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.
This is what makes discussing this game with people who don't like it (or don't like it that much) so frustrating.
You don't like it nearly as much as I do, and that's perfectly fine, your reasons are valid, we just disagree on how good it is, but why is it that the same stance from the opposite side is so much less common? We had OP asking us to "admit" the game is not as good as we're saying, we had people saying the honeymoon period is over instead of people just thinking different things about it, and now you're saying we're looking at it through rose colored glasses and seeing a better game than it actually is. Why can't we just actually think it's a better game than you do?
I swear, it's not like this for most games. The Last Guardian is much more divisive than Automata, and I feel like it's much easier for people who love and hate it to coexist and share their thoughts in the same threads. We all hang in the OT from time to time, even people who hate it, because it's a cool environment and people don't accuse you of anything for liking or disliking the game. Well, some do, but for the most part, it's much less prevalent.
You're a fan of both Yoko Taro and Platinum and you want to bring up "forgiving gamers"? You pretty much have to be forgiving of lacking parts to enjoy either something it excels at or to think the game is more than the sum of its parts for any game either of them made. It's not like people are pretending Automata doesn't have flaws, create a thread about the difficulty balancing and how leveling brings the combat down and you won't see me posting there to say you're wrong and the game is great, because I completely agree with that. But wait, if I'm not able to see things for how they are, then that means the game's difficulty is perfect, then? Oh, of course not, this kind of argument is only valid when people disagree with you, right?
