On December 13, 2025, horror game YouTuber Grimbeard released a review of Next Life, a 2007 point-and-click adventure game that received brutal reviews upon release. Developed by Czech studio Future Games and published by Dreamcatcher Interactive, Next Life promised a sci-fi psycho thriller about what happens after death but delivered what critics called depressingly bleak gameplay with baffling dialogue. IGN’s infamous headline captured the consensus perfectly: “Next Life, but there are good games in this one, so why bother?”
What Is Next Life?
Next Life follows protagonist Adam Raichl, an advertising executive who wakes up in a mysterious apartment with no windows, doors, shower, or bed. A strange woman peers in saying nothing before a German man slaps her behind, establishing the game’s subtle approach to mystery and character. Adam eventually escapes this bizarre situation, retrieves his keys through timed puzzle sequences, and races down a windy road in panic before getting t-boned by another car.
The premise draws obvious comparisons to the TV series Lost with its ensemble cast trapped in mysterious circumstances trying to piece together what’s happening. GameSpot’s 2007 review noted the Lost similarities while slamming the game’s stale gameplay, abundance of adventure game sins, and baffling dialogue. Just Adventure gave the most positive review with an A-minus, praising that it ran flawlessly, kept them hooked to the end, and contained enough variety to prevent gameplay from getting stale.
IGN’s review was particularly brutal, writing: “Playing Next Life becomes so depressingly bleak and dull that its underlying mystery is the only reason you’ll even contemplate finishing the game, but it’s not enough. Your current life is too short to waste time on this next one.” The incorporation of the title into critical takedowns became a running theme across review sites.
Grimbeard’s Approach to Bad Games
Grimbeard has built a YouTube following covering obscure, janky, and often terrible horror and adventure games that mainstream reviewers ignore. His channel explores forgotten PS2 survival horror titles, bizarre indie experiments, and cult classics that aged poorly. The appeal isn’t just mocking bad games but genuinely exploring what makes them fascinating despite (or because of) their flaws.
This approach works particularly well for games like Next Life that are bad in interesting ways. A boring bad game gets ignored. A fascinatingly bad game with bizarre design choices, unintentionally hilarious dialogue, and puzzles that make you question the developers’ sanity becomes compelling content. Grimbeard’s commentary style balances genuine analysis with dry humor, respecting these games as cultural artifacts while acknowledging their failures.
Some Reddit users admit they skip Grimbeard’s skits that bookend his videos, but his actual game analysis remains compelling. He digs into why developers made certain choices, the historical context of when games released, and what design philosophies were popular at the time. For a 2007 point-and-click adventure, understanding the genre’s decline and desperation to stay relevant helps contextualize Next Life’s existence.
The 2007 Adventure Game Landscape
Next Life released during a brutal period for traditional adventure games. The genre peaked in the 1990s with LucasArts and Sierra dominating, but by the mid-2000s, action games and first-person shooters had captured mainstream attention. Point-and-click adventures were increasingly niche products from European studios trying to keep the genre alive.
Czech developer Future Games represented this wave of regional studios producing adventure games for a dwindling audience. These games often had ambitious concepts hampered by limited budgets, awkward English translations, and design philosophies that felt outdated even at release. The result was games that critics savaged but dedicated adventure game fans sometimes defended as flawed but interesting experiments.
Dreamcatcher Interactive, the publisher, specialized in bringing these European adventure games to North American audiences. They published dozens of titles throughout the 2000s with varying quality levels. Some became cult classics. Most disappeared. Next Life fell into the latter category despite its intriguing “what happens after death” premise that should have generated more interest.
Why Grimbeard’s Review Matters
| Aspect | 2007 Reviews | Grimbeard’s Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Perspective | Frustrated with genre decline | Historical curiosity 18 years later |
| Audience | Readers deciding whether to buy | Viewers enjoying bad game analysis |
| Purpose | Consumer guidance | Entertainment and preservation |
| Tone | Harsh and dismissive | Analytical with humor |
| Cultural Value | Minimal interest in preservation | Documents obscure gaming history |
Reviewing Next Life in 2025 serves a completely different purpose than 2007 reviews. Original critics wrote for audiences deciding whether to spend money on a new release during the genre’s decline. Grimbeard creates content for viewers who find entertainment value in analyzing fascinatingly bad games nearly two decades later. The time distance allows for historical perspective impossible when the game was new.
Grimbeard’s channel also performs valuable preservation work. Many obscure games from the 2000s are genuinely lost – no longer sold digitally, physical copies scarce, and no footage or analysis easily available. By covering these forgotten titles, Grimbeard creates permanent records of their existence complete with gameplay, story summaries, and critical context. This matters for gaming history even when the games themselves aren’t good.
The comedic value shouldn’t be understated either. Bad games with bizarre design choices, unintentional humor, and baffling puzzles provide entertainment when experienced through a skilled commentator. Grimbeard’s dry delivery and willingness to thoroughly document these trainwrecks makes the content engaging even for viewers who’d never actually play Next Life themselves.
The Baffling Puzzle Design
According to Grimbeard’s review transcript, Next Life features puzzle sequences that are “fascinating” as “microcosms of stupid, annoying, inconvenient things that happen when you’re panicking.” One early sequence involves Adam trying to reach his keys while presumably being chased, flipping through them while forgetting which opens what. This creates genuine panic and frustration that might actually be genius in how it imparts that feeling to players.
However, intentional or not, frustration rarely equals fun. Traditional adventure game design avoids deliberately annoying players even when simulating stressful situations. The line between “cleverly invoking panic” and “just bad puzzle design” is thin, and based on contemporary reviews, most players felt Next Life fell on the wrong side.
The game apparently includes numerous timed item-based puzzles that require precise execution under pressure. These sequences frustrate rather than challenge because the solutions aren’t intuitive and the timing feels arbitrary. You’re not solving clever puzzles – you’re repeating trial-and-error until you stumble on the exact sequence the developers wanted.
The Lost Comparisons
Multiple reviews compared Next Life to Lost, the ABC drama that captivated audiences from 2004-2010 with its mystery box storytelling. The comparison makes sense – both feature ensemble casts trapped in mysterious circumstances, slowly revealing backstories while raising more questions than they answer. But where Lost (at least initially) balanced mystery with character development and emotional stakes, Next Life apparently offers only the mystery without making players care.
The Lost comparison also highlights changing attitudes toward mystery box storytelling. In 2007, Lost was still riding high and mystery-driven narratives seemed like the future of long-form storytelling. By 2025, we’ve seen enough shows and games use mystery boxes to mask thin storytelling that audiences are more skeptical. Grimbeard’s retrospective likely addresses how Next Life’s approach feels even more hollow now than it did then.
The game’s treatment of its mystery apparently commits the cardinal sin of not earning the reveals. According to IGN’s 2007 review, the underlying mystery is the only reason to contemplate finishing, but even that isn’t enough reward for the slog. When your entire premise rests on mystery and the payoff disappoints, the whole experience collapses.
Technical Performance vs Everything Else
Interestingly, most reviews agreed Next Life ran well technically. Just Adventure’s A-minus review specifically praised that it ran flawlessly without crashes, had stunning visuals at times, and included variety to prevent gameplay from getting stale. GameSpot’s user reviews noted experiencing no crashes or bugs aside from occasional strange pauses.
This creates an unusual situation where the game works perfectly on a technical level while failing completely on design, writing, and entertainment value. It’s like a car that’s mechanically perfect but designed to drive backwards while the steering wheel controls the radio. Everything functions as programmed, the programming just produces a miserable experience.
For 2007 PC adventure games, stable performance wasn’t guaranteed. Many releases struggled with crashes, incompatibility issues, and bugs that made completion impossible. Next Life deserves credit for basic competence even if everything built on that technical foundation was questionable.
The Grimbeard YouTube Channel
Grimbeard has built a substantial following on YouTube covering horror games, adventure titles, and obscure releases that mainstream gaming media ignores. His deep dives combine genuine analysis with entertaining presentation, making even terrible games interesting through historical context and critical examination of design choices.
The channel features regular “Grimpressions” videos covering Steam Next Fest demos, giving indie developers exposure while providing viewers with recommendations for upcoming releases. These supplement the longer retrospective reviews of older games like Next Life. The variety keeps content fresh while maintaining focus on horror and adventure genres.
Grimbeard also produces original music available on Bandcamp and Spotify, with tracks like “Pure Acid Hell” showcasing his creative output beyond game criticism. This multimedia approach gives the channel personality and helps it stand out in a crowded YouTube gaming space dominated by either pure gameplay or surface-level reviews.
Why Bad Game Reviews Matter
Content about terrible games serves multiple purposes beyond entertainment. First, it preserves gaming history. Without creators like Grimbeard documenting these failures, obscure games disappear from cultural memory completely. Future researchers studying game design evolution need records of what didn’t work as much as what succeeded.
Second, analyzing failures teaches better design than studying successes. Understanding why Next Life’s puzzles frustrate rather than challenge, or why its mystery disappoints rather than intrigues, provides lessons applicable to current development. Bad games aren’t just cautionary tales – they’re educational resources when examined thoughtfully.
Third, there’s genuine entertainment value in well-presented analysis of fascinatingly bad games. Not mean-spirited mockery, but thoughtful examination of how things went wrong, why developers made certain choices, and what historical context explains the existence of games that objectively failed. Grimbeard’s approach respects these games as cultural artifacts worth documenting even when they’re not worth playing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Grimbeard?
Grimbeard is a YouTube content creator specializing in reviews of horror games, adventure titles, and obscure releases from gaming history. His channel combines analytical retrospectives with entertaining presentation, documenting games that mainstream media typically ignores.
What is Next Life about?
Next Life is a 2007 point-and-click adventure game about protagonist Adam Raichl who wakes in a mysterious apartment before experiencing bizarre events. The sci-fi thriller promises to explore what happens after death but received harsh reviews for bleak gameplay and baffling dialogue.
How bad were Next Life’s original reviews?
Pretty brutal. IGN titled their review “Next Life, but there are good games in this one, so why bother?” GameSpot noted its depressingly bleak gameplay. Only adventure game specialist Just Adventure gave it an A-minus, mostly for technical stability rather than design quality.
Why review a game from 2007?
Retrospective reviews serve different purposes than contemporary ones. They document gaming history, provide entertainment through analysis of fascinatingly bad games, and offer design lessons by examining failures. Grimbeard’s channel specializes in this kind of historical preservation and analysis.
Is Next Life worth playing?
Almost certainly not unless you’re specifically interested in bad adventure games from the 2000s. Contemporary reviews universally panned it, and time hasn’t been kind. Watching Grimbeard’s review provides entertainment without the frustration of actually playing.
Who developed Next Life?
Czech studio Future Games developed Next Life with Dreamcatcher Interactive publishing. Future Games was one of many European studios producing adventure games for niche audiences during the genre’s 2000s decline.
Does Grimbeard only cover bad games?
No. His channel includes reviews of genuinely good obscure horror games, Steam Next Fest impressions of upcoming indies, and retrospectives on cult classics. The focus is on overlooked or forgotten games regardless of quality, though fascinatingly bad games generate particularly entertaining content.
Where can I watch Grimbeard’s Next Life review?
The review posted December 13, 2025 on Grimbeard’s YouTube channel. It’s titled “Grimbeard – Next Life (PC) – Review” and provides full analysis of the 2007 adventure game’s failures and occasional bizarre successes.
The Bottom Line
Grimbeard’s Next Life review demonstrates why retrospective analysis of failed games matters for preserving gaming history and understanding design evolution. This 2007 point-and-click adventure represents a specific moment when traditional adventure games were dying, European studios were desperately producing content for shrinking audiences, and ambitious concepts regularly failed in execution due to budget constraints and outdated design philosophies.
The game itself sounds genuinely terrible based on contemporary reviews and Grimbeard’s analysis. Baffling puzzles, depressing atmosphere, boring gameplay, and mysteries that don’t pay off create an experience that wastes players’ time rather than entertaining them. IGN’s brutal headline captured the consensus: why play Next Life when better games exist?
But through Grimbeard’s retrospective lens, Next Life becomes interesting as a cultural artifact and design case study. What were Czech developers thinking in 2007? Why did they believe this approach would work? How does this game reflect broader industry trends of its era? These questions make Next Life worth examining even though it’s not worth playing, and content creators like Grimbeard provide that examination with entertainment and historical perspective that traditional reviews never could.