Onimusha: Way of the Sword arrives on September 3 on PC, PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X/S, with a September 4 release listed for Nintendo Switch 2. Capcom developed and published it. The early critical verdict is strong at a glance: OpenCritic lists an 86 average with 95 percent of critics recommending it, while the PS5 edition sits at 86 on Metacritic. Look past that tidy average, though, and the reviews reveal a more useful argument. Scores run from VGC's 3/5 to IGN's 10/10. Almost everyone loves the sword fighting. They disagree over how much repetitive structure a great combat system can carry.
That distinction matters. An aggregate score tells you that critics generally recommend a game. It cannot tell you what they are willing to forgive. Onimusha's return has some reviewers accepting weak connective tissue because the bosses and parries are so good. Others see the same padding as proof that Capcom did not trust its strongest idea enough to keep the adventure lean.
The score spread
The broad range runs from 6/10 to 10/10 among the reviews surfaced at launch. VGC awarded 3/5. Game Rant gave it 7/10, Xbox Achievements 75 percent, Game Informer and DualShockers 8/10, PC Gamer 83/100, and Eurogamer 4/5. At the enthusiastic end, Nintendo Life, Forbes, RPG Site and Push Square all landed at 9/10, COGconnected scored it 92/100, and IGN gave it a perfect 10.
Those numbers suggest disagreement, but not chaos. Nobody is arguing about whether the combat works. The split concerns proportion. How much of a 20-to-30-hour game is operating at the level of its best fights? How often does it make you repeat an encounter or clear another arena before letting you reach the next great boss? Reviewers answered those questions very differently.
"Onimusha: Way of the Sword is an incredible action game with an excellent story to match." - Will Borger, IGN, 10/10
"A sublime mix of classic Capcom action and weighty physical swordfighting. The only enemy it can't overcome is its own pacing." - Wes Fenlon, PC Gamer, 83/100
"Onimusha: Way of the Sword is worth playing for the combat alone, but the game around it doesn't live up to the standards that it sets from a pure gameplay perspective." - Jordan Middler, VGC, 3/5
That is the whole review conversation in three quotes. The first sees a complete triumph. The second sees excellent action dragged down by rhythm. The third thinks the gap between those parts is large enough to define the game.
Everyone agrees on the blade
Onimusha builds its fights around observation and timing. Musashi can block, dodge and parry, but the signature move is the Issen, a counterattack triggered just before an enemy strike lands. It rewards learning animation tells and holding your nerve. Regular attack strings have a supporting role. The heavy damage comes when you read an opponent correctly, create an opening and answer with precision.
Eurogamer's Dom Peppiatt describes this as role-playing through mechanics. Musashi is more effective as a reactor than an instigator, so the player must fight like the swordsman the story says he is. Peppiatt argues that the game makes you feel more like a legendary swordsman than its peers because success depends on judgement rather than acrobatic aggression. The review also warns that longer battles can be gruelling. A single mistake can spoil a long sequence of good reads.
Game Informer reaches a similar conclusion from a harsher angle. Wesley LeBlanc calls the boss fights exams. The game keeps teaching new parts of Musashi's kit for hours, then asks the player to use all of them. Button mashing does not work, and the hardest encounters demand near-perfect execution. LeBlanc's reward for that pressure is "cresting euphoria" after a close win. He gives the game 8/10 and calls it the hardest and most complex Onimusha, as well as the most satisfying.
VGC's lower score does not contradict any of that. Jordan Middler calls the combat "rock-solid" and the Issen the best part of the game. He also notes a genuine skill gap: once he mastered the timing, ordinary enemies and sub-bosses became routine. That mastery is satisfying, but it exposes the repetition around it. When fights lose uncertainty, repeating them becomes much harder to excuse.
This is why the average is not the interesting part. A score of 86 can sound like critics found a polished action game with minor complaints. Their actual writing is more specific. They found an exceptional combat system placed inside a campaign whose pacing, side activities and repeated encounters are sometimes merely adequate.
The argument is about everything between the bosses
Way of the Sword is neither a straight corridor nor a full open world. Its path opens into medium-sized areas with side quests, simple puzzles, upgrade materials and repeatable combat. In theory, that gives Kyoto room to breathe. In practice, several reviewers wanted Capcom to cut more aggressively.
Eurogamer says the "legacy" dungeons and tightly directed routes use Onimusha's time better than the broader diversions. Peppiatt still found value in exploration because it strengthens Musashi and gives the setting texture, but the side missions repeat and the quieter passages cannot match the set pieces. The review puts the likely playtime at about 20 hours for a direct run and closer to 30 for a thorough one. That length works for Peppiatt because the combat asks for sustained concentration and the bosses remain worth revisiting.
Game Informer is less forgiving of the latter half. Its review points to rifts that lock Musashi into combat arenas, frequent boss reuse and recurring malice flowers used to clear fog. LeBlanc understands these as skill checks before major encounters, but says they occur too often and make the journey feel padded. The supporting cast helps. Dokyo's theatrical menace, Okuni's warmth and Ganryu's flamboyant interruptions add personality to a simple demons-invade-Kyoto plot. Yet strong characters do not make repeated arenas disappear.
VGC makes the sharpest case against the structure. Middler reports fighting the same boss seven or eight times and says the roughly 30-hour campaign needed about a quarter removed. His preferred version would move directly from mission to mission, preserving the difficult action while stripping away the open-area chores. The final act, which stacks large set pieces and bosses back to back, becomes his evidence: when Onimusha stops wandering, it is at its best.
This criticism is unusually consistent across the score range. DualShockers gives 8/10 while calling the material between bosses merely all right. Nintendo Life gives 9/10 but notes errands between NPCs that threaten the pacing. PC Gamer's 83/100 verdict identifies pacing as the one enemy the combat cannot beat. Even highly positive reviews are describing the same flaw. What changes is the weight they assign to it.
Why a perfect score can coexist with a 3/5
Review scores compress priorities. IGN's 10/10 means its reviewer found the action and story powerful enough that the weak connective material did not spoil the whole. VGC's 3/5 means its reviewer valued the same combat but considered the surrounding design overlong and dated. Neither position requires denying what the other reviewer saw.
The disagreement also turns on what players expect from a revival. Onimusha began in an era of comparatively short, directed action adventures. A modern sequel faces pressure to offer exploration, upgrades, side objectives and a larger campaign. Some critics appreciate the extra space and the chance to practise. Others think those additions blur the identity that made the old games memorable.
VGC says the sequel learned the wrong lessons from open-world games. Eurogamer praises it for refusing to become another Soulslike. Put together, those views reveal the odd shape of the revival: it is distinctive where the sword is concerned and conventional where the campaign needs filling. Capcom protected the series' combat identity, then surrounded it with habits borrowed from modern action games.
That makes Way of the Sword a useful test of taste. If mechanical depth and boss design dominate your judgement, the higher scores make sense. If pacing and variety matter just as much, the lower reviews offer a serious warning. The game appears to contain both the focused revival fans wanted and a looser 2020s action adventure competing for the same runtime.
The quieter point critics keep making
The visual work is not causing the split. VGC calls the art direction nearly flawless, praising enemies that remain readable even while moving quickly. Bosses are grotesque, imposing and recognisably Onimusha. Eurogamer praises the cinematic direction and the physical performance behind Musashi, whose face draws on actor Toshiro Mifune. Small expressions give the character humour and presence. Push Square likewise points to striking cutscenes and memorable characters alongside the combat.
The story gets a more mixed response, though it fares better than the structure. IGN calls it excellent. Giant Bomb describes it as engaging. Game Informer sees a standard plot elevated by larger-than-life characters. VGC finds the central story forgettable but enjoys the camp performances of its villains. Again, the divide is one of emphasis rather than factual disagreement. Reviewers see charm and spectacle; they differ on whether those qualities turn a familiar plot into a strong one.
Difficulty may be the more practical dividing line for players. Eurogamer expects the battle system to aggravate some people, especially those carrying habits from other hard action games. The colour-coded attacks can resemble a demanding game of Simon Says, but the review finds them fair. Tom's Guide praises the bosses and perfect parries while flagging an uneven difficulty curve. Forbes recommends starting on Story difficulty to learn the pace of enemy attacks. This is not a casual power fantasy. It asks players to submit to its rhythm before it starts giving anything back.
What the reviews mean before launch
Onimusha: Way of the Sword is not genuinely divisive in the usual sense. Its 86 OpenCritic average and 95 percent recommendation rate show a clear positive consensus. The useful split sits underneath that consensus. Critics agree that Capcom built one of the year's stronger melee systems and paired it with excellent bosses. They also agree that repeated encounters and uneven pacing get in the way. The argument is whether those weaknesses are irritants or structural failures.
For players who enjoy learning parry windows, replaying bosses and feeling a difficult system click, the reviews point toward an easy recommendation. There is enough agreement across 7/10, 8/10 and 9/10 reviews to trust the combat praise. Players who dislike arena repetition, reused bosses or side content added mainly to stretch a campaign should take VGC and Game Informer seriously. A high aggregate does not cancel those complaints.
The honest summary is sharper than "critics loved it." Critics loved using the sword. Most enjoyed the characters and spectacle. Several wished Capcom had removed hours of material that kept them from the next major fight. That tension explains the 6/10-to-10/10 range better than the average ever could.
Once you play it, Perthro gives you a place to log the game, rate it on a five-star scale and write a review as short or long as you want. You can also keep it in your backlog or wishlist, put it in a custom list, and compare notes with friends through the feed. Perthro is free on the App Store and requires iOS 17.0 or later. For help, visit support, or read the community guidelines.