WHO'S WHO 2.0

Overall Rating: 🟢 Recommended (with caveats) "A blast with friends, but combat needs some serious polish." If you have a group of friends to play this with, it’s an absolute blast. The gameplay loop is incredibly addictive—we started playing "just for an hour" and suddenly realized we had lost track of time and hooked hours into it without even noticing. It has that perfect "just one more round" quality when you're playing together. However, the game currently suffers from some frustrating combat mechanics in its present state: Hitbox Issues: The hit registration/attack detection feels highly inconsistent. There are times you clearly land a hit, but the game just doesn't register it. Spacing & Range: Judging distances feels off, making it hard to space yourself correctly during fights. Action Priority: Even when you clearly initiate an attack first, the game often prioritizes the enemy's attack, making it feel like they magically hit faster than you. Verdict: A ton of fun for co-op/multiplayer and well worth your time if you want something to sink hours into with friends. But be prepared for some combat jank until the developers patch the hit detection and combat priority.

I’ve pumped many hours into this game, goofing off with friends. If you have a group with at least five people you can definitely get some enjoyment outta this. The biggest sin about this game is that the player base is really low so you NEED friends to play with. On a really lucky night, you can have a full room with strangers but don’t hold your breath. A fun good time me thinks

The koreans are extremly racist and asking to get out from public room, spamming "s**b**"

WHO'S WHO 2.0 is a small social deduction game built around trying to work out who I can trust and who is secretly working against me. The basic idea is easy to understand, but the fun comes from paying attention to other players, noticing suspicious behaviour and making decisions with incomplete information. It is the kind of game where the people I am playing with can matter just as much as the mechanics. The biggest strength for me is the uncertainty. I never have complete information, so I have to make guesses based on what other players are doing. Someone might be genuinely helping the team or deliberately trying to mislead me, and figuring out which is which creates the main tension. A good accusation can feel very satisfying when I have correctly identified the suspicious player. Communication is also an important part of the experience. Talking with other players, listening to their explanations and deciding whether I believe them gives the game most of its personality. I like social deduction games that make me question even seemingly helpful actions, because a clever player can manipulate the conversation without obviously breaking the rules. The simple design makes it…

I like it.

fun with friends