The Order 1886 is a visual masterpiece and a better game than Until Dawn.

[Chazore]

DakonBlackblade said:

I was refearing to the games having bugs that interfere with gameplay, frequent crashes, freeses, some other wierd stuf etc. Te oRder is remarkbly devoid of bugs. And thats quite frequent on the gaming world we live in, games come out with throngs of rather anoyinh bugs.

Ppl give Bethesda a pass for it being Bethesda, I never did. i think its an absurd they are allowed time and time again to release games with some very serious bugs and other technical difficultys just because its Bethesda and ppl love Elder Scrolls.

About Crysis I played it (despite kinda hating FPS games, I played it cause it looked amazing and I wanted ot see what all the fuss was about) from memory I cant recall if it does in fact looks better than the Order, the Order has some more advanced systems tough, specialy regarding reflection, but if does look better than the Order than thats 1 game to count as being technicaly superior, specialy because it was also almost devoid of bugs. I never played Crysis 1 and 2 so i cant realy say anything about them. And i seriouly cant think of a console game that looks as amazing as Order did.

But I think you missed the OPs overall point, even with some games looking the same or better the games that look like this are still very infrequent, the Order as a showcase of what we can expect in the future workd rather well, and for being as technically sound as it was should have gotten a little more recognition. Giving a game like this a score as low as a 3 is just wrong, the game isnt broken, on the countrary it runs super smoothly. Imagine if Star Citzen comes out and it turns out the game is not very fun (but isnt exactly bad either) on the gameplay departement and it has s simple story but one that works. All of a suden rewievers start giving it 3s. You look at the game however and its gorgeous as fck and has 0 bugs. You gota ask yourself "what the hell are these reviewers thinkin ?". "Ye this is not the best game on the planet, it has its flaws, but they arent recognizing the games strengths at all either".  Thats pretty much the point here 

And for those that ran into issues I;m sure they didn't exist or don't matter, again whenever I see someone running into a bug or error you're always and I mean always going to be met with Joe bloggs who goes "huh I never had this bug" in a topic board about solving bug problems. Just because you or someone else didn't run into any doesn't mean the game is factucally the most perfect product in all of existence.

I know you didn't give them a free pass because I was there reading the articles and the forum topics on F4 when you had your left and rights with them, the thing is even though Beth games clearly aren't perfect (or to a form two of you on here are comfortable with), people still enjoy them and regard them as good games and of course on a platform like PC you can mod those out at times or work around them which makes such a method valid (because PC can do it and consoles can't doesn't make it any less valid).

EH I find the first Crysis has aged somewhat, with TO you have advanced character models, lip and bodily movement from the year it was crafted while Crysis was way back into last gen times. Reflection is still nice to look at (I;m actually a sucker for water and it's physics in most games). Crysis 1 still looks the partk, at least compared to 2 and then 3 (apparently 3 is weaker than the series according to fan speak I've learned over the years and I can't think of why).

I do get the point, it's that I don't agree with it all that much, yes I see it as a showcase but a showcase for what the consoles could do this gen or the next, for PC we just have to wait for the enxt Crysis type game to come around and that is looking to be shared between KCD, SC and Eve Valkyrie. With PC you don't really need a showcase from a console exclusive game because we already know what the PC is capable of because at the end of the day it's technically down to you to meet what the game asks, with a console you don't need to adhere to any sort of demand, that's what the console creators have to adhere to and they have to for a number of years and when we get a game like TO we see the results of what can happen now and what we can expect in the future.

See I can admit TO looks great and has the sound and looks about it, the same goes for Battlefront, the engine blows my mind how detailed the forests of Endor or how real the ice looks like on Hoth, the sound is nailed almost to a T but the gameplay modes and lack of SP or any other story just makes the game fall short and I guess when we look into TO it's story somehow fell a bit short for some reviewers to warrant a score, some picking on sound literally sounds silly to me.

I do think Sony should take a stab at making a move based on TO, that way if they make it all CGI and make another installment, the two could easily go hand in hand and create immersion since one is borrowing film elements while the other is actually a film itself (I thought that's what most film game devs were wanting to reach anyway).

 

As for SC, I'm mostly drawn to it's SP experience due to having actors like Gary Oldman, Mark Hamill, Gillian Anderson and Andy Serkis. I will give the MP portion of the game a try though but only with people I know absed on how insurance for your ships works with the game (I'd rather not lose my ships since GTA V taught me that randoms love to ruin your fancy vehicles and know you have to pay high insurance).