Basically, from you post it sounded like they are very run of the mill average games.
My disagreement is maybe minor, but to me, they come out very strong. Their games are always at the top of my list when it starts out, until it gets to a point and then it just fizzles out.
So my disagreement is basically that I do not see them as average games, but very good games that grabs my attention with very interesting characters.
In how their games ends, we are in agreement. It's always on a whimper.
I agree, great starting out and yes they end in a whimper or a wtf happen.
I see. Then you're right: we absolutely disagree. I find them of a little above average quality overall. The
beginning of many of their games are great (but not all; again, I would point to
Reconnections). But that's only a part of the game as a whole. Like I mentioned, there are many quality control problems — missing images, incorrect images, incorrect speaker, easy-to-spot-and-fix typos, often bland dialogue (nothing all that memorable IMO), etc. And the endings, which you agree aren't great, are a huge part of the game.
So
even if I overlook the QC issues they consistently have across all of their games (which I don't, b/c those
are a part of the game as a whole), the fact that the endings never seem to be good drastically mars my opinion of them. If I call a game "mildly entertaining", I mean that about the game overall. For all of the more enjoyable parts in the beginning, I find a nearly equally number of frustrating parts at the end.
That's why I assess them as I do: I take the game in its entirety. I hate it when an ending to an otherwise good-to-great game is a giant car pileup at an intersection. It completely wrecks my view of the rest of the game. And so, knowing how badly they botch the endings, I start each new one with a lingering feeling of future disappointment.