Into the War

Into the War is a contemporary first-person shooter (FPS) developed by Small Town Studios, blending parkour mechanics with realistic graphics and physics. Set in a modern combat environment, the game offers both single-player and multiplayer modes, aiming to combine popular FPS features like vehicle combat and immersive campaigns into a single experience. Released in 2015, the development emphasized community-driven improvements, encouraging players to contribute ideas to shape the game’s evolution.

Into the War: Review

Introduction

In the annals of video game history, few titles encapsulate the perils of Early Access ambition and unfulfilled promise quite like Into the War. Released in 2015 by indie studio Small Town Studios, this “Parkour FPS” sought to meld agility-driven movement with large-scale combat, all while crowdsourcing its evolution through player feedback. The result? A cautionary tale of how grand vision collided with technical limitations, community disillusionment, and the harsh realities of indie development. This review dissects Into the War’s rise, fall, and legacy as a relic of a bygone era in digital distribution—a game that aimed to unite FPS fans but instead became a footnote in discussions about failed potential.

---

Development History & Context

The Studio and the Vision

Small Town Studios, a little-known indie team, positioned Into the War as a passion project designed to fill a perceived void in the FPS genre. Drawing inspiration from titles like Call of Duty and Advanced Warfare, they envisioned a hybrid experience combining parkour mobility, vehicular combat, and expansive maps. As stated on IndieDB, their goal was audacious: to “[take] those features and combine them into one amazing game” through player collaboration.

Technological Constraints and Ambitions

Built on Unity with Photon middleware for multiplayer functionality, Into the War targeted “realistic graphics and physics” (IndieDB). However, the studio’s inexperience with the engine soon became apparent. A December 2014 delay—from an initial December 15 release to January 1, 2015—hinted at turbulence, with the team citing upgrades to character controls as the cause. Yet, even after its eventual February 2015 launch, the game resembled a prototype, riddled with placeholder assets. Accusations later surfaced that Small Town Studios relied heavily on pre-made Unity store assets like UnitZ (VideoGameGeek), undermining claims of originality.

The Early Access Landscape

Into the War debuted amid Steam’s Early Access boom—a double-edged sword empowering indie devs while testing player patience. Small Town Studios leveraged this model, framing the game as a “bare backbone” (Steam) to be shaped by community input. But this transparency backfired. Players grew skeptical as updates stalled, and the studio’s decision to fire an employee and shutter servers (VideoGameGeek) eroded trust. By 2016, forums buzzed with abandonment theories, culminating in the game’s removal from Steam.

---

Narrative & Thematic Deep Dive

Into the War’s narrative ambitions were nearly nonexistent—a critical misstep in an era where even multiplayer-centric titles leaned into world-building. The marketing touted a “historical backdrop” (GameRebellion) and “war-torn landscapes,” but in practice, the game offered no campaign, lore, or contextual depth. Players were thrust into generic combat zones devoid of storyline or character motivation, rendering its setting—a vague “contemporary” conflict (MobyGames)—lifeless.

Themes of Community and Betrayal

Ironically, Into the War’s most compelling narrative unfolded outside the game. Its development became a meta-commentary on player-creator relationships. Promises of community-driven innovation devolved into silence, server shutdowns, and wiped forums (Steam Discussions). This thematic undercurrent—hope versus abandonment—resonated more deeply than any in-game content.

---

Gameplay Mechanics & Systems

Core Loop: Parkour Meets Jank

The game’s hook was its parkour system, allowing players to vault, slide, and sprint through maps. Yet, execution faltered. Movement felt floaty and unpolished, with momentum physics clashing against level geometry. One RAWG reviewer noted that parkour “narrowly fails and misses the target, perhaps by about 3 cm”—a apt metaphor for the entire experience.

Combat and Multiplayer Dysfunction

Gunplay was serviceable but plagued by imbalance. SMGs and shotguns dominated close-quarters fights, while sniper rifles suffered from inconsistent hit detection. The lack of spawn protection in multiplayer modes birthed rampant camping, with players “[waiting] for a poor Soul to be rematerialised” before instantly killing them (RAWG). Grenades, humorously, were “useless”—emitting “beeps” but no damage—a symbol of half-baked systems.

Technical Performance

Performance issues crippled the experience. AMD GPU users reported sub-20 FPS even on mid-tier hardware (RAWG), while crashes and server disconnects were frequent. The laughable “recommended” specs—a GTX 760 for a visually simplistic game—highlighted optimization failures.

UI and Progression

The UI was utilitarian but unintuitive, with clunky menus and minimal customization. Progression systems were shallow, offering basic weapon unlocks but no meaningful rewards to sustain engagement.

---

World-Building, Art & Sound

Visual Design: Asset Flip Aesthetics

Into the War’s visuals epitomized “stock Unity syndrome.” Environments—barren urban maps and generic warehouses—relied heavily on store-bought textures and models, lacking cohesion or artistic identity. Lighting was flat, animations robotic, and textures often clipped or popped. The “realistic graphics” promise (IndieDB) rang hollow, with the game resembling a pre-alpha tech demo.

Atmosphere and Sound Design

Sound design was equally forgettable. Weapon sounds lacked punch, and ambient noise—wind, distant gunfire—felt canned. The absence of a soundtrack further drained tension, reducing firefights to sterile encounters.

---

Reception & Legacy

Initial Reception

Upon release, Into the War garnered a “Mostly Negative” Steam rating (Steambase.io), with a Player Score of 22/100 based on 465 reviews. Critics and players alike skewered its technical flaws, abandoned state, and deceptive marketing. MetaCritic and GameFAQs mirrored this sentiment, with the latter ranking it among the “lowest-rated PC action games.”

Evolution of Reputation

By 2016, the game was synonymous with Early Access failures. Discussion shifted from critique to morbid curiosity, with players hunting for scarce keys (Steam Discussions) or mocking its demise. VideoGameGeek’s trivia section bluntly branded it “abandonware,” citing its November 2015 final update.

Industry Influence

While Into the War never achieved cult status, it inadvertently influenced indie discourse. It became a case study in managing player expectations, exemplified by YouTube essays like “The Parkour FPS That Never Was.” Its downfall also underscored the risks of asset-flipping—a practice later scrutinized in Steam’s curation policies.

---

Conclusion

Into the War is less a game than a cautionary monument—a testament to ambition outpacing execution. Small Town Studios’ vision of a community-crafted FPS crumbled under technical ineptitude, broken promises, and a disconnect from players’ needs. Its legacy lies not in innovation but in its role as a warning: Early Access is a covenant, not a crutch. For historians, it remains a poignant artifact of indie gaming’s Wild West era; for players, a reminder that even the noblest ideas demand more than goodwill to survive. Verdict: A fascinating failure, best remembered as a lesson—not a landmark.