GhostWriter24
Member
I wonder if this game is going to be the Folklore of the early-PS4 age. Looked back on kindly, but very harshly judged initially.
They focused on making a movie out of a game and forgot to write a good script for it.
That is the worst sin you can really do with it. Heavy Rain at least had a good script.
I always want bad games to fail. If bad games don't fail, it means they're probably succeeding. And if they're succeeding, there is a good chance that it's going to influence other games and possibly make them bad as well. You should want bad games to fail.
I'm not saying people should be jumping up and down the aisles with joy, but I find it hard to get mad at someone for being enthused that a terribly short game with very little to offer in the way of game play is in fact being called out for what it is. That's the last place I want video games to go and if it's a bad game, I want people to be as ruthless to it as possible.
It's a lot better then the alternative, where we all pretend like something isn't bad just so the feelings of the people making it won't get hurt.
Your agenda seems to be to twist scepticism and criticism into something bad, which negativity would imply.
The real truth is that the "80s/90s/early-2000s" scale is made up, rose-tinted bullshit. The modern scale is the way that is has always been (with some exaggeration for comedic effect, of course).
There should be space in the video game business to make products which are targeted to excel in the visual presentation so they can be judged on those merits alone. Why should such visual masterpieces be tied down by expectation of people who do not understand the true goals of the product. I read many fans wanting to pick this game up based on how it looks so is there no rating system that protects the desires of said fans to be able to take pride in their purchases and know they're receiving a top-rated visual experience without it being dirtied by the expectation of people who don't appreciate the goes of presentation the product has set for itself? I don't know man... I just feel for people who are getting bummed out by these reviews and treated like what they want from the product is a mediocre gaming experience when what they want is in fact an excellent visual experience. If a game says its a platformer then we shouldn't attack it for not being a RTS and in the same right, if a game says its visually stunning then we shouldn't attack it for gameplay. People are even recommending not to purchase this game hence victimizing people who pre-ordered it. Its rather insensitive to come out and tell people not to buy something they've put money towards... AFTER THE FACT. No one likes to be judged for their purchasing decisions so this judgmental atmosphere at the very least seems rather anti-consumer. Aren't media supposed to be on the consumer's side? Finally on the idea that the product is too short... a good product should leave you wanting more. Like when people say you've overeaten when you feel bloated and you should stop eating when you feel you are about to get full.. in essence, you should be wanting more before you stop eating; this is the proper way. Overeating will make you obese and there's nothing good about that so why are we trying to promote over-gaming like its something healthy. The Order should be commended for not piling on the fat with unnecessary content, variety, game length and extra modes and collectable. It cares about the consumer's gaming health. Judged based on its visual fidelity and respect for consumer health, I'd give the order a 9.7 out of 10 but Metacritic won't carry my review on the "reviewer" section so I'll leave it here and I ask journalist to be kinder with their review. We need more products like the order. Dare I say it... I'd like to The Order another one of these!
They didn't. The reviewer did, the others just came along for the ride. I give up anyway. I see that demanding any form of respect for journalists is a big no-no, as long as they're bashing the subject of the day.
And I didn't set up any false dichotomy, you did.
RAD is still independent isn't it? So why is everyone worried that they're shutting down? it's just one "bad" game.
I hope he stays off twitter/doesn't talk to the press for a while, TB gave some good advice IMO http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1skov0u
Considering that his way to legitimize his views was something to the effect of "lol its a movie, I watched it on YouTube," I don't feel like he has a great perspective on the game. I don't mind hearing legitimate criticism, but the "YouTube" stuff is ridiculous.Come on, now. I mean, the guy has a bit of a point. Look at the metacritic page for the game. Here you go. It currently sits at a Metacritic score of 65. However, thst number is being vastly inflated by fansites and bloggers, not the sites commonly trusted when it comes to reviews. For as much as some people want to talk about websites having bias against Sony exclusives, they don't want to dismiss Sony fansites that have given the game top-marks.
Ultimately, what you think of the game is up to you, but if metacritic went based on professional sites only, and not fansites, the score would be significantly lower.
So essentially this is back lash for them calling the Internet bullies?
That's what I get out of the Super low scores
I wonder if this game is going to be the Folklore of the early-PS4 age. Looked back on kindly, but very harshly judged initially.
Quarterbacks don't get letter grades. Would you like a surgeon messing up what kind of drug he needs to use 41% of the time?
And blocked. :/
Resistance,Uncharted and Ratchet were all great and came out within the first year of the PS3
That is never the answer.
In the event that anyone from RAD is reading...I think you forgot the "game" part of your "video game". Well, if anyone at your company has any brains at all, you'll know to just quit.
I started to watch the GT review, and I had to stop. Because I'm at work. And boobs happened.
A warning would have been nice, GT.
Neither is The OrderResistance and Ratchet are not 1st party, they're Insomniac.
I wonder if this game is going to be the Folklore of the early-PS4 age. Looked back on kindly, but very harshly judged initially.
Is it? I think if there were great gameplay here people could have looked past a "bad script". This is what happens when game developers forget which medium they are working in.
This happens all of the time. Do you think that there are no current studios that have made bad games in the past? A company going under isn't the only alternative to a game being bad and getting panned. If that were the case we would have significantly less video game studios then we have.Actually, no not really. Cause if a bad game does good, there's always a chance to try again. The alternative being the company in question goes under and any attempt to fix past wrongs is gone. It's not like if a game fails they go: "Oh darn, we'll try again next time."
There will be no next time. Which I guess for a lot of gamers is perfectly fine.
What. Did I say criticism is bad? So now your putting words in my mouth? Greeat. Sorry, but there was hardly any scepticism happening. Oh there was it, and it's perfectly fine- but it appears people are rewriting most of the hate that has been spewed as secpticism.
Good point.Didn't they take like 5 years ot make this game?
they just spent 5 years on this game and they are independent
I hope he stays off twitter/doesn't talk to the press for a while, TB gave some good advice IMO http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1skov0u
Neither is The Order
There should be space in the video game business to make products which are targeted to excel in the visual presentation so they can be judged on those merits alone. Why should such visual masterpieces be tied down by expectation of people who do not understand the true goals of the product. I read many fans wanting to pick this game up based on how it looks so is there no rating system that protects the desires of said fans to be able to take pride in their purchases and know they're receiving a top-rated visual experience without it being dirtied by the expectation of people who don't appreciate the goes of presentation the product has set for itself? I don't know man... I just feel for people who are getting bummed out by these reviews and treated like what they want from the product is a mediocre gaming experience when what they want is in fact an excellent visual experience. If a game says its a platformer then we shouldn't attack it for not being a RTS and in the same right, if a game says its visually stunning then we shouldn't attack it for gameplay. People are even recommending not to purchase this game hence victimizing people who pre-ordered it. Its rather insensitive to come out and tell people not to buy something they've put money towards... AFTER THE FACT. No one likes to be judged for their purchasing decisions so this judgmental atmosphere at the very least seems rather anti-consumer. Aren't media supposed to be on the consumer's side? Finally on the idea that the product is too short... a good product should leave you wanting more. Like when people say you've overeaten when you feel bloated and you should stop eating when you feel you are about to get full.. in essence, you should be wanting more before you stop eating; this is the proper way. Overeating will make you obese and there's nothing good about that so why are we trying to promote over-gaming like its something healthy. The Order should be commended for not piling on the fat with unnecessary content, variety, game length and extra modes and collectable. It cares about the consumer's gaming health. Judged based on its visual fidelity and respect for consumer health, I'd give the order a 9.7 out of 10 but Metacritic won't carry my review on the "reviewer" section so I'll leave it here and I ask journalist to be kinder with their review. We need more products like the order. Dare I say it... I'd like to The Order another one of these!
I wonder if this game is going to be the Folklore of the early-PS4 age. Looked back on kindly, but very harshly judged initially.
Maybe the game reviewers reviewed the game.
This happens all of the time. Do you think that there are no current studios that have made bad games in the past? A company going under isn't the only alternative to a game being bad and getting panned. If that were the case we would have significantly less video game studios then we have.
In the world of AAA game development one bad game can sink an entire studio.
You're not the first to suggest this, but you're every bit as wrong as everyone else who suggested it. The success of Walking Dead and TLOU illustrates that the press/media are very open to those types of games. The Borderlands story-driven game just released to much higher acclaim than the traditional shooter Borderlands title.
I think the most damning thing is that it took 5 years of development.
Now either there was a lot of internal development issues or the people in charge (Sony) were negligent and let RAD 'realise their vision' completely unabated.
I applaud the risk taken, because releasing a single-player only game that can be beaten in an evening is utterly insane.
Well, it's sometimes the answer, but you're just not supposed to tell the other person.
Wow, TB is a real douche.
Killzone and Infamous on PS4 weren't great either,Uncharted 1 still shits all over the first party PS4 exclusives released so farWhich makes the concern about Sony's studios all the more odd, since RAD is not owned by them.
Considering that his way to legitimize his views was something to the effect of "lol its a movie, I watched it on YouTube," I don't feel like he has a great perspective on the game. I don't mind hearing legitimate criticism, but the "YouTube" stuff is ridiculous.
Yep. When developers take risks to do something different and fails, gamers mock them and trash their 3-5 years worth of work.
When developers don't take risks, play safe and just make another generic zombie/dude-bro shooters, gamers whine and complain about them.
This is why we can't have nice things.
I hope he stays off twitter/doesn't talk to the press for a while, TB gave some good advice IMO http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1skov0u
Yep. When developers take risks to do something different and fails, gamers mock them and trash their 3-5 years worth of work.
When developers don't take risks, play safe and just make another generic zombie/dude-bro shooters, gamers whine and complain about them.
This is why we can't have nice things.
What I don't get is why someone from Sony or Sony Santa Monica did not step in earlier. There has been bad impression of this game from the very start, so why did someone not step in and try change it? Surely they should have known that the game was not getting well recieved from what they had shown us.
What. Did I say criticism is bad? So now your putting words in my mouth? Greeat. Sorry, but there was hardly any scepticism happening. Oh there was it, and it's perfectly fine- but it appears people are rewriting most of the hate that has been spewed as secpticism.
For everyone acting like this is a developer funeral
Mistakes happen. Studios recover. Life goes on.