I'm revisiting a lot of my older reviews as part of a SECRET PROJECT (details coming soon), and it struck me how nobody seems capable of nuanced opinions anymore. Case in point, I've gotten a lot of crap because I've compared Starbites, from IKINAGAMES, to the Trails series. Like how could I possibly compare that game to one of the greatest series of all time? But looking back at the text of my review, here's what I said: "I love this game. I love this story, these characters, this world. I love everything that's presented and the implication of so much more existing in this universe. I love the way the story is told, just dropping us into the middle of things where character relationships are already established, inside jokes already exist, and the writer trusts us enough to follow along without having to be spoonfed everything. The gameplay is tight and fun and just complex enough to remain interesting for the entire runtime. I can also really easily imagine it being iterated on in future titles, of which I hope there will be many, many more. This has the chance of becoming the next Trails. I don't say that lightly, because Trails is my favorite JRPG series. And true, in terms of gameplay this couldn't be more different than Trails, and in story, too. But the scale of it, the feeling like this game is the first step on a long journey, it gives me Trails in the Sky vibes all over again." Nowhere did I say it's "as good as" Trails. I said it has the potential to become the next Trails for me in some key ways. The death of nuance in the age of the internet should be studied.