Do you know what the orders budget was? If not then it is hot air.

Ah so you got nothing, thanks for the clarification. 

Proof? I doubt it was near close to that.

6.5/10 is exactly what I gave the game (having actually played it from start to finish). There is plenty good about the game, but there are plenty of flaws and lots of room for improvement. So I completely agree with the metascore on this game. And I pretty much agree with most of what Jim Sterling says in his review.

I do suggest playing it on hard, and self imposing the discipline of not using bullet time (which is what I did for my one and only (so far) play through. That way some fights are genuinely challenging and make for a sense of satisfaction when you get through them. If you play on normal and use bullet time the combat will be ridiculously easy and thus make for an unsatisfying experience for those who like to have challenge in their combat. Also making the combat sections too quick and easy to get through increases the perception that the game is nothing but QTEs and cutscenes. When you set up the conditions for combat to be a challenge that perception diminishes significantly. The way I played the game the balance seemed not so unreasonable.

The only gameplay element I felt was boring was the stealth sections. Fortunately there weren't too many of them. I don't know why I didn't like the stealth sections because I am mostly fine with having a change of pace and having the odd stealth sections.

I am very keen for and looking forward to a sequel.

Even if Sony has greenlit a sequel now, I think they should let some more dust settle and not announce it at E3. If there is a sequel it won't be releasing until some time next year, and so E3 2016 is the time to announce show a decent amount of gameplay, and have a playable demo for the press.

The burden of proof is on you for saying :

1: You know the budget

2: It is a flop

You can prove neither. 

What was bayo 2's budget and how do you know that was not a flop? 

So you don't know, thanks again for proving yourself wrong. I don't know if it was a flop or not, neither do you. You don;t know what sony's internal expectations, budget were.

Guys. Please avoid unnecessarily attacking people who liked the product!

That includes 'everyone who bought this game is shit' and the like.

Edit - Permabanned the Weazle!

Not sure about a flop. I'm pretty sure Sony knew what the game was going to play like and how long the game was going to be. They aren't going to throw money at any developer and know nothing about the project.

Secondly, this was RADs first big console release. I highly doubt Sony would give RAD a big budget if they are unproven in the console field, especially on a brand new console.

As for the score, I think 6 is about right. I felt there wasn't enough gameplay and gameplay variety for it to score any higher. The Lycan sections were badly designed and the whole game felt like a prologue to a franchise in the making.

I wonder even if this franchise will ever take off after the bad publicity and start it has received and therfore, if it is worth making a sequel considering a sequel will have to be frigging brilliant for people to trust to buy it after what people experienced with the original.

Although I bought it at launch, I'm just glad I traded it within 2 days and only lost £5 on trade thanks to my store price matching it.

I remember getting into a debate with s guy who said something like "Ready At Dawn only makes great games" or something and listed a bunch of PSP games as his argument. Would love to say I told you so right about now.

It isn't a bad game, IMO. I don't regret the purchase. It isn't among the upper echelon, though.

Bloodborne? Infamous?