Why it would have been at least an 80 metacritic? No matter how many helping hands Sony would give to From Software, Enchanted arms would be bashed anyway for being derivative (which was the cause of the game getting bashed in the first place). Despite Microsoft throwing money at him, Sakaguchi came up with Lost Odyssey which is sitting at a 78 in metacritic because most critics consider it to be too conservative and derivative, so it doesn't matter whereas Microsoft helped or not, the core mechanic of both games wasn't up to the critics taste. Yet Lost Odyssey gets some love from players. Figure it out.

Or are you suggesting that a game that has "Only on Playstation" on the cover automatically gets more metacritic points?

I know that, (im not saying that its wrong or anything, in fact part of the fun of this games is speculating on what may have happened before or after the events of said games),  im just saying that at the end of the day everything is just speculation made from fans nothing else, and nothing thats really undeniable thruth.

in my opinion i have a lot of doubts about the theory that you talked about before, about DaS being a continuation of DeS bad ending

for the following reasons:

1) in the bad ending of DeS you become (much like the old king allant and the old one) the new source or leader of Demons and Demons still round the lands of boletaria and other places, while in DaS the Bed of Chaos (that in said theory would be created probably houndreds of years after DeS) is the official origin of demons, before that in DaS demons didnt exist.

2) Dragons already existed in DeS and there is an old cementery of Dragons that prove that they have been arround way long before the second fog (the one at the beginig of the game... maybe they appeared with the first fog the one that happend before DeS), but in DaS unlike DeS there is a clear time when dragons appeared and dominated everything (even before humans came in), so there are differences in when the dragons appeared and what they where (in DeS they are actually more like Demons brought more than likely by the original Fog, and in Das they are just Dragons because Demons are the ones created by the bed of Chaos, and the bed of chaos appeared a long time after the dragons have ruled the world.

3) Patches the hyena, if we assume that both games are really conected and that DaS is a sequel to DeS then a lot of the "homages" and "easter eggs" (like patches) would become real connections and they would no longer be "easter eggs", so... what about Patches? did he lived and died in DeS and then houndreds of years later a person with the same phisical aspects and the same personality was born who then again has the exact same name (patches) with the same alias (hyena), who also likes to murder and rob people?.... im sorry but for me thats a little to much... i think that patches the easter egg that really connects both games (by them having at least the same NPC) is the one that at the end separets them the most.

4) the cities, we know that in DeS the demons didnt destroy the cities they actually took over them and claimed those cities as their own, (like boletaria or the tower of latria), and we know that dragons lurked the skyes and they didnt destroy the cities either, in fact they lived in them like the two dragons that lived in boletaria, so... what happened to the cities how did they disappear? a tsunami sunk them? an earthquake devoured them? you would expect some of those ruins or old countrys to appear in DaS but they are never referenced and they never appear so what happened to them?.

those are some of the reasons that for me are hard to explain, and you may find a way to give logic to all of this but then again the very base of this whole argument is again just speculation, so in the end just like you said we will never know, but at least for myself i dont belive they are sequels and i think there is enough reasons to think they are not, and since the bases of the reasons that explains that they are sequels are actually speculation then its more reasonable to belive they are not related.

either way everyone is allowed to give the interpretation that they like even if its speculation, its fine im just explaining why i belive they are not related.

SORRY FOR THE LONG TEXT.

They always were a respected studio from Armored Core to Frame Gride to King Field to Otogi.

Games around 60 receive mixed reviews which means that some people enjoyed the game and some didn't and that is why I always consider games that score 60+, just need to research it more. I bet there are games that score 60-69 that you would enjoy if you did some research on it, read some reviews.

I have.

Sakaguchi could run circles around From Software when it comes to RPG's. He doesnt need Microsofts help let alone Sony. For Software though, its a different story. If Sony looks at a developer they are willing to take a risk on the chances are they will still help them develop if they need to creative push. If you look up the development of Demon Souls, that seemed to be the issue.  It was essentially going to be another Kings field if it wasnt for Sony. Sony Japan helped them change it up.

No. I am not suggesting that if a game has Only on Playstation that it automatically gets more metacritic points. I am stating that Sony's level of development awareness is higher than that of Software and the push really helped. Demon Souls actually caught Sony off guard though, which is why Sony was afraid to publish it outside of Japan. The problem with Sony was that they were thinking too much about appeasing the west that they couldn't seen the quality in Demon souls at first.

So, you agree that Enchanted Arms was bound to be 64 in meta either way?

It came out in 2009. The same year as UC2. The PS3 was getting a steady stream of games at this stage. Why is this thread just full of misinformation. Nearly second post is spouting nonsense. Same to the person saying the souls series didn't get big until Dark souls. Demon's sould almost the same number as Dark on the PS3. And I have yet to play any game in the series. Just wanted to correct some things.

Sony has experience with RPG's from their earlier eras. I really wish they would go back to it so i disagree.

And what experience from their earlier eras would prevent Enchanted Arms to be 64 in meta?