This FM has no worse rating than a 6 from a dozen people as of now (apart from my own rating) and I just don't get the appeal. This to me feels like a totally bizarre, poorly made small campaign of 5 missions with no real appeal whatsoever.

Basically everything that in my mind is a bad things in FMs appears here: Lots and lots of marble or metal flooring, sped up NPCs (almost everyone is hyper fast), unappealing design with boring and long halways, lots of doors that you have to pick and even a third lockpick to make it even more annoying and last but not least keyhunting.

Sure it's pretty creative what is done with the environments and the story but creative isn't automatically good.

As the title says, maybe I just don't get it, if so please tell me why I'm wrong but until then this is just a middle of the road set of missions with a bizarre setting and tedious mechanics.

Well, I'd agree with almost all of your criticisms in essence (maybe except the design being unappealing and boring - I mean, it gets like that at times, but it's not universally bad), but I'd still say a 4 is a bit harsh, considering how much novelty this set would offer in its time. Let's remember it's 2006. Sure, looking at it through the lens of today's standards won't do it any good, but then, it's not like today's missions don't have their own gameplay issues and their averages still go through the roof.

Also, I see you tend to be pretty strict with your ratings in general, so maybe people actually had similar conclusions, and it's just your 4/10 is equivalent to most people's 6/10 :P

I appreciate your response!
You are probably right and after a bit of distance from this one I think I'll bump it up to an average mission (I also noticed that my ratings by category should be an overall 5 not a 4, so the bump up is definitely appropriate).
In essence this is a very creative set of missions I just found the execution subpar and would have rated it higher if it had been more enjoyable to play. The annoyances I mentioned above lead to me getting more frustrated by the minute and not wanting to continue any further.

It's sometimes hard to get into the "How would this have been in 2006?" mindset if in the same year a mission like Transitions in Chaos: Conspiracies in the Dark was released. Although this can probably be said for every year and there's always missions of first time authors that just can't reach that level of quality yet.

It's also a fair observation that I most likely am a bit stricter with my ratings though I still try to be considerate and try to be objective as in not giving bad ratings just because this wasn't for me and I can't see any appeal.

Maybe a better approach would be to not rate missions so shortly after playing them but let it sit for a couple of days and then think about how much I liked it.