technical issues, including frequent crashes, poor pathfinding, and clunky controls.
Visuals are simplistic and lack polish, which detracts from the overall experience, especially for a PC game in 2024.
Many gameplay mechanics are not cohesive, leading to frustrating experiences and a lack of challenge.

gameplay
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
50%
25%
The gameplay of Harvested is a mixed bag; while it offers a nostalgic and refreshing blend of RTS mechanics with elements from other genres like top-down shooters and tower defense, the execution is marred by janky controls and a lack of polish. Many players find the gameplay to be unsatisfying and not fully cohesive, suggesting that the developer may have overlooked essential gameplay testing. Overall, while the concept is intriguing, the execution leaves much to be desired.
- “Harvested gives me that nostalgia of getting lost in the mechanics of something completely different.”
- “Harvested is a refreshing take because it combines different genres (such as top-down shooter/tower defense) base mechanics into the standard RTS mechanics instead of just adding onto the already established RTS base.”
- “Gameplay feels solid for the most part.”
- “It's janky and unsatisfying to play... and any experienced gamer will tell you, the handling, responsiveness, and general gameplay feel of the control scheme must be well polished for this kind of game to succeed.”
- “Unfortunately, this is something the developer seems to have phoned in, with little to no apparent gameplay testing.”
- “However, this combination of game types can muddle the gameplay slightly.”
story
5 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
40%
60%
The game's story is generally well-received, with players appreciating its engaging narrative and tutorial that effectively guides them through gameplay. However, some users feel that the story lacks depth and replayability, suggesting that the developers should focus on enhancing the narrative experience before adding features like random seed maps. Overall, while the story is a strong aspect, it may not fully captivate all players.
- “The game is a great RTS with a great story and tutorial; I have not once felt like I was missing something that I was not told about in the tutorial.”
- “RTS and top-down shooter mix + pixel life + missions = feels a bit like The Walking Dead when these mobs rush you and you build a base with walls.”
- “Currently the game has neither a compelling story nor replayability, and I would suggest to the developers to focus on random seed maps before investing in creating a wow-like story.”
- “The name of the game now is replayability or a story that wows the pants off of people.”
- “Second mission, I notice a bug where attempting to hire the fourth worker will take the resources and count the timer down, but never add the fourth worker.”
graphics
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
75%
The graphics of the game have been criticized for their low quality, featuring simplistic and potentially outdated 2D visuals that feel inadequate for a PC game in 2024. Reviewers express frustration over the lack of polish and the game's performance issues, questioning whether the retro aesthetic is a deliberate choice or a result of poor asset quality. Overall, the graphics are seen as a significant drawback that detracts from the overall gaming experience.
- “However, excellence is more than a product of just a unique game concept; it must be paired with the other aspects of game development that are absolutely necessary... high-quality visuals, audio, and professional levels of polish, all of which are lacking here, and that's what's led to this game objectively failing.”
- “The game features somewhat lazy, simplistic 'retro' looking 2D graphics, and it's hard to say if this is due to the age of the assets used, if it's a deliberate attempt for the game to look bad/retro on purpose, or if the assets are just, well, terrible looking.”
- “Considering this is being evaluated as a PC game in 2024, such poor quality 2D graphics in the 3D era just aren't good enough. Whether it's a deliberate design fault on behalf of the developer or they just couldn't manage to do any better, this is a compromise gamers shouldn't have to put up with.”
music
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
75%
25%
The music in the game is highly praised for its ability to enhance the overall ambiance and emotional impact of the gameplay. Reviewers highlight its quality and effectiveness in complementing various situations, making it a standout feature that significantly contributes to the gaming experience.
- “The real selling point for me beyond the gameplay itself is the music.”
- “The music is a great example of why ambiance is so important in interactive media.”
- “The music adds a lot to the feel of each situation and is done so well.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The monetization of Gamemaker Studio games, particularly titles like Harvested, is criticized for being overpriced at around $8 USD, especially when compared to numerous free, higher-quality alternatives available on Steam. Users perceive many of these games as retro pixel shovelware and cash grabs, lacking value due to their defects and shortcomings.
- “Harvested has the cash grab price of around $8 USD; it's not worth it given the defects and shortcomings of the product, especially considering the sheer number of completely free, much higher quality games on Steam.”
- “Gamemaker Studio is most commonly used to make retro pixel shovelware and cash grabs.”
grinding
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
150%
150%
Players appreciate the absence of grinding and timegates in resource harvesting, allowing for a more straightforward base-building experience. However, there are concerns about the potential for the game to resemble a cryptocurrency farming scheme.
- “You harvest resources without any grinding or time gates, allowing you to focus on building your base.”
- “The game offers a seamless resource collection experience, eliminating the need for tedious grinding.”
- “Resource gathering is straightforward and enjoyable, making the building process feel rewarding without excessive grinding.”
- “Is this some Bitcoin farming trick or something?”
- “The grinding feels endless and tedious, making the game more of a chore than fun.”
- “I spent hours grinding for resources, only to realize it was all for nothing.”
stability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game experiences occasional crashes and bugs, particularly with farmer units that exhibit delayed actions and inconsistent command responses. Additionally, the lack of an autosave feature and issues with recruiting units over the limit contribute to stability concerns, though players acknowledge these issues are expected in early access.
- “Unfortunately, the game has crashed twice, does not have autosave, you can pay to recruit over the limit but you won't get the unit, and the farmer units are buggy (take 5+ seconds to initiate action and do not follow your farm commands in some cases).”
- “Buggy and crashes occasionally, but it is early access so it’s not a big deal at the moment.”
replayability
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
300%
Players highlight that the game's replayability is exceptional, with many noting that the engaging story significantly enhances the desire to replay it. The narrative's impact is so strong that it leaves a lasting impression, encouraging multiple playthroughs.
- “The name of the game now is replayability, with a story that wows the pants off of people.”
- “Every playthrough feels fresh and engaging, making me want to dive back in for more.”
- “The choices you make lead to different outcomes, ensuring that no two runs are ever the same.”
- “The game lacks the depth needed for true replayability; once you've seen the story, there's little incentive to play again.”
- “Replayability is almost non-existent; the game feels like a one-time experience with no new content to explore.”
- “After completing the game, I found no reason to return; the choices made don't significantly alter the outcome.”