I really wanna turn this into a thread discussing game design and art and stuff but I’m just going to highlight why I disagree because I don’t want to derail the thread too much.
The animation in the first game wasn’t so much low-budget as it was just plain lazy. Almost every movement in the game is just photographic stills layered on top of each other. It’s so frustratingly sloppy and amateurish to me, especially since he animated the fox animatronic normally! I don’t understand why that was normally animated but everything else is this janky stopmotion-esque nightmare. It doesn’t look good.
The atmosphere is pretty good. The animatronics looks uncanny, especially through the camera stills. The concept itself is interesting. But at the end of the day it’s just an RNG fest, and not even a particularly difficult one at that. I’ve played through it three times I think, and my second and third ones were wayyyy easier because the RNG was more or less easy to adapt to. And I’m not against the fact that it’s a jumpscare-heavy game, I just dislike that that’s the main selling point behind the game. The animation is ugly, the gameplay is repetitive and easy to learn, and even the random “difficult” parts are easy to figure out.
About the only thing it’s got going for it outside of the jumpscare factor is the atmosphere, and Scott really squandered an opportunity there. Heck, I think FNAF would have been great if it borrowed elements from Amnesia and thrust players into the role of a guard walking around while the animatronics are stalking him. I played a fanmade game based on that premise and it was way better than the base game.
/rant lol. I’m just very opinionated when it comes to certain design choices in games.