Common Sense Media may not be a site readily associated with adventure games (there is exactly one reference to it on this site), but I thought this looked like a worthwhile - though extremely critical, yet perfectly commonsensical review
Or rather, I'm afraid
this is the case:
Fans of the series, prepare for a huge disappointment; this sloppy, poorly-constructed game undermines itself at every turn. There are so many issues, it's hard to know where to start -- with the thin story, bad pacing, and slip-shod puzzles? Or the stiff animation, bad voice-acting, and awful camera? It's a veritable buffet of badness that rewards your patience and tenacity with an unsatisfyingly nonsensical, cliff-hanger ending.
The most obvious problem is the interface. Items work differently (or not at all) depending on the situation, and this inconsistency makes using items downright painful. Further, finicky, contrived puzzle design means too often that you know exactly what needs to be done but can't manage to do it. Tasks seem designed to frustrate, with steps set as far apart as possible (which means lots of boring running), requiring objects placed in near-invisible locations. Movement is also frustrating, though the development team tried to deflect responsibility for it by including a pre-game message strongly suggesting you use a controller. Though the music is beautiful, and some of the environments and models give off a cool Jim Henson-ish kind of vibe, their effects are sabotaged by robotic animation and monotonous voice acting (there seems to be a single man and woman voicing every character in the cast). Again, worst of all, if you get through all the clunkiness and red herrings, you're rewarded with one of the least satisfying cliff-hanger endings in adventure game history. It was thirteen years between Syberia II and Syberia III. After this chaotic, discouraging let-down, will anyone wait another thirteen for Syberia IV?
* (one star)
Well I don't think the voice acting was universally bad.
I thought Kate was fine, and a few of the other characters were OK too. I didn't care for the over-the-top cartoon voices that were used for many of the other characters though.
I don't think all the puzzles were bad either, but they were made so much worse by the interface. And no hotspot-highlighter, which should be a standard option by now and is even more critical for 3D interfaces than it was for point-and-click because you have to be aimed the right way as well as being close enough to the object to interact. Otherwise it's too easy to think you aren't supposed to use an object you see onscreen to solve a puzzle, when in fact you're simply aimed wrong or a hair too far away.
And of course there should never be a cliffhanger on a game. It's not like the sequel will be ready the following week to resolve the cliffhanger. It takes years for a game. A plot device that may have worked for 1920's and 1930's movie serials and later for TV series and comic books isn't necessarily going to work for a game, where the wait time is orders of magnitude longer. It becomes more advantageous for the audience to write their own endings and forget about waiting years for a sequel that is only going to have a worse cliffhanger at the end.