I think your mileage with this will heavily depend on how much you can forgive it for being so derivative, but I think in this case it’s worth forgiving. Personally, I have no problem with stealing souls systems like bonfires, estus, stamina management, parries, rallies etc. but there are points where I think Lies of P crosses a line: talking to sick people through windows, a not-fire-keeper calling you “clever one”, slowly pushing open heavy double-doors, the same damn item pickup and menu sounds, I think these kinds of choices are needlessly derivative and will only serve to remind people of other, better, games. A more thrifty approach could have taken the meat of souls without also taking the chaff. Even things like attacking, running and dodging animations are uncannily similar to fromsoft titles, which is a bit of a double-edged sword: On the one hand, this is one of the precious few souls copycats that actually feels great to play, because it takes the finely-tuned animation cadence of fromsoft so wholesale (the other souls copycat that feels good, Nioh, relies on the years of action game experience that Team Ninja has, so it’s maybe preferable for an inexperienced dev to simply steal in this case). The negative side of this is that everything which feels “off” or out of place will stick out all the more severely. Level design is pretty obviously inferior to fromsoft’s games, as linear as it is with a bunch of superfluous shortcuts, lacking the overlapping and layered tracks that define the best souls levels (ds3 undead settlement is a perfect example) and lacking any real side areas. But elsewhere I have to say that as the game went on, I found remarkably little to complain about: Environmental design and the art direction is alarmingly good for a debut game, enemy variety is surprisingly great - one of the critical things that separates good souls from mid souls, I was really taken aback by how the game has unique minibosses that are only used once or twice whereas basically every other souls copycat is defined by excessive reuse. The quality of the animations is universally top-notch, everything flows great and so many weapons have enjoyable movesets and bosses have subtle variations in their combos to signify what they’ll do next.

All creativity is about stealing to some extent, though this is admittedly on the more extreme end of that spectrum. Still, I think a fixation on its similarities - both superficial and meaningful - can cover up the actually original things that are here: Glossing over the neat durability and weapon-fusion mechanics, I love the parry/blocking system in this game and think it's an ingenious fusion of Sekiro and Bloodborne that actually improves both. The boon of Sekiro’s posture and parry mechanics was that it allowed bosses to have flashy, dynamic, extended blockstrings without feeling like you were just waiting for the boss to be done (i.e Elden Ring), because parrying those blockstrings did damage to the enemy. The flaw of Sekiro’s mechanics, for some people at least, was that parry was the only meaningful way to engage with a lot of situations, which Lies of P solves by requiring posture breaks to be activated by a charged heavy, forcing you into finding an opening and not just reacting with parries. Bloodborne, on the other hand, was all about hit-trading, thanks to its rally mechanic, and the boon of this was that getting hit was equally an opportunity just as much as it was a punishment, the flaw, however, was that in some cases it could promote mindlessly aggressive play, where you just hit-trade a boss to death without even trying to avoid their attacks (Bloodborne mostly got around this with clever enemy designs, but some bosses still have the problem). Lies of P fuses these two by locking the rally mechanic behind blocking, while retaining the parrying mechanics of Sekiro. The result is an interesting risk-reward pipeline: Risk a parry to get their posture down, if you miss and get a regular block, now you’re encouraged to go on the offensive to get that health back, getting hit is unequivocally bad and dodging remains very relevant as a repositioning tool. It’s interesting and, for me, very satisfying to engage with, though I wouldn’t say it’s perfect: It’s a little too insistent on parrying with the armour and tracking that bosses/elite enemies sometimes have, the fact that it doesn’t show you the posture bar so that you can’t factor in how close an enemy is to staggering into your decision-making also seems like an odd choice, and the “perilous attacks” beating both block and dodge can get a little ridiculous, but for the most part I really like the systems here.

The deciding factor for me is that the bosses in Lies of P are genuinely fantastic, all with loads of varied, amazingly animated attacks and interesting gimmicks, there are some lacklustre ones, especially the two lategame rematch bosses, but the run of bosses from Andreas with his side-switching gimmick, the Black Rabbits aka "O&S but with 3 different Ornsteins", King of Puppets, Victor and the Green Monster with the clever reuse of the Watchman is just banger after banger, they're all so creatively designed, and if I could commit some blasphemy real quick, I think this boss lineup is better than any other soulslike game, fromsoft included.

It comes with the caveat that this is a very difficult game. I love that, personally, the level of difficulty means that encounters demand you respect them and learn their moves rather than stumbling through, but it won’t be for everyone, and I think if you go in with the mindset that it’s just a copy, you’re not going to want to give it that respect. It’s a little sad that the general reception seems to be so lukewarm, and it’s hard to pinpoint whether this lies in the difficulty, the feeling that it’s a “knockoff”, a vindictive idea that any good soulslike is a threat to fromsoft, or just general fatigue with soulslikes. Regardless, a lot of the takes about how the game is unfair or feels “off” just don’t ring true to me at all; I think this is the real deal, it’s a damn good game, and I honestly find myself feeling that it’s going to be my GOTY, but hey, I loved Bloodborne and Sekiro, so it was probably a given that I would love a fusion of the two as well.

Não há dúvidas, é uma melhoria em relação ao título original. O conteúdo extra e as melhorias visuais e de combate fazem desta a maneira definitiva de se experimentar o título. É um jogo mais responsivo e gostoso de se jogar. Por outro lado, o núcleo do jogo não foi alterado e isto resultou em uma série de decisões questionáveis da era do PS3 sendo transportadas para esta edição.

O combate decepciona pecando pela forma de variação. Jogos do mesmo gênero costumam oferecer variantes diferentes de combo que dependem da mesclagem de ataques fracos com ataques fortes que trazem à mesa novas possibilidades de limpar a tela de inimigos. Nier oferece uma gama de opções muito limitadas neste aspecto, possuindo apenas UMA variante. Não importa o momento que o jogador misture seus ataques fracos com os fortes, o resultado será sempre o mesmo. Entretanto, cabe aqui um elogio: a mistura de gêneros característica de Yoko Taro quebra bastante da eventual chatice e renova as coisas aqui e ali.

Na segunda parte do jogo as opções se abrem com a introdução do sistema de troca de armas. Cada arma possui um propósito em batalha e traz um moveset único, mas seguem apresentando apenas uma opção de variação. Grimoire Weiss como mecânica adiciona tomadas de decisões e é visualmente estimulante. Há um bocado de opções de magia para situações diferentes que podem complementar a sua escolha de arma ou reduzir as suas desvantagens.

A variação de inimigos normais é muito baixa e oferecem pouca diferença substancial entre eles. Há os que são resistentes à mágica, há os encouraçados, os pequenos e mais ágeis e assim por diante. Em geral são bem básicos, mas de vez em quando o jogo brinca com sua perspectiva da câmera alterando o ângulo das batalhas, um truque muito bem vindo que confere novos ares às lutas sem alterar substancialmente o combate.

As boss battle - por outro lado - trazem o diferencial à mesa. Cada luta é sustentada por um grande fator emocional - conferido pelas cutscenes - e possui seu próprio núcleo de ideias que definem seu gameplay. Listei os principais abaixo de acordo com minha percepção apenas para ilustrar o ponto, evitando chefes-spoilers:

Hensel e Gretel são um combate duplo com foco em ataques físicos;
Hook requer que você o siga pelo cenário. Wendy é semelhante;
Shahriyar requer segmentos de mirar e atirar;
Number 6 é imune a ataques físicos;
Roc é o combate mais focado em enfrentar uma horda;
Goose é imortal;


Ainda assim existe repetição entre elas e desviar de ondas de choque terrestre, orbes vermelhas flutuantes ou de uma investida é mais comum do que eu gostaria.

É permitido ao jogador alterar esta característica a qualquer momento no menu do game, então cabe a experimentação aos curiosos. Hard é o único segmento que me exigiu o uso de todas as mecânicas disponíveis, mas prolonga as seções repetitivas de combate. O normal trivializa boa parte da experiência de luta mas permite uma progressão mais rápida. O Easy é realmente para quem não deseja jogar o jogo.
Meu maior problema com esta parte é o sentimento de que deveria haver outra dificuldade entre o Normal e o Hard que não tornasse o combate disfuncional mas que também não prolongasse tanto as batalhas. É como se o modo Easy fosse o Super Easy, e o Normal fosse o verdadeiro Easy. Há a lacuna para um modo Normal que forneça a experiência equilibrada ao jogador.

As localizações são escassas até mesmo quando levamos o setting e ambientação em conta. Não há fast travel por razões artísticas, então o jogador se verá correndo entre as localidades por um bom tempo.

As side quests se assemelham às do gênero MMO, envolvendo localizar NPCs e grindar por itens desnecessários. Em sua maioria são péssimas e não valem o investimento. É discutível o quão opcionais são tendo em vista o fato de serem a principal fonte de recursos do game além de algumas poucas recompensam com armas (necessárias para se alcançar um certo final do jogo). São raras as que se sobressaem e o fazem por meio da narrativa. A história da lighthouse lady é minha favorita neste game, especialmente pelo final da quest e a escolha associada a ele.

A segunda metade do jogo consiste em revisitar lugares já conhecidos pelo jogador. A ausência de um fast travel efetivo (porque sim, há um fast travel) e o excessivo backtracking quebram bastante a experiência em termos de diversão. É importante ressaltar que esta será a parte para onde os jogadores retornarão caso desejem alcançar os finais opcionais do jogo e, portanto, será algo com o que precisarão lidar múltiplas vezes. Felizmente existe um sistema de navegação por meio de barco que atua como um substituto para o fast travel. É útil, mas não tanto quanto precisaria ser pois não te leva diretamente às localidades e ainda te obrigam a andar um pouco. Para melhorar bastaria que os portos fossem sempre dentro das cidades ou localidades de importância.

Um comentário breve sobre os finais, sem spoilers:
O final A propositalmente aparenta ser incompleto.
O final B complementa o primeiro final e enriquece a experiência.
O final C e D são basicamente a mesma coisa e facilmente poderiam ser integrados a outros finais, não apresentando razão para existir.
O final E é interessante e satisfatório, principalmente por ser uma seção inteiramente nova com duração curtíssima. É um pouco diferente dos demais e justifica sua existência.

O fato de jogar do zero a segunda parte para obter estes finais torna a experiência cansativa e nem sempre recompensadora. Um sistema de seleção de capítulos facilmente ajudaria a quebrar esta sensação, mas integrar os finais C e D nos anteriores já seria uma grande melhoria, já que eliminaria uma ou duas playthroughs do jogador. Ainda assim, maior variedade entre cada rota seria um fator que beneficiaria o processo e interesse em jogar outra vez o jogo (ao invés de seguir com uma estrutura tão próxima à da primeira rota)

Apesar de tudo descrito, Nier definitivamente vale a experiência. É um jogo singular que justifica todos seus méritos em sua história, trilha sonora e principalmente personagens. O quarteto principal é muito bem construído e cada um tem seu próprio estilo de jogo e contribuição na história geral.
As experimentações de Taro se mesclam bem e rendem experiências ricas e curiosas, seja quando está mesclando segmentos de (bullet hell, visual novel, etc) ou quando faz referência a outros títulos (a Mansão é uma referência direta ao primeiro Resident Evil).

Devo dizer que decerto esperava mais em termos pessoais. Um toque extra nas quests e sistema de combate/locomoção são necessários. Ainda não experimentei automata, mas Drakengard 3 saiu poucos anos após o Nier original e já trazia melhorias implementadas no combate (armas do mesmo tipo com movesets diferentes, maior quantidade de combos, yada yada).

There is no doubt, it is an improvement over the original title. The extra content and the visual and combat improvements make this the definitive way to experience the title. It is a more responsive and enjoyable game to play. On the other hand, the core of the game has not been changed and this has resulted in a series of questionable decisions from the PS3 era being carried over to this edition.

The combat disappoints by sinning through the form of variation. Games of the same genre usually offer different combo variants that depend on the mix of weak attacks with strong attacks that bring new possibilities to clean the screen of enemies. Nier offers a very limited range of options in this regard, having only ONE variant. No matter when the player mixes his weak and strong attacks, the result will always be the same. However, here is a compliment: the mix of genres characteristic of Yoko Taro breaks a lot of the eventual bummer and renews things here and there.

In the second part of the game, options open up with the introduction of the weapon exchange system. Each weapon has a purpose in battle and brings a unique moveset, but still presents only one variation option. Grimoire Weiss as a mechanic adds decision making and is visually stimulating. There are a lot of magic options for different situations that can complement your choice of weapon or reduce your disadvantages.

The range of normal enemies is very low and offers little substantial difference between them. There are those who are resistant to magic, there are battleships, small and more agile and so on. In general they are very basic, but from time to time the game plays with its perspective of the camera by changing the angle of the battles, a very welcome trick that gives new air to the fights without substantially altering the combat.

Boss battle - on the other hand - brings the difference to the table. Each fight is supported by a big emotional factor - conferred by the cutscenes - and has its own core of ideas that define its gameplay. I listed the main ones below according to my perception just to illustrate the point, avoiding boss-spoilers:

Hensel and Gretel are double combat with a focus on physical attacks;
Hook requires you to follow him around the stage. Wendy is similar;
Shahriyar requires segments to aim and shoot;
Number 6 is immune to physical attacks;
Roc is the combat most focused on facing a horde;
Goose is immortal;

Still there is repetition between them and dodging shock waves on the floor or an onslaught is more common than I would like.

The player is allowed to change this feature at any time in the game menu, so it is up to the experimenters to experiment. Hard is the only segment that required me to use all the mechanics available, but it prolongs the repetitive combat sections. The normal trivializes much of the fighting experience but allows for faster progression. Easy is really for those who don't want to play the game.
My biggest problem with this part is the feeling that there should be another difficulty between Normal and Hard that doesn’t make the combat dysfunctional but that also doesn’t prolong battles so much. It is as if the Easy mode were Super Easy, and Normal was the real Easy. There is a gap for a Normal mode that provides the player with a balanced experience.

The locations are scarce even when we take the setting and ambiance into account. There is no fast travel for artistic reasons, so the player will find himself running between locations for a long time.

Side quests are similar to those of the MMO genre, involving locating NPCs and grinding for unnecessary items. Most of them are terrible and are not worth the investment. It is debatable how optional they are in view of the fact that they are the main source of resources for the game in addition to a few rewards with weapons (necessary to reach a certain end of the game). Rare are those that stand out and do so through narrative. The story of the lighthouse lady is my favorite in this game, especially due to the end of the quest and the choice associated with it.

The second half of the game consists of revisiting places already known to the player. The absence of effective fast travel (because yes, there is fast travel) and excessive backtracking break the experience in terms of fun. It is important to note that this will be the part that players will return to if they wish to reach the optional endings of the game and, therefore, it will be something that they will need to deal with multiple times. Fortunately, there is a navigation system by boat that acts as a substitute for fast travel. It is useful, but not as much as it would need to be, as it does not take you directly to the localities and still requires you to walk a little. In order to improve, it would be enough that the ports were always within the cities or localities of importance.

A brief commentary on the finals, without spoilers:
The ending A purposefully appears to be incomplete.
Final B complements the first final and enriches the experience.
The finals C and D are basically the same thing and could easily be integrated with other endings, giving no reason to exist.
The ending E is interesting and satisfying, mainly because it is an entirely new section with a very short duration. It is a little different from the others and justifies its existence.

Playing the second half from scratch to get these finals makes the experience tiring and not always rewarding. A chapter selection system would easily help to break this feeling, but integrating the finals C and D into the previous ones would be a big improvement, since it would eliminate one or two playthroughs from the player. Still, greater variety between each route would be a factor that would benefit the process and interest in playing the game again (instead of continuing with a structure so close to that of the first route)

Despite everything described, Nier is definitely worth the experience. It is a unique game that justifies all its merits in its history, soundtrack and mainly characters. The main quartet is very well built and each has its own style of play and contribution to the overall story.
Taro's experiments mix well and yield rich and curious experiences, either when he is mixing segments of (bullet hell, visual novel, etc.) or when he makes reference to other titles (the Mansion is a direct reference to the first Resident Evil).

I must say that I certainly expected more on a personal level. An extra touch on the quests and combat / locomotion system is required. I haven't tried automata yet, but Drakengard 3 came out a few years after the original Nier and already brought improvements implemented in combat (weapons of the same type with different movesets, more combos, yada yada).

THE GOOD
+ Interactive Lobby with a lot to do (including drinking until you pass out)
+ Utility tools that allow player expression and are as much valuable as damage input
+ Good amount of biomes, but little expression and variety of scenarios and structures thanks to the procedural nature therefore lacking on the worldbuilding departament
+ Levels with different mechanics (oxygen administration, natural hazards, etc.)
+ Developers have been addressing the concerns of the community
+ M.U.L.E. is a fun and very helpful companion
+ Returning to the Drop Pod at the end of matches is always intense and defines who lives or dies
+ Different classes with unique arsenals and abilities that determine the role you'll play
+ Each class has well-defined advantages and disadvantages
+ Good enemy variety with different weaknesses and unique mechanics that can surprise and even guarantee some scares; Many requiring team work to be eliminated thanks to the weak points not being fully exposed.
+ Good atmosphere and a very organic soundtrack that provides the necessary feelings.
+ Low lighting and some claustrophobic / rugged sectors contribute a lot to immersion and highlight the usefulness of each class and once again leads to an appreciation for variety and cooperation / communication.
+ Levels are generated considering information such as the number of players in the game and the type of mission
+ Good difficulty; Every bullet counts thanks to limited arsenal
+ Events

THE BAD
- Lack of variety in missions. All have similar goals: Collect and survive / kill
- Designs are not very expressive and all characters are defined by the dwarf archetype
- Progression is mostly restricted to numeric upgrades
- Many recycled enemies
- The enemies' AI is questionable and stays all the time in "kill" mode
- Enemies will focus characters out of combat, allowing allies to revive him without the need to remove antagonistic troops. The lack of urgency and the discouragement of a more planned and cautious approach is a negative factor that breaks the immersion of the game and contradicts the choices intrinsic to its design.
- The lack of tags on top of dwarfs makes it impossible to recognize allies if they choose similar classes making communication frustrating

THE UGLY
- Very grindy

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION:
Although recently out of early access status, Deep Rock Galactic already promises to address feedback from its community. At the moment it can be faced as a very competent game and, despite being quite derivative, manages to build a solid and charismatic approach within its genre. It's still rough on its edges, but the promise of improvement makes it easily a titan of the genre that is already easy to recommend.

THE GOOD
+ Interactive Lobby with a lot to do (including drinking until you pass out)
+ Utility tools that allow player expression and are as much valuable as damage input
+ Good amount of biomes, but little expression and variety of scenarios and structures thanks to the procedural nature therefore lacking on the worldbuilding departament
+ Levels with different mechanics (oxygen administration, natural hazards, etc.)
+ Developers have been addressing the concerns of the community
+ M.U.L.E. is a fun and very helpful companion
+ Returning to the Drop Pod at the end of matches is always intense and defines who lives or dies
+ Different classes with unique arsenals and abilities that determine the role you'll play
+ Each class has well-defined advantages and disadvantages
+ Good enemy variety with different weaknesses and unique mechanics that can surprise and even guarantee some scares; Many requiring team work to be eliminated thanks to the weak points not being fully exposed.
+ Good atmosphere and a very organic soundtrack that provides the necessary feelings.
+ Low lighting and some claustrophobic / rugged sectors contribute a lot to immersion and highlight the usefulness of each class and once again leads to an appreciation for variety and cooperation / communication.
+ Levels are generated considering information such as the number of players in the game and the type of mission
+ Good difficulty; Every bullet counts thanks to limited arsenal

THE BAD
- Lack of variety in missions. All have similar goals: Collect and survive / kill
- Designs are not very expressive and all characters are defined by the dwarf archetype
- Progression is mostly restricted to numeric upgrades
- Many recycled enemies
- The enemies' AI is questionable and stays on all the time in "kill" mode
- Enemies will focus characters out of combat, allowing allies to revive him without the need to remove antagonistic troops. The lack of urgency and the discouragement of a more planned and cautious approach is a negative factor that breaks the immersion of the game and contradicts the choices intrinsic to its design.
- The lack of tags on top of dwarfs makes it impossible to recognize allies if they choose similar classes making communication frustrating
- The map is not intuitive and does not communicate information properly. Furthermore, it does not allow you to move while using it

THE UGLY
- The map and the lack of some basic Quality of Life aspects

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION:
Although recently out of early access status, Deep Rock Galactic already promises to address feedback from its community. At the moment it can be faced as a very competent game and, despite being quite derivative, manages to build a solid and charismatic approach within its genre. It's still rough on its edges, but the promise of improvement makes it easily a titan of the genre that is already easy to recommend.

The Good:
+ Press turn is amazing. Easily one of the best systems regarding Turn-based combat
+ Haunting atmosphere that suits perfectly the game. It's one of a kind.
+ Organic tutorials: you learn while have fun and don't really notice that you're playing a tutorial.
+ Good world-building through gameplay aspects like demon negotiating
+ Dante from DMC series (lol)
+ Difficulty on point
+ Mostly contemplative and sophisticated storytelling
+ Phenomenal art direction and expressive art direction. Nocturne has impressive and unorthodox framings to a PS2 video game. The character design as a whole is outstanding thanks to Kaneko Kazuma's art.
+ Many optional bosses with interesting mechanics
+ The soundtrack suits perfectly
+ Huge cast of fiends and a customizable party
+ You can customize the attributes and skills of the MC
+ Extremely fair challenge that rewards the players who learn to exploit it
+ There's no "right ending". Just different philosophical approaches on the subject
+ Varied dungeons. They are never the same and always differ on the the needed mechanics to beat them. Also, different hazards
+ If your main character dies it's Game Over. This makes sense from a narrative point of view, but can be seen as a flaw


The Bad:
- Lack of Quality of Life aspects regarding Fusion inheritance (It's a pain. You can't manually select the skills you want to pass on)
- The sound quality sometimes drop to garbage-levels.
- Nothing really happens storywise until halfway through
- Lack of good characterization: You don't really see characters growing on screen. Most of the development happens offscreen
- Random encounters are annoying on certain dungeons and Estoma should be more effective in this regard
- There aren't many remarkable places inside dungeons making it easier to get lost and less interesting. The map helps, but doesn't eliminates the problem.
- It lacks voice acting
- Evasion can easilly break most of the boss fights

The Ugly:
Demi-fiend's bermuda.

Play it on Mega Man Zero/ZX Collection. It's way better if you turn on the Save Assist.

The Good:
+ Diversity of weapons and elements
+ Fast paced combat
+ Loved the HUB system.
+ Cyber Elves
+ Amazing difficulty (If you make use of the Save Assist)
+ Varied missions
+ Weapon upgrade system lead by how much you use it
+ The small screen doesn't prejudice Zero thanks to his arsenal
+ Good story
+ Nice OST... Albeit isn't as good as the big hits on X series.

The Bad:
- Sometimes requires a "jump of faith"... due to GBA's small screen you can't really see spikes or platforms below you on certain areas of the game
- Could've make better use of the HUB. Most of it is useless
- You need to pause the game to change weapons/elements
- Requires grind to unlock some features that should've been adquired through normal progression
- Repeated scenary on a few missions
- Cyber Elves aren't useful or interesting enough requiring too much grinding
- Could've made better use off the Elemental Chips: They just change the effects when you charge the saber. They could've added more.

The Ugly:
The Save System. But it is totally avoidable if you play this game on Mega Man Zero/ZX Collection.

The Good:
+ Superb gameplay. I dare to say it's one of the best of any action game I've played.
+ Amazing and challenging boss fights.
+ Enemies and bosses have unique mechanics that brings some depth to every fight.
+ Allow for different routes at some points
+ Three unique characters with different play styles
+ Good OST
+ Customization
+ References to previous Devil May Cry
+ Accessibility through providing many Yellow Orbs. Use if you wish.
+ You can control the camera
+ High replay value

The Bad:
- The story is pretty bad. They waste so much time going back to show how things escalated that in the end it goes nowhere. It's also too predictable.
- Characterization doesn't come near DmC 3. Some characters are pretty disposable and doesn't impact the game at all
- Playing V is so safe it gets too easy
- The environments get repetitive
- Inexistent level design. It's too straightforward for its own good: no real puzzles, platforming or anything that could bring more diversity to the table.
- IMO toned down character design
- Repetitive and uninteresting "puzzles". They're too simplistic to their own good.
- You can't choose the character you want to play on every mission
- Strange difficulty spikes

The Ugly:
The story constantly rewinding. Definitely destroyed the pacing and any chance of progression