I think the reason some people in here are defending Nier as hard as they are is because comparisons like this make literally no sense.
There are no real branching paths in Nier Automata, it's a 35-40 hour game where ~5 hours are repeated content. For what it's worth I was not a fan of route B, but I just think the discussion around the "endings" just complicates things for no reason. If you are unhappy with parts of the game then you should drop it as you would any other game, but route A is for sure not the "end" in any respect.
You guys keep saying that we are not worthy, of that we are playing it wrong.
That's why I said "stop pushing it down our throats", because that's the feeling I get when I read some of the replies in here. Either accept it, or you are not good enough for Nier, lol.
And true, you don't have to admit to anything. Most people would agree that VLR did multiple paths better, but if you disagree, that's fine.
I mean, no one is making a comparison between VLR and Nier except for you, so not sure where you are getting the idea that 'most people' would agree with that statement. All you are saying is that YOU think VLR did multiple endings better, which like, that's fine if you feel that way, but no one has to agree with you? You aren't really arguing for that claim either outside of this false narrative that it is some consensus that VLR does endings better than Nier, which is worthless considering you can't prove such a consensus. On top of that, they aren't even remotely similar games. VLR is a visual novel, the way it handles multiple endings is obviously going to be different than the way an action rpg like Nier would handle it. I haven't even played Nier Automata yet, but your argument isn't even remotely convincing. It's fine if you don't like it, but your dismissive attitude, obnoxious gifs, and poor arguments aren't helping your case.
You guys keep saying that we are not worthy, of that we are playing it wrong.
That's why I said "stop pushing it down our throats", because that's the feeling I get when I read some of the replies in here. Either accept it, or you are not good enough for Nier, lol.
And true, you don't have to admit to anything. Most people would agree that VLR did multiple paths better, but if you disagree, that's fine.
More like, stop ranting based on false information. People will keep telling you the same things when you keep suggesting things that aren't true. Most people will agree that the weakest part of the game is part B. Which is also the only part of the game which has repeated content and even then the repeated content isn't longer than 2-3 hours. That also isn't exactly the worst or biggest amount of recycling when it comes to either JRPGs or "character action" games.
Done with this thread, just like I'm done with Nier.
My opinion remains unchanged, they locked key content behind a second and boring play through, and that's just bad. If you enjoyed it, cool. I know I didn't, and looking at this thread and discussions outside of GAF, I know I'm not alone.
Done with this thread, just like I'm done with Nier.
My opinion remains unchanged, they locked key content behind a second and boring play through, and that's just bad. If you enjoyed it, cool. I know I didn't, and looking at this thread and discussions outside of GAF, I know I'm not alone.
If you've ever played a visual novel you'd be familiar with the fast forward feature most of them have to skip things you've already seen/don't care to repeat.
If you've played an MMO you know people who go through the leveling process usually only do it "properly" once, and for leveling alts they burn through things as quickly as possible.
If you ever reread books sometimes you skim through pages to get to the parts you're interested in reliving. Ditto TV shows. Ditto film.
So, it's just not true. There's plenty of reasons to want to "rush through things" and it is in no way, shape, or form some kind of objective measure of quality. The problem here, as is always in these cases, is that a large amount of gamers have a very specific and narrow view of what their "game time" should involve, and any departure from that framework causes them distress at which point they lay the blame on the game for not delivering the experience they've come to expect.
Even then, the later part of Route B is new content. You can even argue then that only the 1 hour you rush through it is a replay...
I would go so far and say that the DMC4 backtracking with old Dante takes more time than if you just play through Route B without doing any sidequests.
If you've ever played a visual novel you'd be familiar with the fast forward feature most of them have to skip things you've already seen/don't care to repeat.
If you've played an MMO you know people who go through the leveling process usually only do it "properly" once, and for leveling alts they burn through things as quickly as possible.
If you ever reread books sometimes you skim through pages to get to the parts you're interested in reliving.
So, it's just not true. There's plenty of reasons to want to "rush through things" and it is in no way, shape, or form some kind of objective measure of quality. The problem here, as is always in these cases, is that a large amount of gamers have a very specific and narrow view of what their games experience should be and any departure from that framework causes them distress at which point they lay the blame the game for not delivering the experience they've come to expect.
I was defending the game earlier in the thread, I thought saying it was a bad decision therefore bad game was enough to show that I was kidding. Sorry for the misunderstanding pal.
Even then, the later part of Route B is new content. You can even argue then that only the 1 hour you rush through it is a replay...
I would go so far and say that the DMC4 backtracking with old Dante takes more time than if you just play through Route B without doing any sidequests.
Done with this thread, just like I'm done with Nier.
My opinion remains unchanged, they locked key content behind a second and boring play through, and that's just bad. If you enjoyed it, cool. I know I didn't, and looking at this thread and discussions outside of GAF, I know I'm not alone.
You were done with Nier before creating the thread. It simply sounds like you didn't care for its story and characters and were waiting for it to get good/better, but since you can't get to the new exciting stuff instantly to satisfy the little curiosity you had, you're not bothering with it.
Fair enough. This wasn't a thread about multiple endings but about "I didn't like Nier Automata, should I play something else?".
I was defending the game earlier in the thread, I thought saying it was a bad decision therefore bad game was enough to show that I was kidding. Sorry for the misunderstanding pal.
Route B has some of my favorite moments of the entire game.
The additional context to the Simone fight for example.
This is also the reason why I disagree with everyone saying they should have just combined the two routes. Half the stuff would lose all its impact without having context from Route A.
The new sidequests are also among the best and can't happen during Route A.
The game routes aren't exactly the same, but routes A and B are the most similar that you'll find,
since it's the same story, just from 9S's perspective
. Sure, I was a little put off when I first realized it would be the same over all plot, but finer details are told to the audience, you learn more about enemies and bosses, and you learn more about the world and its history. Plus, although it was a little overdone by the end for me, hacking adds a nice little extra kick to the combat.
You'll find that the story evolves with each subsequent route being cleared, and you as the audience for the story learn more about the game in tandem. You get into the other routes and start seeing more from the story than you'd have expected, at least I did. Some of the lines of dialogue made more sense, character motivations were made clear, and the character personalities really come into their own
although I'm not sure I really liked 9S at the end... but isn't that the point? The likable nerdy protag turning into a sympathetic anti-hero/villain by the showdown in the Tower. And A2.. boy did I learn to love her the more I learned about her.
So to answer your question OP, no, you do not play through the same game a total of 5 times to fully understand the story. It grows and evolves, and it's really only routes A and B that are similar/samey.
Lets not equate gaf to reality,gaf reception of anything is usually not very indicative of sales. all im saying people are now more open to accepting that the game isn't a masterpiece for some people and the flaws are very real.
Yes, you're saying this like the reception changed, which is not true. Every game that has an exceptional reception gets a backlash window, not because people sour on the game, but because the people who love it are really enthusiastic upfront so people who are less enthusiastic wait until the initial window dies down to share their opinions and find other people who agree.
None of this is to say that contrary opinions aren't legitimate, certainly, but the idea that there's been an actual shift in reception is just not reality.
Route B has some of my favorite moments of the entire game.
The additional context to the Simone fight for example.
This is also the reason why I disagree with everyone saying they should have just combined the two routes. Half the stuff would lose all its impact without having context from Route A.
The new sidequests are also among the best and can't happen during Route A.
My biggest complaint about Route C is that it is significantly harder than Routes A & B without any warning. I gave up for now because I felt the difficulty wall was too frustrating after investing so much time into the game.
It's still a fucking awesome game though and I would still highly recommend it as a Must Play.
My biggest complaint about Route C is that it is significantly harder than Routes A & B without any warning. I gave up for now because I felt the difficulty wall was too frustrating after investing so much time into the game.
It's still a fucking awesome game though and I would still highly recommend it as a Must Play.
Finished it last night and I wasn't really a fan of route B either. It definitely adds context to the route A scenes, but felt mostly like needless padding. I would have preferred it if they just found a way to incorporate all of that in one route. For example, route C
where you're repeatedly switching between 2A and 9S going up the tower
is fucking terrific. I would have liked more of that than just retreading the same areas with 9S. It didn't take too long, but I thought it took a lot of the wind out of the game's sails. Route B and the
virus run
were the two times I came closest to just putting the game down and going to play something else.
I loved the game, about 80 hours in, completed the main quest and have seen all the endings. Currently working my way through the DLC.
When I first heard about the so-called multiple play throughs I wasn't convinced, but then I played the game. I loved the world and characters introduced through route A and wanted more. I really enjoyed Route B its not like replaying route A at all. Different perspective, more shmup sections, 9S is an interesting character and I love the hacking sections, which makes up for him being relatively gimped fighting-wise in comparison to 2B/A2. You don't have to repeat side quests which I was a bit worried about at first and obviously you keep your level, weapons and inventory.
I feel if you didn't fully invest in route A, love the game, the characters and the world they live in, then route B WILL be a chore for you.
Not for me though. Hands down my fave game of the year. That 'E' ending will stay with me. Incredible.
The bolded is where I'm at when I last put the game aside. I had a number of hangups during route A, including not finding side quests to be worth the effort, map frustrations and an excessive amount of "who's the real monster" foreshadowing that dulled the emotional impact by the end. Being dumped back into the same game with minor perspective and gameplay differences isn't great for momentum and is a valid argument for why the structure they went with can be faulted. If you love the game I'm sure it works just fine, but difficult for me to not find it a little self-indulgent. Maybe my opinion flips when I get to C, that would be cool, but I've set expectations accordingly since I'm not quite feeling the game as much as the consensus.
The bolded is where I'm at when I last put the game aside. I had a number of hangups during route A, including not finding side quests to be worth the effort, map frustrations and an excessive amount of "who's the real monster" foreshadowing that dulled the emotional impact by the end. Being dumped back into the same game with minor perspective and gameplay differences isn't great for momentum and is a valid argument for why the structure they went with can be faulted. If you love the game I'm sure it works just fine, but difficult for me to not find it a little self-indulgent. Maybe my opinion flips when I get to C, that would be cool, but I've set expectations accordingly since I'm not quite feeling the game as much as the consensus.
The bolded is where I'm at when I last put the game aside. I had a number of hangups during route A, including not finding side quests to be worth the effort, map frustrations and an excessive amount of "who's the real monster" foreshadowing that dulled the emotional impact by the end. Being dumped back into the same game with minor perspective and gameplay differences isn't great for momentum and is a valid argument for why the structure they went with can be faulted. If you love the game I'm sure it works just fine, but difficult for me to not find it a little self-indulgent. Maybe my opinion flips when I get to C, that would be cool, but I've set expectations accordingly since I'm not quite feeling the game as much as the consensus.
Maybe my opinion flips when I get to C, that would be cool, but I've set expectations accordingly since I'm not quite feeling the game as much as the consensus.
Route C is amusing in that it generally either makes people who weren't too hot on Routes A/B and gets them into it, or gets people who liked Routes A/B really into it. It's not guaranteed of course, but that's how it seems to usually play out lol
That being said, no one should feel forced to finish a game if they truly dislike/hate it that much, especially if it's gameplay-related. But Nier imo is that rare game that genuinely does need you to complete the whole thing due to how it recontexualizes certain things in the previous routes. As opposed to other games, where people "plead" with you to finish a game mainly because they just hope you'll come around and like it.
Your third playthrough is apparently completely different. Don't quote me on this because I stopped after acquiring ending B, mostly because of bugs and poor gameplay.
There is only one playthrough. The second chapter may retread a lot of stuff from the first but it is not a second "playthrough", it is the second third of the game and has its own unique content.
A second playthrough would be using the chapter select to do a New Game+ run from the beginning of chapter one.
What the game does really poorly is make the second play through a giant retread of the first one with a more limited combat system and only a little bit more context.
Where as the other routes are so drastically different (and provide way more context) that having B as the immediate followup to A was just not a good choice. I was on a high during route A but route B swiftly brought me back down and made me realize that god damn, I hate repeated content that way it's presented in Automata.
What the game does really poorly is make the second play through a giant retread of the first one with a more limited combat system and only a little bit more context.
Where as the other routes are so drastically different (and provide way more context) that having B as the immediate followup to A was just not a good choice. I was on a high during route A but route B swiftly brought me back down and made me realize that god damn, I hate repeated content that way it's presented in Automata.
I think I would've been mostly fine with it if I didn't hate playing as 9S. Like, he's worse in literally every single way. His moveset sucks, plus they make you do that hacking shit all the time, and it's terrible.
I was defending the game earlier in the thread, I thought saying it was a bad decision therefore bad game was enough to show that I was kidding. Sorry for the misunderstanding pal.
I think C is the best overall but I did enjoy B more than A simply because the narrative is what I find the most intriguing about the game, so getting the additional context/motivations and the extra side quests all drew me into the world in a way that Route A really didn't.
I had to force myself through B. It makes you feel like you're playing through the game an additional 5 times because A itself can feel extremely repetitive on a stand-alone basis. With that said, I thought A and C were decent but the game isn't spectacular even without the repetitiveness of B forced upon the player. The game is still decent and worth playing, the story is interesting enough to see through, and it makes the most out of its limited resources. A 7/10 but not worthy of the hyperbolic praise it seems to get here from a constituent of very forgiving gamers whom the game resonated with.
A shame because I enjoyed the first Nier and generally enjoy Platinum games (some real stinkers, however). I was really hoping this would be a game with inviting replay value instead of forced. Forced in the sense that you can't really stop after A.
This is a game that really should be more of a sleeper hit, or an overlooked gem. I am happy that it seems to have received more mainstream recognition because of my fondness for Yoko Taro and Platinum. But many gamers are looking at this through rose colored glasses and seeing a better game than is actually there.
I couldn't recommend this game to anyone else without a number of explicitly stated caveats. More than most other games.
I think I would've been mostly fine with it if I didn't hate playing as 9S. Like, he's worse in literally every single way. His moveset sucks, plus they make you do that hacking shit all the time, and it's terrible.
Yea, his moveset is really limiting. He has also got really strange moves that hit at different ranges which is hard to adjust to after having experienced the fluidity of route A's combat.
And yea, the hacking got old within 20-30 minutes.
I had to force myself through B. It makes you feel like you're playing through the game an additional 5 times because A itself can feel extremely repetitive on a stand-alone basis.
This is a game that really should be more of a sleeper hit, or an overlooked gem. I am happy that it seems to have received more mainstream recognition because of my fondness for Yoko Taro and Platinum. But many gamers are looking at this through rose colored glasses and seeing a better game than is actually there.
Feeling it's a 7/10 or even lower is fine. But wow, it is so irksome when people have to throw in that unnecessary implication/snark about how only they can see the game for what it truly is, or something along those lines. That these "many gamers" are just wrong. Like no, it's just your opinion, that some certainly will agree with, but also many happen to feel quite differently about.
This really makes very little sense when I say it aloud, but hey, if that's how you felt, then sure I guess.
Feeling it's a 7/10 or even lower is fine. But wow, it is so irksome when people have to throw in that unnecessary implication/snark about how only they can see the game for what it truly is, or something along those lines. That these "many gamers" are just wrong. Like no, it's just your opinion, that some certainly will agree with, but also many happen to feel quite differently about.
Lol, I mean, I get it. I kind of feel left out with P5's positive reception, due to me not liking it as much as the majority. But uhh, I'm not going to act as if I'm more "right" than said majority, that they're all wrong to like it more, or patiently wait for that "honeymoon phase" to pass.
Honestly it's hard to convince someone to continue if they already made up their mind. Pretty much why I stopped trying and it will be their loss for missing out the story.
When I read that people hate hacking, I just assume they hate, or suck at, bullet hell games. Maybe they didn't expect it to be anything more than a gimmick. But really, this is very bad reason to dislike hacking in Nier: Automata....
I had to force myself through B. It makes you feel like you're playing through the game an additional 5 times because A itself can feel extremely repetitive on a stand-alone basis.
I don't understand. Route B takes less than half the time of Route A. There's a new gameplay mechanic that changes the combat system and the player has to take a different approach to the battles. And you get to see the story of A unfold through a different point of view. What makes this so tiring and repetitive? The "repeated" sections are done fast, I was honestly surprised that Route B ended so quickly. I'd understand if someone who hasn't played it yet feels intimidated by the prospect, but this kind of impressions feel like a total opposite to my experience.
