I played through entire game with Mean difficulty for both and I just can't understand this. Only time I didn't have fun with Rebuttal Showdown was when I was still trying to use touch controls early on.
I did the same (Mean for both), and I actually enjoyed the Rebuttal Showdown because it conceptually makes sense in a Nonstop Debate setting for someone to question your logic aggressively.
The problem, like with most of the minigames, is that the game doesn't explain the mechanics well at all, which leads to frustration trying to figure it out in a time sensitive context.
I liked Rebuttal Showdown a lot, actually. I thought it was a neat visualization of the whole debating process, and it was never hard to figure out what the game wanted me to do after a couple reruns. Thr first time was pretty overwhelming, admittedly! I still liked Logic Dive a lot more, though. Was really satisfying to nail those multiple choice paths and constantly gaining momentum as things started to get clearer was a really cool idea.
Really, the only minigame that I didn't like was Hangman's Gambit.
Hangman's Gambit was the worst executed of the minigames, I thought. Logic Dive, while an okay minigame, really bothers me because the game isn't really congruent with the action.
For Nonstop Debate, shooting down white noise and firing off a point makes sense.
For Hangman's Gambit, you're jogging your memory through trial and error.
For Rebuttal Showdown, you're dueling with someone directly.
For Panic Attack, the other person won't listen to reason and you need to wear them down.
For Logic Dive, I don't see how the snowboarding minigame = logical connections?
