Path of Giants is a perfectly adequate puzzle game. You play as three bundled-up explorers searching a snowy, mountainous area for the lost treasure of the giants. It quickly becomes clear that there are no giants to speak of (save as large, frozen things in the background); rather, this is a pure puzzle game, with no enemies in it whatsoever.

The goal is to get each of the three explorers to a little appropriately colored platform on the far side of the level, and the game pretty much everything it can do with a very limited number of mechanics.

The game is built entirely around isometric movement over a 3D area. The explorers cannot climb from one level to another on their own, but they can climb ladders or be boosted up on the shoulders of their fellows. The simpler puzzles make use of this, and then as the game progresses, additional puzzle pieces are added, such as counterweighted lifts (where if you add more weight to one side, it goes down, and it will balance out if the two sides are equal in weight – such as, say, with one explorer on each), buttons that move around environmental features, and doors that can take you from one part of the level to another.

The game is very simple, and also quite short; I beat all of the main levels in about an hour and a half, with another hour and a half spent on the more difficult post-game levels and in collecting a few achievements I hadn’t gotten my first time through.

There is an undo button in the game that lets you go back one move; this is rarely necessary until the post-game Winterfest puzzles, which are significantly more difficult than the main puzzles and also much easier to trap yourself on. Indeed, I went through the entire original thirteen levels without using it once, which garners you an achievement. That is not to say that the puzzles are facile, however; they have a reasonable difficulty level that ramps up over time, and none of them feel frustratingly vague. You know what you’re supposed to do, you just need to figure out how to do it, which is the correct way to design a puzzle game.

Graphically, it vaguely reminded me of Laura Croft: Go in terms of its graphics and having hidden pots that could be broken in the background with an isometric 3D view. It is reasonable enough in this regard; nothing special, but good enough for the purposes of the game.

So is it worth it? Here, I waver. This is a perfectly adequate puzzle game, and there’s nothing wrong with it. While it might seem a bit on the short side, it really doesn’t want to be any longer than it is; the game does everything it really wants to do with its mechanics, and doing more would just boil down to repetition. So I wouldn’t hold it’s length against it at all.

However, the game doesn’t really excel in any way. Like a lot of puzzle games that end up in the Humble Monthly bundles, this is something that you don’t really feel bad as getting as part of a bundle, but which it doesn’t feel like you would have gone out of your way to experience, either.

As such, this is one of those “this was okay” kind of recommendations – it’s decent, but not amazing. If you are a fan of puzzle games of this sort, this is a fine example, but if you’re not a puzzle game fan, I wouldn’t recommend this to you – it’s not going to leave much of an impression.