It's hard to say how much of this rating is due to return on investment ($19.99 during a PSN sale), amount of joy derived from the product (I first watched Giant Bomb play through the game in its entirety for a feature called Beast in the East that aired three years prior to my purchase) and actual fun had playing the game (I started playing this game on February 11th, 2020 and finished over a year later with nearly 80 hours played) but I do know that the rating is duly earned via some combination of the three.

What is there to say about Yakuza 0 that hasn't already been said better or just as well by so many others? There's plenty to quibble with, mainly a few janky combat scenarios I suppose, but the beauty of Yakuza 0 is that you can take as much or as little from it as you want. Some, like me, will fall in love with the hostesses and begrudgingly complete the real estate management out of a sense of duty to the community. Others will dig deep into the arcade units, or the gladiator arena, or the RC car races, or the obscure (to Western audiences) gambling games. It says a lot that I put so much time into this game and only walked away with 50% of its trophies, though I do take solace in all but one of those missed cheevos are sub-20% completion rate.

But even if I could conjure up some odd memory that'd make me want to knock this game down to a 4 (like the long break I took after starting it, thinking maybe I actually preferred Kiwami more...) ultimately the most important thing anyone can say about Zero is this: without this game's existence, I would've let Yakuza Kiwami linger forever in my PS+ inventory rather than downloaded it immediately. If this game hadn't been as great as it was, I wouldn't have immediately glued my eyes to Kiwami 2, the Remastered Collection, Song of Life and the Judgement games for equally great sales.

And the sales have come, the games are here, and all I see before me on my shiny PS5 dashboard are games developed by RGG between the years 2009 and 2021. Yakuza 0 fucks y'all, and I'm just another Kamurocho baby now.

A masterclass in just about everything it sets out to achieve, Deus Ex is an amazing experience and truly worthy of being considered one of the greatest PC games ever and one of my personal favourites ever.
The thing that makes Deus Ex special the most compared to other games released before and after is the sheer amount of options you are given to progress through the story. Never before have I seen such a massive amount of attention and effort put into every possible method the player might go for to tackle its intricately-designed big levels, bordering on "overdesigned" in many cases. Every decision you make, from the most important ones to the minor or goofy ones, will come back and either play a role in the story or be mentioned again. It's absolutely fucking insane. You can choose to either go gunsblazing and kill the enemies, sneak by them, stealthily kill them, smoke bomb your way through, fucking camo your way through levels, use swimming, lockpick and hack your way through, let bots or other people do your bidding, be a sarcastic jackass and have everyone hate you, throw vending machines at them, kill every single character (important or not) YOU NAME IT, THIS GAME LETS YOU DO IT AND ACKNOWLEDGES IT. HOW COOL IS THAT??? Best part is that none of them feel forced or tacked on and are instead very well-fleshed out mechanics and playstyles, thanks in no small part to its skill and augmentation system.
Every skill and augment in the game is useful in some shape or form and are well-worth going out of your way to explore each level and hub to have enough skill points to upgrade your skills or find augmentation canisters to gain new augments. Skill systems include general upgrades to the core mechanics you're gonna use through the game like: hacking, lockpicking, shooting, using melee weapons, swimming, resistance to environmental hazards. Because of that, they remain useful throughout because every level is littered with opportunities to use them. The augmentation system is just additional abilities that are used in addition with your general skills to open up even more opportunities to tackle levels in a different or easier way. All of the augmentations are useful too, depending on your playstyle, and are fun to use as well.
Of course, deus ex wouldn't be as well remembered if it weren't for the story too. Basically a "what if every single insane conspiracy theory is true" narrative, the game uses it effectively to tackle themes of freedom, capitalism, influence, dependence on technology, philosophy and politics, placing them in the near-future (which still looks like modern times, minus the robots) to make its commentary stick even more with players. It's very intriguing and keeps you guessing at every turn. Not only that, but YOU are able to shape how the story plays out. While the storyline has a fairly linear structure, you still have control on how it's shaped based on your choices and playstyle, making the game highly replayable. The dialogue writing and voice acting is also top-notch, making for some highly quotable and memorable moments. The characters are all written well, especially JC Denton (who has the most memorable and hilarious dialogue options).
The music is well-done too. Composed by Alexander Brandon, the music is a variety of different genres, all of whom perfectly fit each hub and level where they appear and help to elevate the atmosphere around the whole game (they're also bangers in their own way sooooo)
No game is perfect sadly, and there are two minor complaints i have for this game. The game doesn't look that good, even for year 2000 standards. Its optimization is also all over the place. Sometimes it runs good and in other places it runs like complete ass. They are extremely minor when compared to everything else the game does really well.
I think i've said enough regarding why this game deserves to be praised as much as it is. Its gameplay and story are a true showcase of what the industry can accomplish, accompanied by a great soundtrack to boot. While its presentation and performance on pc may leave a lot to be desired, those complaints disappear when you look at the package as a whole. This is a game you have to play before you di. If you don't, I will hunt you down with a GEP gun.

Among Us is divided into 2 phases: the meeting phase (debating who to vote out) and the roaming phase (doing tasks/killing). Because of this differentiation, the roaming phase does not interfere with aspects of the meeting phase (e.g. conversations). This leads to conversations in the form of debates instead of split-second decisions. In that respect Among Us is closer to the original games in the genre like Mafia and Werewolves. Outside of meetings, conversations are not permitted, which shifts the focus to stealth and intel gathering.

Among Us doesn’t rely on a single intricate mechanic to create depth. It instead uses combinations of game elements to introduce variety. Notably, the meta and psychological aspects enrich the strategic complexity despite the underlying mechanics being simple.

Let us consider the core element of the roaming phase: routing. During this phase, the main focus is deciding where to go. If there were no impostors in the game, this would be a simple task of pathing to finish the current tasks as quickly as possible. The presence of an impostor adds an extra layer of complexity: crewmates need to also gather intel regarding where other players are located. In the first round of the game most of the decisions are based on meta-knowledge about other players: individual strategies for intel gathering, tasks players tend to go for, solitary vs group players, how they tend to play as a Crewmate/Impostor, etc. Another option is to take a risk to clear a player by sticking with them (i.e. using yourself as bait). This is a double-edged sword, however, as the Impostor can choose not to go for an easy kill, gaining the trust of the Crewmate testing him (a.k.a. “marinating”). Such risks play a central role in the game. For instance, players that have vital information would avoid dying at any cost so that they can bring it to the meetings. On the other hand, a Crewmate may also want to die:
- sticking to someone that they suspect is an Impostor to tie their hands even by risking their own life.
- to use the noclip and faster speed of being a ghost to finish their tasks faster
- to clear any suspicion over themselves (so the other Crewmates don’t mistakenly think that they’re an Impostor).
Later on, with information from meetings on who is likely to be an Impostor or a Crewmate, more elaborate routes can be devised. Players can also use meetings to gather information about other players’ tasks in order to predict their routes next round.

The emphasis in meeting phases is on deductive and conversational aspects of the game. The information we get in the roaming phase alone is usually not good enough to paint a picture of how the whole round played out. Thus we need to make assumptions based on some kind of deduction. On top of that, the meetings give us information from other parties in the game, letting us make even more accurate deductions to find the Impostors. With good game knowledge enough crewmates by sharing all information, the impostors would be found. (Except in some weird cases where everyone was just speedrunning their tasks, and not getting any information at all). However, it would be foolish for the impostors to let the crewmates do as they please, and this is where the conversational aspect of the game comes into play. In the scenario that the kills haven't been clean in the game (this means the blame for the kill can't be pinpointed to a single or a small group of people), the impostors won't have any benefit of letting the conversation go on untouched. The most direct way to disrupt the meeting conversation is through lies. With a lie, the information deduction alone would not be able to get to a correct answer, though this depends on the type of the lie. A stronger, more direct lie could change the narrative in a predictable way. It can be used to frame or clear someone. Yet such lies would be easy to trace to the liar. They can be more easily found by conflict with other known information, and thus could backfire. It requires a lot of information from the liar, to be able to pull off such a lie. Also, they have to seem trustworthy since they usually won't get backing for that false information (outside of their impostor partner). More importantly, such lies could be found out in later rounds of the game. While it could pay off this round it could cost the impostors the game in the end. More common and useful lies would be a small change of information somewhere deeper in the deduction. (Further away from clearing or pinning someone as an impostor and more about basic information). The benefit of that lie is that it is hard to trace to the liar, but at the same time, the effect is not as clear. However this could again be used - while it wouldn't frame someone for a kill or clear someone, it is effective in wasting time. It is also a safe lie since it might be considered an error rather than a lie as well. Honourable mention to lying by omission. Depending on the context it could be either of 2 types of lies above, and it could even be safer in most scenarios.
Something even more common than lying is conversation control. There is a time limit on each meeting, and players have one button per game they could use for meetings. Note that some meetings can't be extended by those buttons, as the impostors could win if there is a wrong decision in those meetings. Because of that, it is important to be efficient with information. Getting all information out of all players, and sharing deductions from everyone is easier said than done in that short amount of time. This is why the flow of the conversation is important - and also this is where the impostor has an advantage. The impostors know how their own kill happened (and potentially even the kill of their partner) so they know which information is vital. Thus if they control the flow of the conversation they can waste a lot of time on useless information and deductions out of players. This could be used in combination with a lie and to reinforce the lie, by not letting conflicting information in the conversation. Of course, all of this has its own risk, as being wasteful of conversation time is suspicious. An important thing to be noted is that the impostors' lies and disturbance of conversation have an important side effect. It isn't just the impostors that have to deal with scrutinizing their information and deductions, all information would be scrutinized no matter if it is true or false. This is also dependent on the player itself, other ingame information, as well as psychology and meta. Because of this, the players should also worry about their trustworthiness and not just figuring out the killer. You might have everything figured out, but if you can't say it in the short amount of time and convince others, you can't do anything. Even worse someone might undermine your trustworthiness and bring you down - you have to both be good at deduction and conversations to win. One anomaly from this is that there are actually now reasons for crewmates to lie. Saving time, being trustworthy and even catching lies from another player. This does have an innate risk, but it would be often a better choice than telling the truth.

An important element to the deduction is the intel gathering itself. It was mentioned early, but there is an additional aspect to the intel gathering - attention. There is a lot of information that a single player can gather in a single round, but remembering it all isn't an easy thing to do. If there are more alive players, or if the round itself is long, holding old information becomes trouble. While often this information is discarded, if there have been and early kill, without such information it would be untraceable. The intel generally consists of where we saw each player, where they were headed and what tasks they were doing. The hard part here is that you need to remember all this information relevant to the time. Memorizing this information is relevant to some major event, or just a rough estimate of the time is hard enough on its own. Yet, the player might even opt-in counting seconds to give them more precise information in time. Not only that, but it gives information about kill cooldowns, sabotage timings, precise way to estimate if anyone is faking tasks or not. Also, it could give them information about all the possible positions a player could have reached from a last seen position. This could be vital information in determining who are the plausible killers for some kill. Less decisive, but also important but more difficult, it could also be used to catch a lie. This is done by simulating the path given by some player and comparing how well it fits with the information given by other players. Needless to say, doing deductions, counting precisely, keeping information, and making decisions for the route the player would take all at the same is an extremely difficult task. This is most likely impossible to perfect, so there is always going to be a human error of some kind. Related to this, the tasks themselves, while easy to complete and master, could affect the attention of the player. This could lead to some error either in time management or in the information they are trying to keep in their mind. On a side note, tasks also play into the information gathering aspect of the game. They obscure parts of the screen, leading to less information for a player. Also, they might only see a small feature of a player, and not be able to determine who that player is.

I would like to mention a few elements important to impostors in the roaming phase, on top of the things that have been discussed so far. Impostors have much more freedom in their routing. They still have to follow some rules so that they are not caught faking tasks, or having suspicious routes. But even those rules can be bent because of the lack of perfect information in the game. It still carries some risk, but it is unlikely for them to be caught for that. In turn, they can route solely on gathering intel and unique to impostors - setting up kills and denying information. Impostors have the advantage of bigger vision range - allowing them to gain information, without others gaining information about them back. Sabotages also are a great way of denying information. Lights deny information around the players and are also a good way to set up a kill. Communication is a way to deny long-range information. While not a great way to set up a kill (it is more situational) it is a better sabotage to call in-between kills to screw with information. Vent usages could screw up the timing of some people and the impostor could get a clear for the kill.
What should also be mentioned about the game is that despite its high skill ceiling, it is an easy game to get into. The game involves a lot of risks (which introduces luck) and it also involves expectations of players to play in a certain way. Because of that, the inexperience of newer players leads to smaller expectations on them, which in turn gives them more leeway. They are more likely to be overlooked as impostors, which is a bonus both as impostors and crewmates. Even when people get a better understanding of the newer players, they would still be given more leeway on certain actions as a crewmate. This allows more intricate routes as impostors and makes them more trustworthy, which gives them more of a fight chance.
The meta aspect is one of the important things of the game, as everything ties to it. This is also why the game works much better in a group of the same people rather than random groups. Understanding how other people play and act, and also how other people perceive you, is an essential tool you can use in the game. A unique effect of this is that a lot of your actions are going to have consequences even outside of the game that you are currently in. Thus you need to accommodate your crewmate playstyle to fit your impostor playstyle. Doing the opposite is harder, as the better player you are the more other people demand of your playstyle with a crewmate. Also, you can also set up strategies in several rounds, building trust for specific situations, to use it as an impostor in another round to win. You can't keep using that same strategy constantly, which is why you have to keep planting new seeds and adapting your strategy - you reap what you sow.

The game is not without issues. While all the things discussed so far exist, their relevance depends on the used ruleset. The bright side is that the game opt-in for a lot of options to let the people change the settings. Yet even with those settings, the game is still heavily crewmate sided, especially as players improve. The default settings are even more cremate sided, but that is expected in a game with a lower skill level, where impostors would have more of a chance. As players improve, options become more and more restrictive, and eventually, even house rules have to be introduced against some "cheese" strats that can be used to make the game fair. The maps are also a good example of this, at a high enough level all maps but one are unbalanced.
Sked is heavily shifted in crewmates favour. This is due to the lacklustre vents and the 8-like layout of the map, making it hard to find bodies and deny information. Mira is shifted on the other side. It's all interconnected vents, combined with the decontamination area and the weak information tools for the crewmates lead to this shift.
Polus is the most balanced map of the current 3. Its layout allows for a lot of complexity and room for impostors to play out, while also giving the crewmate strong information tools like vitals, admin and cameras. The only downside for that map is the lack of an equivalent of the oxygen sabotage (it isn't there for lore reasons), which doesn't give impostors a good tool for dealing with groups.

In conclusion, despite its simplistic look, the interaction of the mechanics of Among Us leads to deep gameplay. The game shines in its conversation aspect and has attention intensive tasks (not the ingame tasks) to do outside of the meetings. All those things are combined with an intricate metagame.