Screenshots & trailers
What players say
Why the number is what it is: aspect mentions counted across 300 sampled Steam reviews (269 positive / 31 negative), recent and most-helpful. Plain keyword counting, fully reproducible; nothing here is written by a machine.
What positive reviews talk about
- Story & writing25% mention it
- Visuals & art16% mention it
- Bugs & crashes13% mention it
- Combat10% mention it
- World & exploration9% mention it
What negative reviews complain about
- Bugs & crashes48% mention it
- Story & writing39% mention it
- Visuals & art32% mention it
- Controls & UI32% mention it
- Combat19% mention it
Satisfaction by hours played
Same score, different games: see how sentiment holds up the longer people play.
Under 5h
83%
84 reviews
5-15h
87%
95 reviews
15-40h
95%
104 reviews
40-100h
100%
13 reviews
Review sentiment over time
Weekly positive-review rate (green) and review volume (bars). Dashed lines mark significant patches; the amber line is the start of the current scoring window. Hover the dots to see what drove a dip or a jump.
How this score was computed
The VGC Score is a weighted blend on a press-comparable 0-100 quality scale. Steam approval rates are first calibrated (95% positive on Steam ≈ 89.5 quality, since Steam approval skews high). Press and tracked creator reviews each count ~2x a player review and share one cap against player evidence (creator buy/skip calls pool into an approval rate, calibrated like Steam approval); all-time sentiment is capped and halved (it's context, not verdict); reviews of the current build carry the most weight when a fresh patch anchors the window; and a 'typical game' prior keeps small samples from pegging the scale. Because press reviews and Metacritic user aggregates describe the launch build, their weight decays as the game ages (3-year half-life after a 1-year grace). That's how a game that launched rough can outgrow its old reception once updates win players over. Reviews under 2h playtime (the refund window), non-Steam activations, and free copies are downweighted.
| Component | Positive | Quality (0-100) | Weight (pseudo-reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Press reviews (Metacritic) | – | 70 | 6 |
| Creator reviews (1 tracked) | – | 72 | 0 |
| All-time Steam reviews | 91% | 85 | 1000 |
| Metacritic user ratings | – | 86 | 8 |
| Post-patch Steam reviews (trust-weighted) | 95% | 89 | 176 |
| Calibration prior (typical game) | – | 72 | 50 |
Scoring window: last 30 days (no significant patch detected) · 300 reviews sampled · 503 total reviews in window · weighted 216.1 up / 12.3 down · computed 2h ago · full methodology →
Press & Creators reviews (67)
Individual verdicts from outlets we track: scored reviews first, most trusted outlets first among them. The small badge is each outlet's trust score: how well its scoring history aligns with players.
- 70
“It's just a pity that a title inspired by some of the most outlandish and inspired works of literature has to live with some of the driest tropes that the game design textbook has to offer.”
read full review ↗ - 85
“Alice: Madness Returns may not win awards for genre innovation, but it's the most darkly fun and gloriously batty game I've played since Psychonauts. I can't think of any higher praise.”
read full review ↗ - 92
“Alice: Madness Returns reminds me a lot of classic N64 platformers like Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie in the best of ways. By mixing a dark reimagining of a literary classic with stylish combat and rock-solid platforming, EA and Spicy Horse have created a gaming experience quite unlike any other. At any rate, its miles better than the lacklustre Tim Burton movie released last year. This is one rabbit hole worth tumbling down. ”
read full review ↗ - 80
“Truly the definition of a sleeper hit. I enjoyed the twisted atmosphere and the solid mechanics. Sure, the tricks the game uses get repeated far too often, but it is easy to overlook when you weigh the value of the entire package.”
read full review ↗ - 69
“Nightmarish fantasy worlds, bizarre level designs and weird cutscenes - you're in for an unique experience. Unfortunately, the longer you play, the more boring it gets.”
read full review ↗ - 70
“Alice: Madness Returns isn't a bad game; it's a game that isn't quite good enough. Tighter controls, a little more testing, and either much less or much better combat would've turned Madness Returns into one of the all-time greats. Right now, it's picturesque but annoying. It's fun to look at, some of the stages are OK, and there's a lot of variety both in the level design and in the basic gameplay, but as a game, it's frequently half-baked.”
read full review ↗ - 60
“Madness Returns shows substantial flashes of being equal to its predecessor, but its strongest detractions - middling gameplay mechanics, the rushed ending, and that last tier of weapon upgrades being available only as paid DLC - hold it back.”
read full review ↗ - 70
“My Recommendation, then, is clear/ But so I don't deprive/ You any longer, here it is: / You'll love it if you strive/ To overcome the boring bits.”
read full review ↗ - 50
“Worst of all is that exploring Wonderland is, in practice, about as full of wonder as watching paint dry. Paint the colour of blood and dreams, but paint nonetheless. ”
read full review ↗ - 70
“Playing Alice: Madness Returns isn't as exciting as looking at it, but you'll still enjoy getting lost in this twisted fantasy adventure.”
read full review ↗ - 79
“Alice - Madness Returns is the kind of game that's retro in both a good sense and a bad: It's a tough game to beat, but lacks innovations and better graphics.”
read full review ↗ - 50
“Sure, the visuals are hauntingly striking from beginning to end but art style can only carry a game so far. Without enough interesting mechanics and a meaningful narrative, playing Madness Returns became tiresome very quickly.”
read full review ↗
GameWatcher
ZTGD
Worth Playing
The Escapist
Eurogamer
GameSpot…and 55 more tracked reviews.
Patch history
No patch announcements found on Steam yet.