Quantcast
The Order reviewed for what it is

Forums - Sony Discussion - The Order reviewed for what it is

I haven't done to well getting hits on threads in resent months, but I think this will get fans of the order in good spirits. 

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=td2bi2uCijI



Around the Network

He is just talking about what other reviewers said and trying to counter. 

"high quality gameplay mechanics" >.> 



Sharpryno said:

He is just talking about what other reviewers said and trying to counter. 

"high quality gameplay mechanics" >.> 


Disagree. This review points out everything the Order set out to accomplish, and reviewed it. Yeah he mentioned the way others reviewed it, but his points have Merritt. The orders still being reviewed for what it is, not for what was expected.



MARCUSDJACKSON said:
Sharpryno said:

He is just talking about what other reviewers said and trying to counter.

"high quality gameplay mechanics" >.>


Disagree. This review points out everything the Order set out to accomplish, and reviewed it. Yeah he mentioned the way others reviewed it, but his points have Merritt. The orders still being reviewed for what it is, not for what was expected.

Then why did all the bad reviews confirm what was expected months in advance? Doesn't look to me like an issue of high expectations.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

I disagree with you (in the sense that this is about expectations, what it could be vs what it is), and I am an outsider looking in, I highly doubt the game is bad, I highly doubt it is great either.

The reason I disagree is that, objectively a reviewer is allowed to find a game to be bad, as long as he has merits. I think the reason that reviewers have merit is the value of the game. It is a highly priced title with small amount of content, and from what I noticed lack of replayability. Since this is based on what it is, the Order objectively can have lower score, because it does lack value. 

 

(Yes I edited my post a couple of times, I am still not sure I worded it perfectly).



 

Around the Network
I have played the game and consider this a decent / fair review, but it wastes time worrying about other reviews and that in itself makes it a less credible review (makes him not impartial).

vivster said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
Sharpryno said:

He is just talking about what other reviewers said and trying to counter.

"high quality gameplay mechanics" >.>


Disagree. This review points out everything the Order set out to accomplish, and reviewed it. Yeah he mentioned the way others reviewed it, but his points have Merritt. The orders still being reviewed for what it is, not for what was expected.

Then why did all the bad reviews confirm what was expected months in advance? Doesn't look to me like an issue of high expectations.


Reviews are still just opinion. Opinions were confirmed based on opinions. Thanks for the post.  It's more than I got in my last 2 threads total.



Acevil said:

I disagree with you (in the sense that this is about expectations, what it could be vs what it is), and I am an outsider looking in, I highly doubt the game is bad, I highly doubt it is great either.

The reason I disagree is that, objectively a reviewer is allowed to find a game to be bad, as long as he has merits. I think the reason that reviewers have merit is the value of the game. It is a highly priced title with small amount of content, and from what I noticed lack of replayability. Since this is based on what it is, the Order objectively can have lower score, because it does lack value. 

 

(Yes I edited my post a couple of times, I am still not sure I worded it perfectly).

You can edit it again if you like lol. Sup Ace? 

Value is opinionated. Expectations could kill the Pope, or doom a President. Even a review expected to judge a game based on how much of what it was going for that it actually accomplished very expectations. 



MARCUSDJACKSON said:
vivster said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
Sharpryno said:

He is just talking about what other reviewers said and trying to counter.

"high quality gameplay mechanics" >.>


Disagree. This review points out everything the Order set out to accomplish, and reviewed it. Yeah he mentioned the way others reviewed it, but his points have Merritt. The orders still being reviewed for what it is, not for what was expected.

Then why did all the bad reviews confirm what was expected months in advance? Doesn't look to me like an issue of high expectations.


Reviews are still just opinion. Opinions were confirmed based on opinions. Thanks for the post.  It's more than I got in my last 2 threads total.

So apparently what the majority of reviewers say is that the game is even worse than their already low expectations.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
vivster 


Disagree. This review points out everything the Order set out to accomplish, and reviewed it. Yeah he mentioned the way others reviewed it, but his points have Merritt. The orders still being reviewed for what it is, not for what was expected.

Then why did all the bad reviews confirm what was expected months in advance? Doesn't look to me like an issue of high expectations.


Reviews are still just opinion. Opinions were confirmed based on opinions. Thanks for the post.  It's more than I got in my last 2 threads total.

So apparently what the majority of reviewers say is that the game is even worse than their already low expectations.

Yep,  but they knew what they were getting because they were told so. Ready at Dawn talked about what they where going, and trying to accomplish. It's not thier fault reviewers were expecting more. 

Expect what you're told you're getting, and nothing more, less you let yourself down.