By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Insidb on 19 February 2015
Edit Thread
Normchacho said:
starcraft said:

Rol's joke thread was pertinent. 

At the end of the day, dismissing a game before its out is often counterproductive. But equally counterproductive is all this silly defense of poor practices in games. Like offering limited content, having appalling endings, using QTE's where better gameplay options exist.

If you want to say 'lets just wait and see if the Order really has all these things before we attack it,' that would be fine. But so many in this thread and others are actually defending these practices (on principle) and it is incredibly apparent in most cases that its because they fear they are present in The Order, and want to defend that title specifically.

That just encourages other developers to make those poor design decisions, irrespective of whether they actually wind up being abundant in The Order.


Umm...well, I don't think a bad ending has ever been a design choice...but the other two things you mention I would think would be personal preference would they not? Somebody might think that The Order doesn't offer enough content, while others may think it does, Someone might hate QTE and someone else may either not mind them or like them. 

I don't know about you but I don't consider someone giving an unpopular opinion on a game mechanic to be counterproductive.

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of QTE. But I don't mind them if character needs to perform a task to complex for the regular controls, or even just to keep the player involved. But I don't feel strongly enough about them either way to let them sway me on a game.

As for content, I would rather the dev team tell the story they want to tell and spend my $60 on a short game. Than have the dev finish the story and go "uh oh, it isn't long enough...we need to make this longer". I want the developer to make the best game they can, not the best value they can an As a consumer, I determine value based on how I feel when it's over, not based how much of my time it took up.

I have to agree with Norm here: 1) Offering "limited content" is misonomer if it's the exact amount of content needed to tell the narrative; this is an issue, however, when developers sell launch content as DLC to squeeze the consumer for cash (See Evolve, the game that largely skated for what most gamers find abominable.), 2) Whether or not an ending is "appalling" is arbitrary, a judgment made by each player, and never the objective of the developer, and 3) QTE's in lieu of "better ganeplay options" is wholly subjective and preferential: a game is designed however a game is designed, end of story. That's like saying that Mario Party should be an FPS, because it's a "better gameplay option." 

Let's look at this analogously: my friend hates Requiem for a Dream, because it makes him depressed. It's a fantastic film that drives home its message about addiction with the aim of making the viewer feel the characters' sufferings. Does this mean that all movies should be cheery, to suit his preferences? No. He could also complain that it's too short or should have been shot in monochrome. He also could have made all of these comments BEFORE IT WAS EVEN RELEASED. That's what the Order is experiencing right now, and it is patently unwarranted.

Here's a quote, in summation: "People are always saying, 'Life is hard!' Life is hard!? Based on what?"