There is already a Ryse on PS4, it's called Knack

It already looks good in regards to design of the world. I am curious about level design, weapons and enemy types. I will never understand why people prefer open world with meh level design compared to linear with tight focused design. I thought we'd move past this after it became all the rage a decade ago with GTA III.

In any event I have no concerns over scores and plan on checking it out once it is released.

What have we seen that makes it look so awful? 

I seriously doubt that anything shown (thus far) from Microsoft or Sony will score higher than 90, and this includes Uncharted.

I really hope we get that "next-gen" experience, but it seems that company's are more focused on playing it safe, than actually trying something new.

Got this beautiful gem of a game preordered. I got so excited for it, that while I was at the game store. They brought out the pre-order cards for the game and I quickly snatched one up and bought it. Was totally oblivious to the fact I previously preordered the game already on the PlayStation store.

So that should tell you some-what of how much this game means to me and regardless of the reception from people about this game. I got TWO, "The Order"s preordered. Even if uninentional. I'm excited for a more cinamatic gaming experiance. I am willing to buy two to show my enthusiasm for this title. I would like nothing more than to share my admiration for games as this one and to give my extra copy to a person here that likes the same but can't afford to get it. I'll mail it.

Reviews are just broken. The whole way they are conducted is broken. A review should be by a group of people I personally believe. Each with a solid experiance in development of games and a current knowledge of each type of work used in the games developement. The ending credits of games indicates the developers, types of programmers, how many worked on the game and so-on. Each reviewer could judge what is that their expertise is and even give a sentence that describes what it is giving that score. At the end of it all. Show the scores, give the tally, and with all the testers giving their observations from their sentences being put together, #kaaboosh! it's done.

Otherwise just have the game tested by a bunch of noteable colleges from the globe and have a class give a single review about it.

A score in the 70s wouldn't surprise me but you know what? I don't care:) I think it looks good so I'm gonna buy it anyway, I even had fun with Knack!

Plus I can see Bloodborne getting a 80s to mid 90s score easily. A dark souls game with the original lead designer back and back home on PlayStation only? Easily gets a high score. One thing is for sure though, The Order, Bloodborne, and Witcher 3 will keep me busy in February

honestly i think most reviewers seem burnt out, they say everything is a clone of something else.  While this is true it doesnt mean a game isnt fun, or deserving of good scores.

I am willing to suspend my disbelief and expect great things from Ready at Dawn's first big original IP, particularly when developing it with Santa Monica.

It's not really a visual style or choice of theme that really jives with me when I first see it, but I know these guys are capable of much more than meets the eye at first, and it's all about the gameplay.

I think it might, but not because its not good, but because reviewers will talk nonsense like "where is the Gears-level fast-paced shooting" (even though that's not what the game is intended to be), "has too many cutscenes for a shooter" (even though its story-oriented), "doesn't have multiplayer" (we already know it doesn't), "is too scary, shooters shouldn't scare you" (even though that's exactly why half-breeds are there in the game).

They wouldn't judge the game for what it is, but for what it isn't. That's what happened with Driveclub and every exclusive game on PS Vita, and it will happen to this. Perhaps its due to Sony not giving them a ward of cash or a big cheque, but then again Sony can't afford to do it.