I hope I got my point across in part one. But if I didn't, I'll reiterate here: Nier: Automata set the new standard in video game storytelling. Not necessarily the story itself, but how the story is told. That's all well and good, but now it's time to talk about the gameplay. Because unlike other media formats, you can have the absolutely best storytelling of all time ever and still have it ruined because of awful controls or game breaking glitches.
Fortunately, Nier: Automata doesn't have either of those things. But it does come from a series known for less-than-optimal gameplay. Full disclosure, I have never actually played the original Nier or any of the Drakengard games, so I can't really comment on it personally. Any time I see someone call the controls in an old game "wonky" it arouses suspicion, that's in the same category as "aged poorly" for me. What does "wonky" even mean? Sure, if you back it up with details that's fine, but it's a generally lazy argument when just thrown out there. That being said, consensus does seem to indicate that the moment-to-moment gameplay in those titles isn't great, despite them having great storytelling. Fans of the series were very excited when they learned Nier: Automata would be developed by PlatinumGames, a studio better known for its work on Vanquish, Metal Gear Rising Revengeance and, most notably, the Bayonetta series. I'm not going to say I dislike those games, but I don't really love them. I recognize their objective quality, but subjectively I think I would put most of them somewhere between better-than-okay to very good.
We also have to consider the mind behind Nier: Automata, the enigmatic Yoko Taro. Taro is...unique, to say the least. A quick internet search will tell you why way better than I ever could, he's just a different individual. That kind of extends to his games, which are known for excessive fourth wall breaks and design elements that involve, for lack of a better term, trolling players. So, with these two things in mind, I am going to come out and say that, as with other PlatinumGames titles, I liked but didn't really love Nier: Automata's gameplay. It's not bad, it's actually quite good, but I just don't think it quite matched up to the quality of the storytelling. To be fair, that was a high bar to clear. But I think a lot of Taro-isms that made the storytelling so great were actively detrimental to the gameplay.
Before we get to that though, let's go into a little more detail about the gameplay. While it's moment-to-moment gameplay is reminiscent of the other PlatinumGames titles, Nier: Automata is very much an RPG at its core. This is kind of an issue, because those games are primarily skill based and don't have leveling systems. Here, you can get through some of the more difficult parts of the game by grinding. I'm totally okay with that as an RPG person, but I could see how it might be an issue for action game fans, especially since the actual gameplay is action heavy. While there are 2D shooting, 3D shooting and 2D action sequences, most of the game is focused on 3D combat. I do like that there are both ranged and melee combat elements. You can lock on enemies (unless you are playing on hard mode) or break the lock, as well as shoot and use special attacks with your pod with the shoulder buttons. You can jump, slash with heavy and light attacks and dodge, so there's a lot to do. Dodging is very important, as many of the enemies hit very hard and very fast. On the highest difficulty, you die in one hit, so dodging is essential. Most enemies have fairly predictable patterns and most have attacks where they shoot two different types of red orbs, which can be destroyed with melee or shooting attacks depending on their hue. That's just the first playthrough, where you are in control of 2B. 9S is a little different, he doesn't have a heavy attack but can hack machines by playing a 3D shooter mini game. I am not a fan of this and actively tried to avoid it. I tried to keep the focus on the action, even when the game didn't want me to.
If you have played Bayonetta, you will be right at home. There aren't that many enemies in the open world, but when you do encounter them, the battles are fierce and the action is non-stop. You can string together some pretty fun and impressive combos and the dodging mechanics is fairly easy to use. It's fun, but it does wear thin a little bit and once you figure it out you will smash most enemies with ease. The pods have infinite ammo, so worst case scenario you can just sit back and fire until an enemy is defeated. It might take a while, but it's possible. I played on normal mode and I really feel like I should have switched it up to hard, but at the end of the day it's called "normal" for a reason. Again, the combat is probably objectively better than I am giving it credit for, but I think it's closer to good than great. The open world is fun to explore, it's very desolate but that fits with the vibe of the game. It's a relatively small map, but I kind of like that here, especially because you don't unlock fast travel until much later.
I think the best part of the gameplay comes from the RPG elements. The chip mechanic is one of the better customization systems I've seen in a long time and probably my favorite in a modern RPG. Each android can equip a series of chips that increase their stats or improve their abilities, with more powerful chips taking up more space in their OS. You can get OS upgrades to add more chips, which you will likely need to for the second and third playthrough. There's a really good variety of effects here, from basics like additional HP to more complex add-ons like additional on-hit invincibility. Even aspects of the HUD are tied to this system, which I kind of think is cool and provides a huge level of customization. Don't feel like you need your mini-map? Take out the chip. Don't care about how much HP the enemy has? Take out the chip? Want to see a funny alternated ending where you just die? You can take out your OS chip to do just that. That's one of those cool little ways that Nier: Automata subverts expectations. In most games, you just wouldn't even have that option, or it would actually do something positive. Hell, as cryptic as this game can be you might think there's some level of secret involved here. But nope, for once everything is as it seems. The game tells you "you will die if you unequip this item" and you very much die if you unequip that item. The leveling system is pretty standard and you can upgrade your equipment and pods, which gives you something to work towards.
Before I start complaining, I want to call out two more major positives, the graphics and sound. Nier: Automata isn't the most vibrant game; it does take place on a post-apocalyptic Earth after all. But some of the locales are truly beautiful and the camera work really extenuates that beauty. Walking up to the amusement park for the first time was one of those all-time great gaming moments and the factory really popped despite being as brown and gray as it was. It's just a great looking game throughout, which is especially impressive as it used an appropriately bland color palette without looking bland. And the music? It's just absolutely amazing. In addition to just sounding objectively good, every track perfectly mirrors the atmosphere of the location where it plays. The slow buildup of songs as you progress towards certain areas or events is just genius and the syncing of tracks to your character's actions is just above and beyond. The mysterious vocals are also incredibly fitting. I got tired of trying to figure out what they were saying so I went and looked it up...turns out its complete gibberish. Vocalist Emi Evans was asked to listen to songs in a variety of languages and come up with a "futuristic" language that sounds like all of them combined. That's dedication right there.
But now, we need to talk about the issues and believe me, I had a lot of issues with the gameplay here. Some of it is genre bias, as I've said before I like but don't love this style of action game. But a lot of it has to do with some seriously questionable design choices that I think were too cute or too "troll-y" for their own good. If I gained nothing else from playing Nier: Automata, it's that I love my expectations being subverted with story, but I hate it with gameplay. My first issue was with the multiple playthroughs. Outside of a few rare instances, I really don't like playing through the same story twice, even if the perspective is shifted slightly. I especially don't like it when the second playthrough makes the gameplay worse. 2B was a blast to play as, 9S was...not so much. I hated the hacking mini-game and it felt like it constantly broke up the flow of what I was doing. I also hated that I was slower and weaker. And it actually made it worse that your third playthrough as A2 was essentially the second half of the game. Obviously they would have had to change the story for this to happen, but they should have had the A2 playthrough second. Maybe beating the game as 2B unlocks chapter select with 9S, with markers for chapters where there was new content? I don't know, but even with the massive, massive plot revelations and some truly great story sequences his playthrough felt repetitive and it didn't help that he wasn't fun to play as. Part of me thinks this was done on purpose, the only real reason for this playthrough is for the two or three story revelations that occur. The whole "it feels different to kill the machines now" vibe would have still been there if you moved to 2A's playthrough right away, but these huge plot twists were essential. I am very much of the belief that New Game plus modes only work in certain scenarios. It works in Chrono Trigger because getting the different endings is predicated on going about the whole game in a completely different manner. It works in Borderlands 2 because the plot is complete and any story growth takes a back seat to simply getting better stuff. I don't like it here because it basically forces you to experience the first half of the story twice before allowing you to play the second. It's made worse because it feels like this was done more to subvert player expectations than because someone thought it was an actual good design choice.
That stuff is prevalent in the moment-to-moment gameplay as well. Why am I doing an escort mission in 2024 (or I guess in 2017 when the game came out)? I know it's not because the developers thought it would be fun. It feels more like an attempt to troll me as a player. I get wanting to subvert expectations, but my expectation was that escort missions are now considered bad game design and shouldn't be a thing. I don't like that that expectation was subverted. As I've said before, there are certain things I prefer about modern games and mechanics like that being put out to pasture are near the top of the list. Why am I getting stun-locked? That was considered bad game design even back in the day, so I don't know why it's happening here. Yeah, you can equip chips to stop it, but that should just be a normal part of the game. Maybe you turn it off on hard mode or something? I don't know, but it's really frustrating that you are doing fine and then all the sudden just die to a normal enemy because you missed one dodge. Those are just some examples, but there are plenty of others. It's not that I didn't get the ability to fast travel until much later that bothers me, it's the fact that the game made me assume it was just never going to happen. At least tell me or let me believe it may happen. Sometimes, Nier: Automata is good with stuff like this, there are no auto-saves here and the game makes that clear right away. Not holding the players hand is fine and actually kind of nice in this day and age, but some of this stuff goes a little bit too far. I've seen a lot of sources talk about this stuff being in tune with the Nihilistic themes of the game's story, but I don't really think that justifies it. A lot of the gameplay design decisions here feel like they are weird for the sake of being weird. That often works with less interactive media, or even withing a video game's lore or story, but it's almost always a terrible idea when it comes to gameplay.
Not all of my issues are with deeper design decisions, I also had some problems with the more concrete gameplay as well. There's a lot going on in Nier: Automata, which I think is an overall positive. But there were quite a few instances where battle became so chaotic that I completely lost track of what was going on. Some of that was my own problem, but a lot of it had to do with the sheer amount of things going on at once. You are slashing and jumping and dodging and shooting and breaking off locks and dealing with orbs while your partner is doing all the same stuff and the enemies are mobbing you. That wouldn't be a problem itself, but there are a lot of factors that cause it to be. I found it to be most egregious in the 2D sections, it was almost like the game wasn't really designed with them in mind. The camera always seemed to be zoomed out too far for what was going on and I felt like I had to get closer to the TV to really see what my character was doing. Even during the 3D sequences, the camera was the biggest contributor to this problem. Look, I get the desire to have a cinematic camera for a cinematic game. But one of the things a lot of modern developers forget is at the end of the day, you are playing a video game. I appreciate they are trying to make things feel big an epic, but when the camera is jerking around and you can't see what's attacking you it's a major problem. It's an even more major problem in a game that punishes you so badly for failing (at least as far as modern games go). I get the symbolism of the camera refusing to look at the amusement park boss, but it makes the last part of that fight an absolute slog. I understand Nier: Automata is full of symbolism. I understand it's trying to make a statement and offer some deeper meaning. But I have always been of the belief that gameplay needs to be prioritized over that stuff in more tense situations, especially boss fights.
Look, Nier: Automata doesn't have bad gameplay by any means. It's a good, fun time that's going to appeal to both action and RPG gamers alike. But it just didn't do anything from a gameplay perspective to make it feel any different from your standard 3D action game in the modern era. That's yet another aspect that's going to make this game so hard to score. Because its storytelling is as great as advertised. I am going to say it again, Nier: Automata sets the new standard for video game storytelling. It's a must play for that alone. But even with that I feel like I just didn't enjoy this game like a lot of gamers did. That said, I still liked this game a lot. This is probably going to be the first time in the five years that I've done this where I think my score is going to be below what the objective quality of the game should warrant. I just don't love the PlatinumGames style as much as most people seem to, so that's probably the reason why, because I'm definitely on the same page with the internet on the storytelling. If I had to break it down, I'd probably give it a 7/10 for gameplay and a 10/10 for story, which would average out to an 8.5. However, Nier: Automata is an RPG at its core, even if it's gameplay is more action oriented. Because of this, I feel like I need to put more weight on the story. Even in the modern era, RPGs are still the genre I go to more for story than gameplay. With that in mind, I'm going to have to go with...
9.25/10
Comments
Post a Comment