I'm trying to belittle your point? I can't have even attempted to belittle your "point" because you didn't have a point to be belittled in the 1st place. Well atleast what it seemed you were originally trying to get at with your 1st reply to me. You were trying to make it seem like that interactive cutscene was the whole games gameplay that kept being interuppted by cutscenes when it was actually just an interactive cutscene that they let you control at times. 

So basically that video was a cutscene representation and not a gameplay representation.

In that 1st video, i knew exactly what he was about to get at with the thing in TLOU. They basically make something important missable. If you dont pay attention, you could miss out on something. It's like the P.T demo. I was trying to show a friend the P.T demo but the motherfucker kept looking away when the important shit would happen. So basically those type of games are VERY rewarding to people who pay attention and are a lot less rewarding to people who dont pay attention.

The video talked about the shooter thing but lets look at The Order for a second. In the demo, they gave you 1 type of enemy so only logic would tell you that you wouldn't need much strategy or a need to change guns to kill them. Now lets say we took Gears Of War, Uncharted, or ANY OTHER 3rd person shooter on this planet, placed 1 type of enemy in front of them, and let you play. Could you determine the amount of strategy that would be needed to kill this enemy? Would switching guns make a real strategic difference when killing this 1 type of enemy or would it basically be just seeing the explosion of the guns?

Also, Could you show me any other 3rd person shooter demo that showed you that your decisions mattered? I cant think of any at the moment but give me an example of a 3rd person shooter demo that showed how your decisions mattered unlike The Order.

About the movie thing.. Some people claimed that Uncharted was like a movie but that game is better than any other 3rd person shooter that aspires to take a kiddish-no-movie approach any day of the week. If a game wants to have movie qualities then so be it. as long as it's good, i'm all for it. I don't know why people try to act like games that have movie-qualities are bad. As if non-movieish-games are all top notch or something. There are GARBAGE ass'd regular games out here too. Don't try to single out the games that have some movie qualities as if it makes them worse or something.

I believe you're just expecting way too much from this demo of The Order for whatever reason.

We'll see how the game turns out when it releases(hopefully good) because this demo is... a demo

Well I guess in this context I will say that "interactive cutscenes" are bad, if you want to call this an interactive cutscene. It feels jagged and strange and large parts of the cutscene are unneccessary. I have explained that multiple times...I will go into more depth on how this cutscene could have been handled without cutscenes later.

"If you dont pay attention, you could miss out on something":Okay, so what exactly is missable in the context of The Order? The cutscenes in the video I posted were just "look at the monster attacking you". I highly doubt anyone would miss that. In this particular demo (in this thread), what is there to miss? All the cutscene really showed was some people talking to each other. Why does the game need to rip away control there? In the part where he blows up the water heater thing, what is there to miss? Why did that have to be a cutscene?

Also, if your friend kept looking away, that is his fault. You don't blame the movie when you decide to text and miss an important part. Why would you blame the game because your friend has trouble keeping his attention on one thing? If your playstyle is so inattentive that you find yourself missing things that seems like more of a personal flaw than anything...

About the shooting, why does The Order have to send just one enemy type out of spawn holes for three minutes? You are defending the game by saying "this section would be boring in any game, why criticize it here?". How is that a defense? Yeah, the section is boring because it only throws one enemy at you for three minutes with no regard for any sort of tactics or even player movement. If it was designed better, maybe it wouldn't throw just one enemy type at you, or maybe it would make those enemies a little smarter forcing you to move around and handle enemies at various distance levels.

"Also, Could you show me any other 3rd person shooter demo that showed you that your decisions mattered?": First of all, I need to clarify that I'm not really talking about the story here. I'm talking about the gameplay. The gameplay should make me feel like the game is reacting to me instead of just guiding me. With cutscene dominated gameplay, I often feel like I am just painting by numbers, doing what the game tells me to do (press button to initiate cutscene), whereas other games make you feel like how you react will make a difference in the game, even if it is just on a micro level.

Lets break down that encounter with the werewolf guy from a non cutscene dominated perspective. You are walking around in this building, not really knowing what to expect. All of the sudden, you turn a corner and the guy is tearing into someones flesh, but he doesn't notice you immediately. Here you are presented with your first choice. Do you back up, take a breath and calmly think about your next step? Do you immediately take your gun out and start shooting? Do you walk up to it and investigate closer? Do you try to sneak around him or find a different route? 

Lets say you went with the last option, you look around, open a few doors but don't find anything so you turn off your light and try to sneak by it. There is a small wall of boxes between you and it that you may be able to hide behind if you are lucky. You walk up slowly and you think you are about to get by it when you hear it stop chewing and start sniffing the air. All of the sudden it is in front of you, changing form into its full werewolfy horror. Sneaking is no longer an option. Do you run or stand your ground and fight? You decide to whip out your gun and fire a few shots but there is no effect so you run...

Now lets back up for a second...lets say you just decide to go guns blazing from the initial encounter. You whip out your gun and fire a few bullets into the thing, but it shrugs them off and turns towards you, transforms and now you are in the same situation, needing to run. 

As you can see, the player made a few choices, but they led the player to the same outcome, but the player was always in control. Those choices were the player's to make, not the game's, not whatever would make the story the most cinematic. The outcome may have been the same, but the player doesn't know that. Typically, games like this are designed to really only have you play a section once (unless you replay the game) so you would think to yourself "what if I made a different choice?". 

Instead, the game tells you "this is the path you will take" and accepts no deviation from that path.

"Don't try to single out the games that have some movie qualities as if it makes them worse or something.": I'm just saying their are better ways to do these things that play to the strengths of video games as a medium. The Order can still be good, but it missed out on the potential to be something great by just falling back on movies. 

PS: What is wrong with expecting a lot out of games and holding them to a high standard?

I was talking about TLOU having missable things in it. Like something important can happen but you have to be paying attention to see what happens. Like that part in the beginning where Joel's daughter walks into the room and that thing happens. I was using your example you presented in that video

In P.T, it was just the fact that he just kept looking away. I didn't say anything about the game because i wanted to see if he would get scared. Like the part where you have to zoom in on the door handle and the girl pops her head out and closes the door. This motherfucker BEAUTIFULLY looked away withe perfect timing when that part happened. If it was a cutscene, he would've payed more attention because you usually dont want to miss a cutscene. I guess he didn't understand that shit actually happens while you're playing. It was just an example of it being rewarding to those who pay attention

They sent out 1 type of enemy because IT WAS A DEMO. Humans would be the only individusl you fought at the time. Like in Uncharted 2 when you infiltrate that place early in the game and have to sneak past the guards, you ONLY FACE 1 TYPE OF ENEMY in that part. Or in Gears 2 when you reach that town early in the game and the ticjers comr out, YOU ONLY FACE 1 TYPE OF ENEMY AT THAT PART. So i dont see why a more realistic game like The Order would need to have hundreds of different types of enemies thrown at you in this demo. How about we just wait for the full game to experience the different enemies instead of hoping for all of them to be in the demo?

About the werewolf part, how do you know that every single encounter with the wolfs will be this way? This was only 1 specific part they showed IN A DEMO. In The Last Of Us, there was a part *SLIGHT SPOILER* where you have to climb up a latter and the guy kicks you down into the water initiating a interactive cutscene. Then he tries to drown you and you have to try to grab the gun under while underwater. I'm pretty sure that every encounter with humans DIDN'T all happen like that in The Last Of Us. In another video of The Order, there was a part where you were fighting a rebel and it was an interactive cutscene where the guy was winning and galahad had to grab a knife or something like that. I'm pretty sure that every encounter with the rebels in this game wont play out like that as we can see in the video that you were actually having a shootout with rebels in the OP. So why are we trying to act like that specific werewolf segment represents every werewolf encounter in the game?

You can't know what The Order missed out on because you haven't played the full game. Again, A demo is NOT the full game.. It's a demo. 

You can have high expectations if you want but you have to be reasonable. You, for example, were being unreasonable by trying to act like thet werewolf segment represented every werewolf encounter in the game or someshit. You were also trying act like that interactive cutscene was a representation of all of the games gameplay that forcefully gets interupted by cutscenes when it was just a simple interactive cutscene to begin with

" So i dont see why a more realistic game like The Order would need to have hundreds of different types of enemies thrown at you in this demo. ":

The problem isn't that there is one enemy type, it is that this one enemy is boring to fight. A well designed enemy can be interesting, but this is reminiscent of the loot cave in Destiny. Just sitting there, blindly killing things isn't fun. Put the player in a more vulnerable situation and make the enemies smarter (use flanking tactics and attack from multiple distances etc.). As is, the demo section that R@D thought was brilliant enough to repeatedly use as marketing material is just a badly designed, generic shooting gallery, spruced up with pretty cutscenes.

"how do you know that every single encounter with the wolfs will be this way? ":

I of course don't, but first of all, this seems to be the first encounter by the way he acts (he is stunned when he first sees it and doesn't know how to react. If this isn't the first encounter then narrative questions are raised (why did he act that way if he knew what to expect?)). No encounter after this one will hold the same amount of tension or mystery. You will already understand how the werewolves act and behave already and the "right" decision has already been told to you by the game. This section is just a mass of wasted potential and its disappointing to see. This section could be really damn powerful being forced to make the decision of how to react to the unknown, but instead the game just guides you through the entire encounter.

"A demo is NOT the full game.. It's a demo.":

I can only judge what I have been shown. (I think I said this before but) before Destiny's release, I made a bunch of complaints about the beta and I was met with a unanimous "it was just a demo" response from pretty much everyone. When the full game got around to releasing, I kept my money in my pocket while a bunch of others spent their money in the hope that the final product was different. If these cutscene heavy sections are a minority, then I my criticisms will stop at "R@D did a terrible job at illustrating what the game was", but until R@D proves me wrong, I think my negative opinion is just as valid as anyone else's positive opinion ("oh, you like what you see? Well its just a demo. You shouldn't get excited or anything. Have you played the full game? No? Then you have no right to say anything positive!" -obvious hyperbole)