Well, Miiverse also enjoyed Watch_Dogs... It really means nothing.

The only community that really hated a retail game was probably Sonic Boom. It was filled with complaints about bugs and glitches.

I don't think you can trust the positive opinion of anyone who buys a game for $60 knowing it has a 40 on metacritic

Nice. Can't wait to try the free PC version.

"Proves"

Glad they've enjoyed it. It is just the release date in NA is a week after XCX so I won't have the time to play this game when I'm playing an RPG.

That can go both ways.

"Professional" game reviewers are absolutely biased. There has not been a single un-biased one since the mid-90s. There was a time when actual game journalists who works for magazines like EGM and GamePro back when they were actually good, really DID give legitimately unbiased reviews, meaning that they reviewed the merits of the game, regardless of their personal opinions of it, or personal tastes. GamePro most especially, was the best at this in the early to mid 90s, because their ratings system did not have an aggregate score. They would rate each aspect of a game individually, from graphics, sounds, controls, fun factor, etc., so they would let you know if, say, a game had great graphics but shitty sound, or shitty gameplay. Or a game with crap graphics but amazing gameplay. Because they would score each thing seperately, and the reviews themselves would be an unbiased look at what the game is about. Period.

Zero personal opinions, just the facts of the game. And that was great, it was reliable.

Now? Not a chance. Even outlets that try to put forth an air of unbiasedness, such as GameTrailers, fail. IGN once had an ounce of credibility, but that too was many, many years ago.

These days, all ANY "professional" reviewer is, is no more or less than some gamer, just like any one of us, who just so happens to get paid to give their personal opinions. And that's it. Nothing unbiased or "professional" about it at all, except that they're getting paid, so they "must know what they're talking about".

On the other hand, yes gamer reviews and non-paid opinions are biased. Of course they are. EVERY opinion is biased, that is the nature of opinion. But I have found, at times, that you can trust "fan reviews" sometimes more than "pro reviews", because there have been cases where they will actually tell you more of what the game is about, and not just trying to get clicks, views, etc.

Either way, it would not surprise me at all that this game has wonky cameras, controls, a half-baked story, etc., but that is only because that has been how EVERY Itagaki game, especially the Ninja Gaiden 3D games, have always been. He was never known for high quality. And yet many people claimed to love his NG games, or DoA, or whatever.

The people rating the game are mainly 9-12 year old kids. Probably because they are impressed by these sorts of games.

The game has some framerate issues but it's not broken, that's for sure.
I say it might be fun if you like this kinda game and it looks cool too. As for critic reviews, well, they mostly evaluated story mode and... gamergate.

I don't buy it. Critics give Nintendo games good reviews all the time, including Bayonetta 2 just last year.

The game likely isn't very good, that's just all there is to it. It's gotten bad reviews even from Nintendo only sites like Nintendo World Report.

It's not a third party game.