I love to use Reaper in bosses. Extra range is nice bosses in this games are either too fast or needs you to JUMP (God I HATE WITH ALL MY SOUL bosses you need jumping to do damage), so Reapers come in handy, specially with the extra Silk it produces 

While I agree the scenario design is underwhelming (and underdesigned tbh), as I mentioned before, a lot of the recent complaints I read in this thread are really a matter of skill issue. And I hate bringing that up, because I hate that discourse in Fromsoft games, but dudes, you are complaining about things that are rather basic in games like these. Maybe stop trying to force the idea that its "objectively bad design" and try to realize its a "you" problem.

I do not know what to tell you besides its a skill issue.  Once you get accustomed to how Silksong works, using your silk skills is a must, especially during battle areas as you can remove enemies quickly.  You really do need to pay attention to enemies patterns as that is part of the skill set you must develop.  Most battle areas can be cleared in under 10 secs.  The only big critical issues I say Silksong has is the run back.  I havr always dislike the mechanic and I dislike it in Silksong.  Playing Ninja Gaiden 4 pushes that home big time since you start right at the room or boss you died and can just jump into the action

This is really a useless piece of advice. Silk is used for both healing and fighting, but healing uses all your silks instead of partial use of silk (compared to HK where you don't use all your soul to heal). So you either use silk to fight or to heal, you can't use both. At least not on bosses who 3-shot you

This could be mitigated for healing 1 mask a time, with only part of your silk. The healing in this game is a mechanic that is prized a lot, but I miss learning the bosses patterns to figure out their safe healing windows

SK seems to suffer from the same problem of Shadows of Erdtree. Boss fight don't last long enough to you memorize the pattern, and a single mistake like touching a boss can make you lose 4 masks and kill you. This also makes her first full mask to be kinda meh (she should have started with 6 masks and got a 7th after the 4 mask shards). If she wasn't so squishy, battles would last longer and enough to you to memorize bosses patterns

The new difference is Erdtree still open, so if a boss is fucking you, you can come back later with more upgrades stack. At least in act 1 this is not possible to do

As for runbacks, this is a criticism I don't actually agree. At least in act 1 all runbacks were fine, short even

I didn't have any issue with that cause I just used a tool to quickly take of the spawning flying enemies in its 2nd fight and the ones in the 1st fight were no problem. Bilewater on the other hand was a difficult area though so I can relate to the frustration about that somewhat.

The point that the game doesn't revolutionize anything is something I could get behind so I won't contest it. But the other points, I can't agree on

-distance between benches and boss: By making you play a part of the game again you get the chance to interact with its mechanics more and get better at them and more familiar. Also, it forces you to take a short break from the boss to clear your head and come at it at a fresh angle. They build character! None of the run backs are that long, in fact most of them are quite forgiving, I had no trouble running back at bosses and trying them again. 

-poor placement of benches: Don't know what you mean by that, I found most benches well thought at, not too isolated but not too convenient (the game wants you to feel unwanted in its world so designing for that is good design)

-poorly designed world navigation system: I actually found it to be excellent, lots of quick travel points but not too many, so you won't feel too comfortable. The different travel mechanics in the citadel serves narrative purposes, as well as making you not too reliant on your usual travel system

-Shard system: I was always full on shards, there are so many and so plentiful that my problem was always being at cap and never needing to hunt for more. I can give you a point here, as I found the sub weapons too powerful and too forgiving, I never used them because I found that they made the game too easy

-basic enemies too aggressive: That's a refreshing change from games making the enemies fodder. You actually have to account for them somewhat while traversing in Silksong. This is good design because you get to engage with them more. Also adds to the feeling of hostility and despair that the game goes for. I actually never found the basic enemies too aggressive, they were the perfect balance of stating their presence without being a nuisance.Their placement also is deliberate, they get in the way, but an experienced player can get around them easy. 

-Input reading: The only enemy that uses input reading to the point where you might call it a cheat is the super secret final boss. Every other enemy and boss telegraphs their attack and just tries to aim where you are at. I hate input reading, one of the flaws of elden Ring, but it doesn't exist in Silksong. The tracking ranged attacks just take into account your speed and trajectory, something the enemy can see, so of course they would aim for where you are heading. Easily reactable. 

- The tools: There are many, many uses to the tools, try experimenting. Almost everything can be useful, something not many games can say. I never used the compass, took up a slot and I can read a map without something telling me where I am. I actually enjoy the game more this way, more immersing.

-Some gauntlets were too easy, but take into account that when you find them matters. If you find an earlier challenge later in the game it might seem too easy, that's true. 

-I was so relieved there was no double jump until later in the game. It made the traversal that much more interesting. An early double jump would make you ignore lots of challenges. I don't see how it combines poorly with the glider.

As you can see I didn't find the game frustrating, I never had to look up anything, never lost my beads, and all while going in completely blind. I find it the perfect amount of challenging. Maybe it could be a little more challenging? I did have to impose some self made challenges, like not using the compass and sub weapons unless I really struggled. Will have to wait for the dlc. 

A review isn't supposed to "protect the consumer", it's just the opinion of a guy who played it. Maybe the guy who played it enjoyed every single aspect of it and gave it a 10/10 because they thought it was an incredible experience. I personally thought it was a masterpiece and absolutely worth my time even if it was a little too frustrating here and there, mostly toward the first half of the game. I think the game's major "design issue" is how poorly communicated the path to Act 3 is.

What you fail to understand is: the things that stand out as obvious design issues to you may have not been issues to someone else. There is no such thing as objectivity when it comes to videogame opinions. It's all just opinions.

If you look at Opencritic, the game is recommended by 97% of critics. That means 97% of reviewers liked it, and 3% didn't. In other words, not everyone will like the game. No game is loved by everyone. In other words, no game is "perfect", thus by your logic, no game should ever get a 10/10. So basically, your logic sucks.

I understand your point of view, but if criticism is pointless because it's just a matter of opinion, why bother writing a 'review'? Let's call them opinions from now on, not reviews. Let's objectively evaluate games only by frame rate, resolution, and maybe the occasional hiccup. Let's also throw in price and microtransactions, and nothing else.

To clarify the difference between a review and an opinion, I refer you to their definition (not written by me):

"A review is a more in-depth and reasoned evaluation of a product, service, or work, balancing subjective elements with a critical analysis aimed at informing the reader. An opinion, on the other hand, is a more concise, subjective, and often immediate judgment, expressing a personal belief without necessarily providing detailed explanations. Essentially, a review aims to guide the reader with a reasoned interpretation, while an opinion simply communicates an opinion."

Yes, a review must inform the consumer critically and objectively; that would be its purpose.

When I said, in the opening post, not to trust reviews too much, it's because the system has changed compared to the past.

In the past, when print magazines were sold, we, the magazine buyers (you and I), were the ones paying; we were, in effect, the reviewers "real employers". If a reviewer gave you their opinion without critical analysis, and steered you toward a bad purchase, you wouldn't buy that magazine again and move on to something else. So there was an emphasis on criticism, as objective as possible.

Today, we, the consumers, are no longer the "employers" of online magazines, which are free; their employers, the ones who pay, are those who provide the advertising moneys and the review codes—namely, the developers and publishers themselves, who have an interest in promoting their product. In your opinion, can we still speak of objectivity in this context?

I generally appreciate reviews on VGChartz, like the one on Silksong, because they appear more genuine and objective than many other sites.

Sorry for the long rant, but this discussion is much broader and doesn't concern Silksong specifically, so I won't dwell on it.

You've addressed the flaws I listed point by point, so those aspects aren't a source of frustration for you, or at least you're able to tolerate them well. There's nothing else to complain about here; I'm glad you were able to fully enjoy the game (even without using the compass :O), which unfortunately wasn't the case for me.