Compare Avowed vs Nioh 3

Reviewers noted useful accessibility and comfort controls such as camera, subtitle, difficulty, and arachnophobia-related options, though colorblind support was called out as missing.

Accessibility evidence was mixed: one review criticized the lack of lower difficulty options, while another noted subtitle and caption-related options.

One reviewer specifically framed Avowed as more appropriate for older teens and adults because of its complex themes and mature material.

Enemy AI was considered serviceable but not especially smart; later impressions suggested fights remain engaging without feeling brain-dead.

AI behavior was criticized in one review for enemies failing to react believably to nearby actions.

Aiming and first-person spell placement drew criticism when ground-targeted abilities were hard to place precisely.

Animation feedback was mixed, with stiff NPCs and less impressive presentation keeping the game from feeling fully modern.

Animation quality received positive evidence from one review that noted improved animations supporting better combat feel.

Most reviewers praised the bold, colorful, alien fantasy art direction, though a few disliked the cartoony look or felt presentation was uneven.

Art direction was mostly positive, especially for aesthetic and yokai style, despite one review saying it lacked FromSoftware-like beauty.

The Living Lands’ vivid tone, music, and dreamlike spaces were repeatedly praised for creating a distinctive atmosphere.

Atmosphere was praised for distinctive hubs, strong Sengoku flavor, and memorable area identity.

Boss design was criticized as disappointing, with bosses feeling like tougher versions of regular enemies rather than unique encounters.

Boss design was broadly praised for memorable, fair, and demanding encounters, though a few reviewers found some bosses generic or less memorable.

Bug reports varied widely: some reviewers found almost none, while others hit quest bugs, map-edge bugs, or issues that required reloads.

Bug frequency was a concern in several reviews, including disappearing health bars, glitches, and enemies behaving incorrectly.

Camera-related options were appreciated, especially the ability to adjust head bob and camera shake for comfort.

Camera behavior received a negative technical note because stuttery camera movement was part of a broader PC issue list.

Character creation was generally praised as solid or deep, with later updates adding more races and appearance options.

Character customization was mostly praised as deep and flexible, though one review found it weaker than Nioh 2.

Character development split reviewers: some found companions distinct and engaging, while others thought characters were bland or hard to care about.

The companion roster was often seen as small or limited, though some reviewers still liked the four supporting characters.

Character roster was criticized in one review as thin compared with previous entries.

Checkpoints were praised as well placed and supported by abundant shortcuts.

Build and class flexibility was praised because Avowed lets players mix archetypes freely, though balance sometimes favored magic or specific styles.

Class balance was mostly positive, with Samurai and Ninja both seen as viable despite some flexibility concerns.

Co-op was generally praised as smooth, strong, and helpful, with only some stability caveats.

Combat was one of the most consistently praised elements, especially magic, responsiveness, and build variety, despite repetition and gear-gating complaints.

Combat was the most strongly praised attribute, repeatedly called deep, smooth, flexible, and among the best in the soulslike/action RPG space.

Companion combat AI was mixed: some found companions self-sufficient or improved by patches, while others called them weak or unnecessary in fights.

Companion AI received a negative note where summonable allies were said to be ignored by bosses.

Reviewers liked the dense zones and amount of side content, although some felt the scope was restrained rather than sprawling.

Content variety was mixed: several reviews praised packed activities and systems, while others felt repetition or density set in.

Controls and combat feel were commonly praised for responsiveness, impact, and keybind flexibility, with a few targeting frustrations.

Style switching was described as smooth and responsive, with reviewers noting that swapping between Samurai and Ninja quickly became satisfying in battle.

The core loop was divisive: strong combat and exploration were often undermined for some reviewers by gear-tier repetition and open-zone structure.

The core loop was described as addictive and hard to put down, with repeated praise for combat-driven progression and long-term engagement.

Crafting was mixed to negative, with several reviewers calling it threadbare, expensive, or too tied to gear-tier progression.

Crash stability varied by platform and version: some reviewers reported no crashes, while another had severe startup crashes before fixes.

Crash stability was mixed-negative, with multiple reviewers reporting crashes or fatal errors even when saves survived.

Dialogue quality ranged from standout and well acted to overly wordy, forced, or limited in the options it offered.

Difficulty balance was one of the most debated areas, with some finding it fair and flexible and others criticizing gear checks, sponginess, or uneven scaling.

Difficulty was generally seen as challenging but more approachable and flexible, though one review strongly criticized the lack of lower difficulty options.

Resource balance divided reviewers: some liked the meaningful economy, while others felt crafting materials and upgrade resources were too scarce.

Resource balance drew criticism around elixir management, especially early on when healing items felt unnecessarily stressful.

Emotional impact came mostly from moral choices, consequences, and companion moments, though some endings or fallout felt muted to critics.

Emotional impact received limited but positive evidence from one review citing some emotional weight in the leadership theme.

Endgame content was criticized because the original experience did not allow continued post-story play and lacked New Game Plus at launch.

Endgame content was strongly praised through NG+, deep loot payoff, and multiplayer/endgame longevity.

Enemy variety was a recurring concern; many reviewers felt the same bears, spiders, skeletons, and humanoids appeared too often.

Enemy variety was divisive, ranging from praise for a huge monster lineup to criticism of recycled or repetitive foes.

Environmental detail was strongly praised through dense secrets, vistas, caves, and handcrafted spaces, even by some otherwise mixed reviewers.

Environmental detail was praised where reviewers found the large landscapes impressive.

Exploration was one of the strongest consensus positives, with dense maps, secrets, vertical paths, and constant rewards keeping reviewers engaged.

Exploration was consistently praised as rewarding, meaningful, and strongly tied to progression, though a few reviewers noted checklist fatigue.

Facial animations were criticized in later impressions as not matching next-generation expectations.

Returning Eora fans often felt Avowed was faithful to the Pillars of Eternity world, while still accessible to newcomers.

Faithfulness to franchise was praised where reviewers felt the game preserved Nioh’s identity while evolving its formula.

Fast travel was viewed as convenient and generous, making it easy to revisit areas without friction.

Frame-rate stability varied: some reviewers saw stable performance, while others reported hitches, drops, screen tearing, or stuttering.

Frame rate stability varied sharply by reviewer and platform, from stable or flawless to serious regional problems and forced FPS caps.

Fun factor leaned positive overall, especially for combat and exploration, though some reviewers found the experience merely solid or underwhelming.

Fun factor was very high across reviews, with repeated language around fun, addictive play, and strong enjoyment.

Gameplay mechanics were generally praised as streamlined and flexible, but a few reviewers felt RPG systems lacked depth or reactivity.

Reviewers largely praised the Samurai/Ninja systems and style switching for adding flexibility and depth, though a few found specific mechanics underpowered or limiting.

Graphics quality was divisive but often positive, with praise for stunning vistas and vivid visuals alongside criticism of poor or compromised visuals on some platforms.

Graphics were mixed: some called the game good-looking or visually impressive, while others found graphics dated or uneven.

Grind level was a common complaint tied to gear upgrades, resource hunting, and spongy combat loops.

Steam Deck suitability was considered playable and verified, but the visual tradeoff was significant.

Haptic support was platform-dependent: one PS5 review praised DualSense vibration, while another noted missing haptic and trigger use.

HUD clarity improved through options to reduce clutter, adjust opacity, and toggle display elements.

Immersion was helped by dense worldbuilding and atmosphere but hurt for some by static NPCs and limited world reactivity.

Immersion was mixed: one review said empty restored areas harmed it, while another said technical hiccups did not break it.

Innovation was usually described as limited; reviewers saw Avowed as confident and enjoyable rather than genre-changing.

Innovation received positive evidence for blending outside influences into a cohesive whole.

Learning support was helped by reference and lore systems that made Eora’s terminology easier to understand.

The learning curve was widely described as approachable but still steep, dense, or overwhelming depending on player familiarity.

Level design was praised for verticality, density, handcrafted routes, and spaces that felt larger than their footprint.

Level design was broadly praised for open-field layouts, strong world structure, and mission-like areas integrated into larger spaces.

Post-launch support was viewed positively, with free updates improving stability, customization, build options, and quality-of-life features.

Load times were praised as very quick in both supporting reviews.

Loot opinions were mixed: unique items and progression could be satisfying, but many chests and rewards felt predictable or unexciting.

Loot was one of the most repeated pain points, with reviewers describing abundance, inventory pressure, and menu-heavy cleanup despite some useful tools.

Lore depth was consistently praised, especially the in-game books, history, politics, and reference systems that made Eora feel rich.

Map and navigation design was mixed, with missing custom markers criticized before later updates added them.

Map and navigation design was mostly positive, especially collectible reveal systems, though one review disliked checklist-style map completion.

Menu and ability-wheel usability was mixed; some quality-of-life systems helped, but radial wheels and limited hotkeys disrupted combat for others.

Menu usability was a repeated drawback, with reviewers citing convoluted systems, cluttered menus, and too much menu busy work despite mitigation tools.

Mission design drew criticism when quests felt repetitive, fetchy, or like back-and-forth errands, though some standout missions remained.

Mission and Crucible design were viewed positively, with reviewers noting more open paths, pressure-test encounters, and dungeon-like challenge.

Movement feel and parkour were strongly praised for making exploration fluid, vertical, and enjoyable.

Movement earned praise for mobility and flow, especially through Ninja style and the broader feel of moment-to-moment action.

Multiplayer design received limited positive evidence for remaining a strong suit.

Narrative quality was usually a strength thanks to mystery, choices, and world stakes, but some reviewers found the main plot predictable or underwhelming.

Narrative quality was the clearest creative weakness, often described as hard to follow, dry, rough, or merely functional, with a few positive exceptions.

Onboarding was praised when it taught by doing, though lore-heavy openings could feel steep for newcomers.

Onboarding was usually praised for pacing new systems well and helping players get up to speed despite mechanical density.

Online stability was mixed-negative, with co-op praised but disconnections and network instability noted.

Open-zone design split reviewers: many liked curated, dense hubs, while others found the world restrictive, lifeless, or not interactive enough.

The open-field/open-world shift was mostly praised as a strong evolution, with a minority finding it unnecessary or gimmicky.

Originality was limited; reviewers often described Avowed as familiar comfort-food fantasy rather than a bold genre evolution.

Pacing was mixed, with slow starts, downtime, filler quests, and late-game repetition weighing against an otherwise easy-to-follow story.

Pacing received excellent marks where reviewers described the setting and exploration rhythm as unrelentingly addictive.

Performance optimization varied sharply across versions, from stable and improved after patches to demanding, stuttery, or poorly optimized on some PCs.

Performance optimization was mixed, with some smooth experiences but repeated PC issues, frame dips, and calls for optimization.

Platform-specific support was praised for PS5 performance modes, Sony-platform feel, and PC features such as DLSS.

Platforming precision was a pleasant surprise, with simple mantling and vertical puzzles adding a welcome exploration layer.

Platforming was criticized in one review for inconsistency and for making terrain feel more dangerous than intended.

Polish improved over time but remained uneven, with reviewers citing jank, lack of gloss, or presentation limits alongside strong craftsmanship.

Polish was praised by reviews that called Nioh 3 polished, refined, and fleshed out.

Progression systems were divisive: some liked flexible builds and added points, while others found midgame growth stagnant or too gear-dependent.

Progression was praised for free respecs, build freedom, rewarding upgrades, and flexible experimentation across styles and weapons.

Puzzles were generally light but appreciated when they used environmental elements, timing, and exploration paths.

Quest design ranged from excellent side stories and meaningful follow-ups to fetchy, inconsistent, or repetitive tasks.

Side quests were viewed favorably in the cited review because Myths were spaced out rather than overwhelming the map.

Replay value improved with choices and post-launch New Game Plus, though some reviewers felt repeated runs changed too little.

Replay value was rated very highly, with reviewers pointing to postgame hostility resets, NG+, long playtimes, and ongoing engagement.

Sandbox freedom was limited compared with full open-world RPGs, though some reviewers still appreciated freedom in story choices or builds.

Save reliability was a concern for at least one reviewer who needed more careful saving because of bugs.

Side characters and companions were highly divisive: some found them memorable and heartfelt, while others thought they were shallow or uninspired.

Skill trees were praised for flexibility but criticized by others as simple, shallow, or uneven across archetypes.

Skill trees were praised for depth and hidden unlocks, though some reviewers felt the system could be overwhelming at first.

Sound design was praised for impactful effects, combat feedback, and strong weapon audio.

Sound design was strongly praised, especially combat effects, ambient audio, and overall audio presentation.

Soundtrack reception was generally positive but often stopped short of calling the music unforgettable.

Soundtrack quality ranged from forgettable to gorgeous and well-placed, making the overall evidence mixed-positive.

Stealth was criticized as underdeveloped or nearly useless, with little support for stealth-focused play.

Stealth received a mixed note because one reviewer found stealth attacks could alert enemies too easily.

The tutorial was praised for teaching systems naturally and creating meaningful choices early.

Tutorial quality was criticized for poorly introduced systems and badly timed mechanics during difficult early moments.

Upgrade systems were sharply divisive, with some liking gear longevity and many others criticizing tiers, scarcity, or number-go-up design.

UI options such as text sizing and subtitles were appreciated as useful interface support.

Value for money was mixed: reviewers praised Game Pass or lower pricing but questioned the original premium price for the scope.

Value for money was rated highly due to 100-hour completion, content richness, and strong day-one value claims.

Visual effects, especially magic, were repeatedly praised for impact, color, and satisfying feedback.

Visual effects quality was strongly praised in one review for the Crucible’s striking visual design.

Voice acting was mostly praised as strong or outstanding, though one reviewer found performances unable to save weaker writing.

Voice acting was mixed, with Japanese voiceover praised but English voice acting criticized as poor or distracting.

Weapon balance and variety were mostly praised for experimentation and flexible loadouts, but some reviewers felt magic outclassed melee or guns.

Weapon balance/depth was positive overall, though style-locked weapons were also described as controversial.

World-building was one of Avowed’s clearest strengths, especially its politics, cultures, history, and Eora continuity.

World-building was mixed, with time-period variety praised but identity, lore depth, and restored-world immersion criticized in several reviews.

World interactivity was one of the most common criticisms, with many reviewers finding NPCs, theft, objects, and systems too static.

Writing quality was widely praised for lore, companion dialogue, and sharp prose, but a minority found it wordy, pretentious, or mid.

Writing quality was mixed-positive, with praise for spectacle and some story impact despite broader narrative caveats.