LOL, why would anyone disagree with that statement? Why wouldn't gameplay be a concern if you're buying a game? If all you care about is graphics, you might as well just watch Blu-Rays mastered in 4K.

@Logic - "why would anyone disagree with that statement?"

Because they enjoy the unusual change of pace that QD brings to the table compared to a virtual ocean of games with very similar gameplay.

QD needs improved writing, especially if they're going for stories with multiple endings, but I enjoy their gameplay. It's just different, and that's not a bad thing.

@MysticStrummer

Replay value is one the most important things a game should have IMO and QD's games are lacking in that.

Why couldnt we control Jody when we were running from the cops in the forest and try different strategies to escaping rather than just tapping/holding buttons for quick time events?

Making gameplay decide the outcome in the story is something David Cage just doesn't seem willing to try.

@Tekolie - I can see that, though I don't agree that replay value is necessarily tied to the ability to try different things. There have been very linear games that I played again and again just because they were fun, and there have been more open games that I played through once and never looked at again. The opposite is also true. For me, replay value is the general fun I have with the game, and wanting to see the story again. But, everyone likes different things.

My comment was simply stating that many people enjoy QD's gameplay, so Logic didn't need to LOL and act shocked about people disagreeing with Dark. QD has their own style, and no game is for everyone. There are many games which don't have that style so I personally enjoy the change.

Why cant 'interactive movies' be a genre on its own and critisized in that light, fair and square?

Why do people have to complaint about these games all the time? Does every game need to play like COD to be to mainstream satisfaction?

Well guess what these games are NOT mainstream!