The Art of NieR:Automata - The Amusement Park
eu.square-enix.com/en/blog/art-nierautomata-a...Posted Apr 26, 2017, 10:50 PM UTC
30367
eu.square-enix.com
Before Yoko Taro:
- a neat amusement park
After Yoko Taro:
- warzone
My second favourite area of the game - after the desert - the amusement park has a very cool blend of music, characters and as this article shows: artwork + level design that really brings a sort of alice in wonderland fantasy to a world filled with machines.
They really went all out with the boss battle as well and coming through a second time to understand the undertones of the fight does a number on your perception of just who it is you're fighting against. The romeos and juliettes play was the cherry on top.
A lot of places and things are polished to nigh-perfection but you can really tell the Amusement Park got a lot of love and is the crowning jewel of the game's world in terms of standard art.
27
Oh man, the first time I stepped out into the desert. I'm so glad this and zelda both included deserts that feel like deserts.
9
I think the game that did it first was Journey....oooohhh that sand sliding...
1
It's impressive how much work goes into bringing something like this to life. It's incredibly difficult to create something out of a simple idea, especially something that turned out as successful as Automata.
It's always a welcome treat, especially for fellow aspiring creators, to see how the game we see now came to be.
18
Japan literally has a word for worked to death. Don't let a cheery article fool you. There are good people and bad people everywhere.
2
The park was such a cool place to explore. Very unique in the context of the game. The Romeo and Juliet play <3 man I loved this game.
8
The amusement part was such a surreal, breathtaking experience. It's one of the many moments this game expertly uses the background music to dramatically enhance the emotion of the experience.
2
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
I know it seems a bit much but I consider this to contain spoilers. A lot of the value of the amusement park from how odd it is the first time you get there. It's the first introduction to the weirder parts of the game.
1†
Nothing in this interview itself actually contains spoilers, unless you consider "it exists" to be a spoiler.
The interview itself is unrendered concept shots and handrendered backgrounds, which is like saying that a 1 ton solid block of aluminium is a spoiler for how a finished car looks.
2
"It exists" I do feel can be a spoiler , but I also feel that if someone really wants to enter a game with a completely blank slate they should just avoid digging into the subject. It's like what did they expect. To talk about a subject, things need to be revealed to some degree.
3
It's the second area introduced in the main hub world, which is like 1/10th of the overall time into the game.
But yes, it's like going into a thread about a game and being surprised people are talking about it. You're just inviting it upon yourself.
2
I just couldn't get into this game like other people did.
I tried to.. but It's just not that deep or fun imo.
The story wasn't bad and I tried to play through it again so I could see more endings. The second playthrough started out so cool (trying to fix your brother robot) and I thought I was going to be playing a whole different story, or at least experiencing different perspectives of the core plot which steadily expands.
But then it just settled into rehashing the same exact plot more or less as ending A, except with relatively minor tweaks and small scenes to adjust for playing as 9S. The degree of difference in the second playthrough just wasn't sufficient to keep me going through the bland gameplay.
The only aspect of the game I have almost unreserved praise for is the music. Beautiful music, if a tad repetitive.
Edit: lol what a bunch of sensitive manchildren. So emotional and defensive over a video game.
-19†
The third/fourth/etc playthroughs are where the bombshells really drop, you missed out if you stopped at the second one. I think it's widely agreed that the second playthrough is the weakest.
47
Yeah, the 2nd playthrough nearly lost me as well. The gameplay for 9S is by far the worst of all of the characters IMO, and the small changes in the story weren't enough to really keep me interested. I ended up just blazing through that playthrough as fast as possible just to get to the 3rd, and I'm so glad that I did, cause it got so much better then.
17
Yep. It doesn't help that 9S loses half his melee abilities in exchange for a repetitive hacking minigame - if you're not into the hacking, then the second playthrough gets even more boring, since you literally only have one attack button.
10
He doesnt. You can still do heavy attacks with 9S. You just gotta release the light attack,button for,half a second, then continue pressing it, for a heavy chain. Instead of alternatinf between two buttons, the game asks you to instead alternate the rythms in which you push one of the buttons, and heavily encourages you to start switching weapon sets mid-combo too, which i bet many people werent doing up to that point.
You do lose some combo variety, sure, but well, it does make sense that the non combat oriented android has less efficient combat capabilities.
Not like you cant dispense damage like crazy with him tho. Hacking is the best way to plow througb those million health enemies in the game
19
[deleted]
6
9S's moveset is actually more complicated than 2B's. It requires actual inputs now instead of having a button dedicated for it.
You can access the heavy moveset by pausing in the middle of a combo and resuming it, or by doing a dash attack and then resuming a combo.
Not to mention all his attacks are entirely different with all weapon types compared to 2B's.
5
Seriously. Whoever made that design decision shouldn't be granted rights to any further decisions for a while, because the hacking minigame was just awful, especially against enemies that you actually wanted to use it against.
-11
You have to play through the game multiple times to see the best of it?
13
Technically only twice. After you beat the game, you replay it as a different character. It's mostly the same as the first playthrough, with some additional context to things and different combat mechanics. Unless you want to grind for materials or finish up sidequests from Route A, you can finish it in like 5 hours tops. After that comes what's being referred to as the "third playthrough" but would more accurately be described as "the rest of the game." It picks up after the credits from Route B and is 100% different from the first two playthroughs.
10
It's not really "playing through the game multiple times", even if that's what the game suggests you are doing. On the third "playthrough" it actually changes completely. As in it's a continuation of the story instead of a repetition of the same events with a different perspective like the second playthrough is.
5
I feel like you shouldn't have to play through multiple campaigns before a game starts being good. Regardless of the game's quality, if it didn't click for him, it didn't click for him. You shouldn't have to practically finish a game before you can decide if it's for you. I don't like the Metro series. I don't like the shooting, the story doesn't grip me, but I'm not going to play through the entirety of 2033 and half of Last Light before I decide I don't like it.
1
Maybe so but I'd say that's a major flaw then.
If the game is going to require you to repeat the same levels, missions, and events repeatedly so you can experience the story, then there better be a major additional draw (gameplay, loot grind, etc.).
And you also can't afford for the payoff for replaying the game (the payoff here being new story developments) better be significant.
Finally, there better be a good reason why these additional storylines weren't incorporated into one large, epic story.
On that note, is there a plot related reason for why the game is told in repeated playthroughs?
-2†
You don't actually repeat much content - the side quests you completed in your first playthrough stay completed, and there are new sidequests that are only available upon the second playthrough. Even the gameplay in the missions that you repeat is pretty different, because 9S is often in a different part of the level as 2B.
| On that note, is there a plot related reason for why the game is told in repeated playthroughs?
The multiple playthroughs themselves are a storytelling mechanism. The first two playthroughs are meant to introduce you to the characters of 9S and 2B, with the second playthrough dropping some minor bombshells around their relationship and the overall story. The third playthrough is a continuation of the story, not a repeat - so brand new stuff starts happening here.
30
Kind of reminds me of the book cloud atlas though done a lot differently
6
i'm preeeety sure there was a dev saying the second playthrough was added because they were not satisfied with the length of route A+C and did it for the sake of prolonging the game.
i'm sorry, but to say that is was some elaborate storytelling mechanism is a bit bs.
my stance is that the game should not artificially force you to replay already beaten content before you can experience the 'full' story and it was a terrible design choice if you ask me.
-5
You don't actually repeat much content - the side quests you completed in your first playthrough stay completed, and there are new sidequests that are only available upon the second playthrough. Even the gameplay in the missions that you repeat is pretty different, because 9S is often in a different part of the level as 2B.
Well I got about 2/3 through the 2nd playthrough and it was almost identical imo. Sure there were new side quests but side quests in NieR tend to be filler.
The only significantly different sections were 9S's solo detours but they're few and far between.
The first two playthroughs are meant to introduce you to the characters of 9S and 2B, with the second playthrough dropping some minor bombshells around their relationship and the overall story. The third playthrough is a continuation of the story, not a repeat - so brand new stuff starts happening here.
So it doesn't sound (to me at least) like there's any reason why they couldn't have combined these playthroughs into one cohesive playthrough.
I was hoping to hear that there's some kind of framing device or meta-narrative that explains and incorporates the player repeating the core plot over and over.
-11
Man, the second playthrough introduces an entirely,new,minigame that wasnt seen at all in the first playthrough, and unlocks a shitload of new loot and weapons. It gives literally the two examples you asked for, and more.
And you also can't afford for the payoff for replaying the game (the payoff here being new story developments) better be significant
Huh? If you mean that the new story developments that justify a second playthrough have to be important enough to warrant it, well, you are in luck, they are! Specially on the third one.
Finally, there better be a good reason why these additional storylines weren't incorporated into one large, epic story.
They are, mate. You are looking at them like they are separate stories sold in weird chunks. If you look at them like they are chapters, it makes perfect sense.
So much sense, in fact, that when you unlock chapter select you can jump into any point from the three playthroughs, and they are in perfect order, making one large, epic story. Once again, the game gives you just what you are asking from it, i'm not sure what is your problem with it.
On that note, is there a plot related reason for why the game is told in repeated playthroughs?
Not really, it's just a quirky way Yoko Taro likes to structure his stories. He has done this thing with all of the games he has directed. He enjoys playing with story branches and different endings, although the canonical, true ending is actually just one.
Once again, dont look at them as separate playthroughs, look at them like chapters of the same story.
Imagine if in game of thrones, instead of getting the daenerys story and the jon snow story simultaneously, we got one of them from start to end, and then the books continued in the start of the timeline but from the other perspective. And them, when that timeline is finished, it went into simultaneous storytelling of what happens to both after their respective chapters.
That's pretty much what happens in nier automata. The multiple playthroughs thing is just kind of a way to fuck with the audience's perspectives and expectations, for the sake of it, in a very kojimaesque fashion. Authors being authors, if you will.
13
I think it's to make a point about the nature of automation and the evolution and self learning of the machines, and how the androids and machines are essentially both sides of the same coin.
1
On that note, is there a plot related reason for why the game is told in repeated playthroughs?
The other responses don't go into what I believe to be the best thing about the way Nier Automata does multiple playthroughs. Heavy heavy spoilers below (like if you have any desire to play don't read):
[Spoiler](#s "There is a recurring theme throughout the game of repeating/never-ending cycles. At the beginning of the game, we hear 2B say "Everything that lives is designed to end. We are perpetually trapped in a never-ending spiral of life and death. Is this a curse? Or some kind of punishment? I often think about the god who blessed us with this cryptic puzzle...and wonder if we'll ever get the chance to kill him." At the end of the first and second playthrough, 2B says "it always ends like this," referring to 9S's death.")
[Spoiler](#s "Much later on, we learn 9S is trapped in a cycle. His natural curiosity leads him to learn the truth about Project YorHa - the fact that humans are extinct - and it is 2B's job to kill him when this happens. He then loses his memories and begins a new cycle. Additionally, all of the Project YorHa androids are trapped in a cycle. Periodically, they are programmed for failure, at which point all the androids are intended to die, and YorHa to restart. In my opinion the way we have to playthrough the game multiple times reinforces the idea of these "cycles". It also makes ending E particularly powerful. As you literally fight the developers of the game during the end credits, it feels like you are fighting to break out of the cycle that the developers have forced upon you. When the game asks you to sacrifice your save data, this is the final choice to break out of the cycle.")
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but that was my interpretation.
2
[Spoiler] (#s "Playthrough A is the first half of the game from 2B's perspective. Playthrough B is the first half as 9S. Playthrough C has segments for both A2 and 9S, and then you can just chapter select to get endings d and e in like 30 minutes.")
1
Third playthrough is actually completely different from the first and second. Literally pick up the story after the events of the first and second playthrough's ending.
You are missing the second half of the story. You also stop playing as 9S which is way less fun than 2B
9
Well it's too bad for me then that I just didn't find the game fun enough to stick it out to #3.
If I could just play that immediately I would definitely give it a shot but I can't bring myself to trudge the rest of the way through #2.
-6
If you rush it it isnt more than 5 hours. I understand where you are coming from because i also lost a bit of interest in playing when i was in the second playthrough, but if you have any kind of interest or investment in seeing the story through, you should do yourself a favour and try to endure it until the end. I'd say it is worth it IMO
8
Well then the 3rd Act is the reason this game got as much praise as it did.
You can literally speed through 2nd chapter in 5 hours, and even though the main event is the same, there will be major character and plot developments that you didn't see in the first act.
7
Also, if you've already gotten 2/3rds of the way through part b, you are almost at the part where they split off again! Maybe less than an hour, and you'll do something completely new and huge story stuff is revealed too. The new stuff and the things you learn as 9S completely change how you look at the rest of the story (even what you have played so far).
4
You do see a different perspective in the second play through though, you can understand what bosses are saying and 9S gets his side of the story fleshed out. Then it all wraps up together in the final act because lets be real, they aren't endings they're acts or chapters.
The final act is entirely all new content the whole way through not just the "other perspective" of act 2.
The music is a little repetitive only because of the way it seamlessly blends its self into new songs, enter combat and suddenly you have a new instrument in the mix, start hacking and the music doesn't skip a beat but its suddenly chip tune inspired instead etc.
Phenomenal package all round, sucks you couldn't get to the end because like I'm sure you're sick of hearing its a substantial payoff
5
The game has 5 endings though. You technically only played it halfway if you beat just 2 endings.
1
I'm honestly kind of right there with you.
I am enjoying it at the point of the game I'm at and would probably call it like a 7/10 at this point, but the first two playcycles are just incredibly structurally weak. People like to bash Mass Effect Andromeda for having a pointless open world and lots of filler content, but honestly Nier is probably the worst game I've played in a long time in terms of padding content.
The first two playthroughs could've easily been condensed into one, with perspectives switching every so often. And even if they did want to keep it to 2 separate playthroughs, there was absolutely no reason to do 80% of the campaign in 9S's perspective; most of the extra stuff he sees are just cutscenes that have no bearing specifically to his character. It also doesn't help that his playstyle consists of "hold triangle, play minigame" over and over and over again.
I'm about 2 hours into the 3rd playcycle, and the game is actually getting interesting now, but it should've taken me waaay less time to get to where I'm at now.
And you mentioned the music, but I honestly feel like that's a knock against the game for me. Half of the tracks are solid, but the other half that consist of the lady singing through her nose or children singing out of tune can just fuck off forever.
At this point, I think my verdict on the game is going to be that there's an amazing video game in here held back by a subpar game designer who got way too caught up on the gameplay gimmicks he came up with.
-2
I agree and I played all of the "endings." The game picks up a bit, but I'm surprised how much of a pass the game gets for its flaws simply because it does something kind of interesting at the end.
-8
I found it interesting the whole way through honestly.
The answers are at the end but there's plenty there during the rest of the game.
You get the setup with the first character, you get a different point of view which explains a lot of the motivations with the second character which in turn begs more questions then it all wraps up with the final chapter and last character.
People praising it didn't just feel like it was a slog until suddenly an amazing ending pulls it all together, its more like an interesting journey that is great individually and together greater then a sum of its parts.
9
This has been up for 6 hours and nobody has commented on the actual article yet, but I found it quite interesting. I always wonder how they design big areas in games, especially ones as complex as the amusement park. The color palate and architecture combines to make my (second) favorite area in the game, visually.
(I liked the forest the most).
Also, I love the writing style of the article, you can tell how much respect everyone has for others in Japan while still being happy. It's nice to read stuff like this.
Wow, I never realized this.
There is a big difference here. In my industry (tech), the equivalent would be a technical overview of a specific feature. It'd probably be posted on Medium (a free blogging site), and be dripping with self-congratulations for both the writer and the company they work for, to the point of being obnoxious to read.
That is not the case here. It is really enjoyable to read a rundown of something that is written by someone not ruthlessly self-promoting. Ironically, it ends up generating good will akin to self-promotion anyway, but it feels different than the, "look how great I am" variety.