Support NeoGAF

[NullPointer]

So Halo Nightfall is a cutscene for Halo 5?

I'm only being slightly facetious, but I think it's equally facetious to dismiss the Quantum Break episodes as cutscenes. As I've said, they exist to tell a separate story using different characters, but is situated in the same universe. That isn't the function of most video game cutscenes.

But isn't this separate story using different characters affected by player choices made in-game? And isn't that the core idea behind Quantum Break? They don't sound all that optional or secondary or somehow removed from the game.

Maybe cut-scene isn't exactly the right word, but they're a part of the game experience, not something separate like Forward Unto Dawn or even something embedded but tangential like the Halo terminals. They're to some effect player driven.

 

[Alienous]

You've been doing a lot of hand wringing and goalpost moving to not call these cutscenes. They're pretty much cutscenes IMO, and most people seem to be calling them that as well. Insisting they're not cutscenes is what Remedy's PR has been doing, but it just comes off as disingenuous and a way to put a "cool" spin on what they're doing.

Call them what you want, I'm just saying I disagree. I don't think cutscene is the right way to describe them.

 

[WordsintheWater]

The criticisms are shown along with video evidence. It's a fine review in that sense.

Adding my own, I found the game to be extremely uneven.

- The TV show ranged overall from bad to terrible. You can see some of the scenes in his video; The scenes with Charlie in particular are incredibly bad.

- The Game/TV/Game/TV/Game format is a hinderance to the game. There's no sense of pacing or purpose for the interruptions. It adds nothing to the game.

- The platforming is awkward, stilted and entirely unnecessary.

- Combat is the saving grace of the game: Punchy, fun, varied, interesting.

- The story is forgettable.

- The level design is hyperlinear, predictable and unremarkable. Nothing stands out, save for the impressive-looking setpieces.

- Which leads to another cardinal sin: The setpieces have unremarkable gameplay, because it typically focuses on exactly the bad platforming.


Eh. It's a very solid and fun shooter wrapped in bad decisions. There is a period in the game where the shooting saved it and I was very excited about playing it -- I didn't even want it to the end. Eventually, it just plain fell apart IMO.

Hit the nail on the head of how I feel about this game. After Max Payne and Alan Wake, this is a few steps below.

 

[Gravy Boat]

So Halo Nightfall is a cutscene for Halo 5?

I'm only being slightly facetious, but I think it's equally facetious to dismiss the Quantum Break episodes as cutscenes. As I've said, they exist to tell a separate story using different characters, but is situated in the same universe. That isn't the function of most video game cutscenes.

No because it's totally seperate from the game. It isn't interested between sections of gameplay. I can watch nightfall without playing Halo 5. It was developed specifically for tv. Nightfall isn't affected by choices I make in Halo 5.

It doesn't matter if most cutscenes don't fall into your narrow definition, most people would call any in game footage inbetween sections of gameplay a 'cutscene'.

If it exists to tell a story about different characters then do it somewhere else, not inbetween segments of gameplay. Like a I said before, keep it seperate or integrate it properly.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

So Halo Nightfall is a cutscene for Halo 5?

I'm only being slightly facetious, but I think it's equally facetious to dismiss the Quantum Break episodes as cutscenes. As I've said, they exist to tell a separate story using different characters, but is situated in the same universe. That isn't the function of most video game cutscenes.

It's a cutscenes which happens to be FMV. It might be a different take on cutscenes, the way it focuses on other characters, but it's still a cutscene

It's a non interactive section of a game that tells a story. To me that's a cutscene

 

[jjgzee]

It's just his opinion. I disagreed with his take on Halo 5 as well. Halo 5 had its problems, but it wasn't a 6/10 imo. And while Quantum Break is no masterpiece, it's still a great game. I wouldn't give it any less than an 8.

But I was listening to his review and I agree with some of his points. The TV show is pretty lame. Compared to a lot of TV shows currently on, it's actually better, but compared to quality shows on TV right now (Better Call Saul, Game of Thrones, House of Cards etc) it's pretty bad.

 

[Alienous]

It's a cutscenes which happens to be FMV. It might be a different take on cutscenes, the way it focuses on other characters, but it's still a cutscene

It's a non interactive section of a game that tells a story. To me that's a cutscene

We can all call it whatever we want. My only point in saying it isn't a cutscene is that it's unlike what we would typically call a video game cutscene. It's a 20+ minute, fast-forward and rewindable episode of a story that runs in parallel to the story of the main game, but focuses on a different cast of characters. So if that fits your definition of cutscene, sure, but I think that's dismissive to what it is and what it tries to accomplish.

 

[Gestault]

I disagree, I don't need to play it to know whether or not I think 20 minute episodes at the end of each chapter is something I'll enjoy, especially in the age of YouTube where I can extensively check out a game before buying it. I'm not talking about a gameplay decision here, this is something I can easily come to a decision on without playing since the part Im talking about doesn't actually involve playing.

I don't want to oversimplify what you're saying, but it does sound like the crux is a 20-minute story segment is too long to be justifiable in a videogame. And part of why you're finding confusion/disagreement from some people who played it is because they thought it was successfully done.

I'll talk in theoreticals, just because of how you're coming at it. A lot of action games hang on that razor's edge of feeling a bit monotone with the frequency or pacing of action sequences. I think that alone is the justification for why an approach like this could be successful, and it would be precisely in a way that wouldn't translate to watching the game passively on Youtube.

Which types of live-action sequences follow/precede which types of gameplay is part of their design. The showcased NPCs are three-dimensional, which matters to the game by the last act. If the presentation didn't respect the player's time, I'd be more understanding of categorically dismissing them, but the game works without them (and allows you to watch them at your leisure), and my experience tells me the game works better with them. If you simply injected that same information all into the central gameplay, I think it would risk feeling superfluous (or at least long-winded) in a way this avoids.

 

[Gravy Boat]

We can all call it whatever we want. My only point in saying it isn't a cutscene is that it's unlike what we would typically call a video game cutscene. It's a 20+ minute, fast-forward and rewindable episode of a story that runs in parallel to the story of the main game, but focuses on a different cast of characters. So if that fits your definition of cutscene, sure, but I think that's dismissive to what it is and what it tries to accomplish.

It tries to accomplish the same thing every cutscene does by teaching the player things they otherwise wouldn't know. The specifics on what it focuses on aren't what defines it as a cutscene. It being a non-interactive segment of an otherwise playable game is what would lead most people to call it a cutscene.

 

[Alienous]

It tries to accomplish the same thing every cutscene does by teaching the player things they otherwise wouldn't know. The specifics on what it focuses on aren't what defines it as a cutscene. It being a non-interactive segment of an otherwise playable game is what would lead most people to call it a cutscene.

You're oversimplifying it.

But as I said, call it whatever you want.

 

[Gravy Boat]

You're oversimplifying it.

But as I said, call it whatever you want.

Actually I think most people would agree that you're over complicating it.

 

[SomTervo]

Yeah, ridiculous. The shooting is what makes the gameplay so damn fun. I just heard from my friend that he says Alan Wake and Max Payne are much better with it. I suggest Joe fires up Max Payne then, because the shooting in QB is MUCH better, lol.

Idk, i think Max Payne's encounter design and actual shooting is better - but QB has better mechanics and AI and near-comparable encounter design

You're oversimplifying it.

But as I said, call it whatever you want.

I suppose in Greecious's defence, the original definition of "cutscene" was just "scene which cuts away from gameplay".

Mainly playing Devil's Advocate here, but the episodes literally are cutscenes. I don't see them like that, but they literally are.

 

[Alienous]

Actually I think most people would agree that you're over complicating it.

Ok, so it exists somewhere between 'just a cutscene' and 'not just a cutscene'. So, not just a cutscene.

 

[Messofanego]

Still haven't had a chance to see it completely. Can someone tell me if Joe played the game how it is meant to be played or did he screw up how he played by just thinking it is a cover shooter?

The latter

 

[Gravy Boat]

Ok, so it exists somewhere between 'just a cutscene' and 'not just a cutscene'.

Can you give me any other example of a non-interactive scene in a game, that you watch to learn more about the game, that isn't a cutscene?

 

[papo]

But I was listening to his review and I agree with some of his points. The TV show is pretty lame. Compared to a lot of TV shows currently on, it's actually better, but compared to quality shows on TV right now (Better Call Saul, Game of Thrones, House of Cards etc) it's pretty bad.

See that's the thing I don;t like a lot about recent Joe reviews. Whenever he tackles story it seems that he and I have a pretty different view of things.

I know the TV show was not quality. Nothing in gaming is as good in quality when you compare it to the shows you mention. GoT is good, but not even that great in quality of story sometimes. Not even TLOU or Witcher 3 come close to something like Breaking Bad. And that is not a bad thing.

I don't think anyone came into the game and story thinking it was going to be as good as those. I think realistically if you expected a decent SciFi quality show then that's what you got and that's where I disagree with Joe. It seems that for Joe if the story is not top notch or perfect then it is crap. I can enjoy Breaking Bad, but I can also enjoy the cheesy one season TV show on SciFi that got cancelled because it was good, just not great.

And that's why I really don't take his review into account. His tastes are just to impossible to satisfy sometimes. He expects everything to be of TLOU quality and that's not doable. I loved what we got and to me it is a solid 7.5/10. Even though it is his opinion 5/10 seems harsh. The game is not that bad. 5/10 means it fails completely at what it wanted to do and that is just not true.

What I would really like to know is if Joe played the game correctly and if that affected the review at all.

The latter

Damn...This is what I feared. I remember when I started the game I was playing incorrectly until I saw a post from one of you guys here and then everything changed. This is not a cover shooter at all. It just happens to have cover. A shame that he did not review the gameplay properly. He should go back to address that.

 

[Gator86]

Yeah, ridiculous. The shooting is what makes the gameplay so damn fun. I just heard from my friend that he says Alan Wake and Max Payne are much better with it. I suggest Joe fires up Max Payne then, because the shooting in QB is MUCH better, lol.

Genuinely dumbfounded by this. Almost every gun in the game, save the carbine and shotgun, feels like absolute trash to shoot.

 

[Alienous]

Can you give me any other example of a non-interactive scene in a game, that you watch to learn more about the game, that isn't a cutscene?

Can you give me an example of several non-interactive scenes in a game that focus on developing a story tangential to, but existing in the same universe as, the story that constitutes the main narrative of the experience?

It's a fairly unique thing. It tells a different story and focuses on different characters. There's no reason why it must be considered a cutscene, and all I'm arguing is that it can be viewed as something different. Not that it has to, but that it can be.

 

[Bear Force One]

Sorry, can't agree. I question the sanity of anyone who thinks this game sucks. Talk about horrible taste.

He thinks it's average. I question the sanity of people who think their opinion has more weight than others.

 

[Osahi]

So Halo Nightfall is a cutscene for Halo 5?

I'm only being slightly facetious, but I think it's equally facetious to dismiss the Quantum Break episodes as cutscenes. As I've said, they exist to tell a separate story using different characters, but is situated in the same universe. That isn't the function of most video game cutscenes.

Nightfall is not mixed into a Halo game. It is separate.

i don't agree the 'show' tells another story, if it was, it could be watched stand alone to. It needs the game to work, that makes it cutscenes. You can argue about it, but it is not because the show has scenes could have been cut (most of them any way) without hurting the logic of the story they are not cutscenes.

Apart from the fact they are live action, there is nothing that can define the show as an actual tv-show. A tv-show, like I said, should be able to stand on it's own. Like American Dream can, and just like (i supose, because i didn't watch it) Nightfall can.

 

[Gravy Boat]

And that's why I really don't take his review into account. His tastes are just to impossible to satisfy sometimes. He expects everything to be of TLOU quality and that's not doable. I loved what we got and to me it is a solid 7.5/10. Even though it is his opinion 5/10 seems harsh. The game is not that bad. 5/10 means it fails completely at what it wanted to do and that is just not true.

That's not what 5/10 means. It means average. Middle of the road. Not bad but no great.

 

[Gravy Boat]

Can you give me an example of several non-interactive scenes in a game that focus on developing a story tangential to, but existing in the same universe as, the story that constitutes the main narrative of the experience?

It's a fairly unique thing. It tells a different story and focuses on different characters. There's no reason why it must be considered a cutscene, and all I'm arguing is that it can be viewed as something different. Not that it has to, but that it can be.

So you're going to avoid the question then?

Can I watch the FMV scenes in QB and get a coherent plot from start to finish without needing to play any of the actual gameplay? Everyone else seems to say no, so it's odd for you to argue like you are that its seperate from the main plot line.

 

[JP]

IMO it is a good game. It has a cheesy SciFi quality story that works if you are into that kind of stuff. The gameplay is fun, specially using the powers. Cover sucks, but it really isn't a cover shooter. It's not amazing, but it is a good and fun experience in line with other Remedy games.

I really enjoyed it; the majority of reviews have been positive. Definitely watch his and look at others as well. If you didn't like past Remedy games then there's a strong chance you probably won't enjoy this as well since it has that distinct Remedy flavor. I'd at least rent it or try it if you know someone that owns it though.

It's not perfect and it has some flaws, so it really depends if these flaws affect your enjoyement of games.

Personally I think it's really good game.

Thanks, I will catch up with what it's being doing, I think I've just let it slip by because it's a Remedy game and to me it looks like it is. I'm in no way saying they make bad game as I know people love them but they've just never worked for me.

Maybe it'll be worth me picking up down the line when it's had a decent price cut or too. We'll see.

 

[Alienous]

So you're going to avoid the question then?

I'm pointing out that it's a loaded question, but if you want an answer, how about behind the scenes videos. Cutscenes?

It's a pointless question, because you're comparing a fairly unique, new concept using terms that weren't created to describe it. And I say call them whatever you want, I just think calling them cutscenes is an oversimplification. Quantum Break has cutscenes that fit the mold of what a video game cutscene traditionally is, and it also has the episodes, which don't.

Can I watch the FMV scenes in QB and get a coherent plot from start to finish without needing to play any of the actual gameplay? Everyone else seems to say no, so it's odd for you to argue like you are that its seperate from the main plot line.

It is separate. The game exists separately from the episodes, but the episodes do not exist separately from the game. That's why they are 'on' the disc, in-between chapters of the game. You get a full game without watching the episodes, but you don't get a full season of a television show without playing the game.

 

[Osahi]

Can you give me an example of several non-interactive scenes in a game that focus on developing a story tangential to, but existing in the same universe as, the story that constitutes the main narrative of the experience?

It's a fairly unique thing. It tells a different story and focuses on different characters. There's no reason why it must be considered a cutscene, and all I'm arguing is that it can be viewed as something different. Not that it has to, but that it can be.

A lot of games show cutscenes away from the main characters story. For instance the bad guy view. There is also the quantic dream games (fahrenheit and heavy rain) telling stuff from different sides, allthough they are offcourse playable. But the idea is quite the same (qb would have profited of making the show story playable for parts imo)

Yes, QB goes pretty far in it by giving the sidestory lots of screen time, but it doesn't make it unique, nor does it mean the cutscenes it uses to tell it are something else then cutscenes. Let alone it being innovative. Qb is actually very old fashioned in it's way it tells its story.

 

[jiiikoo]

I haven't played QB but I have a question, can you skip these episodes or do you have to watch them?

 

[Nowise10]

I haven't played QB but I have a question, can you skip these episodes or do you have to watch them?

You can skip them. I wouldn't recommend it, however.

 

[sheepishlord]

im not sure if anyone has seen this but this was posted in the OT about the cover system, From dev that worked on the game.

Re cover:

Yes, Jack will automatically "duck" when near cover, but I don't think that makes the game a cover shooter. At least, not to me. Is *insert another well-known TPS here* a CQC game because you can melee attack characters? It’s one player verb of many. We added the automated (passive) cover system so that Jack doesn’t seem, well, incompetent. Being able to take cover is now an established player verb in third person shooters, I honestly think removing our lite version of it would of annoyed more people than having it.

That said, it does look like we could of done better pushing players out of cover, or encouraging players to use their movement based powers more.

Interesting fact; we actually did have a blindfire / hipfire option in the game for a very long while – to finish it would of cost X (a lot) amount of time and resource and we felt that a: people wouldn’t use blindfire (internal and external testing showed that no one used it) and b: we wanted to spend that resource on something else.

 

[Osahi]

I'm pointing out that it's a loaded question, but if you want an answer, how about behind the scenes videos. Cutscenes?

It's a pointless question, because you're comparing a fairly unique, new concept using terms that weren't created to describe it. And I say call them whatever you want, I just think calling them cutscenes is an oversimplification. Quantum Break has cutscenes that fit the mold of what a video game cutscene traditionally is, and it also has the episodes, which don't.



It is separate. The game exists separately from the episodes, but the episodes do not exist separately from the game. That's why they are 'on' the disc, in-between chapters of the game. You get a full game without the episodes, but you don't get a full season of a television show without the game.

How can you actually refer to behind the scenes videos? That is in no way comparable to the QB 'show'

And the fact the show is not self contained makes it cutscenes. I'm dure you can cut lots of stuff oit of mgs4s very long cutscenes without hurting the story, but you can't watch them on their own as a tv-show.

 

[Gravy Boat]

I'm pointing out that it's a loaded question, but if you want an answer, how about behind the scenes videos. Cutscenes?

It's a pointless question, because you're comparing a fairly unique, new concept using terms that weren't created to describe it. And I say call them whatever you want, I just think calling them cutscenes is an oversimplification. Quantum Break has cutscenes that fit the mold of what a video game cutscene traditionally is, and it also has the episodes, which don't.



It is separate. The game exists separately from the episodes, but the episodes do not exist separately from the game. That's why they are 'on' the disc, in-between chapters of the game. You get a full game without the episodes, but you don't get a full season of a television show without the game.

There's nothing fairly unique about it. It's not the first game to have cutscenes focused on side charaters and events happening elsewhere. The MGS series is full of them. Hell MGS IV even has some live action stuff that doesn't directly relate to the main plot but instead is just there to set the tone. Behind the scenes clips aren't an apt comparison because they're not usually (ever?) interjected inbetween gameplay sections and they aren't there to further the narrative.

If you don't get a full show without the game then they can't be seperate. You're contradicting yourself by saying they're seperate then saying you can't enjoy the show without the game. They're affected directly by what you do in the game (but again that's nothing new). There are choices you need to make specifically to effect what happens in these cutscenes. They're anything but seperate. They're connected, just poorly.

 

[-COOLIO-]

Disappointed with this review, especially on the gameplay front.


Angry Joe's criticisms of the gameplay in Quantum Break, I found to be in general pretty weak and surprisingly lacking examples or proof when he's usually good at this (hence why his video reviews are half-hour lengths). I'm agreed with the lack of hip firing and inconsistent platforming in terms of what you can climb but the stuff with the doors (dude spends 3min on invisible walls lol) is just some of the weakest criticism ever and can be applied to every videogame in existence as no videogame is perfect on invisible walls. Apparently invisible walls now equals "stinks of lazy level design" and the game "not sticking to its own rules". I didn't find myself wrestling with the camera. I didn't find the gunplay stiff, and he doesn't even give an example of these couple of criticisms. This is his argument he uses to support the "gunplay is not very good" criticism: "it's a cover-based shooter without a cover system!!!" (who ever said it was a cover based shooter? The game never does nor did any of the creators in interviews). His example of "dumb AI" is literally focusing on 1 grunt enemy with the weakest pistol from far away who doesn't want to come close while he's behind a rock. If the default AI is not good, how come he couldn't find at least more than 3 examples than just this one? Most of the time, the enemy will flush you out of cover and they're pretty darn good in general. "But in the videogame, It'll take 15 clips (huh?) to kill the dudes [referring to Striker enemy]", but it takes less than a clip from the front

, and fewer shots if you flank them from the back to hit the backpack, or just one shotgun shell from the front.

But from all the footage of him playing the game, he plays it conservatively like a cover shooter from afar rather than making use of the mobility system. Honestly believe Angry Joe played it like a cover shooter cause he just got done with The Division and was still in that mode of playing a thirdperson shooter.

I would disagree about "the lack of emotional impact" and counter with all the focus on Beth, especially in Act 4. I don't want to spoil it but the way how the plot goes backwards and develops her quest, then how it figures into the ending, left an impact on me as much as Alan Wake. Now, I would have loved if there was more than just one character who I cared that much about, but the Beth stuff is some of the most involving work in a Remedy game.

I did like the Wee Man and clone bits in this review

"playing it wrong" is a criticism that often comes up in reviews of reviews and it's invalid to me. if a game isn't fun to play intuitively without special out-of-game coaching then that's a problem with the game itself.

 

[FuturusX]

Interesting fact; we actually did have a blindfire / hipfire option in the game for a very long while – to finish it would of cost X (a lot) amount of time and resource and we felt that a: people wouldn’t use blindfire (internal and external testing showed that no one used it) and b: we wanted to spend that resource on something else.

Hmm.

So a hip fire feature was in place for a long time, but focus testers didn't like it and it would be have been expensive to finish developing. More so because nobody used it.

Thanks focus testers.

 

[Alienous]

.

Look, I get it. I'm just saying they don't fit the bill as 'just' cutscenes to me. It's a trivial topic, and it's just becoming a semantics argument.

Fine. To you they are just 20+ minute cutscenes. I find that reductive, you don't.

Anyway, I'm done discussing it.

 

[Gravy Boat]

Look, I get it. I'm just saying they don't fit the bill as 'just' cutscenes to me. It's a trivial topic, and it's just becoming a semantics argument.

Fine. To you they are just 20+ minute cutscenes. I find that reductive, you don't.

Anyway, I'm done discussing it.

If it's so trivial then why did you feel the need to bring it up anytime someone called it a cutscene as if it somehow made a difference to the point they were trying to make?

 

[Alienous]

If it's so trivial then why did you feel the need to bring it up anytime someone called it a cutscene as if it somehow made a difference to the point they were trying to make?

I now see that it's trivial. I was only expressing my opinion, as someone who has played the game, that 'cutscene' didn't seem like the right kind of label for it.

But look, you won. I'm done. You wore me out. Your winners medal is in the post, and it should arrive in 7-12 working days, but drop me a PM if it gets lost in transit.

 

[UrbanDandy]

Yeah, ridiculous. The shooting is what makes the gameplay so damn fun. I just heard from my friend that he says Alan Wake and Max Payne are much better with it. I suggest Joe fires up Max Payne then, because the shooting in QB is MUCH better, lol.

Joe's thoughts on the shooting mechanic was that he couldn't ''shoot fro the hip." Unfortunately I don't have the game, so I can't make any critiques myself.

 

[KORNdoggy]

I now see that it's trivial. I was only expressing my opinion, as someone who has played the game, that 'cutscene' didn't seem like the right kind of label for it.

But look, you won. I'm done. You wore me out. Your winners medal is in the post, and it should arrive in 7-12 working days, but drop me a PM if it gets lost in transit.

Aka "i'm taking my ball and going home"

Lol.

 

[D20CritMiss]

How does this thread go 17 pages?

Dude clearly didn't grasp core concepts of the gunplay. Dude clearly engaged in click seeking activities even before the review was live, laying out the juicy bait for fanboys both for and against Xbox. And I'm not sure how anyone takes him as anything more than jerry springer level gaming based entertainment.

There's other real problems with his "review" but those above are enough.

Also, why is this it's own thread? What makes this special compared to say any of the 8s or 9s?

Joe's thoughts on the shooting mechanic was that he couldn't ''shoot fro the hip." Unfortunately I don't have the game, so I can't make any critiques myself.

I'm not sure why he'd want to shoot from the hip, its the aiming in that triggers the "focus time" and focus time is the most key part of the combat. Joe just didn't get it, and needs to "git gud".

 

[jjgzee]

See that's the thing I don;t like a lot about recent Joe reviews. Whenever he tackles story it seems that he and I have a pretty different view of things.

I know the TV show was not quality. Nothing in gaming is as good in quality when you compare it to the shows you mention. GoT is good, but not even that great in quality of story sometimes. Not even TLOU or Witcher 3 come close to something like Breaking Bad. And that is not a bad thing.

I don't think anyone came into the game and story thinking it was going to be as good as those. I think realistically if you expected a decent SciFi quality show then that's what you got and that's where I disagree with Joe. It seems that for Joe if the story is not top notch or perfect then it is crap. I can enjoy Breaking Bad, but I can also enjoy the cheesy one season TV show on SciFi that got cancelled because it was good, just not great.

And that's why I really don't take his review into account. His tastes are just to impossible to satisfy sometimes. He expects everything to be of TLOU quality and that's not doable. I loved what we got and to me it is a solid 7.5/10. Even though it is his opinion 5/10 seems harsh. The game is not that bad. 5/10 means it fails completely at what it wanted to do and that is just not true.

What I would really like to know is if Joe played the game correctly and if that affected the review at all.

True. That's the thing, though. When I sit down for around 30 minutes and watch a tv show, I want the story to be really good. That's why I don't watch anything but a select few shows that I think are exceptional. The reason why Quantum Break's tv show was weak to me is because I got into that tv mode when watching it. If developers expect me to sit through a 30 minute episode, I'm going to judge it like any other TV show.

The thing with TLOU and TW3, their cutscenes are short and to the point. Imo, if any developer is going to bother making live action television shows, they should strive for excellent quality. Imo, the tv show was decent, but it's a weak part in an otherwise great game. I enjoyed the in-game cutscenes more.

 

[Gravy Boat]

I now see that it's trivial. I was only expressing my opinion, as someone who has played the game, that 'cutscene' didn't seem like the right kind of label for it.

But look, you won. I'm done. You wore me out. Your winners medal is in the post, and it should arrive in 7-12 working days, but drop me a PM if it gets lost in transit.

Sweet, thanks.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Hahaha his issue with the trash can had me dying I remember thinking that exact same thing.

I have to go back to 1988 where some guy had that trash can out.

I thought the game was more enjoyable than Angry Joe but all his criticisms are pretty valid. Except I really liked the combat.

 

[Dabanton]

"playing it wrong" is a criticism that often comes up in reviews of reviews and it's invalid to me. if a game isn't fun to play intuitively without special out-of-game coaching then that's a problem with the game itself.

But it is fun to play intuitively. With the powers they give you, the game is basically telling you to use constant movement and attack as defence. With the bare minimum of seeking cover.

Same sort of thinking is in games like Vanquish or Max Payne 3 which many people did play 'wrongly'.

Some gamers are hardwired into always seeking cover trying to pick off enemies one by one. Getting rushed and fucked up, then frustrated.

Sometimes people are just shit at games with or without a clear explanation of the in game systems.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

But it is fun to play intuitively. With the powers they give you, the game is basically telling you to use constant movement and attack as defence. With the bare minimum of seeking cover.

Same sort of thinking is in games like Vanquish or Max Payne 3 which many people did play 'wrongly'.

Some gamers are hardwired into always seeking cover trying to pick off enemies one by one. Getting rushed and fucked up, then frustrated.

Sometimes people are just shit at games with or without a clear explanation of the in game systems.

Yeah the game does everything it can to discourage you from using real cover. I don't understand how he locked into playing it that way for so long.

Also 5 hours seems dubious. You would have to be really rushing to beat it in that amount of time.

 

[shandy706]

"playing it wrong" is a criticism that often comes up in reviews of reviews and it's invalid to me. if a game isn't fun to play intuitively without special out-of-game coaching then that's a problem with the game itself.

You're really not going to like the Souls games/threads.

Can't comment on Quantum Break, but the design in the Souls games forces you to engage with and master the mechanics. "Playing it wrong" will usually end up with you dying.

Same with QB on anything above easy...maybe even on easy.

(Example = Me - Died 7 times in 16 hours in QB. Other Players - Some died 30 to 250+ times (yes 250+!) in the same or less time. In fact going through other guys I know played it, they seem to have died a good 50 - 90 times)

I'm sure you could just fudge your way through it eventually, unlike Souls. LOL

I wouldn't be having fun either if I died 80 times in a single play-through...sounds rough.

I'm on my second play-through and I'm at 18 deaths. A few come from being stupid and trying stuff out/messing around, and a good 8 came from the boss fight.

 

[zsynqx]

You're really not going to like the Souls games.

Can't comment on Quantum Break, but the design in the Souls games forces you to engage with and master the mechanics. "Playing it wrong" will usually end up with you dying. (speaking about your average player here, not people like lobos who can beat the game without healing and using fists only)

 

[kitschykitty]

That's a bingo

 

[Markitron]

That's a bingo

Lol, I was just asking for this earlier in the thread, is this new?

 

[16BitNova]

Want to watch but, is this review spoilery?

 

[aravuus]

That's a bingo

Shockingly many hits

You must have made this for this thread

 

[kitschykitty]

Shockingly many hits

You must have made this for this thread

Yup, also inspired by the halo 5 thread.