The Order: 1886

[Shifty Geezer]

The problem is that these days even reviews aren't all that helpful...

Reviews means all reviews, including gaming press, users, YouTubers, etc. That's where cautious buyers can get a reasonable estimate, from research, as to whether a game will suit them or not. Those more indulgent in their hobby and more open to spending on experiences can act like you and be their own judge. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

I preorder The Order 1886. If the game is not very good, I will at least be impressed by the graphics and maybe play a good story.

After Drive Club reviews I only have confidence to player "review" from forum like B3D.

Cannot agree more. B3D is my review site now, reviewers have all gone bonkers with bias from their personal expectations and deadlines to review the game. They seem to have no fun while reviewing a game. Driveclub is the best example ever, Destiny second, Wolfenstien third, etc, etc ,etc.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

Killer graphics !

 

[L. Scofield]

There's a difference between something "looking" not fun to play, and something actually not being fun to play. For me, I'd rather reserve judgement until I've got the disc in my PS4 and the controller in my hand. Not sure how you can make a criticism about how any game plays based solely on short 2-3 mins videos...

We have much more than that, plus the impressions of people who have indeed played it. Also, this is a very typical type of game. If you have any experience with the genre you can tell by all the footage they've shown so far whether those mechanics will be fun or not.

I thought Knack looked vapid and dull to play, but I bought the game and had an absolute blast with it. A surprising amount of stretegy was required to the gameplay, despite the simple mechanics.

Tl;DR - don't be too hasty to judge a book by its cover.

I could be wrong, but then again the Edge preview agrees that the game is very lacking in variation and replayability so I doubt it. There's also precedent in that changing the type of enemies midway through the game doesn't improve it but quite the opposite. Happened in both Far Cry and Crysis. If the human enemies aren't particularly fun to engage with I wouldn't put high hopes in the monsters.

Uncharted don't show its monster, and that was necessary for the story. Spoilers.

Don't those usually appear pretty much at the end of the games? I don't that's the case here. Although in this case RAD already showed them so what they're hiding right now is the gameplay of those encounters, not the monsters themselves.

Killer graphics !

I wish they would have shown more of the actual tech. Pretty much everything they said was already known from presentations they've given. Seeing Gallahad without any blurring was interesting, though.

 

[Scott_Arm]

The well lit interior areas do not look nearly as good as the areas with more dramatic lighting. The visuals still really appeal to me.

 

[Prophecy2k]

We have much more than that, plus the impressions of people who have indeed played it. Also, this is a very typical type of game. If you have any experience with the genre you can tell by all the footage they've shown so far whether those mechanics will be fun or not.


I could be wrong, but then again the Edge preview agrees that the game is very lacking in variation and replayability so I doubt it. There's also precedent in that changing the type of enemies midway through the game doesn't improve it but quite the opposite. Happened in both Far Cry and Crysis. If the human enemies aren't particularly fun to engage with I wouldn't put high hopes in the monsters.


Don't those usually appear pretty much at the end of the games? I don't that's the case here. Although in this case RAD already showed them so what they're hiding right now is the gameplay of those encounters, not the monsters themselves.


I wish they would have shown more of the actual tech. Pretty much everything they said was already known from presentations they've given. Seeing Gallahad without any blurring was interesting, though.

But it's all been subjective presumptions. I look at the gameplay footage and it looks fun to me. You do and you come away with a different impression. Point is, you can just as easily change your mind when you play it (that goes for the gaming media too).

Even media impressions have been mixed. But fundamentally, there's been so much slant and bias against this game in the media, that I can't find any media impression useful or believable at this stage.

Some NeoGaf gamers got to play it at PSX, and they came away with prevailingly positive impressions. So a stark contrast to the gaming media that seem more like they have an axe to grind than anything else with this title.

Eitherway, it's just be dumb to make you mind up conclusively about a game you haven't played, that you've seen barely anything of, especially one that has so much sh!tflinging and fanboyism surrounding its launch. At least wait until there's more gameplay footage out before making your mind up about things like the game design and how fun the combat design and enemy encounters are.

 

[Scott_Arm]

So saying negative things is slant and bias that makes media impressions useless, but what about all the glowing press? Is it equally as useless? If someone has issues with the game, from the released information, or from having played it, then that's how they feel. Are they supposed to just stay silent? If so, then people shouldn't be allowed to write nice things either. If anything, some negativity in previews from "access journalism" is a sign of a healthy gaming press.

Anyway, I think the game looks great, both from a graphical and gameplay standpoint. Maybe I shouldn't write that.

 

[DrJay24]

Just wait for it to come out. Right now we have a group of people who can play it argueing with people who can't play it.

You're free to disagree with my predictions and my reasoning behind them.

You have spent a dozens pages shitting on this game, you seem to have some personal vendetta. Why so much time and energy posting about a game you seem to have little interest in, do you have a console to it play on or is it just fun to spread negativity?

 

[L. Scofield]

You really are working overtime to dismiss all and every negative opinions on this game. So a few Neogaf users liked it. Big deal. Doesn't refute anything specific I said about the game.

*sigh*

 

[Prophecy2k]

So saying negative things is slant and bias that makes media impressions useless, but what about all the glowing press? Is it equally as useless? If someone has issues with the game, from the released information, or from having played it, then that's how they feel. Are they supposed to just stay silent? If so, then people shouldn't be allowed to write nice things either. If anything, some negativity in previews from "access journalism" is a sign of a healthy gaming press.

Anyway, I think the game looks great, both from a graphical and gameplay standpoint. Maybe I shouldn't write that.

This strawman needs to be shot dead. Nowhere did I say slant and bias was expressed through previews being negative about an unreleased game. If you'd read any of my previous posts in this thread then you'd realise that we've gone over this before and that's not what I'm arguing.

Previews that spend paragraph after paragraph ranting about things as if they are inherent negatives, which do not even get a mention in other games in the same genre, are what i find slanted and useless. Similarly tirades like the Game Central preview which brely actually says anything about the game but spends more time raving about the developer's PR statements and why "cinematic" and "story" in games is the devil, is what I'm talking about.

 

[Prophecy2k]

You really are working overtime to dismiss all and every negative opinions on this game. So a few Neogaf users liked it. Big deal. Doesn't refute anything specific I said about the game.

*sigh*

Same logic can be applied to your stance.

"You really are working overtime to dismiss all and every positive opinion on this game. So a few VG journos disliked it. Big deal. Doesn't refute anything specific I said about the game."

 

[chris1515]

The game was in Paris Game week and some friends play it and tell me it is a classical gameplay but a pretty good one. A short demo is not enough for have an idea about the game.

I just hope there is a photo mode.

 

[L. Scofield]

Previews that spend paragraph after paragraph ranting about things as if they are inherent negatives, which do not even get a mention in other games in the same genre, are what i find slanted and useless. Similarly tirades like the Game Central preview which brely actually says anything about the game but spends more time raving about the developer's PR statements and why "cinematic" and "story" in games is the devil, is what I'm talking about.

So if there's nothing inherently negative with the things they mentioned then it follows there is nothing inherently positive about them either. They have an opinion on the game based on what was shown to them and what they got to play. What's wrong with that? Are negative evaluations forbidden?

Same logic can be applied to your stance.

"You really are working overtime to dismiss all and every positive opinion on this game. So a few VG journos disliked it. Big deal. Doesn't refute anything specific I said about the game."

Except I don't. I don't dismiss other people's opinions as invalid and worthless like you do.

 

[Prophecy2k]

So if there's nothing inherently negative with the things they mentioned then it follows there is nothing inherently positive about them either. They have an opinion on the game based on what was shown to them and what they got to play. What's wrong with that? Are negative evaluations forbidden?

Except I don't. I don't dismiss other people's opinions as invalid and worthless like you do.

What's wrong with dismissing a person's opinion when the opinion expressed is irrelevant to the actual game in question?
Journo X, rants about how he hates story in games. That's his opinion. It means nothing to me because I quite enjoy story in games.
The whole point of impressions is to give actual information about a game to inform gamers. So if you follow a different definition and value negative rants about things tangental to the actual subject of the preview then that's you.
I on the other hand I will freely dismiss or listen to opinions that I find useful or not. And I won't feel bad about it.
This isn't some wierd moral debate...

 

[L. Scofield]

What's wrong with dismissing a person's opinion when the opinion expressed is irrelevant to the actual game in question?
Journo X, rants about how he hates story in games. That's his opinion. It means nothing to me because I quite enjoy story in games.
The whole point of impressions is to give actual information about a game to inform gamers. So if you follow a different definition and value negative rants about things tangental to the actual subject of the preview then that's you.
I on the other hand I will freely dismiss or listen to opinions that I find useful or not. And I won't feel bad about it.
This isn't some wierd moral debate...

I don't know, Edge's negative opinions seem very relevant to the game to me. Sounds more like you don't like negative opinions of things you do like.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I don't know, Edge's negative opinions seem very relevant to the game to me. Sounds more like you don't like negative opinions of things you do like.

Haven't read the edge preview, and if they give criticisms about the actual game then they're useful and I would never argue against them.

I don't understand why you are trying so hard to play the "haha you're a fanboy" card when it's so clear that I'm not actually dismissing anyone's genuine criticisms about the game, rather just expressing a bit of frsutration with the extreaneous sh!t that seems to populate previews and discussion about this game that isn't really founded on any sort of logical or rational basis (e.g. claims that the level of gameplay interactivity will be as limited as games like Heavy Rain, when clearly it's a typical third person shooter).

If anyone is trying hard at anything here it's you.

 

[L. Scofield]

You keep dismissing mine, which actually only mirrors Edge's.

 

[MrFox]

So, it has come to this.

 

[Lightman]

You keep dismissing mine, which actually only mirrors Edge's.

New Mirrors Edge? When

[pun intended]

 

[L. Scofield]

New Mirrors Edge? When

[pun intended]

Next year of course