Crossguard isn't necessarily sith. It just happens that Kylo has one. I've seen a double ended lightsaber in a trailer and Maul had one so...?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order - Review Thread
- Thread starter Earvin Infinity
- Start date
I'm pretty sure you have to make the krystal unstable with the force to get it
OK, what's up with that?
It is ~30 hours long or so, at least, but this attitude. Why must the game be that long? I feel like this demand for longer games is only leading to worse games in many cases. This is a game that should have been somewhat shorter, in fact.
I understand the money/value thing - but games never needed to be this insanely long in the past. Why now?
So we can never finish them and have an endless backlog?
For me quality over length every time. A short but amazing experience is better than stretching it out artificially.
I find it weird - you hardly ever hear someone say of an album - "its amazing but sadly 4 minutes shorter than average".
On a side note - haven't played it yet - but hearing mixed things about HDR implementation - anything you can say on that? Should I turn HDR off to play it on my X?
Yesss. I'm eagerly awaiting the analysis of the PC and console versions.
Occasional stutter aside, it's an absolutely gorgeous game.
Yes, exactly. I'm sure some people have time to dedicate to thousand hour games but...come on, I can't imagine most do. I personally almost never finish those super long games as it's obvious they are only long as a result of padding. They always lose momentum. I much prefer shorter games or at least games that fill their run-time or feel well paced.
HDR is great in Fallen Order!
I sometimes feel like the industry is going in circles. It used to be that anything below 20 hours playtime was considered way too short and a sign of a crappy game, but then the first Max Payne, which clocks in at under 10 hours, surprised everyone with how focused and good it was. This resulted in a lot more games deciding to be confidently short, which again made for some great game experiences that didn't feel the need to drag things out for an artifically high number on the back of the box.
Nowadays we're back to the pre-Max Payne days of people thinking that the quality of a game and the number of hours it takes to beat are directly proportional. This is part of the reason why so many games are dull collectatons these days.
Let's do games a favor and stop obsessing over playtime. Let developers make their games exactly as long as they feel they need to be.
In other news, this is the first EA game I've bought since 2012 (Mass Effect 3). I guess it was inevitable that even EA could eventually produce something that was worth playing for me. It only took them 7 years.
Nowadays we're back to the pre-Max Payne days of people thinking that the quality of a game and the number of hours it takes to beat are directly proportional. This is part of the reason why so many games are dull collectatons these days.
Let's do games a favor and stop obsessing over playtime. Let developers make their games exactly as long as they feel they need to be.
In other news, this is the first EA game I've bought since 2012 (Mass Effect 3). I guess it was inevitable that even EA could eventually produce something that was worth playing for me. It only took them 7 years.
Darn. Man hopefully this does well enough so Respawn can make a spiritual successor to RC.
It's an 84 now. I expect it to settle in around this.
PC version is at 90 with 12 reviews. Discrepancy is a bit much makes me think the issues on consoles are more detrimental to the experience.
I am generally in the same boat as you regarding EA, but might I recommend Titanfall 2? It's probably the best single player FPS released in a long time. It has some interesting gameplay gimmicks/mechanics that don't overstay their welcome held together by robust on-foot shooting and mech-based combat mechanics.
It's really quite excellent, probably my favourite FPS of the generation, and usually goes for less than £10 during sales on PSN/Xbox/Origin and if you're on PC it will probably find its way to Steam soon.
Still up in the air - the reviewers tweets say they might not, but the magazine said to expect a full verdict in the next issue so who knows
Too bad then. Can't just ignore poor technical performance on consoles.
Hope they fix it.
Also 12 reviews is a pretty small sample size. The PS4 version is getting the bulk of the reviews.
Not necessarily - it depends on the console.
Any reviewer that played on Xbox One base/Xbox One S will have had a dramatically worse time than someone playing on X or PC.
Is it the same reviewers rating the PC version higher? Otherwise the difference in score is meaningless.
I feel like single player games that aren't open world/rpgs have always been short
for me personally, i just can't justify paying $80 for a sub 15 hours SP game where i am from
that's about a month paycheck fyi
I was merely pointing out that the game itself is reviewing better where problems are less severe. Bulk of reviews for a platform where one doesn't intend to play are not relevant to others. All versions need to be fixed unfortunately to varying degrees judging by the complaints in the performance thread.
So you agree with those choosing to hold off? Great I guess.
Are you saying the poorly implemented Metroidvania elements and backtracking to the ship, fighting recently defeated enemies are the reviewers opinion and not facts? If you could point to reviews which say that, I'd be happy to change my mind! Thanks.
People were really desperate to clutch to any single player Star Wars huh?
The game looks bang average in every video yet it's out here with an 86 while continuing to look average..
The game looks bang average in every video yet it's out here with an 86 while continuing to look average..
Nah maybe it's a good game, have you played it or are you basing it off of some YouTube videos that show 1% of the game
There are plenty of people in the OT enjoying the game so far and the reviews are in line with expectations.
🙃
Congrats on the worst review thread comment in living memory - there was a lot of competition for the prize as well.
Yes, I've heard good things about it, but EA's lack of a presence on Steam meant I couldn't be bothered to get that game. I'm keeping an eye out for it.
It's been a long time since the era I was talking about, but I distinctly remember any game that was shorter than 20 hours almost instantly dismissed as not good enough many years ago. 20 hours was the magical number back then. Anything shorter risked lower review scores. The way I remember it, this is one of the main reasons games like Monkey Island 2 are so large for their genre (which in that particular case turned out to be a good thing).
LMAO yeah okay, brush aside the opinions of everyone who has actually played the fucking game while you bless us with your dumb take based on 0 hands on experience. What a stupid post.
Cannot feel the sentiment from many Twitter reactions I've read, that say that this is a GOTY contender. It looks good, plays nice - sure! But it does nothing original and lacks a lot of polish that I expect from a GOTY. Strip away the Star Wars cover and the reactions would have definitely been worse, I think.
Then again, it was not necessarily a strong year for AAA games, so maybe it is indeed a GOTY contender in the year 2019.
Then again, it was not necessarily a strong year for AAA games, so maybe it is indeed a GOTY contender in the year 2019.
I suggest waiting then. I've been there, I understand the issue. It's just that those longer runtimes often mean an inferior game.
Prices drop so fast these days (maybe not a good thing) that you'll never have to wait long.
Just... Err... Wut... Is this post missing a /jk
Glad this reviewing well, can't wait to play today.
Why is originality so important? Execution is often more valuable.
It does lack polish, though.
I'll have to wait and see what other people say and see for myself, but back-tracking is a feature I've grown to dislike in a lot of titles recently.
The problem for me is familiarity, repetition and generally not much new to see in this "extra" area. Especially annoying if you have to keep slogging through enemies just to get there, double so if the reward/pay off is barely anything. The weak story that most reviews talk about is disappointing but I usually...usually can move past that, or critics are too ....critical ? Hah I don't know.
Ultimately I just hate going back to places I've been over and over and over, seems long elongated content over reused areas, and delayed access by re-spawning enemies everywhere. Even if these enemies are the most basic and easy ones, on easy mode - take multiple hits.
It's what I hate about BT's respawning in SPECIFIC areas in Death Stranding, I get putting it in set missions and encounters, but the 20th time you need to pass through an area that has no other way through gets boring, annoying more-so than the fear factor the first few times. But that's a different thread. I just, games, please.. stop wasting my time with this :(
I would say an individual's take on those issues is the opinion. Backtracking is not a bad thing and the Metroidvania elements are not poorly implemented...in my opinion. That's the thing about it. Those features are part of the game but whether you enjoy them or not is going to vary. As always.
Loving the combat and docility settings however even with SSD on consoles I'm getting constant loading on death and some big performance drops when getting into fights.
alao some pop ins
I'm loving the game but the back tracking has got me confused like back in Retro gaming days.
alao some pop ins
I'm loving the game but the back tracking has got me confused like back in Retro gaming days.