His/her descriptive analysis of the game is right on, as far as I am concerned, but I don't think that what is described is a one/five star game.
I am torn between believing that this game is satire and believing it is silly. The history teacher claims that this island has a great educational system, but the college-level math class consists of being given some problems and an hour to work on them. The history of the island as presented is hilarious: "We had great democracy! But there was only one politician on the whole island, so he was democratically elected dictator-for-life! Yeah for democracy!" and then there's this weirdness where the Americans somehow have French slaves in 1932 and try to build a canal across the island for some reason. We are supposed to laugh at such clear nonsense, right? Right?
I am going to LOL for sure if the dev, at the end, expects anyone to have learned all the bogus language rules, history, units of measurement, etc given in the lessons so the MC can "pass her exams." That would be bad game design purely for the sake of bad game design.
So, yeah, the dialogue is painfully bad, but that's the nature of dialogue presented in a language the developer doesn't speak well. Sure, the game uses those same Honey Select models we've all seen, and it's hard to break our preconceptions of what they are like based on other games, but HS is the most accessible of the model sets and starter devs need to keep costs down, so that's fine. Sure, there are story elements and passages that strain credulity, but that's going to be true of pretty much any first effort. You can see that the dev is improving as he/she goes along, because, for instance, those dreadful fourth-wall-breaking scenes where the MC awkwardly addresses the player disappear after a while.
I'd rate the game a three, with the potential to get better. Unless it becomes important to have learned all the classroom stuff, in which case it has the potential to get worse, too.
