But you haven't played it? More accurately, it's a shit playthrough of a game you watched on youtube
What's funny is that even the youtuber who uploaded the playthrough said it was worth playing.
But you haven't played it? More accurately, it's a shit playthrough of a game you watched on youtube
No that isn't what that means.
Haha I mean, it's a shit game. Imo not nearly worth the price. But to each his own. If thats your prerogative then go for it
So because someone says "They're super into writing" and yet didn't even finish the Youtube video to see where the "writing" takes them, they're free to say the story is crap? If you don't see what's wrong with that post, I don't have much I could say to you that would persuade you differently.What exactly is wrong with his post?
How do you know is a shit game? Have you actually, you know, played it?
Cinematic games never had anything to do with player agency. Games like Bioshock, LA Noire, GTAV, God of War are all cinematic. Cinematic means the games presentation shares similarities with movies or has an emphasis on spectacle, not that the game literally plays like watching a movie and is full of interactive cutscenes.
Cinematic was a term that was used before games like Heavy Rain or Uncharted were a thing. Not sure why people seem to have changed the meaning.
Or you could just wait for the physical release and buy the movie for $20+. Then all that other crap is obsolete.
*looks at the chart* Should remove that watermark
Is it? What other games would you put in the company of The Order?
To guess from these impressions I think of The Order like a shorter Max Payne 3, with more direct moment-to-moment action than something like Beyond: Two Souls. Thats just a gut sense from the impressions I've read but it still seems short.
Then please, explain.
Vanquish. Though if the combat in The Order is as tight as that...I wouldn't care if it was 2 hours.
I don't think that's what he means. The person is rather general. It also doesn't make sense. If it's the same guy, why does it matter if it's reputable or not? If I can see the chapters and their numbers to go along with each video, then how is that any different than a media outlet doing it?
Congratulations, you've just discovered that Gaussian (normal) distribution describes the statistical preference of any given human crowd quite accurately.but as the chart shows, preferences can vary among individuals
Surely you can see that the cinematic element in Heavy Rain and The Order is of a totally different quality than say BioShock. Oh and at one time sprite graphics was the pinnacle of visual quality. Definitions change. Especially with fast moving technology.Cinematic games never had anything to do with player agency. Games like Bioshock, LA Noire, GTAV, God of War are all cinematic. Cinematic means the games presentation shares similarities with movies or has an emphasis on spectacle, not that the game literally plays like watching a movie and is full of interactive cutscenes.
Cinematic was a term that was used before games like Heavy Rain or Uncharted were a thing. Not sure why people seem to have changed the meaning.
But you haven't played it? More accurately, it's a shit playthrough of a game you watched on youtube
Vanquish wasn't interspersed with cutscenes that interrupt the flow of combat.
More accurately, the game looked pretty, but not at all fun. It was boring, but a different boring then something like Ryse which I played. Ryse, also a super pretty game, was boring because you were doing the same thing over and over and over again: blocking and spamming X and doing QTEs.
I asked the other poster, too, but why do you think his thoughts about the story would change if he had been holding the controller instead of simply watching it?
What exactly is wrong with his post?
Well, regardless of the semantics you should be able to see how distinct Bayonetta is from Uncharted.
And there is nothing inherently wrong with <insert term denominating this type of game> and in fact I played tons of Uncharted 2 but I think the difference in games is pretty big and pretty obvious.
As a rather educated bankruptcy attorney who handles chapter 11 business reorganization and capitalization, I do not see a tiered pricing scheme as being a bad thing, or even something that would necessarily be implemented in the alpha portion of the game. Pricing is largely determined by the publisher, and happens as a result of what the board of directors for the publishing house feel they can get for the game. The idea that a developer determines pricing is wrong and shows a disconnect with business. The only way a developer impacts price decisions are how effective and efficient they are at producing content on a budget.
A tiered pricing system would be good for consumers, since it would hold publishers more accountable for their bottom line, and it would increase marketplace competiveness. We would see publishers asking developers to consolidate efforts and not overspend on certain things. (Like spending too much on voice actors by the line and not having enough capital for more worthwhile stuff. DESTINY I am lookin at you kid.)
What would be nice is if Congress passed a consumer protection reform that required board of directors to post production costs on each units clearly on the outside of the package, so we consumers would know just how much they are ripping us off.
Not that this is necessarily happening in this case.
You can also purchase a battery in your cartridge with the 8K of program RAM so it will be persistent (i.e., you can save your game) and you can purchase a timer interrupt if your product needs it for sound or special video tricks. Each of these cartridge extras raises the production price of your cartridge by a couple of dollars. If you plan to sell a hundred thousand or more cartridges, a couple of extra dollars per cartridge can really add up to lots of lost profit so usually you need to design your game to keep the cost as low as possible.
Programming MC Kids by Gregg Iz-Tavares and Dan Chang
What would be nice is if Congress passed a consumer protection reform that required board of directors to post production costs on each units clearly on the outside of the package, so we consumers would know just how much they are ripping us off
Amidst all the hand wringing and head shaking, I think we need to acknowledge that the developers have chosen to present the game in this way. What I mean by that is it would have been very easy to artificially extend the length of the game as many TPS's do by simply having wave based enemy encounters. By keeping the encounters short and tight they will have prioritised the pace and exposition of the story. The entirety of the debate and cyclical arguments will be very subjective for each person, and we won't really be in a position to comment until we've played it. I'd rather the game was honest and the developers confident enough to present it as so. But just let's wait and give it a chance instead of potentially harming what could be a very good experience.
Oh nvmMore accurately, the game looked pretty, but not at all fun. It was boring, but a different boring then something like Ryse which I played. Ryse, also a super pretty game, was boring because you were doing the same thing over and over and over again: blocking and spamming X and doing QTEs. The Order was super boring because the player just doesn't really do anything. He does a lot of walking from one cutscene to another, and there's hardly even any ambient dialogue like in Last of Us or Bioshock. The gameplay in The Order just seems super lame to me, and the story's nowhere good enough to make that experience worthwhile. Story fluctuates between cliche and boring. It's funny, because the game looks the most lifelike game I've ever seen, but the story is so shallow and bland that the game feels like one of the most lifeless I've ever seen.
I consider opinions of people who didn't play games themselves but base their own judgement on videos made by somebody else to be useless. Those opinions are useless for me, not videos. There are multiple reasons why watching a game being played and playing it yourself aren't the same thing or even close. There's a different perception of time and immersion in both cases, different engagement and so on. That's why people still play games, not just watch them, which you can do now for free anytime. Do I really need to explain those things in a gaming forum? I'd think it should be obvious to people who consider gaming a hobby.
And to refer to what you said, I also find media outlet's impressions and reviews useless for similar reasons. They play games on easy, rush through them and generally do it because it's their job, not a hobby. They also mostly get those games for free. All that changes attitude and perception of what they assess and I find those very far from my own experiences. Game reviews are just a waste of time for me, I even once made a thread about it where some people agreed (and others disagreed).
Watching someone play is not the same as playing. Seriously, what's wrong with his post? Aside from making assumptions about a game for which he doesn't own the platform its being released on. How do you judge a game's story, when you personally are not being immersed in the game itself? I saw a bunch of people play Journey and I thought it was a bore. When I finally got my hands on the game, it turned out to be one of my favorite PS3 games.
I still think you simply can't criticize a videogame without playing it. One thing is to say that it's not your thing, or that it doesn't interest you, but to flat out say it's crap without even playing is just plain idiotic.
length isn't a big factor. Journey was like 2 hours and one of the best games ever. It's like people here have never heard of quality >> quantity.
if you want 100 hours of generic filler play skyrim. The order is for those that appreciate a finely crafted experience.
I consider opinions of people who didn't play games themselves but base their own judgement on videos made by somebody else to be useless. Those opinions are useless for me, not videos. There are multiple reasons why watching a game being played and playing it yourself aren't the same thing or even close. There's a different perception of time and immersion in both cases, different engagement and so on. That's why people still play games, not just watch them, which you can do now for free anytime. Do I really need to explain those things in a gaming forum? I'd think it should be obvious to people who consider gaming a hobby.
And to refer to what you said, I also find media outlet's impressions and reviews useless for similar reasons. They play games on easy, rush through them and generally do it because it's their job, not a hobby. They also mostly get those games for free. All that changes attitude and perception of what they assess and I find those very far from my own experiences. Game reviews are just a waste of time for me, I even once made a thread about it where some people agreed (and others disagreed).
length isn't a big factor. Journey was like 2 hours and one of the best games ever. It's like people here have never heard of quality >> quantity.
if you want 100 hours of generic filler play skyrim. The order is for those that appreciate a finely crafted experience.
Again, just giving my thoughts on a game that a lot of people are on the fence about getting, and for good reason. No one has to take my advice, but I don't know why you would blindly defend the game purely on the developer's word. My opinion is that it's not a good game, but who knows, maybe some of you will like it and there's nothing wrong with that.
Watching someone play is not the same as playing.
I bought into this garbage and watched TLoU on YouTube instead of playing it. Then I got the remastered a few months ago. The feeling and impact of the cutscenes was wholly different when I was engaged with the content.That's probably because Journey is 100% about your personal experience with the game. It's not mostly cutscenes that show you a story. You make the story by playing it. You can't say that with a game like the order. It is what it is. Now, him calling it a bad game without playing it is bullshit, but his opinions on the story within the game are valid (even if I ultimately end up disagreeing with them). You don't need to be holding the controller to really "experience" a cutscene.
Wow, GAF. Wow.
I'll be back after I've, you know, *played* the game myself and can form my own opinions. You all have fun now
Double, triple, quadruple wow.
The posting quality of some juniors recently is really baffling. Dude already admitted that they don't even own a PS4. +1 to the ignore list.
Your opinion cannot be that the game is not good because you haven't played it. Your opinion can be that you think it looks like it might not be good,mout that's about it.
I bought into this garbage and watched TLoU on YouTube instead of playing it. Then I got the remastered a few months ago. The feeling and impact of the cutscenes was wholly different when I was engaged with the content.
Engaging in any part of a game without playing it creates a major disconnect from how it was meant to be experienced. It's an inferior manner of consumption and gives you no real right to judge a game.
Imru al-Qays;152343095 said:The only part of The Order that people actually need to play to have an opinion about is the least important part: the gunplay. The Order will rise or fall on the back of its cinematic presentation, and that's something that you can absolutely judge from watching a YouTube video, in the same way that you could judge a film by watching it on your laptop.
That's probably because Journey is 100% about your personal experience with the game. It's not mostly cutscenes that show you a story. You make the story by playing it. You can't say that with a game like the order. It is what it is. Now, him calling it a bad game without playing it is bullshit, but his opinions on the story within the game are valid (even if I ultimately end up disagreeing with them). You don't need to be holding the controller to really "experience" a cutscene.
Is this seriously where we're at?
I bought into this garbage and watched TLoU on YouTube instead of playing it. Then I got the remastered a few months ago. The feeling and impact of the cutscenes was wholly different when I was engaged with the content.
Definitely. I was in the process of making a similar post but the thread is moving too fast for me while I'm at work lolI bought into this garbage and watched TLoU on YouTube instead of playing it. Then I got the remastered a few months ago. The feeling and impact of the cutscenes was wholly different when I was engaged with the content.
Threads about exclusives are always the best, when do the reviews come out by the way?
Is this seriously where we're at?
That's the least important? Really? Christ.