Whaddya know? Its shit.

>who knew that a Ninja Theory game wouldn't be good?

fixed

>>386530197
It blows my mind how they've -consistently- made shit.

All of them, terrible. It just blows my mind.

>>386530156
When the game dropped on steam I took a bus to my cousin's house to watch him play it real quick to get a feel for it before I decided I wanted it or not. The thread yesterday when anon posted articles to more gameplay I was almost completely turned off, but once I saw my cousin play it and got to play a little myself I just can't stand it. The whole story and character seem like something which needs a longer format and I'm guessing to fit in an "indie" budget to use as a sort of marketing comic they cutdown on any expanded ideas that could eb explored which makes the presentation of schizophrenia not only disgusting as OP said but merely unbearable. I just built my gaming PC, I was looking for games to play since all I have is Bayonetta and I saw this and was interested, now I know this is not a game for me. And even if this game gets more interesting than the first half I saw, it has zero replay value from what I could tell. In my opinion I couldn't stand the combat, and I actually liked the combat in their past titles like Enslaved and Heavenly Sword and DmC. A shame really.

>>386530156
Only paid reviewers gave it a decent score so I guess you're not the only one.

>>386530620
ign gave it a fucking 9 calling it some sort of art piece.

>>386530696
They're paid off, clearly. Jim Sterling gave it a 1/10, in comparison.

>>386530764
I just saw, glad he also mentioned the mechanic where you have to go all the way back once dying a certain amount of times

>>386530925
That mechanic is okay in of itself, but it doesn't seem to mesh well with the game being relatively easy. They ought to make the game harder, but have more in-game punishments for failing rather than making the game easy because the punishment for failure is so, so severe.

>>386530620
so if a game you want to hate gets good paid its paid

>>386531083
I have no idea what you're saying, regardless. My comment had more to do with the difference in opinion between ''professional'' critics and amateur critics. It's not lauded all across the board, which is telling.

Another crappy game came out that we'll forget in 2 weeks. In other news today...

>>386530156
>potential
Not even worth talking about in any context, if it sucks then it sucks.

Giant Bomb
>man, i love all their games!
>DmC was sooo goood!
>this is amazing!