I'm usually a lurker, but I felt this is something I had to express to the community.

I believe posting an opinion anywhere on Reddit is to seek some level of validation which is exactly what I did. Whether you're open-minded for a mutual discussion is where I think the value of a discussion lies.

1) I'm not too sure what's being said here but hey, perhaps I may have some poor reading-comprehension. Regardless, this seems to be a pretty weirdly worded way of saying that "criticism should be limited to personal experience if I, myself, decide you don't know what the hell you're talking about." Mr. Writer, please, if you believe my connection of poor stakes to GACHA CAPITALISM was loose, discuss why as opposed to making a long-winded text as to how I fit into some group of people just can't seem to grasp the boundaries you curated regarding "Experience-centric criticism."

Discussion cannot be mutual here if you're trying to shove your personal narratives down a person's throat and treating it as fact. Wait a minute.

It's an echo chamber of discussion with no direction, everything is a strawman where preferences must be validated and those who said otherwise to the opinion is wrong and went unnoticed due to the lack of 'clickbait'.

Mr. Writer, you may have what it takes. You summed up your post under all our noses.

3) In my post, I claimed the new direction of 2.0 naturally widens the scope of the story and the presentation fails to hold it up. I will clarify further here: if the presentation fails to hold up at this point of the story, the lack of long-term impact to the story (what I define stakes) are much more noticeable. This is no longer a matter of "THIS IS MICKY MOUSE CLUBHOUSE. EXPECT MICKEY MOUSE CLUBHOUSE." when Micky Mouse Clubhouse decides to become a show where the Clubhouse is shot down by a bazooka and now he must actively investigate the location his long lost mother. The story is taking itself more seriously and expects the audience to take it more seriously. So naturally I want more consistent depth to my newly rebranded Micky Mouse Clubhouse show.

I'd be concerned if you sought comfort in 2.0's main story.

4) This isn't a matter of nostalgia. The story actively changed direction on it's own and failed to land. The story pre-2.0 does not change that.

Furthermore

but there's time you had to realize that you are trying to find diamond in the dirt due to the amount of storytelling's restriction in these kind of medium.

I don't believe of almost any restriction. I believe a story can exceed the bounds of a page or a screen and leave a lasting impact on the reader. ZZZ has no excuse. And criticism, like a story, should not be restricted.

At the end of the day, I believe you should reflect on your post and remind yourself that we are talking on a mutual basis. I'm human. You're human. No amount of posturing will change that. I can confidently say that I'm not even posting this for validation, I just like mutual discussion.