A Short Hike

A small, confidently made game that earns its warmth

A Short Hike's premise is disarmingly simple: reach the top of a mountain in Hawk Peak Provincial Park, however you like, at whatever pace you like. What elevates it past a simple walking simulator, according to the overwhelming majority of its reviewers, is the specificity and warmth of what fills that mountain along the way. A 2020 review captures the appeal directly even while ultimately raising its own reservations: "The Good: I liked climbing and flying and swimming and helping various people around the island. I liked the feeling of getting to the top of the mountain. I liked finding treasure chests and coins on the ground." Reviewers across the review base consistently single out the writing and character work specifically — witty, small-scale conversations with island inhabitants that build real charm without needing a sprawling plot to support it. The 3D pixel-art visual style and an understated, well-fitted soundtrack round out a presentation reviewers describe as punching well above what the game's small scope and low price might suggest.

A dominant, honest complaint: this really is short

The single most repeated criticism, raised even by many reviewers who otherwise recommend the game without reservation, concerns length. "I know the word 'short' is in the name, but I really really wish this game had more content," reads a 2025 review. A 2025 review is more direct about the value calculation: "It's nice but VERY short (you can easily finish the game in 1 hour, what makes it 6 euro per hour)." A 2020 review frames the same complaint against a genre comparison: "This is just a slight walking simulator that gets by on aesthetic. Pretty easily finished in 90 minutes, it is tough to recommend this, especially at full price." This review treats this complaint as legitimate rather than dismissing it as an unfair expectation — the game's own title telegraphs a short experience, but "short" can still mean different things to different buyers, and a large enough share of reviews raise the price-to-length ratio specifically that it's worth stating plainly: most players should expect one to two focused sessions, not a long-term project, and should weigh the modest asking price against that expectation rather than against a typical full-length indie game.

A more specific, structural complaint: camera and controls

Separate from length, a recurring and more concrete complaint concerns the camera and movement system. "I find ease of navigation very important because clunky handling can break the immersion... the base movement mechanics are [functional but] underdeliver," reads a 2022 review. A 2021 review is blunter: "I loathe cameras that constantly switch positions as you move, and this one did it a LOT in some places, to a disorienting degree." A 2020 review specifically flags the lack of a manual camera option: "you do not get to control the camera, and you move on an angle with the arrow keys... an automatic camera, with occlusion, angled movement, and no in-game tracking map... make this hard to read [at times]." This is a specific, structural design choice — a fixed, automatically-adjusting camera rather than free player control — and while the large majority of reviewers don't flag it as a serious problem, it's raised consistently enough across the negative-review sample to be worth naming as the game's clearest mechanical rough edge, distinct from the more subjective length complaint above.

A smaller but real controller-compatibility gap

A further, narrower technical issue: several reviews report specific controller compatibility problems on certain platforms. "Does not even support DualSense or Switch Pro controllers," reads a 2022 review. A separate 2022 review reports macOS-specific instability: "Crashes immediately on launch. Unplayable on macOS Monterey." These are lower-volume complaints than the length or camera issues, but worth flagging directly for anyone planning to play on a non-standard controller or an updated macOS version, since they're specific and actionable rather than general dissatisfaction.

What the optional side content actually adds

It's worth being specific about what fills the time beyond a direct climb to the summit, since that optional content is where several reviewers who finish quickly say the real value lies. Fishing, volleyball with island inhabitants, treasure-hunting for buried coins, photography challenges and a scavenger hunt for collectible hats are all fully optional systems layered on top of the core climb, and reviewers who engage with them report meaningfully longer, more varied playtimes than the one-hour "rush to the top" figure some critical reviews cite. That doesn't erase the value complaint above — a player who only wants the main story is still getting a short experience — but it does mean the headline "one hour" figure some reviews lead with understates what's actually available to anyone willing to explore rather than beeline for the peak, and it's a meaningful distinction worth making clear to a prospective buyer weighing the price against the content on offer.

Weighing the length complaint against what the achievement data shows

It's worth checking the value complaint against Steam's own achievement data rather than relying purely on reviewer impressions of pacing. This review found that just over half of all players who own the game have completed its main story achievement — an unusually high completion rate for any game, and a strong signal that the length reviewers describe isn't a symptom of players losing interest and quitting early, but simply an accurate reflection of the game's actual, intentionally compact scope. That's a meaningfully different situation from a longer game where a similar completion rate might suggest players getting bored or stuck partway through; here, it suggests a game that most buyers genuinely finish, which reframes the length complaint as a question of price-per-hour rather than a sign the experience itself fails to hold attention.

Final verdict

A Short Hike delivers a small, warm, confidently designed experience that the overwhelming majority of its reviewers describe finishing in full and enjoying without reservation — reflected clearly in both its 99%-positive rating and an unusually high in-game completion rate. This review takes the honestly-repeated length and camera complaints seriously rather than waving them away: buyers should expect a short, tightly scoped experience with a fixed rather than fully manual camera, and weigh the low asking price against that scope rather than against a longer game's runtime. Within those honestly stated limits, it's an easy recommendation for anyone wanting a brief, well-written, genuinely relaxing game to unwind with.