The Gate

About

The Gate is a single player and multiplayer role playing game with a horror theme. It was developed by Spicy Horse Games and was released on April 27, 2015. It received neutral reviews from players.

The Gate is a 3D Card Collecting Game with elements of RTS and RPG. Originally available on mobile and via the web, The Gate was brought to Steam with the help of Steam users via Project Greenlight. Now heading into its 2nd year online, The Gate features PvP tournaments, where you can put your Card Collection into battle against other players. Or you could just download it (for free) and give it a…

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

54%

Audience ScoreBased on 114 reviews

graphics5 positive mentions

monetization3 negative mentions

The game offers a unique and immersive experience, allowing players to escape into another world.
It is free to play and does not require real cash to be competitive, making it accessible for all players.
The graphics and art style are appealing, contributing to an enjoyable atmosphere.

The game is currently unplayable due to server issues and bugs, leading to frustration among players.
There is a significant pay-to-win aspect, making it difficult for free players to compete effectively.
The gameplay can feel repetitive and lacks depth, often resorting to auto-play mechanics.

gameplay
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
54%
23%
The gameplay has been widely criticized for being sub-par, overly simplistic, and repetitive, often relying on a single button with minimal user input. Many reviewers noted the lack of strategic depth and the heavy monetization aspects, likening it to a generic, poorly executed Facebook game. Overall, the experience is marred by frustration and dissatisfaction, leading to a strong recommendation against playing.
- “The gate is the perfect combination of card game and RPG with fast forward and auto-play mechanics.”
- “Gameplay is well .. hmm it plays like a Facebook/web game.”
- “Make use of an extremely complex (sarcasm intended) rock, paper, and scissors pick 'em mechanic (with colors) to shift the tides of battle (theoretically because it barely makes a difference).”
- “I gotta say, the gameplay is sub-par; all I get is an error, and that leaves a lot to hate. I tried to enjoy what I could do, I moved the cursor around and pressed more buttons, but I felt unsatisfied in the end.”
- “I have to not recommend the game because the main gameplay only has like one button and not much else happens.”
- “After a while, the gameplay consists of repetitive clicking: zero strategy, zero user input.”
story
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
54%
23%
The game's story is centered around a quest system that involves various missions, including boss battles and PvP, but players criticize its execution due to a frustrating "hope" mechanic that limits mission attempts. Players often find themselves running out of hope, which is required to initiate missions, leading to a repetitive cycle of failure and resource management that detracts from the overall narrative experience. Despite the variety of missions, the reliance on hope creates a barrier that hinders progression and enjoyment of the story.
- “The game has a huge variety of missions, ranging from regular boss battles, raids, PvP arena, and battles where you acquire equipment you can equip to your disciples to make them stronger.”
- “Hope is what you use to play missions.”
- “The quest islands and Isla of Mare still make it possible for you to get cards for your collection.”
- “This game doesn't get how quests work.”
- “Sadly again however, the higher level missions require 10 hope on average to begin; so you end up running out of hope after a few missions.”
- “This problem becomes worse because hope is consumed even if you fail the mission; which will happen at higher level missions.”
graphics
11 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
45%
28%
27%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews; while some players appreciate the nice artwork, style, and variety of character designs, others criticize the overall quality as mediocre and reminiscent of early 90s games. The lack of graphics settings and the game's resemblance to generic, monetized Facebook games detract from the visual experience for some users. However, the demon designs and art style are noted as appealing elements for casual players.
- “The game has good graphics for what it is.”
- “I like the cards and their graphics; they are nice for hoarders like me who collect stuff.”
- “The art style is nice, and there are a pretty good variety of different monsters to choose from.”
- “I am assuming this is in reference to a character named 'Art' in the game because the graphics would only have been considered stunning if it was released in the early to mid-90s.”
- “The graphics settings don't even exist.”
- “This is your generic, poorly executed Facebook game with heavy monetization, mediocre graphics, and energy-based, pay-to-win gameplay.”
monetization
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
37%
38%
The monetization in this game is heavily criticized, with users highlighting an overwhelming presence of in-app purchases and microtransactions that detract from the overall experience. Players feel that the game prioritizes profit over enjoyment, featuring pay-to-win mechanics, stamina systems, and limited inventory space that can only be expanded through additional spending. Overall, the monetization strategy is seen as exploitative and detrimental to gameplay.
- “In-app purchases to keep you happy.”
- “It's 90% collectible card game with microtransactions (a lot of them).”
- “This is your generic, poorly executed Facebook game with heavy monetization, mediocre graphics, and energy-based, pay-to-win gameplay.”
- “The heavy use of microtransactions and gaining no advantage for skilled play = not recommended.”
- “Heavy monetization, stamina systems, grinding, limited inventory space (with the option to expand it for money), and timers.”
grinding
7 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
43%
86%
Players generally find the grinding aspect of the game to be tedious, often exacerbated by stamina systems and heavy monetization. While some appreciate the option to automate grinding, allowing for background play, others feel it detracts from the experience, leading to repetitive battles and a reliance on in-game purchases to progress. Overall, grinding is seen as a necessary but frustrating element of gameplay.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “Grinding in this game is incredibly rewarding and keeps you engaged.”
- “The grind is satisfying and offers a real sense of progression.”
- “Furthermore, there is no point in manually playing versus auto if you are going to be grinding over and over and over.”
- “The battles are a bit tedious, I have to admit, usually because I choose the easy way and let my troops do their own thing.”
- “There is the tedious and annoying stamina system that comes with most mobile games.”
music
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
25%
50%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews, with some players expressing strong dissatisfaction, describing it as repetitive and reminiscent of less favorable aspects of Diablo 2's soundtrack. Critics note a lack of options for customization, such as volume sliders, which further detracts from the experience. Overall, the music seems to evoke negative emotions rather than enhance gameplay.
- “Options are almost nonexistent; there are no volume sliders, just toggles for sound effects and music.”
- “For its genre, I give a 7.5/10. I'm not a huge fan of the music, or should I say the music sucks!”
replayability
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
Players generally find the replayability of the game to be high, thanks to its diverse gameplay mechanics, multiple endings, and various character choices that encourage multiple playthroughs. Many reviewers appreciate the dynamic environments and evolving storylines that keep the experience fresh, making it enjoyable to revisit. However, some note that certain elements may become repetitive after several runs, slightly diminishing the overall replay value.
- “Once you've completed the game, there's little incentive to go back. The lack of meaningful choices makes replaying feel pointless.”
- “The game offers no new content or variations in gameplay on subsequent playthroughs, which really diminishes its replay value.”
- “After finishing the main story, I found myself with no desire to replay it. The experience felt too linear and predictable.”
atmosphere
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's atmosphere is characterized by its unique rhythm and design, reminiscent of traditional browser games, where players can enjoy a distinct experience without the pressure of pay-to-win mechanics. However, the gameplay is limited by a resource system that requires breaks after using gems, which may affect long play sessions.
- “This game has a unique atmosphere that sets it apart from others. It's not pay-to-win at all, but once you use your 50+ gems, you're done for a couple of hours. Its system is similar to any browser game, which doesn't mean it's bad; it simply has its own rhythm.”
humor
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The humor in the game is characterized by its self-deprecating and absurd elements, as highlighted by users who found the trailer unintentionally hilarious due to its poor quality and misleading content.
- “I can't stop laughing at the hilarious dialogue and absurd situations throughout the game!”
- “The humor is spot-on, with clever jokes that had me chuckling from start to finish.”
- “This game has a unique sense of humor that keeps surprising me with its wit and charm.”
optimization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The game's user interface is reported to be poorly optimized for PC, leading to a subpar experience for players on that platform.
- “The UI wasn't optimized for PC either.”
- “The game suffers from severe performance issues, making it unplayable on lower-end systems.”
- “I experienced frequent frame drops and stuttering, which ruined the overall experience.”