i was going to give this thread some credit until i saw that you wrote that the game has "low-res textures, which undoubtedly contribute to the “uncanny valley” feeling that many current-gen games still suffer from."
generally (that term) is used when a computer generated effect, or artwork, is of such a high similarity to the actual object (but only very very slightly off, and usually human) that it causes repulsion.
the following underlined stuff is just reasoning and boring example stuff:
The idea comes from our innate ability to sense danger. We know how things are supposed to look and sound and feel. If something we believe is real is off by like a hair, we get an immediate reaction. It supposedly is really only going to be a problem for things that are supposed to take the place of a real thing, like a cyborg perhaps, or how when you play a sports game the announcer sounds like he's loading a bunch of responses strung together. games aren't generally meant to be seen as reality, so i don't think they are in any danger. just that sports thing, and it's because they are really trying to sell it as smooth conversation. trust me, the quicker and more fluid the conversation becomes the more you will hate it, until it is actual conversation. we can still hear the tiny switch from phrase to phrase.
if you are going to give reasons to bash a game that a lot of people are expecting to like, then give some adequate criticism. i spotted "uncanny valley" in your second point right away since it is a buzzword that a lot of people don't seem to understand and use to make themselves sound intelligent, so i didn't read the first point and won't read the others.
the only real uncanny valley here is something near perfect that is being hated on, try taking a guess what i'm referring to.
honestly though the game looks good, i don't know how good, and i'm not defending it. But i make it a point to contrast myself from an entire argument if some reasoning is flawed.
