I hope so because then it becomes another game worth playing this year.

No you invented your own story about thé game, anyone, like, who followed thé game since its reveal knew nothing changed, its still a TPS very inspired by TLOU and also by Gears,  with little moments of exploration, investigation , émotion, a story centric game just like they always said 

Is it a bad thing ? I dont Know, ask that to Naughty Dog

It looks like they put a lot of effort into creating it and at the end of the day I believe that it will be acknowledged for it, The game looks good. I am sure the story is great, and the gameplay looks fun. I have a thing for guns that shot lightning lol.

I've said, since the beginning, that the game looks cool, in concept, but Ready at Dawn is unproven. We've only seen them take other team's IPs and make games using other team's formulas. We have yet to see what originality they have. So, expectations should be tempered.

Will the game be incredible? Yes.

Will it shut up "critics"? Only a few. Once they make up a narrative, they rarely are willing to break from it. Don't give them any credit.

I expect the generic and meh another shooter narrative to continue and people will say "the gameplay isn't next gen" when they have no idea what it means anyway. Lol!

Next thing we know people will complain about FPS games because its in first person. Lol!

It's an easy excuse to use if the game gets poorer than expected reviews. Just like you still see with Driveclub. Supposedly reviewers killed the game for the online issues which are now (mostly) fixed, yet a majority of the poor reviews make little to no mention of online issues. They scored it low for AI and gameplay flaws but nope, it's that bugged launch which is now fixed.

The shutting up already started with the PSX demo, with some of the major publications backpedalling and going away impressed with it. The hushing gradually increases with each new trailer. The planet's crow population will go extinct in a few weeks (eg).

But no, not all will shut up. As I already wrote in another thread, these won't like it no matter what:

Gamespot - Grew a boner for open world/ended games. Will complain about non-existing QTEs and stealth, even though Shadow of mordor with its insta-fail crap was nominated as GOTY by them.

Eurogamer - Grew a boner for anti-PS4 propaganda. Probably realized it gives them even more hits than anti XB1-propaganda. Out with the old, in with the new, and all that. Also gave W:TNO a 6/10 so you know you can't trust these guys with shooters (or anything, really).

Quarter to three - self-explanatory, will score even lower than TLOU

Metrogamecentral - The less controversial equivalent of quarter to three, tea-sipping snobs with a very narrow view of game design.

Edge - Edge will always be Edge. If it's not from Nintendo or Rockstar, they're not gonna be kind. Then again, they gave LBP3 a 9/10, which is odd because they are one of the harshest around when it comes to buggy/unpolished games. Guess they can be unpredictable here and there.

Will get good scores from most other publications.

Someone on gaf took a quote from either Polygon or Kotaku (don't remember which and can't find it now) that is a good description of why the game looks so interesting. But i'll use my own words to translate their idea, by using Max Payne 3 as an example.

MP3 had pacing issues, because you were constantly being interrupted. Now, the problem there was that the game was consisted SOLELY of: A) Always the same TPSing with slow-mo + B) watching a cutscene unfold. And so the game's structure went like this:

A, B, A, B, A, B, A, B, A, B, A, B... and so on and so forth, until the end of the game, and with some of these sections comprising no more than a few seconds.

The Order, on the other hand, seems to be a lot more dynamic and pulls you in to constantly different situations and interactions. Whether it's simple cutscene interaction (and they can vary a lot as we've seen, not talking about simple QTEs), "mini-games", stealth, melee-focused combat, gunplay, set-pieces, etc. So the game's structure ends up being this:

A, B, C, A, D, B, E, F, G, A, B, D, F, G ..... and so on and so forth. This makes the story/cinematic aspect of the game feel a lot less frustrating and actually helps make things more interesting. You are constantly "moving forward", but without doing it by going from cover shooting to cover shooting ad infinitum. This helps set it apart from other TPSes, which is why (along with the cool unique weapons we've seen) actually makes this the least generic TPS i've seen in years, contrary to some people's narrative.

You are right, I did partly invent my own story of the game because the trailer said so little but alluded to so much that it caught my interest. 

That's bullshit dude. I followed it very closely from the beginning, as I said, I was very interested in it. I watched that trailer loads of times and there wasn't a whole lot said about the game at the time that the trailer was released. It is far from what was originally shown in the initial trailer. Did you actually watch them? They could be entirely different games with similar settings. 

I'm sorry you didn't like what I had to say, but get over it. 

It wont. It'll need to be lucky to get 75+ metascore IMO.