(3DS eShop)

Samurai G (3DS eShop)

Game Review

Samurai G Review

USA USA Version

Posted by Jon Wahlgren

The "G" is for "garbage"

UFO Interactive's eShop releases seemed to be on a slow but steady progression towards quality, with Johnny Kung Fu almost breaking through this underwhelming barrier. But then along comes Samurai G to pee in everyone's cereal.

Samurai G is like being presented with a spoon and a bowl full of live bees: just one look is enough to grasp what horrors await, and one scoop later you find yourself with a mouth full of bees and it's unsurprisingly horrid. Confusion, stinging, pointless agony and existential questioning follow.

This title attempts the endless runner genre of which kids these days can't seem to get enough, with a dose of enemies to stab, obstacles to dodge and swat with a sword, and coins to collect. After collecting 100 coins the samurai is able to go into a temporary super-powered frenzy, slicing and dicing all invincible-like.

The whiffs are really quite impressive here, making us question whether anyone actually play-tested the poor thing before shoving it out the door, because the game fails at pretty much everything it sets out to do. For one, the drab colour palette and fine art style makes tiny obstacles nigh-impossible to discern in motion. The amount of focus needed to spot a smudge makes keeping track of anything else - like the constant barrage of ninja stars coming from all directions or instant-death ground obstacles - a Herculean task.

Getting hit once isn't strictly "the end" and instead chips away at a health bar - but suffering a blow does render you unable to move for a moment, meaning that an errant jump can lead to a chain of hits that will in fact spell your doom.

To make matters worse, stilted and horrid controls make the slightest danger nearly impossible to react to on the fly, demanding carnal knowledge that Samurai G in no way has earned the right to demand from players. How anybody thought that these controls were functional is beyond us.


Samurai G is a terrible, horrible, not good very bad excuse for an endless runner. It's satisfied with regurgitating genre ideas and didn't even take the time to think about how to make those ideas work well before charging people actual currency for a flimsy prototype. If there is any running to be done here, it is as far away as possible.

From the web

User Comments (107)



Whopper744 said:

Alright, lets get on to the Mario Golf GBC review! I know that one will have a few more stars then this for sure. haha.



Wonder_Ideal said:

Phew... I'm glad I read the ingredients (review) before I considered buying Samurai G Bee Cereal.



WarioPower said:

I suspected this. I shouldn't assume, but I know when I see the name UFO on a game it's going to be bad..



iphys said:

Wow, I guess I can't trust the reviews from NintendoLife at all anymore. I wish I had the $5 back I wasted on Drop Zone that you guys gave an 8, but I definitely don't regret the $2 I spent on this game.



Auracle said:

1) UFO =
2) This game just beat out the Disney princess game for the lowest rating I've seen on NL. Congratulations!



Undead_terror said:

I got the game, its either bad or just hard...probaubly both!
While playing the game, The visuals are nice but you will notice they took out 20% of the screen (10% on the top and bottom), this makes it smaller to see things and its hard enough already because the enemy projectiles and traps are too small as it is so your gonna have to multi-task when playing this game, your gonna have to look at you charater/look on the ground for holes or any other traps/and watch out for projectiles.The game also has cheap enemies , there's ninja's that throw shurikens at your direction no matter if your on ground or in the air, there are men in gliders (airborne enemies) that throw shurikens really quick so when one of them comes on screen your going to spend more time looking at him then any where else, theres white ninjas who pop out of no where right in your face so meaning your gonna have to swing your sword even if there are no enemies just to be on the safe side, there are blue ninjas who fly across the screen fast like a eagle swooping down to get its meal for the day so you got to time your attack, and then there are men on horses but they are pretty easy since they don't do much.The controls in the game are not bad,to move you can use either D-pad or circle pad, Y is to use your sword which is your only weapon in the game and once the enemies get hit by it they get cut and fall down?....NO their arms, legs, head gets cut off from their bodies in one strike of that sword and the blood goes every where!, the jump button is B, you can tap it for a little jump or hold down on it for a big jump that glides a tiny bit and L is to activate your gold rage in which you use your gold coins to be invincible and make more enemies appear and make everything more fast paced, but if you don't press L after collecting a bunch of coins the gold rage will activate on its own. There are 2 modes in the game, normal and advanced, there are no difference but in advanced some of the later enemies appear earlier, the songs are alright to listen to, each enemy has their own sounds which sound fine and yourself also.There are 24 achievements and the game keeps record of your total distance, score, gold coins, enemies killed.

The game is not easy to play due to the difficulty and size of things but everything else is alright, it is only recommended if you want a challenge to beat the achievements or some good ol' club nintendo coins (15 club nintendo coins), but other then that save your money!
please feel free to post your impressions and helpful information for others, but proper reviews belong in your own webspace :3 — TBD



Boo_Buster said:

Hey! Samurai Garbage is the name of my comic strip NL! Expect a letter from my attorney shortly



Nekketsu3D said:

This game is as mobile and literally translates in price, There was a Super Famicom game that was exactly the same call Edono Kiba with a little more "obstacles". not to put a note 1, but not worth much.



XCWarrior said:

Endless Runner has to be one of the worst genres ever conceived. More reason to avoid most mobile games.



thedanman64 said:

What else have UFO Interactive released?
Chuck E Cheese Arcade Room ( 1/10 stars)
Retro Pocket (4/10 stars)
Johnny Kung Fu (4/10 stars)
And now this.

Well done UFO. That's quite the reputation you're building there.



GuardianKing said:

UFO is just LJN from the NES era in disguise.

Wait a minute... LJN... (Draws another N next to the already existing N) LJM.

On dear...



Flowerlark said:

@iphys- Agreed! I liked this game. I don't regret getting it. It just takes practise, like almost any other game. Honestly, NL reviews are so biased on whether it was a kind of game the reviewer likes. If it is, no matter how flawed they score it high, if not, it gets a 1 even if it's decent for the price you're paying. Also I'd like to note that the stages are not random like most endless runners, so you start memorising obstacles and reacting accordingly.



IAmNotWill said:

Come on UFO. I know you guys can make a good game. Their ideas game ideas aren't bad, but they got to at least try!



Windy said:

WOW! Just WOW! I don't know whether to say good review or bad review but I will say thank you for saving me some money



Hokori said:

I like a ton of things Japanese related, but no I'm not getting this or the other samurai game by UFO, I was worried when looking at Sakurai samurai and the other samurai and planed on buying one Im so glad I picked the right one...



RR529 said:

I've seen some varying reviews on this. While NL gave it a 1/10, NWR gave it a 7/10.

Regardless, I was never interested in the game, so I could care less what it scores



LittleKing said:

@XCWarrior So, just because there are a few games belonging to a subgenre you dislike, you're going to discount all of mobile gaming? That's like me saying Imagine Party Babyz on the Wii is horrible, and another reason to stay away from all Wii games. <insert shallow runner game> is a mobile game, and therefore all mobile games are <insert shallow runner game>? Don't reverse the implication. I'll take a 3DS over an iPhone any day, but there ARE some fun games on there.



OptometristLime said:

The reviewer is wrong on this one, as you might have inferred from the lack of actual content in the review.
If you came here to read an entertaining review, that is exactly what is on offer.

But after reading a comment by @iphys I became curious and downloaded the game, to try for myself. As you all should, if the game still interests you.
I won't offer any more than my impressions, but, I can confirm that the game is quite playable with any control issues being highly exaggerated.



GrumpyGoomba said:

UFO's process of making a game
1.Get an ok idea for a game
2.Make the idea as unoriginal as possible
3.Put little to no effort into making the game
4.After all that "hard work" repeat



Kyloctopus said:

So interesting enough, the few commenters who bought this game are loving it. Something tells me Jon made an extremely biased or just rushed down review.



theblackdragon said:

@Kylo: That's not really saying much; people agree and disagree with our reviews all the time. If Jon didn't like it and couldn't find it in himself to recommend it at all, then it is what it is — buyer beware, is all :3



MAB said:

I thought Samurai G had all his homies down on the corner of 1800 & Crenshaw n sh*t word up!



rayword45 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if there was bias, even.minor bias, against UFO. But I can't say because I don't have the game.



JonWahlgren said:

@FashionablyLate I dig your argument that Samurai G and Angry Birds are of equal crap quality. Or of good quality? Who knows, my bias is incredulously blinding.

I see no fault whatsoever in your comparison about scores and value between super similar software in the exact same genre. It couldn't possibly be that one of them is well made, accessible and top of its genre and thus might be actually worth paying extra for, and the other is a steaming pile of crap no matter how much it costs, right?



rayword45 said:

Dude, I think the point of his argument was that they basically felt of equal quality, being mobile games without much fancy in them.

The reception is so mixed that I want to try it.

And its not you, there has been bias against companies before on NL



rayword45 said:

Its also in the writing of the review, which often goes off in tangents using hyperbolic (I hope) descriptions of how much the game sucks, with only controls and nothing else at all reviewed besides some gameplay problems which don't sound broken at all (chain attacks aren't rare AT ALL dude.)



JonWahlgren said:

So hyperbole is a sign of bias? Or the fact that multiple reviewers have scored UFO games low?



Radixxs said:

Ahem. If you don't want bias, then I suggest you stop reading reviews. Accusing a reviewer of being generally 'biased' is the most ridiculous argument someone could make, as a review without bias or opinion is simply a list of the game's features. The review isn't titled 'rayword45's Review,' and therefore it doesn't need to reflect your opinion or 'bias.'



rayword45 said:

I'd honestly prefer a non-sarcastic response, since I'm only trying to point out what others think, not my own thoughts.

Anyways, hyperbole isn't a sign of bias. When your review consists of 85 percent hyperbolic statements and the rest game analyzing, it LOOKS like bias/avoiding review (not saying it is)

The other reviewers part could factor into it. Its like keeping a reputation of things or not breaking a chain. It's not likely here though, seeing how Balloon Pop Remix was scored high



rayword45 said:

@Radixxs Not bias against the game. That's a stupid argument, but bias over other things is not.

Like I said, not my views. I don't own the game.



JonWahlgren said:

If a developer consistently gets poor reviews that doesn't have to indicate bias — more likely it indicates a poor developer. Nobody at NL has it out for UFO Interactive or any studio for that matter, and for people to think otherwise is honestly a little ridiculous.

I can understand how someone might think that this review is a lot of flash if all they read is the first two grafs and count the stars. There is plenty of talk about the game proper and analysis of it, but we're not in the business of writing textbooks or manuals so perhaps it's not as "comprehensive" as some might like. If that's the case, go check other reviews and talk to people in the forums!



RR529 said:

I think why some people are upset isn't necessarily because of the low score, but instead, about how low the score is (a 1).

a 1/10 would indicate that the game is utterly broken in every single category, rendering it completely unplayable. However, if it were so unplayable, no professional reviewer would ever give it a 7 (such as NWR did), no matter how much their personal opinion differed from NL's. Could their score still be higher? maybe, but then it would more likely be a 2, 3, or even a 4, if the game is indeed broken.

I understand that there is a degree of "bias" to any review, based on the users own personal experience, but I find it hard to believe that the difference would be great enough to result some reviewers saying it's completely broken at every level (1) and others saying it's a decent, but not great, time waster (7).

It all comes down to this. Is the game completely broken in every aspect? If not, it's not a 1, no matter how much you dislike it. If it is, those other reviewers are on something.

Personally, I'm not buying the game, so I could care less what it scores. I just feel like this is why others are so up in arms on the issue.



Gamesake said:

@RR529 Yikes! A decent, not great, time waster is scoring a 7/10 elsewhere?! We might all want to remember that a 5/10 is an average game.



OptometristLime said:

Look Jon, you're not in this to make people happy so I don't think it's worth getting bitter over some disparaging comments.

After I read your review, and the perhaps inflammatory tag line "The G is for Garbage", I decided to try out the game for myself. My experience was different than the review, and that's fine.

The only thing I could fairly take issue with is the tone of your review. I found it distracting, but I'm just one person and a good reviewer is honest if nothing else.



rayword45 said:

@Gamesake A 5/10 may be average, but how often does that want to make you buy it?

I think most people think like an actual grading system. A C is average, or in the 70s. A 60s range grade is a D, or "you barely passed". 5 and below is F, 8 is B, 9 and 10 are A.

I don't think for everyone, but the way they treat 7s makes it sound like they think SOMEWHAT close to this. Otherwise the actual "average" score of 5 wouldn't be tossed aside as "shovelware"



FonistofCruxis said:

@RR529 Some games just have extremely polarising opinions. Zelda II is a good example of this. I would give it a 4 or maybe even a 3/10 yet I've seen some people say its their favourite game in the series,



Windy said:

And here I thought Planet Crashers was the worst game in the Eshop......hee hee



JonWahlgren said:

@thelastlemming I'm not annoyed that someone would disagree with me or question the review – that comes with the territory, and like you said it's not my job to please everyone, and this is hardly the most polarising score I've given so ultimately it doesn't matter to me whether someone disagrees. And if people don't like my tone then so be it, it's my voice and I will use it.

I do take offense when people throw the terms "biased" or "lazy" around as criticism because they're insulting and baseless accusations. There's little point in arguing this all the time but for whatever reason it seems I wanted clarification here as to where this is coming from. I feel I've received that (thank you!) so off I go!



RR529 said:

@Gamesake, That attack kinda came out of nowhere...

And yes, a 7 is indicative of a decently good, but not great, game. I see no reason to attack me on that. The way I see it:

10 - Perfect
9 - Amazing
8 - Great
7 - Good
6 - Decent
5 - Average
4 - Underwhelming
3 - Bad
2 - Terrible
1 - Unplayable

Sure, in my original post I said decent, instead of good (referring to the 7), but I see no reason to jump me.



Void said:

Never been a fan of 'endless runners,' so I wasn't planning on getting this at all either way.

@RR529 I see it like this...
10-Top of it's genre.
9-Excellent example of it's genre, can't see how it would be much better.
8-Great example of the genre, had something that held it back.
7-Good example of the genre, fans will probably enjoy it, but is missing something from the normal experience of the genre that held it back.
6-Fair example of the genre, better than some, but not to good, better games you could get, but there is some enjoyment you can have if it's flaws don't bother you/you can get past them.
5-Mediocre, meh, there might be some fun to be had, but there is better out there.
4-Poor example of the genre, messed up in a lot of places, you should pass on this, not a reason to get it when there is better.
3-Bad, what it says on the tin, one to avoid, and return if you find this in a birthday gift or in your stocking.
2-Terrible game of it's genre, iee, it will make you ask how it could get worse?
1-The ugly. This is how it gets worse.



Slapshot said:

Hehehe.... sounds like it'd have been better if the ninja got knocked out by the first coin and it was Game Over for the wannabe Ryu!



IsawYoshi said:

@JonWahlgren I feel that people forget that people have different opinions. While most the time they are similar, or not to far from each other, there are also the cases where people can have extremely different opinions, like absolutely hate a game that most others think is good or ok. I love games like endless ocean 2 over ocarina of time (yeah, really ), and even I can see the crazy things with it. Sometimes people have different opinions, and people need to respect the large scale these opinions can come in.



Philip_J_Reed said:

@Gamesake A 5/10 may be average, but how often does that want to make you buy it?

Our goal here isn't to make people "want to buy" it, and we don't score with that in mind. We score games in line with what we feel they deserve. If we think a game deserves a 6/10, for instance, we're not going to bump it up to 7/10 because we think too many folks will ignore a game that got a 6. Nor would we bump a game down from what we think it deserves so that people won't buy it. Whether or not anyone buys it is up to them, always. (See the comments above.) That's nothing to do with how a game is scored.

I think most people think like an actual grading system.

We link to our scoring policy with every review. People can "think like" whatever they want, but if they're confusing what the scores actually mean, then I'm afraid that's on them; we make it pretty clear what they mean!



OptometristLime said:

I'm splitting hairs at this point, still I think it's unrealistic to act like there is an arbitrary space where you pass judgement on a game and "5 stars" means the same to each person. We all read these reviews for a different reason, and while counting the stars would be a trite reason to choose a game, it's likely that readers will be swayed by it. And in fact all the words of the review are periphery too, when it comes to taking Metacritic scores at face value.

None of this affects the way you should review games in a strict sense, but I just think it's disingenuous to believe that the number of stars is something less than a final verdict for a gamer on the fence.

Actually the scoring policy doesn't quite match what you've said.

scoring%20policy wrote:

1 - Awful

This game is a shambling mockery of a game. You should be insulted that someone thought you were dumb enough to even consider buying this turd. If you ever see a rating of a one DO NOT even consider buying this game. RUN for your life!



theblackdragon said:

Guys, it's time for the discussion to get back to the game at hand, please. If you have any further questions, comments, or concerns about our Scoring Policy or how it's applied to a given game, please feel free to get in touch with us directly. Thanks in advance!



Philip_J_Reed said:

None of this affects the way you should review games in a strict sense, but I just think it's disingenuous to believe that the number of stars is something less than a final verdict for a gamer on the fence.

Yes, but that's my point. The gamer makes up his or her mind...we don't make up minds for them. We rate them according to our experiences with them, and in-line with our easily-accessible and clear scoring policy. We don't also take into account that folks will only buy something over a certain threshhold.

You say that each reader will see the same number of stars as meaning something different to them. I don't doubt that but, again, that's why we link to the scoring policy...so everyone can see what that numbers means to us. If someone still chooses to read them differently we can't help that, nor could we possibly account for that.

And I'm not sure what about the excerpt you pasted works against anything I've said. If that excerpt represents Jon's feelings on the game, and it certainly seems to me that it does, then he rated it correctly.



OptometristLime said:

I'm not allowed to respond directly, but again thanks for taking the time to clarify your point.

Maybe I'm not understanding but you seemed to be suggesting that your ratings are independent from a buyer's spending rationale. When in fact it's built into your review system "Do Not Buy".



rayword45 said:

@Philip_J_Reed Even with the scoring policy in mind, and the whole "we're not trying to make you buy it" part, I still believe that a 5/10 isn't "average" per say. More like "below mediocre"

Look through games with a 5/10 score. Those aren't "average" games most of the time, rather, they're downright bad. The best of the 5/10s get a mention as "it works, but it's so bland"

A 7/10 review usually states "some flaws but still pretty decent"



Dark-Luigi said:

I am not getting this at all. After UFO ripped me off with johnny kung fu I am not getting any of their crappy games!



MAB said:

Don't worry about all the bickering above... Buy it 'G' is for GREAT



mayhem13 said:

I thought Johnny Kung Fu was great. So I'm no blind UFO hater or Nintendo Life hugger. Maybe a 6 or 7 because in no way did it feel like it was anything new, just retro for the sake of being retro. But fun and well done retro nonetheless. This game is not great for sure, but for the price, I don't expect much. 1 star, thats rough. 3 or 4 yea. More accurate. Its brutal difficulty might actually appeal to people. Its a blessing and a curse, if your good, you may just enjoy this game alot in short doses. It's very simple overall...a slightly more complex "I must run". If your not good at this game, you'll get frustrated and probably never want to play it again. The controls are perfectly fine I don't understand what your problem is with the controls, it's the gameplay and muddled visuals that hurt a game that is all about reflexes. I do agree with that.



Windy said:

Well I just read Nintendo world Report who gave this game a pretty good review. So there are 2 very different oppinions on the game. From the Videos the game looks pretty neat but looks to be very repetative as most of these Running games are. I may still pick it up since its a cheapy. But anyone who has downloaded this, give us your 2 cents on what you think. I will be back after I try it out. We do already have a couple of Conflicting reports above.

Also guys if the reviewer hated the game he hated the game thats his oppinion. Just because he didnt like it doesn't mean everyone in the world will dislike the game. I've seen alot of reviews over the years that I did not agree with but came to realize it's all subjective and not everyone will agree.

I would like to know why every single game in the Eshop has a good rating. Cause there is seriously some bad games in the Eshop that are not worthy of a good rating. But if you will notice every single game is rated good. Even Planet Crashers which to me is close to one of the worst games ever made and definately left me feeling ripped off at 9.99



LittleIrves said:

I think we're all missing the big picture here.... Jon says the game is "demanding carnal knowledge" from the player. Isn't that illegal outside of Paris?



bhornburg said:

This game is at least a 5/10, as it blows away the snore inducing Bird Mania 3d by a mile. The art is great and the gameplay has a bit of depth to it. Actually having a health bar is kinda cool for an endless runner, and collecting coins to fuel your invulnerability power is a nice game mechanic, even if it is implemented rather poorly here. Sadly, the game suffers from some poor design choices and a general lack of polish in regards to the controls and player messaging.

However, you could do a lot worse for an endless runner on the 3ds. If you're really interested in this game, I would read some of the other online reviews. This review seems to have been written more to entertain than to inform.



Windy said:

@bhornburg Thanks for the heads up review. im going to give this game a whirl this weekend if I can drag myself away from Cave Story and The Denpa Men. The Artwork and The Graphics look to be this games strong point.



OptometristLime said:

@Windy - hope you enjoy it!

The game is artificially difficult, but the controls are smooth and the game play fluid enough that I keep coming back for more (punishment).



blacKnight said:

@undead_terror haha! You made a better review than Mr. Rant "Jon", all he did was rant about how bad the game is but never told why. You pointed out all of what's there in the game that we are about to feel unworthy of our purchase. But for $2? Man I would love to try it!



Windy said:

@thelastlemming Im usually not into these runner type games but would love to see HarmoKinght localized and will give this a shot sometime tonight or tommorrow. Also guys I do alot of whining around here but I love Nintendo LOL

Jon if you read this Dont take some of the insults Directed at you personal. Man the game was just not good in your oppinion and people have to realize thats just you. Even if I like the game I'm not going to bury you or your review. I probably wont like it much myself as the runner games drive me nuts



Windy said:

Ok I downloaded and tried the game. Been playing it now for a few hours off and on and you know what I found out? I stink! I mean if you can find the worst runner type of guy to play this game it wouldbe my old 47 year old bones lol. I find the game to be kind of fun. However the 3d background scrolls could have been much nicer. The game could have been very cool lookin with probably minimal effort by extending the length of the scrolls instead of having just 2 houses and 2 hills fly by in the backgrounds. Levels 2 and 3 are no better although it is cool the way the levels seemlessly flow into one another. Controls seem pretty tight but you are going to take some cheepo hits. I guess thats the norm pretty much for runners. Once you get the invincible power up and super speed power up you can really cover some ground and tear up your enemies. This part of the game is pretty neat. Now the floor spears are just wrong! You run 2 miles piled up coins and dodged everything and bam your dead by getting ran through by a floor spear. Omg I got probably 20 games of Samurai G in and that single death floor spear is the most annoying thing. I thought the guys in the bamboo hang glyders looked cool and the ninjas throwing stars at you looked cool. The music in the game sets the mood for this type of game. I will probably play this game again and see if I can beat my wopping 3.32 miles lol. I think im just not fast enough anymore but will try. Personally I would give this game a 4 out of 10 and will Eshop rate it a 2 or 3 star although my vote wont matter anymore since the system is wacked somehow and 99% of the games have 4 stars. But there is some fun to have here but it will get annoying if you play long stretches



Windy said:

I just thought of something. Is this really part of Nintendos quality over quantity campaign? Nope I think not. Some people will enjoy this game but definately not a quality peice of software so Jon you are correct each week im going to beat that likea dead horse as we get bad release after bad release. Of course I wont do that to a good peice of software like Cave Story or if we get HarmoKnight and who knows HarmoKnight maynot be that great but it looks good



NintendoCat14 said:

UFO... why do you try? BTW, can't wait to see your review on Jonny Hotshot, the sequel to Jonny Kung Fu XD



Foot77 said:



Anyway, it all depends on opinion, I mean, could imagine if EVERY review ended in 'But that's just my opinion, completely ignore my professional opinion, and possibly waste your $60( just a number, because that's the standard price for console games), and see if you like it yourselves'. Heck no, reviews are to express professional opinions( opinions of people who know what to look for in games).

That being said, i might completely disregard Jon's opinion.



2Sang said:

This game is actually better than average, I'd say a 7/10 plus it's only $2. It's got probably $10 worth of fun. Whatever your guys beef is with UFO I don't get it. Some of their games are crap like chuckecheese, but they must not be paying you like other companies or something. Johnny Kung Fu was decent and so is this game, but you rate them lower than below average.



WinterWarm said:


Your comment irritated me and because I have no life I'm going to reply to it a near total year later.

A 5 by NL's standards is average, while a 7 to GameInformer is average. It all varies on scoring policy, personal opinion, genre, etc.

The best thing to do is find a reviewer who's opinions are close to yours. That's the way you get the most dependability out of reviews.

Also, screw UFO.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...