I think the stealth stuff deserves to be hammered, for even on paper, it just sounds fucking BAD. Stealth in Castlevania? Starring a powerful vampire lord? It screams "well, we sort of want to just check boxes for AAA games". This is never, ever a good reason to include it.
This is how we got QTEs all over the fucking place with this subseries, too. But enough criticism helped MercurySteam realize that they're garbage and can (and should) be turned off. Too bad they won't be making another Castlevania with rat transformations, huh?
Dude, hammer the stealth all you want. I don't really give two shits because it probably won't hamper my experience all that much, and if you think it'll kill some sort of upcoming trend, all the more power to you.
I just think it's disingenuous to downrate an entire game based on a segment that is supposedly 10% of the game, if even that. 7/10? Sure. 4/10? Nah...
I'm just not seeing how these reviews are lining up with the LoS1 reviews. Aside from the stealth, it seems to be bringing up all the same issues, while noting that the combat and boss battles, the focus of the game, has improved greatly, and aside from Edge, everyone has been praising the graphics. Yet LoS1 got largely positive reviews, and people are slamming LoS2 for the same stuff, yet it's getting far, far worse reviews because "lolbadstealth". To warrant a 50% drop in quality, that stealth better be buttfucking awful.
Like, I should want to take it up the rear rather than play through it.
I wonder if Rugal feels vindicated.
I thought he was pretty vindicated by MoF.