Barack Lesnar
Banned
Mind...blownIt's just occurred to me that the window on the cover of Beyond Earth is a hex.
Mind...blownIt's just occurred to me that the window on the cover of Beyond Earth is a hex.
So because you saw the future and don't think halo 5 is a good game, or think that Halo 4 which had a really fun MP doesn't deserve any high scores, or titanfall that means that no one else does and anyone journalist who gives it a positive review is paid? What?Or instead of making that claim, you could I dunno, refute it with some evidence? Oh but wait, that won't work - because you don't have any. IGN consistently proves that the bigger the game, the more they're going to hype it up, because not surprisingly they're paid to do so. As I said, most mainstream gaming sites are nothing more than PR tools for developers and publishers.
I don't think there's a single person here who would argue, for example, that Halo 5 was the best game in the series. In fact, most people hate the changes to the MP (I don't) and feel like it destroys what they love about Halo. What did IGN have to say on the matter?
9.8 - Amazing
Really? Because as far as I could tell the sandboxes weren't even as impressive as Halo 3s, much more linear with only a few paths.
What? Did they completely ignore that out of nowhere appearance of the Didact...or the shitty QTE sections...or the constant button pressing?
Very few Halo fans were happy with how the MP turned out...and yet IGN acted like it was the best thing since sliced bread.
They lost their objectivity a long time ago...because as I said they are nothing more than a PR mouthpiece. All you need to do to get a glowing review is throw down some money, which is what the big publishers do.
Where IGN is concerned, yes. This is the same site that hyped that mediocre garbage Titanfall to the high heavens over and over again. They exist as a PR mouthpiece, plain and simple.
And to be fair, the Order could end up going on either way, I am not disputing that. I am disputing that anyone should believe anything IGN says because their opinion is always going to be biased - based on their history.
And this should tell me all I need to know about trying to argue with someone like you.
Or instead of making that claim, you could I dunno, refute it with some evidence? Oh but wait, that won't work - because you don't have any. IGN consistently proves that the bigger the game, the more they're going to hype it up, because not surprisingly they're paid to do so. As I said, most mainstream gaming sites are nothing more than PR tools for developers and publishers.
I don't think there's a single person here who would argue, for example, that Halo 5 was the best game in the series. In fact, most people hate the changes to the MP (I don't) and feel like it destroys what they love about Halo. What did IGN have to say on the matter?
9.8 - Amazing
Really? Because as far as I could tell the sandboxes weren't even as impressive as Halo 3s, much more linear with only a few paths.
What? Did they completely ignore that out of nowhere appearance of the Didact...or the shitty QTE sections...or the constant button pressing?
Very few Halo fans were happy with how the MP turned out...and yet IGN acted like it was the best thing since sliced bread.
They lost their objectivity a long time ago...because as I said they are nothing more than a PR mouthpiece. All you need to do to get a glowing review is throw down some money, which is what the big publishers do.
Where IGN is concerned, yes. This is the same site that hyped that mediocre garbage Titanfall to the high heavens over and over again. They exist as a PR mouthpiece, plain and simple.
And to be fair, the Order could end up going on either way, I am not disputing that. I am disputing that anyone should believe anything IGN says because their opinion is always going to be biased - based on their history.
And this should tell me all I need to know about trying to argue with someone like you.
Once again people - the Order could turn out to be the worst game of 2015, I can't dispute either way until it comes out. But IGN has shown themselves to be on a whole different level of PR nonsense since last gen...hence why I tend not to trust anything they say.
So because you saw the future and don't think halo 5 is a good game, or think that Halo 4 which had a really fun MP doesn't deserve any high scores, or titanfall that means that no one else does and anyone journalist who gives it a positive review is paid? What?
Or they could be people with opinions. The reason I laughed at you was because all too often when "x" game gets bad previews, fanboys come out in droves to defend it and trying to find an excuse to why it previewed badly hence " I guess they are upset they didn't get paid"
It's a stupid notion based on nothing but personal feelings.
Honestly, I think we'll be hearing the same stuff until release. They've been downplaying the gameplay since its announcement and focusing on story/visual fidelity because Sony and RAD think that that is what makes the Naughty Dog games so successful. If the gameplay isn't mind-blowing, then why show it?
No one knew exactly how the entirety of The Last of Us played or was paced until the weeks leading up to release and the reviews. I don't mind Sony being secretive, but they aren't exactly building up hype the way they should to the "hardcore".
Let me fix that for you, boss:
Biggest mistake was having The Order be single player only. Gears of War had longevity because of its multiplayer, and Gears fans are hungry.
Trash, buzzfeed level article title. We need saved you a click for gaming.
Well, sorry to say that to you, but judging by this thread, you're incompetent, corrupted, didn't receive Sony's check, biaised as hell by criticizing gameplay on this demo, I may miss something...
Honestly, I think we'll be hearing the same stuff until release. They've been downplaying the gameplay since its announcement and focusing on story/visual fidelity because Sony and RAD think that that is what makes the Naughty Dog games so successful. If the gameplay isn't mind-blowing, then why show it?
No one knew exactly how the entirety of The Last of Us played or was paced until the weeks leading up to release and the reviews. I don't mind Sony being secretive, but they aren't exactly building up hype the way they should to the "hardcore".
Turned out i'm also a horrible person and that my straw hat doesn't look good on me ;_;
Honestly, I think we'll be hearing the same stuff until release. They've been downplaying the gameplay since its announcement and focusing on story/visual fidelity because Sony and RAD think that that is what makes the Naughty Dog games so successful. If the gameplay isn't mind-blowing, then why show it?
No one knew exactly how the entirety of The Last of Us played or was paced until the weeks leading up to release and the reviews. I don't mind Sony being secretive, but they aren't exactly building up hype the way they should to the "hardcore".
Maybe if it was a money hat instead...
Not really surprised, but you know what? IGN's critiscm isn't fair because most AAA games, especially shooters, will be like this.
Turned out i'm also a horrible person and that my straw hat doesn't look good on me ;_;
Isn't he talking about a build from about 6 months ago (the segment shown in February and on the show floor at E3)?
Biggest mistake was having The Order be single player only. Gears of War had longevity because of its multiplayer, and Gears fans are hungry.
This seems like nonsense to me: generalization to the point where a reaction to a game "isn't fair." There's nuance that separates quality between action games. Little things about the "feel" of game mechanics are really important, which is why hands-on reactions are so much more revealing than trailers.
The NeoGAF thread of responses from people in the community who had a chance to play the Order at Gamescom had a lot of people with the same feeling.
We have seen a grand total of one single gameplay scene...
Gears fans bought/will buy an xbox.
Honestly, I think we'll be hearing the same stuff until release. They've been downplaying the gameplay since its announcement and focusing on story/visual fidelity because Sony and RAD think that that is what makes the Naughty Dog games so successful. If the gameplay isn't mind-blowing, then why show it?
No one knew exactly how the entirety of The Last of Us played or was paced until the weeks leading up to release and the reviews. I don't mind Sony being secretive, but they aren't exactly building up hype the way they should to the "hardcore".
I can't really get mad about the gameplay since RAD themselves have pretty much said that they were focusing on the visuals and atmosphere. Remember that gameplay quote?
It's clear that this game is a graphical showcase for the PS4, so if we keep our expectations in check, maybe we'll like this game. At least, that's how I'm gonna look at this title going in.
I hit a satellite on my way to the Phantom Zone. The impact freed me.
Its cool they're supporting the passion. I just think Sony need to be careful of what projects they sign. You don't see MS signing a FPS based around humans vs Aliens as they have Halo.
I don't know why it's acceptable for games to have gameplay take the backseat.
The graphics will stop being amazing four years from release anyway.
I don't know why it's acceptable for games to have gameplay take the backseat.
The graphics will stop being amazing four years from release anyway.
The difference between you and the IGN guy is that youTurned out i'm also a horrible person and that my straw hat doesn't look good on me ;_;
I have never seen anybody use a hyphen there before.
Even worse than e3 with the same demoI'm starting to get worried. This sounds even worse than the things we've heard from E3. I still hope that it won't completely suck since I really like the horroresque art style and setting.