The Order: 1886

Like I said a hundred times, Sony and Microsoft should have held off on making new consoles. There is so much more that could've been done with the PS3 and 360. I don't expect myself to own a "next-gen" console until another year or so passes. Waste of money and the thing will collect dust just sitting there. Big misses by both companies.
No, both systems were nearing the end. If the PS4 and X1 were to launch this year, that would have made 10 years for the 360. The limitations of both it and the PS3 have hindered developers. It was time to move on. There really isnt much more those consoles have to offer
 
No, both systems were nearing the end. If the PS4 and X1 were to launch this year, that would have made 10 years for the 360. The limitations of both it and the PS3 have hindered developers. It was time to move on. There really isnt much more those consoles have to offer

Developers are being hindered by the "next-gen" consoles, not the old ones. The PS3 and 360 were beginning to be mastered and used properly into making games that were beyond amazing. Now they have to start over and are being tasked with making miracles (PC level games) without the proper tools. Look at The Order and all the news that is coming out about the game.

I'd rather have 15-20 years of 360 and PS3 use than shoving a struggling console out onto the markets.
 
I think the issue is that as soon as they figure out how to get power out of one console the new one comes out. Like it takes them close to a decade to pump out the maximum of a current gen ironically.
 
Developers are being hindered by the "next-gen" consoles, not the old ones. The PS3 and 360 were beginning to be mastered and used properly into making games that were beyond amazing. Now they have to start over and are being tasked with making miracles (PC level games) without the proper tools. Look at The Order and all the news that is coming out about the game.

I'd rather have 15-20 years of 360 and PS3 use than shoving a struggling console out onto the markets.

Um no. Devs can and do so much on PC and have for years. They've been forced to scale back bc of the limitations of the 360/PS3. There used to be a time in the PS2 days where PC versions were far inferior but thats not the case as PC games hold higher quality textures, have higher resolution and can hit 60 fps on a regular basis and this isnt with the top of the line set up. The PS3/360 have lagged behind and that was very apparent, especially for anyone that played the same game on the PC vs console set up.

The PS4/X1 have opened the doors and giving them access to a new se of tools that simply are not possible on the old gen consoles. I really dont see how anyone can honestly say the PS4 and X1 are hindering development

You say shove a struggling console onto the markets, but these consoles arent struggling. They are both doing just fine. The 2015 exclusive lineup is looking to be amazing with titles like Bloodbourne, Batman Arkham Knight, Uncharted 4, The Witcher 3 and Halo 5 all set to be released and this is bc Sony and MS released their consoles when they did

I think the issue is that as soon as they figure out how to get power out of one console the new one comes out. Like it takes them close to a decade to pump out the maximum of a current gen ironically.

that may be true but its not like its just a series of crap games till then. The Last of Us was arguably the epitome of the PS3's capabilities but did that in any way take away the technical achievements that were the Uncharted games, Journey, Mass Effect 2, Batman Arkham Asylum, MGS4, God of War 3, etc... before it? TLoU came about bc of the years of experience with the hardware. You need them out in order to get that. Had the PS3 launched later, lets say in 2010 instead of 2006, then we might not have seen it
 
Last edited:
The Order was supposed to be one of those games.... So I'll take your comment with a grain of salt. Those other amazing titles you named are sequels. Nothing really changes with those games since the blueprint was made on the previous consoles.

The new consoles aren't doing fine, either. Some research may need to be done on your part. No disrespect.
 
The Order was supposed to be one of those games.... So I'll take your comment with a grain of salt. Those other amazing titles you named are sequels. Nothing really changes with those games since the blueprint was made on the previous consoles.

The new consoles aren't doing fine, either. Some research may need to be done on your part. No disrespect.

Bloodbourne isnt a sequel. Besides the other games I listed are bc the devs/IPs have a proven pedigree. All those games could suck for all I know but the previews look promising and based on previous entries, chances are they wont. I could have named something like The Order, but its unproven until it actually comes out

As for your second statement, both consoles launched with record numbers. The PS4 especially is doing much better than the PS3 before it. It was at 18M last time numbers were reported and will easily be over 20M by the end of this first quarter. How is it not doing fine? What research do you have to add?
 
Developers are being hindered by the "next-gen" consoles, not the old ones. The PS3 and 360 were beginning to be mastered and used properly into making games that were beyond amazing. Now they have to start over and are being tasked with making miracles (PC level games) without the proper tools. Look at The Order and all the news that is coming out about the game.

I'd rather have 15-20 years of 360 and PS3 use than shoving a struggling console out onto the markets.
That just not true. A lot of games lost content, and were dwarfed by the PC versions because of the old tech. Games were being released on multiple disc on the 360. People just need to look at the difference between GTAV and other rereleases to understand how limiting the old consoles are.

Something like Arkham Knight, The Witcher 3, and Uncharted 4 would be impossible on the old systems.
 
The Order was supposed to be one of those games.... So I'll take your comment with a grain of salt. Those other amazing titles you named are sequels. Nothing really changes with those games since the blueprint was made on the previous consoles.

The new consoles aren't doing fine, either. Some research may need to be done on your part. No disrespect.
You do realize this happens every time right? There is a big drought at the start of every new console cycle, with of course the few exceptions. How many console launches have you lived through? Using your theory, we should still have the N64 and PS1. That just doesn't make any sense. Like at all...
 
Lol, could you imagine if we were just leaving the PS1/N64 life cycle meanwhile the PCs has everything from the last 15 years. Crazy talk
 
Lol, could you imagine if we were just leaving the PS1/N64 life cycle meanwhile the PCs has everything from the last 15 years. Crazy talk
I am sure we would have games like Bioshock Infinite, Uncharted 2, and Bayonetta if we stuck with those systems. :hehe:
 
Those aren't bullies, those are your customers.
They seem very insecure about their work. And also the BS about it being impossible to finish the game in just over 5 hours? There is actual evidence online. And to think, they made one of my favorite games in Ghost of Sparta. :csad:
 
Oh, things are getting juicy on twitter. Two "previews" for reviews are pretty hilarious. Especially the GameInformer one.
 
There is no review, just a tweet about the game.

https://***********/gameinformer/status/568169456280715264
 
https://***********/gameinformer/status/568171249731538944
 
They seem very insecure about their work. And also the BS about it being impossible to finish the game in just over 5 hours? There is actual evidence online. And to think, they made one of my favorite games in Ghost of Sparta. :csad:
I don't see them as being insecure about the game at all. In fact, they seem VERY confident in the quality of their game. They just seem tired of the complaints about a game 99% of the commentators haven't even played yet.

They raise a perfectly valid point about quantity versus quality and this is coming from someone who thinks these types of games should be 15-20 hours long. Theyve said time and time again that the average game time will be 8-10 hours (average for this genre) which is shorter than what I would like, but is reasonable. I'd rather have a 8 hour game that is solid and fun than a 30 hour game that is lacking in consistent quality. Note that I'm not arguing about the actual merits of the game since I have no idea yet, but more so the logic behind the stance. We'll see what this game is like when it actually comes out.

And yes, he's exacrly right about the Internet being the new playground for bullies. Look at Twitter, YouTube...hell everywhere. You can blindly toss a stone into the air and hit some self-righteous, self-absorbed asshate spewing hate because they think it's funny or think they deserve something they aren't getting. It's disgusting.
 
Skywalker, the things about the game being bad might be true. However, some of these comments are being taken out of context. When Dana Jan was talking about quality and quantity, he was asked a question about quality of gameplay vs. game length gameplay. He was not specifically responding to the length of the game rumors.
 
Also, I actually agree with everything he said about the internet being a wellspring of negativity and hate.

People use the internet and the sort of anonymous veil it gives us to be completely hateful rude and mean.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,277
Messages
22,078,840
Members
45,878
Latest member
Remembrance1988
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"