I think my 2/5 score is in part because of me, what I hoped this would be, and how I play games. I wanted this to be more of a "Papers, Please" type experience, with decisions and determinations that lead to self-reflection. The admittedly charming story that I replaced that self-reflection was not, for me, a satisfying alternative.
I think my issue with what the game ACTUALLY is lies with the scoring system after each case. It presents itself as the government's evaluation of you (which, based on the above paragraph, is clearly up my alley, given how corrupt that government seems to be), but getting full points often required me to do things that stretch my suspension of disbelief thin.
Why, for example, does the government want me to confiscate a can of paint from a man THEY hired? It didn't even matter which can I took, as far as the points were concerned. Whether I'm right or wrong, it feels more like scoring highly involves doing what the developers, rather than the government, wanted of me.
In most other games, I'd be perfectly fine with that! However, in the context of a "choose your own adventure" type game like this, it feels simply incongruous.
I think my issue with what the game ACTUALLY is lies with the scoring system after each case. It presents itself as the government's evaluation of you (which, based on the above paragraph, is clearly up my alley, given how corrupt that government seems to be), but getting full points often required me to do things that stretch my suspension of disbelief thin.
Why, for example, does the government want me to confiscate a can of paint from a man THEY hired? It didn't even matter which can I took, as far as the points were concerned. Whether I'm right or wrong, it feels more like scoring highly involves doing what the developers, rather than the government, wanted of me.
In most other games, I'd be perfectly fine with that! However, in the context of a "choose your own adventure" type game like this, it feels simply incongruous.