so why is this game getting hate whereas god of soy is praised again?

[❂ Shin]

the game is carbon copy of the nu-gow series, a glorified walking sim with 'combat' scattered here and there too keep brain dead people engaged but it literally does everything nu gow did much better especially with its story. so why the hate? does this mean xbox fans havent deranged as much as sony fans to accept every sh*tty slop that is served to them? what gives?

[Dollmaker]

Not that i know, but from what i heard, most of the complains come from how short the game is.

I also heard the story wasnt as good as the first game.

[JocularJosh]

If you think GoW has similar gameplay you have never even played GoW.
GoW can easily last you well over 50 hours and the combat is both satisfying and challenging at least on harder difficulties.
Senua offers barely any actual gameplay, the combat is barebones and very simplistic and on top of all that it's a very short game.

[The Spu]

Originally posted by Dollmaker:

Not that i know, but from what i heard, most of the complains come from how short the game is.

I also heard the story wasnt as good as the first game.

I played both and think I prefer the first game, but this one is by no means a bad sequel. But I think the main issue is Hellblade is just not made for the majority of players; It's a heavily narrative-driven series with a focus on a mental illness most people will never experience.

Even back when the first game was released, there were people who were expecting some action-packed hack and slash game. Call it poor marketing if you'd like, even just the name "Hellblade" doesn't give an accurate picture of the game.

But where I think people go wrong is that they can't tell the difference between a game made for a different audience, and a game that's bad. A lot of the opinions on the forums here are.. poorly constructed at best, and farming steam points at worst.

I think it's fair to say the game is short and expensive, everyone has a different financial situation, and video games are all a waste of money if you get right down to it. People deserve to be able to make informed purchases. But that says exactly 0 about the actual contents of the game.

[Necropants]

80 dollars (thats what it is in my region) for a 5 hours game that's completely linear and that you spend the first 45 minutes holding up is just over the red line for me.

[spicy little monkey]

Originally posted by Necropants:

80 dollars (thats what it is in my region) for a 5 hours game that's completely linear and that you spend the first 45 minutes holding up is just over the red line for me.

spend the 1st 45 mins "holding up"? what do you mean by that?

[Popi26]

This is a fantastic looking disappointment, it's so short you can finish in a day no problem!! If your looking for lots of combat, forget it, there's not that much and the fight mechanics suck, it's like trying to fight underwater.A ton of cut-scenes, forced 16:9 aspect ratio, no health bar or prompts to let you know that you can interact with something, no character development of any kind. The fact you can have the game "self play" the combat tells a lot.
$70 for a 1 day story, should be $40

[BINARYGOD]

Originally posted by Necropants:

80 dollars (thats what it is in my region) for a 5 hours game that's completely linear and that you spend the first 45 minutes holding up is just over the red line for me.

you EVER paying that price for any game is a personal problem

[spicy little monkey]

Originally posted by BINARYGOD:

Originally posted by Necropants:

80 dollars (thats what it is in my region) for a 5 hours game that's completely linear and that you spend the first 45 minutes holding up is just over the red line for me.

you EVER paying that price for any game is a personal problem

how? Games are entertainment. People spend hundreds or thousands of dollars a month on hobbies. Games are no different.

[FATMAN]

people or gamers expected a game, they expected fun combat with a good story and a immersive experience, like the previous titles from the devs

But this is not that, its a cutscene walking simulator

The combat is slow, jaggy and Senua fights like a drunk with zero energy

The constant weird voices is annoying and horrible, if u switch off the speech you then have no guidance

Like i said the only thing that is good is the nice graphics, but they only pulled that off because the games resources are aimed at rendering the scenes, if this was a fast paced proper action game then they would of had to tone down the graphics or otherwise it would of run like absolute crap

Thats why its extremely slow paced, why the combat is slow, why its inundated with cutscenes and voices to even drive therapists mad

No way this is worth £50 coz it will have ZERO replay ability, they should of made this in to a indie point n click puzzle solver like the 1st game

[Regnier575]

GOW whilst being a walking sim has more to it than this slop.... hell, the first Hellblade had more to it than this

This should have been a tech demo for series x launch

[spicy little monkey]

Originally posted by Regnier575:

GOW whilst being a walking sim has more to it than this slop.... hell, the first Hellblade had more to it than this

This should have been a tech demo for series x launch

GoW is not a walking sim...

[Alezul]

Originally posted by The Spu:

Even back when the first game was released, there were people who were expecting some action-packed hack and slash game. Call it poor marketing if you'd like, even just the name "Hellblade" doesn't give an accurate picture of the game.

I can't tell what the issue is but something is clearly wrong with people's expectations of this game.

Where are all the people raging at Portal 1 and 2 for not having enough combat?

Tales from the Borderlands is an adventure game spinoff from a looter shooter, yet i didn't see any outrage from a lack of combat.

Disco Elysium looks just like your typical classic rpg yet has absolutely no combat. I didn't see its forum spammed with demands for more action.

So what's the problem with hellblade? The steam storefront barely shows any action so you can't say it's misleading people.

[Demystificator]

Because there are some questionable youtubers and 50 ppl on the forum crying about the price, it doesn't mean the game is hated.

[Kleerex]

I haven't finished the game yet but here's my verdict: great atmosphere, great character acting (though Melina Juergens tend to overact), great graphics. However, anything gameplay-related is bad. Puzzles are boring, there are lenghty sections where you just have to hold down W while characters in front of you are rambling about something.

Inner voices turn it into cacophony most of the time.

My greatest disappointment is combat. I understand that they went for Sekiro-style "dodge unblockables and parry everything else", but they did rather poor job with it. They also added my most hated "feature" ever, stunlock. Every time Senua eats a hit, she gets stunlocked, but same does not apply to enemies, which leads to frantic button mashing.

Chloe Bruce did Senua combat mocap for the first game. She's a martial artist, and it shows. For the sequel Melina Juergens did combat mocap herself, and she fights like Jon Snow. She wields a sword like it's a heavy mace.

Whoever designed gameplay for Senua's Saga needs to be fired. God of War is miles above it in terms of, well, everything.

Here's the thing that confuses me the most: Ninja Theory aren't new to game design, they surely noticed shortcomings. But they chose to ignore them. This reminds me of Arkane's Redfall. Harvey Smith, the guy befind freaking Deus Ex, was its co-director. He knows how to make great games, yet he did poor job with Redfall and he knew that it was bad. Yet he did nothing.

What the hell is happening to Zenimax-owned studios? Arkane, Tango Games, now Ninja Theory. Even Bethesda itself.

[Star Rain]

I still feel like Ryse looks and runs a billion times better.