By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - The Order 1886 Review Thread - Meta: 66

darkenergy on 19 February 2015
ZyroXZ2 said:
DonFerrari said:


the point being?

The point being that all of the hate turned out to be... right.

Now all of a sudden full defense mode is turned on and everyone's like "but review scores are meaningless" and "well as long as I have fun" and "I'm buying it anyway because I think for myself"...

I tell ya, being a Nintendo fan and watching the other team use these same defenses is kind of funny, lol... I mean, come on xD

I notice this as well,if a game that wasn't made by Naughty Dogs the Metacritic is somehow flawed and it won't matter



Proud to be a Californian.

Around the Network
Zekkyou on 19 February 2015
ZyroXZ2 said:
DonFerrari said:


the point being?

The point being that all of the hate turned out to be... right.

Now all of a sudden full defense mode is turned on and everyone's like "but review scores are meaningless" and "well as long as I have fun" and "I'm buying it anyway because I think for myself"...

I tell ya, being a Nintendo fan and watching the other team use these same defenses is kind of funny, lol... I mean, come on xD

Are you implying that the Nintendo fanbase doesn't also have a minority of people guilty of this? :p



sundin13 on 19 February 2015
2008ProchargedGT said:
Wow some really strange review cropping up. Some obvious troll click bait reviews 2/10, 4/10 and so on, then there some this is the greatest thing ever Sonys new big IP 9.5/10. Ive also read a few where the reviewer mention a few minor things or says something like "its hard not to recommend theis game" then gives it a 6 or 6.5 lol. So people love 8bit retro games from 20 years ago but if a game is of the mold of "5 years" ago then its a trash game? Welp I already have it paid for so I guess ill just make my own opinion in a day. So far IMO all the negative things the reviews nhave mentioned are very minor. This games seems to be what I have been craving for some time.


There is a difference between dated and retro...

Basically, dated refers to when a game hasn't learned how to fix the mistakes old games have made and falls into similar pitfalls. While in some of those old games, a positive reception could still be given, because the shine of innovation allowed you to gloss over the flaws, but now that shine isn't there, the flaws feel obvious.

Retro games on the other hand are typically the opposite. They often excel in doing something simple really well and perfecting those ideas, without relying on the shine of innovation. Look at a game like Shovel Knight. It was built in the fashion of NES games, but in doing so, it made something mechanically perfect with great level design, great character design and great art.



vkaraujo on 19 February 2015
Burek said:
sales2099 said:
Being real here: Given PS4's defining AAA titles (no ports) so far (Killzone SF, Infamous, Drive Club, LBP 3, and now The Order), I simply don't see PS4's hardware sales as being truly justified. Is it merely riding off the positive brand image of PS3 in the last few years because it certainly isn't selling for the system-defining exclusives imo.

To sound fair and not trolling, this is like 360 hardware sales from the dreaded period of 2011-2013, when 1st party exclusives all but dried up, save for Forza/Gears/Halo, yet 360 still sold at a very decent pace.

They really aren't justified when you focus on exclusives. Because PS4 truly hasn't offered any must haves so far, just as you say.

I see PS4 sales more as a function of people wanting to play good 3rd party games on a new machine (Destiny, Watch Dogs, CoD, FIFA, Madden, Ass. Creed, GTA and many others...)

And the reason why many more bought a PS4 instead of XOne for those multiplats is because MS stumbled out of the gate, made some wrong moves and it took some time to regain goodwill amongst consumers.

But now, after 15 months, I don't see PS4 being able to ride XOne's faults anymore. MS rectified the wrongdoings, dropped the price, and is becoming more of a competitor.

So 2014 exclusives were irrelevant (not that XOne had more or significantly better ones --- a bit better perhaps). But from now on, the exclusives should start to matter. And any powerful and quality title will matter.

The Order was supposed to be the first one --- an exclusive in the period when XOne has none. It was supposed to widen the gap. Sure, first week it might sell well, bundles in Europe will sell decently as well. But this kind of reception can do more damage to PS4 than releasing nothing will damage XOne.

Bloodborne seems like a winner, that game should push PS4, but then there is Until Dawn (which I am very interested in) that I foresee doing worse than The Order. And then an Uncharted/Halo battle, but a battle between two very different target markets.

Basically, what I wanted to say, PS4 is selling due to a mix of multiplats and XOne's mistakes, but if PS4 keeps betting on experiments that keep failing, the advantage will surely fade away.

[Bolded]: Really? Can we expect it to move consoles?

Don't get me wrong, i love Demon Souls and Dark Souls (still need to play DS 2) and expect it to get a deserved 90+ Meta Score, but it is the very opposite of accessible. The Souls series looks more of a sleeper hit than a console seller.

I mean, DS 2 opened FW with 800k on a 160M userbase.



Aeolus451 on 19 February 2015
shikamaru317 said:
dukerx2 said:

Gamestop already shipped mine so some people may be screwed.

Shouldn't people still be able to return it as long as it's still in the cellophane wrap? 


I don't know about individual retailers' policies but for the most part, you'll just have to trade it in to get some money back on it. Hell, I recommend that you trade it after you beat it unless you want to collect it. 



Around the Network
Aeolus451 on 19 February 2015
shikamaru317 said:
Sweep said:

Very disappointed of people using reviews to judge a game without playing it...

People that game on a budget pretty much have to decide rather or not to buy a game based on it's reviews. It would be kind of foolish to buy a game for $60 without reading reviews, especially if you already had qualms about the game based on other prerelease information. 

I play video games on a budget but I don't use reviews as a way to figure out if a game is worth buying or not. They're not reliable sources of info and reviews on games. A lot of them have an agenda or bias behind their reviews. I'll do research on the game and read about it's features from a credible source then use my own judgement on whether to get it or not. The majority of the time, I'm happy with my purchases. If I do buy a lemon then I'll make a note of the dev and be more weary of their games in the future. 

I generally trade in most of the games I buy after I've beat 'em or exhausted my interest in 'em since I'm on a budget and all. :D



Aeolus451 on 19 February 2015
think-man said:
Will sony ever learn?


How to sell a console or games? Yes, they have.



2008ProchargedGT on 19 February 2015
sundin13 said:
2008ProchargedGT said:
Wow some really strange review cropping up. Some obvious troll click bait reviews 2/10, 4/10 and so on, then there some this is the greatest thing ever Sonys new big IP 9.5/10. Ive also read a few where the reviewer mention a few minor things or says something like "its hard not to recommend theis game" then gives it a 6 or 6.5 lol. So people love 8bit retro games from 20 years ago but if a game is of the mold of "5 years" ago then its a trash game? Welp I already have it paid for so I guess ill just make my own opinion in a day. So far IMO all the negative things the reviews nhave mentioned are very minor. This games seems to be what I have been craving for some time.


There is a difference between dated and retro...

Basically, dated refers to when a game hasn't learned how to fix the mistakes old games have made and falls into similar pitfalls. While in some of those old games, a positive reception could still be given, because the shine of innovation allowed you to gloss over the flaws, but now that shine isn't there, the flaws feel obvious.

Retro games on the other hand are typically the opposite. They often excel in doing something simple really well and perfecting those ideas, without relying on the shine of innovation. Look at a game like Shovel Knight. It was built in the fashion of NES games, but in doing so, it made something mechanically perfect with great level design, great character design and great art.


Thats a fair point.



KLAMarine on 19 February 2015

This is what happens when you go into the video game industry hoping to make a movie. Add in console warriors and you have yourself a storm.

In my opinion, TO deserves the middle-of-the-road reviews considering the design philosophy RaD adopted in making TO. Graphics will look nice to many people and RaD should be commended for TO's visuals but graphics are not the only thing that go into a video game just like lighting is not all there is to a movie. Video games can also feature game play, sound design, replayability, frame rate, a good story, multiplayer, etc.

Let this be a learning experience for RaD going forward.



Aeolus451 on 19 February 2015
foodfather said:

Not surprising at all.

Gameplay > Graphics. This has been the case in the past and it will continue in the future. Shame Sony doesn't think this way.

 

User was moderated for this post - Conegamer


Honestly, I don't really understand this moderation but then again I don't know this person's history.