Type:Rider is a good game which could have been great.
The game is quite a nice idea and well done. It's a physics game where you play as two dots (I assume, a colon laid sideways by gravity) where you progress through the history of typography, riding on and jumping off various huge letters and such through to the end of that level, picking up the alphabet along the way. Also, along the way are asterisks (*) which then add pages to books which you can pause gameplay to read. These provide the story, or rather history, of the font, time period, creator, how the font was first used, etc. And the pages aren't that long, so they make for a quick read providing an interesting insight into its history. Each book is about 8 pages, so there's not a lot of stopping to read along the way.
The graphics of the levels are quite nice and set for the time period of the font.
The problem in the game, for me anyway, is that starting with about the 4th or 5th level (of ~9), playing as round balls which are invisibly tied together on a physics engine
...makes consistant response and control difficult. And in later levels, this lack of control gets quite irritating when you're supposed to jump through narrow spaces where jumping too high/low, or too early/late gets you killed...as does the random chance one of the balls gets held up slightly or you jump and this time you're at an odd angle which didn't happen last time.
One of my favorite levels was the "Pixel" level (the last level, before the hidden/mystery level)...or rather, it would
have been my favorite if it hadn't been for the number of precision jumps you had to do. Getting passed the mini-game of Tetris was particularly infuriating due to the lack of reliable, predictable controls.
Time to Complete Game: 2.7hrs
+ Love the environment, graphics, and perspective.
+ Unique and great idea of a game.
+ Simply fun.
+ Informative without being "too much".
- Controls stink on later levels where more precision is needed.
If they made better controls, or tweaked the physics or balls so controls react more consistantly/predictably, then the game would be great. Instead, it's just "good".
As is, 7 out of 10.