To start - I think Astrobot was overall an amazing game. Extremely polished, great visuals/audio, oozes charm, etc. It's clearly a labour of love. It wasn't my personal GOTY but I'm not mad at it winning.
If there's one thing that was disappointing, it's the difficulty. Or rather the lack of it.
1) There's basically no ramp in the game. The first area was understandably easy but it just never demands anything more of you. It doesn't iterate on the platforming challenges in any meaningful way and it feels like you're a tourist the entire time. You're doing short, impossible to miss jumps/hovers from beginning to end. The only exception to this was the challenge levels (Square/Circle/Cross/Triangle), which are coincidentally some of the best in the game.
2) Astro's base move set is super limited and honestly kind of sucks? There's nothing advanced you can even do to make the game more challenging within its level design. Mario Odyssey had a similar issue in terms of not demanding precision, but this was at least somewhat offset by the ability to choose to use the different tech to get around the level faster/skip things entirely. Odyssey would also be better if more difficult but Mario has a long jump, double/triple jumps, wall jumps, cap tech which you can repeatedly chain once you get good enough, etc. Astro has a jump and a short hover, neither of which allow you to do much of anything beyond the obvious.
Maybe it's because I grew up on platformers, but to me, all the best ones have some level of challenge. It's core to the experience - a good platformer has precise controls and precise controls are best enjoyed when the game demands them.
And I get it's a genre/game targeted at kids. These are mass market products and I'm not expecting it to be like Celeste. But that's always been true. SMB, SMB3, SMW and SM64 were all targeted at kids. DKC/DKC2/DKC3 were targeted at kids. Lion King was targeted at kids. Crash Bandicoot was targeted at kids. None of these games are what I would call difficult, but they do have challenging aspects, and I think they're better becasue of it.
If there's one thing that was disappointing, it's the difficulty. Or rather the lack of it.
1) There's basically no ramp in the game. The first area was understandably easy but it just never demands anything more of you. It doesn't iterate on the platforming challenges in any meaningful way and it feels like you're a tourist the entire time. You're doing short, impossible to miss jumps/hovers from beginning to end. The only exception to this was the challenge levels (Square/Circle/Cross/Triangle), which are coincidentally some of the best in the game.
2) Astro's base move set is super limited and honestly kind of sucks? There's nothing advanced you can even do to make the game more challenging within its level design. Mario Odyssey had a similar issue in terms of not demanding precision, but this was at least somewhat offset by the ability to choose to use the different tech to get around the level faster/skip things entirely. Odyssey would also be better if more difficult but Mario has a long jump, double/triple jumps, wall jumps, cap tech which you can repeatedly chain once you get good enough, etc. Astro has a jump and a short hover, neither of which allow you to do much of anything beyond the obvious.
Maybe it's because I grew up on platformers, but to me, all the best ones have some level of challenge. It's core to the experience - a good platformer has precise controls and precise controls are best enjoyed when the game demands them.
And I get it's a genre/game targeted at kids. These are mass market products and I'm not expecting it to be like Celeste. But that's always been true. SMB, SMB3, SMW and SM64 were all targeted at kids. DKC/DKC2/DKC3 were targeted at kids. Lion King was targeted at kids. Crash Bandicoot was targeted at kids. None of these games are what I would call difficult, but they do have challenging aspects, and I think they're better becasue of it.