Angry Joe Review - For Honor (7/10)

I agree with him ,For Honor is a competitive game, it should have a stable connection and more dedicated servers

I think part of the issue is that it's a fighting game, with like actual frame data n shit. From my understanding, dedi servers actually add to the issues of a fighting game more than they fix, which is why a lot of them have stayed P2P, so the 1 v 1 nature of a fighting game, which is actually For Honor is rad as ****, and even 2 v 2s, its actually more ideal for it to be P2P. But Dominion n Deathmatch because of the increased player count, and then with how creeps work probably would be better suited for dedis. But that's something angry joe wouldn't know, because he's a shmuck.

So it is what it not having dedis isn't necessarily a problem, if anything might be more of a net positive. The connection itself isn't even the problem to begin with outside of people latching on to one crowbcat video (because again, gamers would rather use a brick than a paint brush). Like actual game net code when you're in a match is actually fantastic. It's the stuff around it. Getting into a match, host migrations, and other issues when people drop. It's similar to what can be annoying about Siege, for a company that makes good mp games out of nowhere, there actual product still lacks polish which is beyond irritating.

Also more joe stupidity: Weird that he never figured out that the "teleporting" he blames on lag is actually a bot replacing a dropped player.

Like what the ****? I knew the difference from just watching his examples and barely investing time into playing the game. What a clown lol

Don't give a shit what Angry Joe says but I am really close to picking up For Honor. Ghost Recon beta sucks so that's one less game I have to get and I really want For Honor. Don't know what system to get it on though. Doubt any of my Xbox friends get it

@jg4xchamp: I didn't hear many people complain about gameplay or say it's a bad game , most of negative reviews on steam are about connection problems. I think dedicated severs add more stability especially when it comes to matchmaking , if I'm not wrong ,Overwatch is using dedicated servers though it's a different game

@the_master_race: I didn't pick on his critique that is fine, I'm saying the man spouts from a place of ignorance often. Overwatch being a shooter isn't about frame data the way a fighter is. At least not in the same way.

I'm saying the decision might actually make some level of sense if Ubisoft saw the game as a fighting game; because it has a lot of obvious fighting game tendencies. The part where it's sloppy is typical Ubisoft. But I don't necessarily think peer 2 peer is the problem.

whatever the problem is I hope they can fix it soon , Rainbow had a rocky lunch too but it's much better now , I'm sure For Honor will get better with new updates and patches

I'm giving the game a 9.

Incredible gameplay. The attention to detail is phenomenal. Really fun when playing with friends.

The issue is that in competitive online gaming, most gamers today don't have any honor, let alone know what it is. The rage quitting is a massive issue with the P2P connections; especially in 8 player matches. It's primarily why I try to only go up against bots; they don't rage quit.

7/10 sounds exactly like what I would give the game. It was pretty fun for a while. Not worth full price.

Then why bother to click this thread?

That Angry Joe review video was, LEGENDARY!

And I'm just glad he also review that new Power Rangers game cause I almost bought it until I saw the games flows, I back out at the last minute!

And that's Ubisoft for you. They should simply focus on making the core of their games like the engines, assets, graphics etc but should leave the gameplay department to someone else. Their games are seldom outright bad but they always leave so much to be desired it's fucking irritating. Some could have been masterpieces but they miss a little piece that is such a big deal they end up almost sucking.

coming from Nioh I found For Honor's combat to be horribly slow and clunky.

I also think its kinda lame that the core system of blocking/stances/attacking is basically a well disguised QTE event.

Torn Banner did this shit better with Chivalry Medieval Warfare back in 2012

gonna wait for a decent sale before i jump in

Because he wanted to say that he is close to buying it, can't you read?

Don't care about Angry Turd either. But I'm just going to wait until the game drops in price. Looks more like a 30 bucks buy to me.

Hey Guys, Angry Joe here- Just wanted to say I appreciate you all checking out my stuff!!

This felt like another fad game.

Excellent production values, but ultimetely another small team based arena moba-like feeling with very little else going on.

I'l not bother with this, will wait for Mount & Blade 2: Bannerlord ... going to be so much better (besides graphics/animations).

most of the online games i play are on servers. i can't deal with P2P personally. games like titanfall 1, halo 5, gears of war 4, and overwatch run really great. This game when i played the beta felt laggy as ****.

I commend them for trying and making a new IP, the graphics are great, the gameplay is pretty fun just needs balancing (which ubisoft never does and another reason i skipped it) but the fact it isn't running on servers is a sham. activision, sony, and ubisoft need to step up. hell even EA has dedicated servers for battlefield and battlefront

But the gameplay in this is good -_-

@jg4xchamp: Haven't played it. From what I heard it's fun for a couple of hours but quickly gets stale because of an utter lack of depth.

If you play Dominion, and don't know shit about fighting games. Sure. But they are insane. I present counter-argument

I'm purposefully avoiding this game like a scum bag. I'm already missing my SFV time, don't need some new twist on the FG genre keeping me away even longer lol.

If the game is still plenty active this summer I might jump on it.

It's the reverse for me.....the more I play it the better it becomes, it's like a fighter....at first you get clobbered because you don't know the mechanics well. As you become better and improve your strategies, you start doing well and it's more fun as a result. This is the kind of game where you will most likely get slaughtered if you button mash, but as soon as you start applying all the moves such as parrying, blocking, guard breaking, etc. you immediately survive longer.

My advice to anyone who plays this game is to learn the tutorials very well before going online. Don't be afraid to run, tactical retreat is often the best course of action.....not to be confused with being a coward.

@the_master_race: I don't like Angry Joe he's kind of a tool but I agree with the score and some of his comments.

It would be so much better with dedicated servers on Live. They could even make some really good Seige maps with more players in the matches.

It's a fun game though and actually has a good amount of depth in the mechanics. I play a bit everyday and I'm still learning new moves on the couple of classes I've been maining.

If they handle it the same way they handle the new content for R6 Seige it might see an actually decent life span. I know the next update is bringing Ninja and Centurion.

The thing that's most interesting to me is that there's mechanics in the game to actually expand it with more game modes like the mounted combat, the archers and the battering rams in the campaign.

Great review. This is also what i'd consider the 2nd best ubishit title in the past ~10 years.

lol yeah, his reviews are always damn entertaining but this one is definitely one of the best!

Great review. Really changed my outlook on the game. He hammered down the points and didn't bitch about the game being too hard. Reviewed it like a fighting game too which it kind of is.

Much better than Angry Joe's review that lasted fucking 29 minutes. Still can't articulate a point to save his life.

6.5/10 - 7/10 seems about right.

Everyone is just hyped on it since the guy in charge of the game is a bamf hype man.

The combat was way too plodding. I get that they characters needed weight and momentum, but it comes off as being sluggish and slow. And I hate the blocking, it is indeed a scarcely hidden qte. I've learned to never buy a Ubisoft game at launch anyway, given as every single game they release is broken for months. That is insulting, and they dont deserve people's money. As long as people preorder and buy unfinished and buggy games, they'll keep pushing them out. If Ghost Recon beta was any indication, that will be another to add to a long list. Not Ghost Recon, and not finished even, with all the same Ubisoft gameplay we have seen for 7 years.

Same.

@oflow: Yeah dedicated servers would be nice.... it's one of those things where if you're an Xbox One owner you are accustomed to having top notch connections on all first-party titles and it's a little jarring when 3rd party stuff can't keep up.

Overall though I'm enjoying this game, most of my gripes are technical in nature.

So is the story good for this game or what?

I like it a lot. It's easy to lose a couple hours in 2v2 and the community is pretty good from my experience.

I generally don't have issues with lag in game, and it's pretty well optimized. There's only one arena where my frames always seem to drop (2v2 with snow).

Only thing I don't like is the menu system. And I wish I could opt out of that global war thing, cause I couldn't care less.