I don't think the game is all that good or fun(personally).
I'm a pretty seasoned SoulsBorne player playing all of the games aside from Elden Ring. I've only had trouble on two of the bosses so far. But my big issue is I'm just not having a good time like with the other games and I'm almost done with it.
I know the combat is much faster paced which I appreciate but its also very dull. Its the same Dark Souls combat with most of the creativity removed and a looooot of parrying. And the parrying isn't even rewarding, it makes it like a rhythm game.
Problem with it being a rhythm game though is that I expect to know when I need to parry but the timings are all over the place. I also just don't think the enemies are all that different to fight, most of them are the exact same in this game just different timings or tells.
I mean I see the reviews, everyone loves this game and I loved all the other games but is it just the fast paced combat and grappling hook that helps it? Having a visible story is nice so far too I suppose.
I'm just curious if other people do or don't like it and why or why not.
Preface: I have played through DS1 multiple times, DS 3 multiple times, Elden Ring multiple times, and Sekiro twice. I love all these games to bits. I tried DeS, and while I found it fascinating, I came upon it too late and did not feel like proceeding as I have been spoiled by later titles.
Sekiro is beloved due to its very tight design. It asks the player to excel at a handful of specific skills rather than presenting a wide array of options and going "well some of this ought to work for you if combined correctly". Is either approach better than the other? Subjective. But it's easy to see why one or the other could appeal more or less to individuals.
That being said, with a narrower band of skills to sharpen comes more constrained encounters. Sekiro is (chiefly) a game about one-on-one combat where nearly every attack can be deflected. "Parry" really is the wrong word for the primary defensive option in Sekiro. Even attacks that are telegraphed with the big red "watch out!" warning actually CAN be deflected (though perhaps you'd be a fool to try). The game is clearly trying to get the player into the groove of trading strikes. You attack until sparks fly, the enemy disengages, or winds up an attack unhindered by your strikes. Then you are met with the defensive challenge: here is one or more attacks with different timings and potential responses. It is now up to the player to answer with whatever they feel is most effective. This may be deflect, block, dodge, jump, mikiri counter, consumable item, or shinobi prosthetic tool. You may find more than one answer fits and therein lies the player's ability to be creative.
I would argue being creative within a more limited set of constraints does not necessarily diminish the quality of satisfaction one could experience. Being able to master - or at minimum become proficient with - a difficult set of skills despite constraints could even be argued to be far more satisfying as there is less opportunity to find some cheese in the massive toolbox that you would otherwise have access to. And it's not like the toolbox you have in Sekiro is as small as some detractors seem to think. However, it is much smaller and focused than other titles... especially Elden Ring.
And this is me only talking about the combat. All the other aspects of the game are very well designed too, but I've said enough. Also, critics tend to focus on the combat anyway.
That is a very comprehensive and well articulated response. I enjoyed the game for what it was and I appreciate the response it got which set the foundation for the success of Elden Ring.
With that said, I still strongly believe that DMC5 got robbed that year for the attention it deserved. Personally, I believe DMC5 did everything Sekiro was doing better. From combat, characters to enemy and level design.