but none of that is 'objective' analysis. You find it bland? Sure, but it isn't. It's incredibly deep. The towns and locations are actually quite varied, so you're wrong there. The characters have some of the best development of any game, let alone any FF game, so again you're plain wrong there. Kefka can be annoying, I'll give you that, but he's also one of the most maniacal, devious, effective villains in all of gaming. The soundtrack was fantastic, though music can be subjective so I'll leave that point alone. The narrative was not weak, and even as a kid I never, ever had any problem knowing what to do next.
Subjectively not a game you like, sure, but not objectively bad.
Talking about a broken, restrictive combat system, linear narration, and an un-engaging story that barely includes the player at all? That's objecively a poor game. If I Wanted to read an encyclopedia, I'd go to the library.
I'm not saying I find it bland, I'm TELLING you it's bland. How is it not an objective analysis, yet yours is? How can I be wrong when I'm right?
@ Bolded: Wa-hey, we're getting somewhere...Kinda.
Surely reviewers are meant to review games objectively? Did Square Enix pay-off all 82 reviewers (ignoring the single reviewer that gave the game a negative review) or something?