data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d39d3/d39d3aa61c7dda36bb2ee463d21f78aaa7e17651" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/021ad/021ad62c149e2c2330c0f3909d66441b98ba4d8c" alt=""
2·
10 days agoDamn, this looks like a proper Onimusha game? Ballsy from Capcom there. The dub is awful though, holy shit 😂
Damn, this looks like a proper Onimusha game? Ballsy from Capcom there. The dub is awful though, holy shit 😂
And this has Denuvo? 😂 It’s a 2D Shinobi game in 2025, why are they spending money on Denuvo.
Hmm… I suppose they’re not wrong seeing the most successful action franchise today—Devil May Cry—took the combo simulator route, which’s not necessarily bad, just not in line with the design principles of the genre’s best games: Devil May Cry 3, Bayonetta, and Ninja Gaiden 2.
We need the challenging/awesome action balance to come back, for sure.
Makes sense. Why they’re not marketing more towards their growing Linux-based buyers is beyond me.
Hmm… sure, but I feel like “reviews are subjective” gets used as an excuse to give low-effort reviews a pass too often.
Like, I understand if a Steam reviewer writes whatever because they’re just a user, but I cannot justify using the same scale to judge a professional reviewer.
I understand a game may not be a reviewer’s cup of tea, but if this stops them from engaging with the game’s systems and attempting to provide insight through their review then I think it’s fair to judge they haven’t done their job well.
Like, if someone hires me to do a job, and I accept, I cannot go “Oh, I’m gonna do half of it because the rest isn’t my cup of tea. Sorry.” No, I’ll do the job and maybe complain about it afterwards, which IMO, is exactly what reviewers should do—example: “I beat the boss, but the fight sucked because X, Y, and Z.”
I think there should be standards, otherwise you get reviewers unfairly judging games they barely played like in the infamous God Hand review.