I'm having trouble reconciling these 9/10 and 10/10 reviews with the demo I played. While I know that not every genre and game appeals to everyone, I feel that 9+/10 games basically should transcend genre preferences and appeal to a wide audience because of their quality, and so I'm left wondering if the demo just doesn't capture what is special about the game. I played the demo three times to make sure, but I just didn't find the combat compelling, nor the slice of narrative or characters I saw. Maybe the demo just wasn't good at presenting the game?
That's exactly what I go into in my review. When I first played the demo and realized it wasn't Bayonetta 3, I was kind of like "oh". And then, getting through that and the beginning of the game, I felt like it wasn't really going to be a great game.
It grows, though, like a pot coming to boil. It doesn't hit right away, but it starts getting its hooks into you. And, bit by bit, you start to realize that it's going to be a better game than you expected. And then, it does to make you briefly go back to that "oh" feelings—but then it pulls you back in, and ramps up ever more.
There's plenty of games that I've played where I knew of their quality or had a good feel for what to expect in the first hour, if not 15 minutes. This absolutely isn't one of those games.
Though, I should also say I totally disagree with your idea of what a 9/10 should be, because then at that point you could—for example—have the greatest flight simulator that's ever been produced, but not be able to give it a score on that level because your average person won't care about flight sims. I've heard that point argued by some outlets over the years, and I've always thought it was BS.