Playing it, loving it! Wish it had more freedom to explore and items to pick up and use. I don't mean open world, but like TLOU where you go around searching rooms and looking around.
And holy shit when you first put in this game.. That first chapter.. Felt like I was playing CG! I couldn't believe my eyes. Wow.
No it's not. Maybe a reviewer here and there has an axe to grind or something, but overall they are professionals who have reviewed many, many games. It's what they do.
No it's not. Maybe a reviewer here and there has an axe to grind or something, but overall they are professionals who have reviewed many, many games. It's what they do.
The conception that a review about a video game isn't colored by emotion or bias is impossible. Any game review is an opinion piece by its very nature. we choose to follow reviewers because they have opinions we generally share, or they extrapolate from parts in the game in an interesting way maybe we didn't. Saying you trust a reviewer because they are professionals, and less biased than most gamers is complete bullshit. We follow reviewers because we like their opinions, not because we think they are more qualified to give them.
The conception that a review about a video game isn't colored by emotion or bias is impossible. Any game review is an opinion piece by its very nature. we choose to follow reviewers because they have opinions we generally share, or they extrapolate from parts in the game in an interesting way maybe we didn't. Saying you trust a reviewer because they are professionals, and less biased than most gamers is complete bullshit. We follow reviewers because we like their opinions, not because we think they are more qualified to give them.
Sorry I didn't clearly explain. I was up for 30 hours busy with other stuff and have was not playing the game at the time. I bought the game digitally so I started when it went live.
The conception that a review about a video game isn't colored by emotion or bias is impossible. Any game review is an opinion piece by its very nature. we choose to follow reviewers because they have opinions we generally share, or they extrapolate from parts in the game in an interesting way maybe we didn't. Saying you trust a reviewer because they are professionals, and less biased than most gamers is complete bullshit. We follow reviewers because we like their opinions, not because we think they are more qualified to give them.
They sure have a lot less emotional investment than Gaffers who preordered the game months ago. Plus, it's more or less a press consensus, which is rare for a game like this. I won't trust any positive impressions in the OT (Bar a few regulars who are known to be well versed in critical thinking) until the honeymoon period is over. Which should be by Monday given how short and unreplayable the game is. Negative reviews are more trustworthy.
No it's not. Maybe a reviewer here and there has an axe to grind or something, but overall they are professionals who have reviewed many, many games. It's what they do.
Its not about that, it is about being human and relating a subjective experience. We aren't talking about vacuum cleaners or dog food, it is entertainment and everyone experiences it subjectively.
This whole debate revolves around a flawed premise: reviews are in whole or in part objective; and it's collary, metacritic is a reflection of objective worth. And the reason this is a problem is that most reviewers pretend to have an objective insight into the worth of a game. It gives them authority and status and legitimizes their work. It is also deceptive and cowardly. Listen to Jeff Gertzman to see what I mean.
I get that people like numbers and want to know the consensus; and have a need to organize information, make judgments, and look for patterns. And for that, metacritic has worth. But when someone uses it as an objective yardstick instead of a disparate collection of subjective experiences, as if games were cell phones or microwave ovens, that's when things like this thread happen.
And if you have trouble understanding this, re-read the above, but replace 'game' with 'music'.
If you ask any of them, the story usually begins with "I liked videogames and I knew this guy...". These people aren't professionals, nor did they train for the job.
I've never written a detailed review for a game, so I'm still feeling my way through it. Forgive me if it isn't professional quality
MINOR SPOILERS BELOW
Let's cut straight to the chase. The Order 1886 is a missed opportunity on so many levels. Not in the sense that it didn't deliver what I wanted the game to be. It didn't even deliver what RAD promised. Other than their obvious focus on story, setting, sound, graphics and art, here's what we were led to believe when the game was revealed:
Awesome futuristic weapons
Shoot werewolves in the face with a lightning gun
Experience overwhelming numbers of these aggressive creatures in open/semi-open arenas where they would surround & flank you and your squad and use their ability to climb as an advantage against you
Crowd-control them with the thermite rifle
Did I mention shooting werewolves in the face with a lightning gun? Yeah...
Do any of those sound like an unreasonable expectation based on that trailer? When they revealed it, I was fucking hyped by its potential. As time progressed, we were introduced to the "rebels" and the amount of marketing around the half breeds became increasingly scarce. Every piece of media that came out focused on the rebels with the odd werewolf sighting. Every gameplay reveal had lukewarm to cold reception, because it showed nothing that stood out like the original reveal. "Oh RAD is holding so much back because of spoilers", "Oh Sony's marketing sucks. RAD deserves better", "Oh stop hating on the game, wait till it's out". We all found ways to keep that hope alive. Myself included. But it had reached a point where I started being a passive reader on those threads. There was nothing to say because nothing really was being shown. My hype had hit a plateau. Then I got to play it at PSX and found that they had nailed the gunplay, the most criticized aspect of the game. So all hope was not lost. Now that I've played the entire game, I should be hyped for a sequel, right?
Before I answer that, let's explore what the final product does and does not do well. I played it on hard, with aim assist off, vertical stick inverted (like normal people would play) and all sensitivity options cranked up to 8.
The prologue of this game when watched on mute on youtube felt like the best introduction this game could possibly get. It was intense, suspenseful and dire. Anyone who had followed the game's story prior to release would immediately be drawn by all the questions that it raised. After spoiling myself on this portion last week, I was really looking forward to playing it. Little did I know that it had the worst introduction to gameplay that I ever imagined a game of this caliber could have. The oncoming barrage of button prompts and QTEs was an assault even to my sensibilities, someone who liked heavy rain. The first 3 buttons you are asked to press are all through button prompts that interrupt an otherwise intense cutscene - tap triangle, mash triangle and hold triangle. The end result of all these 3 button prompts is essentially the same, Galahad forcefully using his hand to do something. So why the redundant variations? Makes you wonder. Once you get full control of Galahad, you would think the game would let you keep it. But surprise, it doesn't. You get about 10-20 seconds of walking around after which you are stuck in another cinematic camera angle. And another. And another. Some were forgivable and others were downright abhorrent. There was one segment where the game asks you to use L2 to aim. So like any normal gamer would, I pressed L2, expecting to aim. Guess what happens? It zooms on to the target automatically. Trying to aim left or right has no effect. I couldn't even move Galahad left, right or backwards. I was walking through a standard room just moments ago. Now I was walking an invisible line with invisible walls in all directions except forward. Failure to comply meant insta-death and a restart. So I complied. This went on for a few minutes of painstakingly choreographed cutscenes that were compromised by distracting button prompts. The analogy that came to mind was a movie that paused every few seconds and forced you to press play, just to make sure you are paying attention. Or a great orator stopping every 5 seconds to confirm that you are still listening. Wouldn't that make you want to judge the orator? The game wasn't just hand holding, it was dragging me like an abusive parent, and punishing me if I resisted. I tried not to judge the game based on this. It was too early for that. The narrative that unfolded made the ordeal worth it.
Fortunately, this was the only section in the game that was so excessively riddled with button prompts. I wouldn't call all of them QTEs, as QTEs are time sensitive. Some of these are just Press-It-or Rot-Here-Forever prompts. It still appears every now and then, but not in such an egregious and offensive way.
The game eventually opens up a lot, with its stunning visuals and atmosphere on full display and nary a hiccup in framerate. And it looks absolutely stunning for the most part. The first chapter and several others that followed let you walk around for quite a bit and take in the atmosphere. The attention to detail is staggering. The textures are all marvelously detailed. You hear sounds that you wouldn't expect them to be put there, like the ticking of a wall clock when you get real close to it. Even the coat tails of random NPCs fluttered realistically in the wind.
But the early exploration also revealed another problem that appears throughout the game. Dead ends. Empty, uninteresting dead ends. At most, you might have a newspaper or pamphlet to read. Some that add substance to the lore, others that don't. But many dead ends had nothing at all. And given that the first "exploratory" section did not allow you to run (the reason is anybody's guess), it started getting a bit boring walking around. Even the game doesn't expect you to roam around for too long. When you do, you will notice the NPC dialogues looping back to the beginning.
Also the writing on the newspapers are too small for someone viewing it ten feet away. After a point, I stopped reading the contents and stuck to the headlines. They really should have had a text only or zoom option.
Despite these niggles, the game started winning me over again. There were barely any idiotic button prompts later. I controlled Galahad for the most part. Cutscenes were very well done, dialogues and banter were enjoyable and all the lead characters showed great chemistry with each other. The story was intriguing. The voice acting was superb, the ambient sounds and background score were impeccable and the game kept blowing my mind from a technical as well aesthetic point of view. The gunplay was solid through and through. Hit detection for the human AI was vastly improved from earlier reveal videos and the AI in general was not bad, though sometimes they scream "grenade" and continue to stand right next to it. The level design during the early stages were mostly fun.
But why would I suggest that I didn't like the game if things got better? It's because other things started happening. Bad things.
Enter the Lycans. The first time I watched this on the spoiler thread, I really enjoyed it. It had such an intimidating atmosphere and it was thrilling to watch. But it was such a chore to play. As enemies, these were the least interesting enemies in the game. They literally had just one attack pattern. Line up, charge, pounce & retreat. Rinse and repeat. It didn't matter if it pounced on you and you were pinned to the ground. It will still retreat. It doesn't matter if you dodged awkwardly and it landed on you with no damage, it will retreat. You can shoot it while it retreats and it won't react. You can shoot it while it charges you and it won't react to that either. Once you pump enough lead into it, it would abruptly collapse and that's that. It felt like something out of a PS2 game and it got old real fast. I found myself going through the motions. You will even notice that there might be 2 or more lycans attacking, but as soon as you kill 3 in total, the other one simply disappeared so that you could move on to the next segment. And they all happen in closed, cramped spaces that look like abandoned warehouses. Just bad level design, bad AI, bad gameplay loop. Bad everything. And to top it off, every time you have such an encounter, you have none of those special weapons shown at the reveal. And that is all you get from the standard Lycans in the ENTIRE game. Yes. Now look back at the reveal trailer and imagine my disappointment. There are the "elders" with their own gameplay loop, but that was an even bigger slap in the face for anyone expecting anything remotely exciting from a gameplay standpoint. They are almost entirely QTE based with an option to throw in attacks haphazardly when said QTEs aren't prompted. RAD was so proud of it that they decided to regurgitate it as-is
for the final boss fight
. That right there is a deal breaker for me.
Fighting humans after the initial stages were a mixed bag. Some were good. Others not so much. I can pin the issue on mediocre level design and spawning strategies. So many potentially fun levels devolved into obnoxious 'shotgun specialists' rushing you with no care in the world, then hordes of scrubs filling in from all directions and then more 'shotgun specialists' rushing ad nauseum.
The camera bias felt unintuitive. Not sure why they were trying to reinvent the wheel here. So many games have done shoulder swapping that works well. In any case, this game seemed to do a lot of the swapping automatically, so I never actually needed to use it during gameplay.
Melee was hit or miss. Some cinematic cut scenes were fast and efficient. Others were drawn out and irritating. Melee doesn't work if prompt doesn't appear. There were several times when melee did not register because the game hadn't figured out that the target was near enough.
The lantern sections were so poorly thought out, with enemies casually walking in the open and shooting while you had no way to take cover because holding a lantern is a formidable task that a centuries old knight couldn't figure out. Those levels felt like an insanely pretty remaster of a 1990s game.
So even though the gunplay was good, the level design showed a serious dearth of innovation or inspiration. It felt like "that thing you do in shooters between story segments". And to make things worse, you end up using those futuristic weapons on humans, because RAD thought "fuck werewolves and exciting fast paced action, let's give gamers some exploding heads and dismemberment instead". It was way too inhumane for knights sworn to protect these people to use it on them. The rebels were using them too, so an eye for an eye should be expected, but it felt out of place on both sides. These weapons were so overpowered that after the initial spectacle, they felt like cheat codes to dispatch enemies in a rapid and comical fashion. When I had these, I was breezing through encounters without even having to aim properly. Soon they became boring.
The penultimate gameplay section was the worst designed shooter level I've seen in ages. Remember the travesty that was the final shooting segment in Killzone: Shadowfall? Where every enemy you have ever encountered throughout the game comes pouring in? Now imagine that in a tiny dark room. It was such a clusterfuck of epic proportions that any last vestige of fun from the gunplay was sucked right out.
The mini games were ok. I hated the inspect mechanic as the game refused to move ahead if I didn't look at the same pretty object from every possible angle that didn't involve spraining Galahad's wrist. Sometimes it would pop a triangle and you could do something. Other times it just felt pointless. The morse code was a major letdown. So utterly pointless that calling it a gimmick would be an overstatement. Browsing the audio logs in the archive was a chore. Couldn't they just play it live while I walk around? So many games have done that. And the logs themselves were so loosely connected to the story/lore that they didn't seem to add anything substantive.
The game really lacked spectacle. There were no set pieces whatsoever. They even had the chance to show an exploding/
crashing airship
, but they shied away from it and blacked it out, probably under the pretense of "emotional gravitas". I wonder if they feared the engine was already bursting through the seams. The destructibility was no different than most action games this generation (or the last). We've had real time shattering glass and miscellaneous objects for ages now. I can't believe they boasted so much about it to the press to make it seem like it had any tangible impact on game design, gameplay, or even visuals for that matter. There are just a handful of encounters where it was noticeable. The world, for the most part, was a static you-can-look-but-you-can't-touch object.
There was one scene where I needed to use the monocular to find something to drop on the rebels. The game for some reason did not recognize my controller input at all. It eventually skipped that portion on its own.
During the early portion of the game, the cutscenes had a weird bounce/jerky movement every time the camera cut to a different angle, as if the scene was being rendered before it was fully ready. This eventually faded away (either because they cleaned it up later in the game or my eyes got used to it
Blood was randomly appearing and disappearing from Galahad's body in one scene towards the end. The blood was from the previous combat where I got hit pretty bad. The glitch was a bit distracting during that cutscene.
Noticed a couple of jarring oversights in the screenplay, but not too significant. When the guy at the
brothel
demanded that Galahad should deposit his weapons before entering, he totally allowed the giant conspicuous knife he was carrying on his back. Similarly, when Galahad is asked if brutally stealth killing all those guards towards the end was necessary, his response was "there is no time". So everything the man lived to uphold for centuries was thrown right out the window, because gamers could get some satisfying knife-to-throat action. Couldn't they even think about non-lethal takedowns that were just as cool? And later on,
Galahad is accused of "incapacitating" the guards
. What he did was anything but that. If there were any apt examples of ludonarrative dissonance in games, this would be a top pick.
The story which was quite good for a large portion of the game, started falling apart in the second half, with unclear motivations, insufficient exposition and "twists" that made no sense. Things were happening with no real context on why they were happening, so it became difficult to care after a point. Characters fell off the grid with no closure and the teaser ending that is supposed to hint at things to come was just as confusing as their PR cycles - an empty promise.
Closing thoughts:
RAD has a true gem of an engine built for this game and I hope it serves them well for their future endeavors. But this game is so inundated with questionable design decisions that RAD really needs to take a long and hard look at what separates a great game from the rest. It isn't all about the story, especially when the storytelling falls short, albeit to a lesser extent. At this point, a sequel needs to be so drastically different from the original for me to get excited for this IP again.
The Good:
+ Mindblowing graphics, sound and art
+ Solid gunplay for traditional weapons
+ Exceptional performance and predominantly bug free experience
+ Load times
+ Intriguing characters
+ Fluid movement
The Bad:
- Mediocre level design
- Obscenely excessive button prompts, instructions and QTEs
- Under utilized and overpowered exotic weapons
- Lycan combat (all variants)
- Weak story conclusion
- Lack of set pieces
- Inconsistent melee performance
- Unrewarding exploration
Its not about that, it is about being human and relating a subjective experience. We aren't talking about vacuum cleaners or dog food, it is entertainment and everyone experiences it subjectively.
This whole debate revolves around a flawed premise: reviews are in whole or in part objective; and it's collary, metacritic is a reflection of objective worth. And the reason this is a problem is that most reviewers pretend to have an objective insight into the worth of a game. It gives them authority and status and legitimizes their work. It is also deceptive and cowardly. Listen to Jeff Gertzman to see what I mean.
I get that people like numbers and want to know the consensus; and have a need to organize information, make judgments, and look for patterns. And for that, metacritic has worth. But when someone uses it as an objective yardstick instead of a disparate collection of subjective experiences, as if games were cell phones or microwave ovens, that's when things like this thread happen.
And if you have trouble understanding this, re-read the above, but replace 'game' with 'music'.
Your analogy with music doesn't work. Games are engineered and designed. There's objectively a good and bad way to design games. Example: Z-targeting VS Tomb Raider lock-on system, TLOU close combat VS The Order QTEs, skippable cutscenes VS unskippable cutscenes and so on.
Its not about that, it is about being human and relating a subjective experience. We aren't talking about vacuum cleaners or dog food, it is entertainment and everyone experiences it subjectively.
This whole debate revolves around a flawed premise: reviews are in whole or in part objective; and it's collary, metacritic is a reflection of objective worth. And the reason this is a problem is that most reviewers pretend to have an objective insight into the worth of a game. It gives them authority and status and legitimizes their work. It is also deceptive and cowardly. Listen to Jeff Gertzman to see what I mean.
I get that people like numbers and want to know the consensus; and have a need to organize information, make judgments, and look for patterns. And for that, metacritic has worth. But when someone uses it as an objective yardstick instead of a disparate collection of subjective experiences, as if games were cell phones or microwave ovens, that's when things like this thread happen.
And if you have trouble understanding this, re-read the above, but replace 'game' with 'music'.
If you ask any of them, the story usually begins with "I liked videogames and I knew this guy...". These people aren't professionals, nor did they train for the job.
All forms of media have some form of professional critique. By and large, this is performed by qualified people. They have to prove their worth or the outlet would not put that person in the position to present their critique. Sure, many get their break by knowing someone. That is irrelevant.
Just because there are gaming forums where people can post their opinions doesn't mean that qualified critics are obsolete. If you don't respect professional criticism, that's not their fault.
Its not about that, it is about being human and relating a subjective experience. We aren't talking about vacuum cleaners or dog food, it is entertainment and everyone experiences it subjectively.
This whole debate revolves around a flawed premise: reviews are in whole or in part objective; and it's collary, metacritic is a reflection of objective worth. And the reason this is a problem is that most reviewers pretend to have an objective insight into the worth of a game. It gives them authority and status and legitimizes their work. It is also deceptive and cowardly. Listen to Jeff Gertzman to see what I mean.
I get that people like numbers and want to know the consensus; and have a need to organize information, make judgments, and look for patterns. And for that, metacritic has worth. But when someone uses it as an objective yardstick instead of a disparate collection of subjective experiences, as if games were cell phones or microwave ovens, that's when things like this thread happen.
And if you have trouble understanding this, re-read the above, but replace 'game' with 'music'.
If you ask any of them, the story usually begins with "I liked videogames and I knew this guy...". These people aren't professionals, nor did they train for the job.
Because they started writing op ed pieces and people liked what they had to say? I personally find Doc Seuss's writing and opinions fantastic, better than some of the "best" in the industry. He's a random Gaffer, hopefully some day he'll even be able to do it as a full time job.
Jim Sterling is a prime example of this btw. I thought it was pertinent, as it seems he's someone you follow.
Up to Chapter XI right now. I actually agree with the lower end of the review scale. The 4/10 side of things. I actively hate this game. As short as it is, I don't even want to finish it. It took every annoying aspect of gaming over the past 7 years and crammed it into the title. All that is missing a water level. Then, it threw in annoying aspects of comics/movies and added to the pile (for example, Characters who are literally indestructible...until the story decides they aren't...then back to being so.) Then, it decided to throw in a bunch of stuff Anita Serkeesian will have a field day with.
Graphics are a saving grace I guess, but its nowhere near enough. A shame this engine was wasted on this game.
I'll try to finish it. Might as well. Heard most of the last chapters are all cutscenes anyway.
hahaha oh wow, people actually bought the PS4 version of The Order? No wonder this economy's in shambles. Well, while you cum chumps were trying to get something resembling enjoyment out of Electric Bill Simulator 2015, I'm just sitting here playing The Order on my Super Pong IV:
Because they started writing op ed pieces and people liked what they had to say? I personally find Doc Seuss's writing and opinions fantastic, better than some of the "best" in the industry. He's a random Gaffer, hopefully some day he'll even be able to do it as a full time job.
Jim Sterling is a prime example of this btw. I thought it was pertinent, as it seems he's someone you follow.
That's a fundamental misunderstanding of what a credible reviewer is. If you prefer the credibility of forum posters, by all means, filter through the opinions you think best suits you.
In Sterling's case, he's uniquely entertaining and has a knack for cutting through bullshit and getting right to the point.
His unwillingness to accept and/or admit to the subjectiveness of his critiques. He takes the role of arbitor of quality. Contrast that with anyone else on the podcast.
Having said that, he is the most entertain guy there and the only reason I listen. It is also possible that it is just part of his schtick/on-line persona.
His unwillingness to accept and/or admit to the subjectiveness of his critiques. He takes the role of arbitor of quality. Contrast that with anyone else on the podcast.
Having said that, he is the most entertain guy there and the only reason I listen. It is also possible that it is just part of his schtick/on-line persona.
What? He openly says that reviews are purely a subjective thing. People know the other games he likes and they can make a comparison from there about whether they would like it. Show me a quote that shows him saying his reviews are objective. The whole point of GiantBomb is to be a personality driven website. They don't try to be objective.
Up to Chapter XI right now. I actually agree with the lower end of the review scale. The 4/10 side of things. I actively hate this game. As short as it is, I don't even want to finish it. It took every annoying aspect of gaming over the past 7 years and crammed it into the title. All that is missing a water level. Then, it threw in annoying aspects of comics/movies and added to the pile (for example, Characters who are literally indestructible...until the story decides they aren't...then back to being so.) Then, it decided to throw in a bunch of stuff Anita Serkeesian will have a field day with.
Graphics are a saving grace I guess, but its nowhere near enough. A shame this engine was wasted on this game.
I'll try to finish it. Might as well. Heard most of the last chapters are all cutscenes anyway.
7/10!!!!?? What's wrong with you. You enjoyed the game and gave it a 7/10!!!??? You very well know that society reserves 7/10 for mediocre games!!! If you enjoyed it, atleast give it a 7.1 or 7.2. God Fucking DAMN!! People need to learn how to review games. So incompetent.
Whelp. I just finished it about 30 minutes ago. I disagree with the reviewers. I'll be writing my impressions layer today after I've slept on it, but needless to say I really enjoyed it. I'd love to see a sequel from Ready at Dawn. Hopefully the reviews haven't made this game DOA.
Can we talk about something? Something that soured me on the entire story from nearly the whole way forward?
Huge spoilers for the entire game ahead.
Lucan is the traitor. From second one, Lucan is the traitor. From the very first cutscene, his Albert Wesker look and voice, it was obvious. Incredibly obvious. I know Lucan is a classic knight of the round table, but to have the audacity, the fucking AUDACITY, to give us an ENTIRE mission late game with him to uncover the real plot, in which you KNOW he's the traitor, to have the balls to have Lucan be a Lycan?! REALLY? IT'S A SINGLE LETTER OFF. It's like having a guy in your party in FF7 named Fephiroth. For fucks sake. Holy christ. And taking him out in a near identical QTE when you find out that you're going to just eat the entire rap for everything for literally no reason? Holy god damn what a horrible conclusion to the story.
The other bit that drove me insane was asking Perceval what was up with that old guy that he was talking to, and he says I'll tell you after the mission. He might as well be decapitated 10 seconds later because he just marked himself for death.
And how that Old Man is going to end up being King Arthur and a huge force in the 2nd game, but they did literally nothing with him.
Or the entire mission at the docks where you know you're going to open up crates and find werewolves, and shocker, it's vampires instead. So you're fighting through the entire section in order to get a story revelation you've mostly guessed already. Christ.
I have just completed it. If I was going to rate it a 6.5/ 7 would be fair. There are great bits(atmosphere, graphics) good bits(voice acting) ok bits(story) and bad (AI and level design and too many cutscenes to gameplay). I still hope there is a sequel tho.
hahaha oh wow, people actually bought the PS4 version of The Order? No wonder this economy's in shambles. Well, while you cum chumps were trying to get something resembling enjoyment out of Electric Bill Simulator 2015, I'm just sitting here playing The Order on my Super Pong IV:
Really great read Viveks, and I appreciate that you went into such detail and contrasted the finished product against the promise and potential in the game's reveal and early footage. You're better at this than you think
I'm still scratching my head at the idea of using three different button prompts for the same action in the beginning of the game. And what you say about the non-QTE-but-still-button-prompts takes me back to Beyond: Two Souls where the interactivity a lot of the time was just a matter of hitting "play" on the cinematic. I just don't get the thought process behind that stuff.
Really great read Viveks, and I appreciate that you went into such detail and contrasted the finished product against the promise and potential in the game's reveal and early footage. You're better at this than you think
I'm still scratching my head at the idea of using three different button prompts for the same action in the beginning of the game. And what you say about the non-QTE-but-still-button-prompts takes me back to Beyond: Two Souls where the interactivity a lot of the time was just a matter of hitting "play" on the cinematic. I just don't get the thought process behind that stuff.
Thanks man! I now feel encouraged to write such reviews for games I'm most hyped for. Let's see.
I think the button prompt issue comes from an obsession for cinematic camera angles, which can't really be made interactive in any other way and a misguided notion that simply pressing buttons draws people into the game
Thanks man! I now feel encouraged to write such reviews for games I'm most hyped for. Let's see.
I think the button prompt issue comes from an obsession for cinematic camera angles, which can't really be made interactive in any other way and a misguided notion that simply pressing buttons draws people into the game
It seems that some people perceive the Order's bad reviews and scores as an attack against linear story-driven third-person shooters. Reviews seem to indicate that the Order just isn't a good linear story-driven third-person shooter.
I think the button prompt issue comes from an obsession for cinematic camera angles, which can't really be made interactive in any other way and a misguided notion that simply pressing buttons draws people into the game
If RAD gets a chance I'm hoping they find a way to make the cinematics more interactive that doesn't rely on QTE and button prompts. You're sort of in disbelief you can control certain cutscenes that look pre-rendered, but the act of interacting itself is just not very engaging. You get sick of the button prompts relatively quickly.
well enjoying a few moments of bland intercourse with a girl only to be pushed aside to watch someone else do it better for just as long would probably frustrate most people.
It seems that some people perceive the Order's bad reviews and scores as an attack against linear story-driven third-person shooters. Reviews seem to indicate that the Order just isn't a good linear story-driven third-person shooter.
If RAD gets a chance I'm hoping they find a way to make the cinematics more interactive that doesn't rely on QTE and button prompts. You're sort of in disbelief you can control certain cutscenes that look pre-rendered, but the act of interacting itself is just not very engaging. You get sick of the button prompts relatively quickly.
Ya. Viveks summation that they feel like its just pausing and you are just pressing play again to make sure you're still paying attention is pretty accurate.
It seems that some people perceive the Order's bad reviews and scores as an attack against linear story-driven third-person shooters. Reviews seem to indicate that the Order just isn't a good linear story-driven third-person shooter.
I don't see how it's not a good linear story-driven third person shooter, from my POV.
- Great gunplay mechanics
- Fun and engaging core gameplay
- Controls well
- Story is pretty engrossing from what I've played so far (better than most in the genre, even AAA ones).
out of 10
