I actually believe this, and find your passive-aggressive, ironic spouting of it to be really shitty.
I was responding in kind to TheLoyalTraitor's comment. We ended our comments with an understanding that art is in the eye of beholder. Which I believe it is.
I also wrote "I don't want anyone to take it as that they're "wrong" for liking a game.".
Im not sure how you can find me not liking a game a form of passive-aggressiveness. Ill say it again, if you like Nier, you're not wrong or right. This is a matter of opinion. Im sorry you find this so ..."shitty"....
For me, the existentialism in Nier is not the main reason I've grown attached to it. It is its story telling done in a way only video games can, use of game mechanics to do simply weird and interesting things, and its re-framing of its narrative multiple times from endings A to E that gets me emotionally hooked on it. Existential robots is simply window dressing.
All Nier does is present things that are relatable at the most basic level and then apply them to cliched questions of Sci-fi, all of which result in failure to me.
What does this even mean?
Sorry, I could have said that better. I was responding to the commenter's opinion on how the extreme characters meshed with the idea of consciousness. To me, Nier was presenting basic characterization, that is ultimately very relatable, and mixing them very complicated questions about morality and existence. Its as if it was presenting questions that were genuinely interesting only to destroy them by presenting characters that had childish delusions thoughtlessly foisted upon them by the madness of human beings. It was presenting these characters as answers, and I found that pretty obnoxious.

Log in to comment