I like how we're already moving the posts and locking them in places with such rules to make it so neither of those games have any sort of chance to be the next best looking game out there. If you think they are going to be superior then why not notice their quality currently?, you seem to take rgeat notice of anything Sony shows before release and yet anyone that isn't on Sony's list roll doesn't get a second look, not even Star Citizen.

This is typical though, I should have expected less but I thought people wouldn't let a game and brand get in the way.

You read too much into my words. Besides, arent you the one of the ones defending that every game should look like the Order the the first place? I'm saying i don't want that. I do think that every game benefits from 60fps. If you don't agree with that go ahead. But its not a technical disagreement its a "i dont care that much about perfectly responsive and immediate gameplay versus more shinies". So, its not like you don't know 60fps is better, you just don't care.

Wtf are you talking about? The OP is talking about The Order ebing Technicaly Sound, looking great and running great. The 3 games you cited are most likely gona look amazing but we realy cant know if theyll run amazing till after they release. Before that they cant be counted, they are a promise of something great right now (specialy Kingdom Come Deliverance wich can be an awesome RPD if done right) but they arent fully fledged games yet.

And as they come out I'm sure there will be some posts to be moved on why they are shit or aren't as good as a movie based game.

That will only be the case if they run like shit actualy, considering theyre 3 games odds are at least 1 will be mired by bugs its how things go nowadays. If they dont run like shit and look as good as they do now theyll be acknowledged as remarkble games. Before they release they arent even games yet, so they dont count period.

Nope, I didn't say every game should look like the Order, I didn't even say that I would only play or value games that look like it.

But you said like only 60fps are worth... Every game is a matter of resources... So if a game can be 1080p30fps or 720p60fps more times I'll choose the first option. And if a game would be 1080p60fps it probably is cutting on other IQ itens. I will choose what I preffer based on the intended game, several times 60fps doesn't matter, and how do we know that? We have been playing 30fps games without much hassle in diverse genres for several gen. But sure, you must know the prefference for everyone and how much better 60fps is that no one can play bellow it or think the gain is negible and preffer the resources are used in other places, and because of that your rule should be definitive and everyone need to adhere.

RUn like shit isn't really a thing unless it's on your system of pref, in which case it's not a system that can run absolutely everything under the sun, with a PC that's all on you if you don't meet the spec and believe me I have seen oh so many claim a game is shit only for them to be found with weaker specs or asking for too much from their system.

Every game has their bugs though so we can't really excuse other games, including these ones but we also shouldn't just pin it as the sole cause to judge so harshly, Skyrim was riddled to the core with them and yet it won GOTY on here, VGA's and is loved by the ES fanbase. Looking good is more or lesss a subjective matter, one I knew we would get to sooner or later because that's why I mentioned those 3 titles because some on here seem to have a firm stance that a movie themed (yes the black bars are a thing from movies, including the "cinematic experience") game is better than anything out there, including a platform the game was never going to land on and despite that I've seen much different from watching the 3 other games mentioned. Yes we see progress just like we see those nice Watch DOgs or GTA V style trailers long before the games are even finished, only with Star Citizen and KCD we don't get AAA style trailer or verticle slices and think the games have been complete (some here are likely to think as such otherwise we'd come to my conclusion sooner), with those indev games we are watching them as they are being created, yes the games can have chances of fucking up but from what I'm seeing at this moment, I see promise and good looking quality. The thing is though with quality being subjective is I don't expect anyone on here to even be blown or wowed in the slightest at SC, maybe KCD since it's touching PS4/X1 but I imagine DF videos will sort that little spat out.

To get down to the point of all this, how much have we or anyone else on here talked about say Crysis or anything not from a console in terms of bar none visuals?, so far all I can think of is a few Crysis 1 mentions but we all know that was from years gone by, before TO I saw no mention of anything wow inducing on the platform, saw plenty of interested folk with some DF videos and pic vs pic anaylsis from PS4-X1 on here. Basically a game like SC has absolutely no chance with this site regardless of it's quality due to how people on here perciece quality. I mnyself think TO looks good for a movie based game that really captures a good cinematic feeel but I also like SC and KCD along with how gorgeous Battlefront looks.

I was refearing to the games having bugs that interfere with gameplay, frequent crashes, freeses, some other wierd stuf etc. Te Order is remarkbly devoid of bugs. And thats quite infrequent on the gaming world we live in, games come out with throngs of rather anoyinh bugs more often than not.

Ppl give Bethesda a pass for it being Bethesda, I never did. I think its an absurd they are allowed time and time again to release games with some very serious bugs and other technical difficultys just because its Bethesda and ppl love Elder Scrolls. They call those bugs "funy". I beg to differ when I get stuck mid mission and have to reload a save 30 minutes in the past to get around a bug.

About Crysis I played it (despite kinda hating FPS games, I played it cause it looked amazing and I wanted ot see what all the fuss was about) from memory I cant recall if it does in fact looks better than the Order, the Order has some more advanced systems tough, specialy regarding reflection, but if does look better than the Order than thats 1 game to count as being technicaly superior, specialy because it was also almost devoid of bugs. I never played Crysis 1 and 2 so I cant realy say anything about them. And i seriouly cant think of a console game that looks as amazing as the Order did.

But I think you missed the OPs overall point, even with some games looking the same or better the games that look like this are still very infrequent, the Order as a showcase of what we can expect in the future worked rather well, and for being as technically sound as it was should have gotten a little more recognition. Giving a game like this a score as low as a 3 is just wrong, the game isnt broken, on the countrary it runs super smoothly. Imagine if Star Citzen comes out and it turns out the game is not very fun (but isnt exactly bad either) on the gameplay departement and it has a simple story but one that works. All of a suden rewievers start giving it 3s. You look at the game however and its gorgeous as fck and has 0 bugs. You gota ask yourself "what the hell are these reviewers thinkin ?". "Ye this is not the best game on the planet, it has its flaws, but they arent recognizing the games strengths at all either".  Thats pretty much the point here 

No game is ever perfect though.