"Outside of its aesthetic appeal, there's very little to like in Sakura Samurai: Art of the Blade. Its core mechanics are slightly troubled thanks to the auto-targeting, but more importantly, it's a fairly bland experience that is better off passed on."
Aron writes:
"Imagine this: you are a young person in feudal Japan, out for a quiet morning stroll. Maybe you’re just walking because video games haven’t been invented yet, so there’s not much else to do. Or perhaps you’re just looking for a quiet place by a stream to beat your laundry on a rock and contemplate the meaning of life. Unfortunately, none of this is to come to pass because a tiny green man gives you a magic cherry blossom sword and tasks you with saving the land’s princess. This may sound like a fever dream, but it is actually the opening sequence to Sakura Samurai: Art of the Sword for the Nintendo 3DS. In this eShop exclusive title, you must learn to use the aforementioned sword to mow down the countless ninjas, brutes and various other bad guys that would stop you from saving the fair princess."
Game Rumble: A game that has something to do with swords would typically end up to be a hack n slash game. However, Sakura Samurai takes a different route and would introduce a more tactical way to engage in a fight. It chose to follow its own virtue, but does it succeed? Read our review and find out!
"Since early summer of last year, the Nintendo 3DS system's eShop has seen a robust lineup of interesting offerings, some good and some bad. We've seen great titles like Pushmo, Mighty Switch Force, and Mutant Mudds, for starters. A title that released in the first quarter of 2012 in North America, Sakura Samurai: Art of the Sword, has finally released in European territories, though renamed Hana Samurai: Art of the Sword, for whatever reason. Is the swordplay within the game a work of art or a disaster of a masterpiece?"
I think this is another example of a review based upon personal preference rather than one based upon informing the public. So, it makes me wonder why some people even bother to review. Why is it that most give this generally good reviews, yet one person says "there is very little to like here"? Trust me, I don't care if someone doesn't like the game, but I also believe that you shouldn't recommend or not recommend a game in a review just based upon what you like. It makes me doubt your credentials as a game reviewer.
I'm just of the school of gamers that believes that a review's purpose is to PREDICT whether OTHER PEOPLE will like a game to help them decide. And I think based upon many other reviews from many other reputable game reporters that this review may be giving people bad advice. Bad advice is poor journalism.
An example: I LOATHE the Grand Theft Auto series. But, I wouldn't not recommend it to someone, knowing that many gamers love it, simply because I don't like it. I would be giving irresponsible advice.