Quantum Conundrum

Quantum Conundrum is the king of puzzles. Sadly, some of the controls keep it from being king of the genre.

80%Game Brain Score

gameplay, story

grinding, optimization

84% User Score Based on 1,549 reviews

Critic Score 75%Based on 7 reviews

Platforms

Buy Nowfrom $1.58

Buy NowGet on Steam$8.99

Buy NowGet on Xbox Games Store

About

Quantum Conundrum is a first-person puzzle game where players manipulate time and space to solve challenging puzzles. As the nephew of the brilliant, eccentric inventor Professor Quadwrangle, you must navigate through his ever-changing mansion and experiment with his latest quantum invention: the Interdimensional Shift Device. Your goal is to rescue the professor from himself and his out-of-control inventions before it's too late!

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

+16

84%

Audience ScoreBased on 1,556 reviews

gameplay119 positive mentions

grinding28 negative mentions

Creative and enjoyable puzzles that utilize unique mechanics of dimension shifting.
Charming art style and humorous narration by John de Lancie add to the overall experience.
Fun gameplay that balances puzzle-solving with platforming elements.

Platforming sections can be frustrating due to imprecise controls and timing requirements.
The story is weak and the ending feels abrupt and unsatisfying.
Some puzzles rely too heavily on execution rather than problem-solving, leading to repetitive gameplay.

gameplay
309 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
39%
55%
6%
The gameplay of "Quantum Conundrum" is characterized by its unique dimension-shifting mechanics, allowing players to manipulate objects in various ways to solve puzzles. While the puzzles are generally enjoyable and creatively designed, many players feel that the gameplay can become repetitive and overly reliant on platforming elements, which detracts from the overall experience. Despite its charming visuals and humor, the game struggles with a lack of depth in its mechanics and narrative, leading to mixed reviews regarding its execution and replayability.
- “The dimension shifts all come together to create a fun, mechanically deep puzzle game with emergent gameplay solutions.”
- “I like this game; it’s got a very unique mechanic where you can change dimensions, and that makes things lighter. It’s also fun to play because of that and it being somewhat similar to Portal.”
- “Quantum Conundrum teaches the player its mechanics and does a good job at it, also bringing back things introduced in previous chapters in the later ones.”
- “Some fun puzzles, one or two funny quotes, and some decent platforming, but it's just so devoid of a real identity and personality that it diminishes the gameplay efforts.”
- “The puzzle mechanics are fine, but there's so little you can do with any of them, either on their own or together.”
- “The gameplay is mediocre, the puzzles are mediocre, the writing is awful, and the game is too short.”
story
283 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
64%
11%
The story in "Quantum Conundrum" is generally perceived as weak and lacking depth, often described as a simple and forgettable backdrop to the gameplay. While some players appreciate the humor and light-heartedness of the narrative, many criticize it for being underdeveloped, with an abrupt ending that fails to provide a satisfying conclusion. Overall, the game prioritizes puzzle mechanics over storytelling, leading to mixed feelings about the narrative's contribution to the overall experience.
- “The story is simple but interesting, and the dialogue (both about the story and various side dialogues) is pretty nice and funny.”
- “The story is fantastic, and this game is just so creative and fun in so many ways.”
- “The dialogue is funny, the story is interesting, and the gameplay is fun.”
- “The plot is very dull and not very interesting.”
- “There's no real storyline and the ending is bad.”
- “The story is all told through words and pictures, and not gameplay, which is horrible for storytelling.”
humor
224 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
98%
2%
The humor in "Quantum Conundrum" is often described as lighthearted and whimsical, with a mix of cheesy jokes and quirky dialogue delivered by the narrator, voiced by John de Lancie. While some players find the humor charming and enjoyable, others feel it falls flat compared to the darker, more sophisticated wit of games like "Portal." Overall, the game offers a fun and entertaining experience, though opinions on the effectiveness of its comedic elements vary widely.
- “The story is simple but interesting and the dialogue (both about the story and various side dialogues) is pretty nice and funny.”
- “A great puzzle game set in a very bizarre and quirky world with amazing voice acting and humor.”
- “The dialogue is funny, the story is interesting, and the gameplay is fun.”
- “The writers clearly wanted to create the same witty, 'punny' sort of one-liners as in Portal, but it's not funny at all, and the only voice actor in the game completely messes up the delivery.”
- “The story, which is mostly told through your uncle's voice through the mansion's intercom system, is pretty bland and painfully unfunny.”
- “Mediocre and unfunny Portal clone.”
graphics
172 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
47%
47%
6%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews, with some players praising the charming, cartoonish art style that fits well with the game's whimsical theme, while others criticize the visuals as bland or repetitive, especially for a title released in 2012. Many appreciate the colorful aesthetics and the unique dimension-shifting mechanics, but some report issues with graphical performance and a lack of advanced settings. Overall, while the graphics are generally considered decent and enjoyable, they may not meet the expectations set by more modern titles.
- “The graphics hold up extremely well (that's just the nature of cartoon art styles, after all).”
- “The graphics are really nice, with a sort of cartoonish feel which matches quite well with the portrayal of the mad scientist and his funny quotes.”
- “Quantum Conundrum achieves both of these areas spectacularly with beautifully created graphics and a comedic storyline.”
- “The visuals are bland, the music is repetitive and not memorable.”
- “Perhaps this game may have merited a mild recommendation when it came out, but in 2024 there are just so many other puzzle platformers (in 2D or 3D) that have better plots, graphics, mechanics, and puzzles.”
- “The graphics are bad in my opinion.”
music
68 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
44%
52%
4%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players praising its catchy and fitting soundtrack that enhances the overall atmosphere, while others find it repetitive and forgettable. Many appreciate the lively and whimsical tone of the music, which complements the game's visuals and mechanics, although a few critiques mention that certain tracks, particularly the ending song, fall flat. Overall, the soundtrack is seen as a positive aspect, contributing to the game's charm despite some inconsistencies.
- “The music fits well with the overall tone of the game.”
- “The music is fantastic; it is one reason I continued to play through the game.”
- “Much like Portal, this game is a good puzzle platformer that features some very unique mechanics that is also backed up with a great soundtrack.”
- “The visuals are bland, the music is repetitive and not memorable.”
- “The music is a bit of a mixed bag.”
- “The art assets and level design are the very definition of cookie-cutter layouts, and the music is as bland as it is forgettable.”
grinding
28 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Overall, players find the grinding aspect of the game to be tedious and repetitive, particularly due to frustrating platforming mechanics and the execution of puzzles. While some enjoy the quirky vibe and initial fun, many express that the experience quickly becomes a drag, with levels feeling overly difficult or monotonous. The combination of tedious puzzles and inconsistent mechanics detracts from the overall enjoyment, leading to a sense of frustration rather than rewarding gameplay.
- “However, at a certain point, you’re just going from puzzle room to puzzle room and it got tedious really fast.”
- “This game was fun for about a few hours but got extremely tedious due to horrible platforming mechanics and wonky physics getting in the way of solving actual puzzles.”
- “The puzzles here are tedious and not rewarding, and the levels are repetitive and don't offer much detail.”
atmosphere
20 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
60%
25%
15%
The atmosphere of the game is described as charming and cartoonish, enhanced by engaging music and voice acting, particularly from John de Lancie. While some players appreciate the unique world and humor, others find the character interactions and repetitive environments detract from the overall experience. Overall, the game successfully creates a fun and whimsical atmosphere, though it may not reach the heights of its inspirations like Portal.
- “The graphics are also well done and give the whole game a fun, 'cartoony' atmosphere.”
- “Dripping with atmosphere, interesting mechanics, and great puzzles.”
- “John de Lancie as a narrator does a great job creating atmosphere; I could say it is almost as good as in The Stanley Parable and makes the game so much better and alive.”
- “While GLaDOS’ dialogue is a crucial part of Portal's atmosphere, here I just kept wishing I could mute Qwadrangle.”
- “The graphics are a bit stilted but work in the cartoon atmosphere of absurdity.”
- “And though the puzzles themselves are masterfully made, creating situations that are intellectually satisfying while remaining simple enough to avoid frustration, the mark that QC missed, mainly, is atmosphere: the uncle (voiced by John de Lancie) is utterly unlikeable and the levels, after a while, became very same-y.”
optimization
17 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
18%
64%
18%
The game's optimization has received largely negative feedback, with many players reporting significant performance issues, including stuttering and long loading times, even on high-end systems. While some aspects of the game run smoothly, the lack of optimization options and instability detract from the overall experience, leading to frustration among users. Overall, the consensus indicates that the game is poorly optimized, impacting gameplay enjoyment.
- “The areas are filled with a nice array of collectibles, the game runs smoothly... I can't really find too many things wrong with this.”
- “Not sure why such an old game would have performance issues and require a fix from online.”
- “However, the game is strangely without optimization options and can be quite repetitive in the in-between spaces.”
- “On top of that, the game appears to have performance issues even on PCs that should be able to play it without problems.”
replayability
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
42%
25%
The game's replayability is mixed; while some players appreciate the challenge of achieving high scores, completing collectibles, and engaging with time and dimension-shift goals, others find these elements to be artificial and lacking depth. The short story mode, which can be completed in about 6-7 hours, limits overall replay value, making it more appealing for completionists or those seeking a quick puzzle experience rather than long-term engagement. Overall, it offers some replay incentives, but many players feel it falls short of providing substantial replayability.
- “Good story mode, replayable for high scores, and makes physicists cry.”
- “Fun puzzle platformer that has replayability.”
- “Timeruns, least dimension shifts, and collectibles feed the replayability.”
- “Since the game is a bit short and doesn't have much replayability, I recommend buying it on sale; if you do, you'll get your money's worth for sure.”
- “Unfortunately, there isn't much replayability except for finding all of the collectibles and the DLC, but the game is a solid experience on its own and could very well be worth the asking price if you are interested.”
- “Unfortunately, the game doesn't seem to offer that much replay value, so unless you're a completionist, you're probably done in about 6-7 hours.”
stability
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's stability is frequently criticized, with users reporting significant input lag, random freezes, and various bugs that affect gameplay, such as disappearing items and graphical glitches. While the aesthetics are generally appreciated, the presence of game-breaking glitches and inconsistent performance detracts from the overall experience. Players are advised to be cautious, especially if their hardware struggles with demanding graphics.
- “I'm not talking about a nanosecond input lag; I'm talking about multiple seconds of input lag for single button presses, as well as random freezes and slowdown.”
- “The physics engine is a bit flimsy, and I encountered some buggy behaviors, like items disappearing or respawning back for no apparent reason.”
- “Be warned that there were a few game-breaking glitches associated with the graphics rendering, so if your computer can't handle intensive game graphics, you may want to hold off.”
emotional
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
83%
50%
The emotional responses to the game are mixed, with some players feeling disappointed by the lackluster ending that undermines their sense of accomplishment, while others express a range of intense feelings, from laughter to frustration. Despite the game's potential for a satisfying conclusion, many felt it fell short, leading to a sense of wasted time. Overall, while the game offers moments of joy, the emotional payoff is marred by an unsatisfactory narrative resolution.
- “It's a real shame this game had no better cutscene since the game was building the ending to be a nice sparkly bow to a great game, but it didn't, which is a real shame since the game is worth it at full price but the ending made me feel like I wasted my time and that everything I did in the game was really for nothing.”
- “I laughed, I cried, I punched a hole in the drywall and screamed into it with rage and elation until I got a call from my landlord demanding I stop.”
- “Definitely buy it if you've got spare cash for a few hours of wholesome fun!”
- “The story was boring and the ending was unsatisfying.”
- “The emotional depth was lacking, making it hard to connect with the characters.”
- “I felt no emotional impact; the narrative failed to engage me.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players express frustration with the game's monetization strategy, particularly due to its cliffhanger ending and the misleading advertisements that suggest a different gameplay experience. This has led to disappointment regarding the value received for their investment.
- “I like the game, but it ends on a cliffhanger which kind of upsets me, and also the advertisements suggest that you would play as the science character.”
- “I normally say a lot more, but the advertisements for the game tell you enough.”

75%Critics’ scoreBased on 7 critic reviews

Buy Quantum Conundrum

7h Median play time

7h Average play time

6-9h Spent by most gamers

*Based on 10 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

86%4.2kreviews

The Entropy Centre

2022

Platformer

78%1kreviews

Q.U.B.E. 2

2018

Platformer

84%3.4kreviews

Lightmatter

2020

Puzzle

81%8.2kreviews

The Turing Test

2016

Shooter

This game contains adult content

68%290reviews

Relicta

2020

Action Adventure

Quantum Conundrum

Platforms

About