Infinite Lives

Analysis By Mobexer

I went into Infinite Lives expecting the kind of open-ended adventure associated with MDickie’s unusual game design, and I came away with a title that is more interesting when treated as a sandbox than as a tightly guided campaign. Its central appeal is the freedom to see superhumans and subhumans clash, then decide how much I want to participate, interfere, survive, or simply observe the consequences. That freedom can be entertaining, but it also means the game asks me to create much of my own purpose.

This is a free adventure game from MDickie, aimed at mature players with a 17+ content rating. The current version is 1.0.7, and it runs on devices using Android 7.1 or later. The game has already passed 500K installs, while its average sits at 4.1 from roughly 6K ratings. Those numbers suggest a healthy audience, but they also set the right expectation: this is a niche, personality-driven experience rather than a universally polished blockbuster.

How Infinite Lives feels to play and spend money on

A sandbox where making your own story matters

The most important thing to understand is that the adventure does not depend only on a traditional chain of missions. The premise of superhumans and subhumans fighting for control creates a setting where conflict itself is the attraction. I enjoy games like this most when I stop looking for a single correct route and instead treat each session as a small experiment: what happens if I confront a powerful character, avoid a faction, take advantage of confusion, or let rival personalities collide?

That approach also explains why the game can feel less immediately rewarding than a conventional action adventure. In a more linear alternative, I always know whether I am moving toward the next objective. Here, the satisfaction comes from discovering an unexpected situation and deciding what to do with it. Players who like emergent stories will probably find more value than players who want carefully staged missions, constant rewards, and a clear checklist.

I would recommend beginning with short sessions rather than trying to master everything at once. The unusual world is easier to read when I focus on one personal goal, such as staying alive, testing the limits of a confrontation, or seeing how far I can progress without spending. This makes the game feel less chaotic and gives each run a recognizable shape.

What the free entry point really tells you

The game is free to download, which makes trying it straightforward. The important spending detail is that in-app purchases are listed at $3.99 per item. That gives the purchase model a clear boundary in one respect: the individual items are not presented as a maze of tiny charges. However, the existence of a fixed item price does not by itself tell me whether a purchase is essential, merely convenient, or mainly cosmetic.

That distinction matters because a sandbox can create pressure in less obvious ways. A player may feel tempted to pay after a frustrating defeat, when progress seems slow, or when a particular situation appears easier with extra help. I would not assume that every purchase improves the experience equally. My practical advice is to play long enough to understand the basic rhythm before buying anything. If the free experience already gives you enjoyable stories, spending should remain optional rather than becoming a way to discover whether you actually like the game.

There is no good reason to treat the listed item price as proof that the game is unfair, and there is also no reason to treat it as proof that the game is perfectly balanced. The useful conclusion is narrower: the financial commitment is easy to identify, but the value depends on what each item does in your own play. I would make a purchase only after deciding that it solves a specific annoyance or adds something I genuinely want, not simply because a difficult encounter made me impatient.

Progress can be exciting, but pressure changes the mood

Games built around conflict often create a strong push-pull feeling. A setback can make me want to try again immediately, especially when I believe a different decision could have changed the outcome. That is a real strength here: the story does not need to be perfect for a defeat to feel like part of a larger personal narrative.

The downside is that open-ended progress can feel less predictable than progression in a standard adventure. If you prefer clearly signposted goals, carefully balanced levels, and a steady stream of guaranteed rewards, this may feel rough around the edges. The game’s appeal is tied to uncertainty, so not every session will produce a satisfying breakthrough.

A useful everyday scenario would be playing during a short commute or while waiting for an appointment. I would start with one simple intention instead of expecting a complete chapter, then stop after a memorable encounter rather than forcing the session to deliver a major achievement. That mindset reduces the pressure to spend after a bad result and makes the game’s strange situations easier to appreciate.

For longer sessions, I would keep track mentally of what caused a failure. Was I outmatched, too aggressive, distracted by another conflict, or simply unlucky in the situation that developed? Separating those causes helps me decide whether another attempt is worthwhile. It also prevents the common mistake of assuming that every loss can be fixed by buying something.

Fairness is difficult to judge from the purchase label alone

Competitive fairness deserves a careful distinction here. The setting involves groups fighting for control, but that does not automatically make the game a conventional player-versus-player competition. I would not evaluate it by the same standard as a ranked multiplayer title unless the actual experience places players directly against one another. What matters first is whether paid items distort the personal adventure enough to make free play feel deliberately restricted.

From the purchase information alone, I can say that spending is present and that each item carries a $3.99 price. I cannot responsibly turn that into a claim that the game is pay-to-win, because that depends on the role of those items in play. The fairest way to approach it is to compare your enjoyment before and after understanding the free loop. If the game is entertaining without purchases, you have a meaningful baseline for judging value. If every difficult moment immediately points toward payment, that is a reason to step back.

I also think fairness includes the treatment of time. A game can avoid direct competitive advantages and still feel pressuring if it makes ordinary progress exhausting. With Infinite Lives, I would pay attention to whether frustration comes from the intended challenge or from a repeated need to buy assistance. That observation is more useful than a blanket label, especially for a title whose appeal comes from unpredictable situations rather than a simple score race.

Players who want a fully even competitive environment should probably choose a game designed specifically around transparent multiplayer rules. Infinite Lives is a better fit for someone who accepts that the experience is primarily about navigating a volatile fictional world. Its unusual conflict is part of the entertainment, but it is not the same thing as a carefully regulated competitive arena.

Three ways I would get more from the game

First, I would deliberately separate experimentation from progress attempts. On one run, I might test how much trouble I can create without caring about the result. On another, I would play conservatively and focus on staying involved for as long as possible. This prevents every session from becoming a stressful attempt to advance and turns the game’s unpredictability into a tool.

Second, I would avoid spending immediately after a dramatic failure. Waiting until the next session makes it easier to tell whether the problem was a temporary mistake or a genuine limitation in the free experience. This is especially important because the game’s premise encourages emotional reactions: a sudden reversal can make a purchase feel more necessary than it really is.

Third, I would judge the game by the stories it creates rather than by comparing every moment with a polished, mission-based adventure. Infinite Lives is most distinctive when its superhuman and subhuman conflict produces situations I did not plan. If I demand the same clarity and pacing as a conventional campaign, I may overlook its strongest quality. If I let every event count as entertainment, I get a better sense of whether its rougher structure suits me.

Who should play it, and who should skip it?

I think the game is a good match for mature players who enjoy unusual worlds, self-directed objectives, and the possibility that a session will become memorable for unexpected reasons. Fans of MDickie’s distinctive approach are likely to understand the appeal quickly. It is also worth trying if you want an adventure that does not feel interchangeable with a standard hero journey.

I would be more cautious if you need a calm, predictable experience. The 17+ rating is an important signal that this is not aimed at children, and parents should not treat the free price as a reason to overlook the age classification. The mature audience is part of the product’s identity, not a minor footnote.

I would also skip it if your main goal is a polished competitive game with transparent rankings and tightly controlled balance. The conflict may sound competitive, but the attraction is the broader sandbox experience. Likewise, players who dislike replaying situations after an unclear defeat may find the open-ended structure tiring instead of liberating.

Device expectations and practical patience

The minimum operating-system requirement is Android 7.1, so the game is accessible to a wide range of older Android devices in principle. That does not guarantee identical performance across every phone or tablet, and I would still keep expectations sensible on aging hardware. A game with many moving elements and unpredictable encounters can feel less comfortable if the device struggles, the controls feel cramped, or the screen is small.

The current version, 1.0.7, is another reason to approach the game as an evolving experience rather than assuming every rough edge reflects the final word. I would install it, spend enough time to see more than the opening impression, and then decide whether its style works for me. A few minutes may show the premise, but the real test is whether I enjoy making decisions when the situation stops behaving like a scripted level.

I would also be careful with storage and battery expectations in ordinary use, not because a specific problem is confirmed, but because mobile adventure games are more comfortable when the device has enough free space and the player is not already dealing with low battery. That is basic preparation, yet it matters more here because the game’s enjoyment depends on staying engaged through an unfolding situation rather than rushing through a tiny puzzle.

The questions I would ask before installing

Is it genuinely free to try? Yes. The game is available at no upfront cost, while optional purchases are listed at $3.99 per item. I would still treat the free download as an opportunity to evaluate the core experience, not as an automatic promise that every useful addition is free.

Is it suitable for younger players? No. The age classification is Mature 17+, so I would keep it away from children and choose something made for a younger audience when sharing a device or recommending a game to a family member.

Will it suit someone who wants a normal adventure campaign? Probably not as well as a conventional mission-driven title. Its appeal comes from the conflict between superhumans and subhumans and from the freedom to shape your own encounters. If you need a fixed plot with obvious milestones, another adventure game will likely be a better choice.

Is paying necessary to enjoy it? I would not assume that it is. The game can be tried for free, and the purchase information identifies optional items, but the practical value of buying depends on what those items change during your own play. I would establish a no-spend baseline first.

Does the rating guarantee that everyone will like it? Certainly not. An average of 4.1 from around 6K ratings shows that many players find value in it, but a rating cannot predict whether you enjoy unscripted conflict, mature themes, or a less traditional progression style.

My trust verdict after weighing the trade-offs

I trust Infinite Lives as a clearly positioned niche adventure: the developer is identified as MDickie, the game explains its central conflict in a compact way, the mature age classification is visible, and the free entry point makes experimentation reasonable. I also appreciate that the purchase price is not hidden behind vague wording; each listed in-app item costs $3.99. Those details give me enough context to approach the game without pretending that spending is irrelevant.

My reservation is not about the existence of purchases by itself. It is about making sure the game’s pressure does not decide for me. When a session ends badly, I want to know whether I am motivated by curiosity or being pushed by frustration. That is the key personal test. If I can keep playing, experimenting, and enjoying the world without feeling forced to buy, the model feels easier to accept. If payment starts to seem like the only practical answer to ordinary setbacks, I would stop spending and reconsider the game.

Overall, I would recommend it to a specific kind of player rather than to everyone. Infinite Lives is at its best when you want a mature, unpredictable adventure sandbox and are comfortable creating your own reasons to continue. I would try the free version, use short experimental sessions, and delay any purchase until the game has earned my confidence. For fans of MDickie’s distinctive style, that is a sensible invitation. For players seeking polished linear storytelling or tightly controlled competition, choosing a different adventure would be the wiser decision.

FAQ