The game is quite long for how limited the gameplay is. Combat had an interesting rhythm gimmick but it should have been a 5-6 hour, tight experience, not 10-12. It really outstayed its welcome for me given that the game is just combat arenas and cutscenes.
Apart from that combat could be broken by spamming companion abilities once you unlocked them all, it didn’t feel like there was any reason to use different combos than 2 or 3 that worked fine.
I end up with the feeling that the hype around the game comes mainly from the unfair closure of a studio that did something that wasn’t just following trends.
People hold the game up as an example of what’s wrong with the cash grabbing nature of big publishers in the industry, but I just don’t think it’s a good game at all.
It is tricky, I agree.
Another point I think I need to try and comment on:
I think when people praise Hi-Fi Rush, they basically mean: “Hurray, a mid-budget, FINISHED action romp from a big publisher with a cool gimmick and no intention to drown me in microtransactions!” which is why you see the PS2/PS3/Xbox 360 catalog comparisons.
I don’t think anyone actually means Hi-Fi Rush is the Jesus Christ of gaming—and if they do, I completely disagree.
We could use similar games though—specifically in the action game genre. We get very few of those nowadays.
It’s the sort of game I think we should praise for those reasons, I agree. I’m definitely in the no-buy camp if a game has a cash shop. The indie game space is where truely high risk creative design is happening, AA is the space for slightly more ambitious titles that require that polish but can still take some risk. I respect Tango for that and definitely think they were done dirty BTW.