Amazing concept, but i sadly have a number of qualms with how inconsistent the polish can be. Yes i know thats the point but in my opinion, constantly seeing fake paintings having their textures almost always slightly misaligned or doors being misaligned (like the one on the side of the castle near the waterfall… geez), it kind of takes me out of what this game is trying to do if that makes any sense. Still, a lot of the areas are really interesting and fun to explore, and plus its mario 64 so just moving around is fun on its own. And I know for a lot of people b3313 will definitely satisfy that itch of exploring cool mario 64 liminal spaces.

Its just that for me it only reaches maybe like 80% of what I truly want out of something like this. The castle areas are easily the most fun to explore but they range so wildly in quality for me. I still think theres more room for potential here… I want to explore fleshed out areas like the parallel lobby or nebula lobby instead of the 4b floor…. which that floor really isnt great in my opinion!

It’s weird though. I think you’d be better off not 100%ing the game, dont even go for it in the slightest. Surprisingly going for every single fucking star, at least for me, provided a lot more annoyances with how the structure of this game is than I wanted, which is to be expected.

Overall its a really interesting and honestly really cool game. I think it has a great balance of that intentional inconsistency in its structure but also still having some sense of direction, meaning you can actually map out a specific place you wanna go to which is really cool. But sadly the experience slowly got worse for me as I went for 100%… so dont go for 100%.

I'm joining the war on narrative games, and I'm on the side of narrative. Before I ever really got serious about video games, I was serious about books and film, and like those mediums it's story that piques my interest.

Undeniably, Undertale is one of the most interesting narratively-driven games of the last decade. It's probably the most I've ever played a game I did not like, having done several playthroughs, neutral or pacifist or genocide, waiting for it all to "click". But it just won't. Why not?

I'll say that I thoroughly enjoy the gameplay and think it works perfectly as an example of narrative gameplay integration, and is used consistently and intelligently throughout. But paradoxically, in a game that encourages you to avoid combat, it's these moments where the characters get the most personality; their attack patterns and even their projectiles say more about them in a language unique to this game than their dialogue ever could.

It's appropriate that this game is so strongly associated with an auteur, because even moreso than the amount of times you'll see his name pop in the credits as composer or designer or writer or caterer, it becomes very obvious very fast that this game is only really meant to appeal to one kind of person. (Well, two kinds of people. Furries also exist.)

As someone else said in their review of this game, you should indeed not let one annoying fandom ruin your perception of a game, and I wish it was as simple as ignoring Tumblr's collective opinion. The problem is that this game was only ever meant to be FOR Tumblr, or more specifically the kind of person that Tumblr has cultivated; someone who thinks a character's likeability comes from them being 'adorkable' and not any kind of dramatic pathos or arc or actual character, someone who calls dogs 'doggos' and 'puppers', someone who spends six dollars on laptop stickers that say inane phrases like "why be moody when you can shake that booty".

A difference in humor is one thing -- though I'd argue it's still justifiably off-putting, considering how much of this game is reliant on its humor, to the point of stopping gameplay dead in its tracks to dedicate time to the kind of weak character skits you see in rejected SNL auditions -- but within this setting, it is crucial that you enjoy such humor and characterization if you hope to get any kind of mileage out of the game's narrative.
Which is a shame, because the game does have some true highs; the combat system allows for an exploration of morality with some genuine weight to your actions, there's clearly been a lot of thought put into the mechanics of this world and how consequences develop throughout the story. But it's ultimately at the service of very little; you will only root for Sans if you enjoy puns, you will only care about Napstablook if you unironically have Daria as your Twitter icon, you will only care for Alphys if you are the kind of unbearable nerd who sees themselves as an anime protagonist and not, you know, a fucking annoying prick.

Differences in humor tend to be the main reason people conflict about melo-dramedy stories like BoJack Horseman or Fleabag. Because humor and drama are interwoven in these stories and end up being celebrate to making each other work, which becomes hard to breach for an audience if they just don't enjoy your chosen method of comedy (pop culture references in BoJack or fourth wall breaking in Fleabag, for example). It works for these shows because, like the humor, the drama is very personal as well. Undertale on the other hand combines very personal humor with large sweeping statements about morality, postmodernism, ludonarrative dissonance, very large lofty themes that have to co-exist with pretty braindead humor like "what if the rock wouldn't stay put, LOL".

At its most egregious it suggests a kind of ego on behalf of the creators, that there never was a true conversation about these decisions concerning the narrative, or even that there was no one around to challenge these ideas. A lot of this feels adolescent and juvenile, especially compared to its successor Deltarune, which has demonstrated far stronger capabilities of self-awareness and actual character development.

In the end, Undertale falls in line with a game like Borderlands; decent to play, but god I wish it was written by anyone else.