Well Dweller Guide
Home › Well Dweller reviews and scores

Well Dweller reviews and scores

Checked September 24, 2026

Verdict

Well Dweller's critical reception at launch is strong and, more unusually, not uniform across platforms — the review averages differ by console, and the Switch figure does not exist yet. This page reports each score against the platform it belongs to, with the date it was read, and explains how the single Steam review figure on the store page should be read.

VERIFIED Scores read: PC 91(7) · PS5 88(4) · Xbox 85(5) · Switch not yet scored

Scores read Metacritic, Steam and the r/Games thread's OpenCritic figures, all read 2026-09-24

We do not score the game ourselves. Every number below is somebody else's, quoted with its source.

How to read this page

Three rules apply to everything here:

  1. A score belongs to a platform. Metacritic computes its averages per platform, so a "91" is a PC figure, not a Well Dweller figure.
  2. Every figure carries the date it was read. Review averages move as critics file; ours are readings from 2026-09-24.
  3. Small samples are labelled as small. Several of these averages rest on a handful of reviews, and we say so next to the number instead of leaving it to the reader to work out.

Metacritic, platform by platform

Read on 2026-09-24:

PlatformMetascoreCritics countedMetacritic's own label
PC917Universal Acclaim · 100% positive
PlayStation 5884—
Xbox Series X855—
Nintendo Switchno score yet3 reviewsMetacritic has not published an average for this platform
Nintendo Switch 2no score—The platform is listed on the game's page; no score row was published

Note the arithmetic honesty required here: the PlayStation figure rests on four critics and the Xbox figure on five. Those are the counts Metacritic published, and a four-review average is a much softer number than a twenty-review average — which is exactly why the column is printed.

The Switch row is the one to watch. Metacritic shows three Switch reviews without publishing a Metascore, so we publish it as "no score yet" rather than computing a number of our own or borrowing the PC figure for it.

Metacritic's user score

Also read on 2026-09-24, from the same page:

Sixteen ratings is a very small base, and the percentages above round to slightly more than 100% because that is how the source presents them. Treat the user score as a direction of travel, not a measurement.

OpenCritic

OpenCritic's game page carries a 90 average with 100% recommended, across 16 reviews. That reading comes from the game-information block of the r/Games review thread for the launch, which quotes OpenCritic's own figures; the OpenCritic page itself is linked from the footer of this site. It is one average across all platforms rather than a per-platform set, which is simply how OpenCritic aggregates — do not read it as contradicting the Metacritic table above, because the two sites are counting different pools.

Steam user reviews

The Steam store page publishes one headline review figure — the All Reviews line — and that is the only Steam review total this site quotes. As read from the store page on 2026-09-24:

What Steam showsValue
All ReviewsVery Positive — 96% of 464 user reviews are positive

Read it as a dated snapshot, because that is what it is. The field moves by the minute and the page is served from a CDN cache, so the same page re-read minutes later can return a different total while the percentage sits still. We therefore publish the reading we actually took, with its date, rather than a total from one moment paired with a percentage from another.

Two rules follow, and both are about scope rather than arithmetic:

This game's store page also carries no Recent Reviews row — the All Reviews line is the only summary it publishes — so no recent-review figure is quoted on this site. The small-sample caveat that applies everywhere else on this page applies here too: 464 reviews is a working number, not a verdict.

Critics, quoted with their own numbers

These are the scored reviews Metacritic listed for the PC version on 2026-09-24, with each outlet's own score:

OutletScore
Console Creatures100
Loot Level Chill95
Worth Playing90
Hardcore Gamer90
The Indie Informer90
Noisy Pixel90
Oyungezer80

A wider set of scored reviews — around seventeen outlets, including several console-specific ones — is collected in the launch review thread on r/Games, which we describe on what the community is saying. We do not reproduce every quote from that thread here; the table above is the set Metacritic itself counted toward the PC average, so it is the set that explains the 91.

Why we do not average these into one number

Adding Metacritic's PC 91, OpenCritic's 90 and Steam's 96% into a single headline would produce a number that no source published and that no platform actually received. The three are also counting different things: Metacritic averages critics, OpenCritic averages critics across platforms, and Steam averages players. Keeping them apart is the honest presentation, and it is why the home page quotes the PC Metacritic figure with its critic count and its date rather than presenting a blended score.

What would change this page

There is also a reception question this page cannot answer with numbers — whether the "horror metroidvania" framing fits — and that argument is happening in the community rather than in the review averages. It is recorded on what the community is saying, with the disagreement left visible.

Checked 2026-09-24 against the Metacritic game page, the Steam store page and the r/Games launch review thread (for OpenCritic's figures). Every count, average and percentage on this page is a dated reading of a named source and should be treated as one; nothing here combines a figure taken at one moment with a figure taken at another.

← Swipe wide tables to compare all columns →