I could write Torment, given that I am one of the few people on dex who do not straight up loathe the game.
I did however only come across the game long after the entire kickstarter show was done, so I could only comment on what the game is, not on what they advertised it as.
But that will be dishonest in a way. I mean,the game is total shit,i to didn't fallow the drama and just played the game,even am replaying it now to see if it was that shit. And it is pretty shit. It lacks interesting story,good mechanics and decent writing.
That is an echochamber sentiment. Game is at 71% steam, 6.9 Metacritic users, both Codex and Rpgwatch (lol) steam curators recommend it.
The game is mediocre, and has drawn a lot of rage by people who feel scammed from the kickstarter (half the codex) and a lot of ill will from trying to be PST too hard instead of being its own thing.
I think it would be more interesting to have someone write a review who knows the details about the cut content, as an example the weird underwater desert oasis you only visit once with the memory oasis and then suddenly at the end of the game was supposed to be an entire hub area, and is featured prominently on the kickstarter page.
But just having someone write a slating review is more intellectually dishonest in this case, since while the game is nowhere near a masterpiece or able to live up to its inspiration it is also a long road from actual shit rpgs, and even better than some other mediocre ones.
I would go so far as to say that it is better than Bard's Tale IV and about even to Wasteland II, to stick with InXiles other games in comparison.