Its the rule for responsive and fun gaming. You are against that?

A fun and resposive game will be good forever. A good looking game will be good for a couple of years. Gameplay over graphics anyday. And yes, you can consider that a rule for all the universe to use. Its what good gaming is.

I've been at this long enough to be able to tell you that graphics matter nothing in the grand scheme. Even an 8 bit game can be fun today if it was responsive and fun. Good looking games from years ago look like ass now. No one cares about them anymore.

Damn! Way to go against the grain. You're the first person I've seen shower The Order with that levl of praise. Care to elaborate on what makes it so great in your eyes? Cause I've heard some incredibly scathing reviews of this game that have me convinced I wouldn't be able to enjoy it.

I think it was ReviewTechUSA (I hate that guy) that did a review of this game that I totally agreed with.

Technically i agree. Solid fps, high res and no bugs
Visually every developer should have liberty to make your kind of game. I don't want every game strict to the photorealism, I am already feed up with these kind of games

Last I checked PC didn't had proper gens. So why bring it?

Yes, I'm against anyone thinking their taste should be universal rule. Other people have different prefferences, you could always try to respect it.

I cant agree more, even giving this game a 6 is too low imo. Technicaly and graphicaly its umatched. Gameplaywize it works, not the most fun but its not like its clunky, uberable or anything like that. And the story is somewhat shallow but also not atrocious. So realy giving this a 6.5-7 is justifiable anything lower is pretty dumb.

None of those games are released yet, theyre all in betas alfas and whatnot. Also theyre first person games wich change the rules a bit since you dont need ot render the player character wich free resources to rendering everything else. Anyway theyll most likely look better than The Order but will be releasing over 1 year after it and on a system that is  much more powerfull than a PS4, therefore anything on a PC should be technically superior to The Order but only 3 games are going to be and that isnt even asured we dont know yet if these games wont be mired by bugs and run like shit.

One of my main complaints with Uncharted is it's very linear and very static. You can throw other franchises like Gears of War in there also imho. Not that it's always a bad thing, for example Max Payne 3 is the same way yet I thought the game was amazing outside of insane load times. Yet even Uncharted is wayyyy more open than The Order. I wouldn't expect many if any games to reach the visual level of The Order on consoles and that's a good thing, because we need less games like The Order. It's the type of game you'd expect at the launch of a console, where you can excuse the extremely short length (5.5 hours to platinum for me) many gameplay flaws, and cliff hanger ending on being rushed for launch. But the game wasn't set for launch and was even delayed on top of that. Which means their intention was to present the prettiest game they possibly could with little to no regard for quality of actually playing it. And that's sad. It maybe sets the standard for how not to make a game. It's no surprise the game was shat on, the founder stepped down, and last I read they still don't have Sony's approval for a sequel.

I think eventually a sequel will come, although it might not be from RAD. We could easily see a less expensive downloadable title to close the story. The investment wouldn't have to be nearly as large since the engine is done already. There is a market for these types of "games".

You have it backwards on FPS. They used to be a lot more open ended and varied until they succumbed to modern game design. CoD4 followed the same design other shooters do now. Hell, it might have invented it. Run down corridor, handle enemy waves, cut scene, run down corridor, handle enemy waves, etc etc. You're guided through the levels as opposed to finding your way. I mean, compare that to something like Goldeneye, where you could sit 10 people down and see them beat a level like Facility in 10 different ways. And the modern design can be fine if the experience is worth it. Developers can make a good story, have challenging AI, good weapon design, good level design, interesting enemies. For me The Order had none of that. The only interesting enemy turns out to be a generic and repetitive QTE.

Normally, i would agree with you, but this isn't a matter of opinion. Its just wether you care enough. Its a fact that 60 fps is better for gameplay purposes. 

yeah im the same way, I prefer gameplay over graphics. A  game can look amazing all it wants,but if it fails in the gameplay department, then its not worthy of praise, just in my opinion in regards to that 

I don't really see how Until Dawn and 1886 are 'essentially the same'. They're both 3rd person, and both have a strong focus on story, but that's about it. Even those two similarities are handled quite differently.

I personally enjoyed Until Dawn a lot more. It wasn't particularly scary, and the second half's sudden shift in tone was pretty odd, but while it lasted Until Dawn really sucked me in. It loses a lot of its charm in your 2nd run (where you start to see the cracks in its illusion of choice), but in that first run, where i had no idea which choices would and wouldn't be significant, i felt a real sense of danger. That's not something video games often make me feel.