it turns out I had played this game before.
not just because this is a send-up to a genre mostly instilled in gamers' collective memory by nintendo and other companies in the 90s and early 00s, but that sure didn't help.
no, it turns out I had literally already played and beaten this game before, and simply failed to remember doing so, so thoroughly it failed to make a mark on me. that's honestly astounding to me, given my predisposition to retaining information on games, but I went through the finale sequence and got the sinking feeling that I've been here before, and not in a cute way like with dragon's dogma 2.
so what is there to say about a game that slid entirely off my brain at least once before? to be frank, I'm more perplexed by that phenomenon than anything, so I was pondering what was causing this incompatibility with memorability while I did the dishes, and... hm.
as I mentioned, my experience with the genre (3d platformer) mostly came from nintendo and other companies in the generation including the nintendo 64, gamecube, and playstations 1 + 2. the era had larger teams making worlds for smaller-scoped games on lighter-spec'd console generations. it's not even just the big ones like super mario 64 and sunshine, but stuff like spyro, jak & daxter, croc... hell, even gex!
the stuff I've played from that era stands out in my mind for one reason or another, but the things that differentiate them in my mind are honestly the unique bits of friction from games trying to do something specific and either the game's or my failing to execute it perfectly. spyro's flight sections and damage type differentiation, jak & daxter's minigames and the feel of the double-jump, croc's tank controls and completionism-sparking gobbo collection mechanics, gex's... entire fucking vibe, honestly.
but I think it's mostly that anchoring is a motherfucker. my first 3d platformer, along with a lot of people's, is going to be a mario game. mine was mario 64 and I've replayed that game plenty, but looking at it, it's a lot of game for 1996! a lot of game that wasn't entirely predicated on trying to be difficult, but being mostly doable for people adapting to the idea of movement in a 3d game space. it's got 120 stars, 15 distinct levels with a bunch of different gimmicks and themes, and most of them pretty memorable and pretty brisk on average.
what differs here is the design scope. making a game for a world where standards have changed means that if you're intending to design a similar experience, your design practices have to change. one solo dev (eventually joined by others, but nowhere near as many as working on even super mario 64) making a game world where fidelity needs to be higher to make the cut means you can't commit to as much Content.
the base game of hat in time has four normal worlds, each with their own severely different vibe, and a world with the final level. the number of Time Pieces (the equivalent to SM64's Power Stars) is 40, a third of the 120 from SM64, and you need 25 to unlock the final boss, which is roughly equivalent to the 70 needed for the final bowser fight in SM64... but closer in practical effect to the 30 you need for dire dire docks and the second bowser fight.
how do you fix this discrepancy? depends on your design philosophy.
this game's design philosophy is picking and choosing level gimmicks in the hopes they'll make a memorable experience. mafia town has the tutorials, a "collect x items around the world" mission, a floor is (literal) lava mission, and a "come back later with a powerup you won't get til later" mission. battle of the birds has stealth missions, a linear mission with time pressure, and a super mario galaxy 2 style cosmic clone mission with a less literal lava floor. subcon forest has a grappling hook and associated tutorial, a horror puzzle section, a mail delivery vehicle mission, and two boss fights. the alpine skyline is just a big pile of unrelated platforming challenges in four different directions in one large map.
so how do you get unrelated level gimmicks to fill out some game time? make that game feel like it's worth the price tag and the kickstarter success? same way as candy makers make a profit with cheap candy. fill it up with nougat.
nougat is just a confection with a protein and sugar syrup, but notably, it's used in a lot of candy because it's mostly air. air is free, and nougat is free bulk for your product. every bit of a hat in time feels like nougat to me. it's inoffensive, but it takes a little longer than feels satisfying, because the bosses have one more gimmick they need to make you engage with (at least twice, so the game knows it's not just luck), the missions have one more complication that keeps you from just getting your reward, the hats make you pick up the yarn to craft them instead of just giving you access, and the hookshot (mandatory) is a badge you have to sacrifice a slot for... I mean, fuck, man, you have to pay pons (the coin-like collectables) to unlock levels! I got walled at least twice by this and had to go farm more pons instead of doing a level I was excited about!
unfortunately, when I look at a hat in time, I see scrapings and cut corners from other games with more going on, draped with amateur enthusiasm on a core of time I could've spent better. it might be generously described as a highlight reel by someone, but I wish they'd have left it on the cutting room floor.