Pics of you and the bottles.Would I rather a $100 bottle of champagne, or 6 bottles of decent sparkling?
I'll have the 6 bottles for the midweek and the fancy bottle for a splurge.
As long as we have variety, we're all winners
Pics of you and the bottles.Would I rather a $100 bottle of champagne, or 6 bottles of decent sparkling?
I'll have the 6 bottles for the midweek and the fancy bottle for a splurge.
As long as we have variety, we're all winners
I am not pointing fingers but short sp games being okay for full time gamers all of a sudden is a sony fanboy spin.
I expect 7-15 and that isn't enough unless its the latter with a nice Season pass and/or MP mode.If Quantum Break is a 5 hour game, watch me get hypocritical as a mother****er. Lol
I hope not. But I have a feeling it might be a sim5lar thing.
Would I rather a $100 bottle of champagne, or 6 bottles of decent sparkling?
I'll have the 6 bottles for the midweek and the fancy bottle for a splurge.
As long as we have variety, we're all winners
Even worse when half the time of a 5-8 hour game is unskippable cut-scenes. Well, some devs will do anything to artificially prolong a game.$60 in a one time ride for 5-8 is a crime
That's the potential problem with QB right now. It's some kind of action game + live action cinema clips or something.If Quantum Break is a 5 hour game, watch me get hypocritical as a mother****er. Lol
I hope not. But I have a feeling it might be a similar thing.
Agreed.To be blunt, this entire article is rubbish. You spend $60 per game, you should get your money's worth. Stop making excuses for mediocrity. In the relationship between developers and gamers, its still risk versus reward. We risk (invest) $60 per game hoping to be rewarded with something worth the time and money we invest into it. Its been a decent arrangement thusfar. To suggest that the length of a game shouldnt matter versus the money spent is treacherous to the point of being insane. You're essentially asking to have your fudge properly packed for you without even an ounce of dignity to cling to. Its absurd....
End rant/
I think it's abvious they were targeting the Heavy Rain, Walking Dead and Beyond 2 Souls audience of the world. I wouldn't expect multi player out of this genre especially at release. From what Ive read a lot the reviews are just plane ignorant. Games like these should be no more than 7-8 hours or it would get boring. Anyway I will be enjoying the game while laughing at ignorant people on the web XD.
The Order is actually the poster child for being generic shooter in terms of gameplay. If it was some fresh experience from a gameplay perspective, then maybe that would be an argument. Beyond and especially Heavy Rain could lean on this argument a bit, but don't come out with a generic 7-8 hour shooter, with no multiplayer and expect people to rave about your game.
Why wouldn't you expect multiplayer? Almost every cover shooter in the last 8 years has had it. The only reason the game got boring is there is no substance, its the same dumb 3 AI over and over, shotgunner rush, cover camper, and sniper that we've seen for over a decade, and probably the worst version of each I can remember. The Order deserves zero slack Zero. I'm sorry. It doesn't do gameplay well, and if it was in likes of Heavy Rain.... be like Heavy Rain then, we can respect that.
I understand the concept they tried to be like TLoU in terms of gameplay, but they don't have a solid AI base to even consider it. So, it ended up falling apart for after the 2nd-3rd encounter. The story is really good though.
I saw/heard one of the devs say that it was a third person action shooter in an interview. They weren't going for TLOU. I'm not sure how that comparison even gets made. Because it is slow? TLOU's game-play isn't shooter game-play, even if it does have some shooting in it. The items you pick up and inspect don't even affect the game in any way. That's so weird to me.
It has even less in common with Heavy Rain( presence of QTEs?). Your actions change the outcome of the story in HR. The QTEs had branching actions, and there were multiple endings. even if Cage didn't want people to play more than once( for impact), there was still a reason to replay it.
The Order's critics are not just criticizing the length, even though people seem to be fixating on that. It is the length, relative to price, relative to cutscenes/gameplay, relative to features, relative replay-ability.
The Length is NOT the only thing people are upset about.
I don't want to get too down on the Order, as I know there is something to it, but some of the defenses are silly.
It's easy to find examples of short games that are worth full price. The only trouble is, they are all indie games, and full price is $15. It's hard to find examples of short retail games that are worth full price.
The Order is actually the poster child for being generic shooter in terms of gameplay. If it was some fresh experience from a gameplay perspective, then maybe that would be an argument. Beyond and especially Heavy Rain could lean on this argument a bit, but don't come out with a generic 7-8 hour shooter, with no multiplayer and expect people to rave about your game.
Why wouldn't you expect multiplayer? Almost every cover shooter in the last 8 years has had it. The only reason the game got boring is there is no substance, its the same dumb 3 AI over and over, shotgunner rush, cover camper, and sniper that we've seen for over a decade, and probably the worst version of each I can remember. The Order deserves zero slack Zero. I'm sorry. It doesn't do gameplay well, and if it was in likes of Heavy Rain.... be like Heavy Rain then, we can respect that.
I understand the concept they tried to be like TLoU in terms of gameplay, but they don't have a solid AI base to even consider it. So, it ended up falling apart for after the 2nd-3rd encounter. The story is really good though.
The AI is lousy.I was at a friends place and she was playing it today, and I have to agree that the A.I. Was... Not great.
I really hope the game sells well enough to support the studio. I love the idea of games as art. Its a stunning piece of software, and it has potential to be something special.
Journalists are entitled to review it for what they feel its worth, but I really wish that they kept the view of supporting the industry in mind.
I do think that maybe Sony should have thought about the pricing a bit more. If it were half price, I feel the drama would be null and void. I'm not sure of the studios size, or the games budget, but they should have realized the potential of this as a long lasting, console defining property.
Can the licence recover from this? I hope so.
But then does value actually effect the score of a game? It does when I'm buying it, but a good experience is a good experience, whether it be based on his visuals or gameply...
Agreed.I weigh cost vs. content.
5 hours is not worth the cost of a new game.