Holy shit, those black bars are huge. I would dock it points just for the aspect ratio.... gives black crush new meaning The part of the screen that is actually being used looks amazing but I am disappointed this didn't turn out better. I was looking forward to a good cover shooter. Ill keep it on my gamefly Q and get around to playing it someday.
All the time. Think of any games less than 10 hours on average. Regardless of quality and sales. Let's say it even sold a pretty decent amount.
If it was 10 hours on average or under without a multi / replay ability component it sold less copies than it otherwise could have. A game doesn't have to be long by any means, but there needs to be a reason people keep playing the game and don't trade it in quickly.
I hate to argue for tacked on multi or co-op but if your game is 10 hours or less and full priced you need to do something to ensure people keep playing it after 1 week / tell their friends its worth it. $60 for your average Joe to sit down and play 6 hours and be done, its not a good look for business.
All that being said I still think Order will have a solid launch. I'm just really curious about its legs.
Wasn't there a really negative preview of this game from Eurogamer like four months ago? I am not sure why people are surprised.
It is one of those games that became overhyped purely on the merit that it was a Sony exclusive. Just like Lair, Haze, most of the Killzone series, and more recently, Knack.
It's based on all kinds of false premises. A) That the money would have been used on games B) That the games would have been good C) That the games would have been worthwhile ventures financially, etc.
He did say they "could" have been used differently. Not that it "would" have. But if the game bombs, then yes, any other use of that money probably would have been better.
Hopefully RAD gets to build a sequel, and with all the ground work already done, they should be able to focus more on gameplay, rather than engine-building.
You've just proven his point. Are making up your mind based on what other people "say"?
I'm going in for this game basically because I like the setting, I like the visual, it's different than other games already out, and I want to support a new IP. These reasons alone make it MY decision, not someone else's. It's not like I'm throwing away $60, I'm still playing a very solid game.
Also, nowadays you have to be careful what you read on forums and such, astro-turfing is very real. There's millions of dollars at play here, video games are not for kids anymore.
I have to say I wasn't expecting anything below a 6/10. Seems very harsh from some reviewers, I guess RaD unashamedly wanting to make a highly cinematic game got the rabid "GAMEPLAY FIRST OR DEATH" types rather riled up (as this thread proves).
How long are reviewers going to go on marking games down because of a lack of 'next-gen gameplay'? The sooner they realise that phrase is meaningless bullshit the better.
Hopefully RAD gets to build a sequel, and with all the ground work already done, they should be able to focus more on gameplay, rather than engine-building.
Unless there is a demo available or you shit money, what else are you supposed to do? Drop $60 (or in my case 70), find out the game is shit and then go "oh welp"?
I haven't played the game yet, but I certainly don't have to in order to find scores of 20/30/40 to be shameful and sensational. Given the way scales are viewed, where really the only ones that are viewed in a positive light are 70 - 100, anything below suggests, using the current standard, that the game has nothing redeemable. That's my two cents. I can tell I'll enjoy what this game has to offer, but I don't know how much I will enjoy it yet. I just know it has something to offer that is substantially more than an arbitrary value of 20, 30, or 40.
Eh, something about this really rubs me the wrong way. Sorry if this has been discussed to death.
Wasn't expecting this but reading the reviews it's deserved. Pacing is a key part of games and I HATE forced walking sections. Jumping in and out just because as it sounds, seems like a waste. On the gameplay side of things killing mostly humans is disappointing. Didnt cancel my preorder, will judge for myself, but It looks like I'll be selling this on Monday
Wow totally didn't expect it to get panned and thrown under some big AAA titles like Ryse. Well to be fair, Ryse had more contents, Assassin's Creed Unity had tons of contents to do, Master Chief Collection had four full games, multiplayer (when it works) so they get better overall reviews. The Order 1886 seems to lack those and gameplay isn't as good therefore it get panned by everywhere. Graphics' only their saving grace, otherwise it'll be even worse.
Glad I didn't pre order it, so will probably rent it or buy when it's $14.99.
All the time. Think of any games less than 10 hours on average. Regardless of quality and sales. Let's say it even sold a pretty decent amount.
If it was 10 hours on average or under without a multi / replay ability component it sold less copies than it otherwise could have. A game doesn't have to be long by any means, but there needs to be a reason people keep playing the game and don't trade it in quickly.
I hate to argue for tacked on multi or co-op but if your game is 10 hours or less and full priced you need to do something to ensure people keep playing it after 1 week / tell their friends its worth it. $60 for your average Joe to sit down and play 6 hours and be done, its not a good look for business.
All that being said I still think Order will have a solid launch. I'm just really curious about its legs.
Legs will depend how quick the second-hand market floods with copies. If by Sunday or Monday morning GameStops start to get in a handful of used copies, then legs won't be long. And that is one of the issues with the game: with no known campaign DLC planned, there is no incentive to keep the game upon completion since its replay value is basically nonexistent.
On EGM, we actually use the full scale. A 5 is average. We should be arguing against the mistake people have fallen into thinking that everything should land in the 7 ~ 10 range, not for us to consider that the correct way to score games.
Or EGM could stop using scores all together because they're not a good measure of the game and turn away people even if you have the best of intentions because of the way scores have been manipulated to indicate quality only with the highest of scores, and nothing below.
Hopefully RAD gets to build a sequel, and with all the ground work already done, they should be able to focus more on gameplay, rather than engine-building.
Nobody asks people to buy every game. But every gamer has a special interest in some games for whatever reasons. If a game interests me for some reason (in the case of The Order the art and iconography) I don't care about other people's opinion. I buy the game, I play the game and I decide afterwards if it was a good move on my part.
I'm 40, I game since I was a teenager, I don't need the opinion of a 25 years old game journo who know less than me, to tell me what games are good or not. I have a brain, I have personal tastes, I have a huge personal gaming experience. I can decide for myself, I have all the tools to decide for myself. And if I'm wrong (and it happens from time to time) then so be it. I don't pretend I'm Superman but I rather be wrong on my terms than blindly follow the advice of a game journos or some random gamers on the internet.
Watching the giantbomb quicklook they were trying so hard to find things to hate on.
"Game looks gorgeous"
"The lycan element was a surprise and was neat"
"The shooting feels tight and nice"
"The light pistol feels overpowered and no reason to use the other one... Oh wait the revolver is actually better"
"The voice acting is really good"
"The story seems interesting"
But then it got to the value thing and was like "its not worth $60"
Seems like its all based on it being prices too high. Which I agree. Hopefully it will drop in price faster than usual, cause its still a good experience.
It's based on all kinds of false premises. A) That the money would have been used on games B) That the games would have been good C) That the games would have been worthwhile ventures financially, etc.
My point rests on the very complex assumption that making games costs money, that there is a finite amount of money that can be spent on developing games, and that this money is allocated to different projects and one project's gain can be another's loss (or maybe the loss for all games). There certainly isn't an infinite amount of money to spend on development and a costly game that does not succeed certainly doesn't increase the budgets for other games sponsored by the same company.
Did people really expect a "cinematic" game that is only 5-6 (half being cutscenes) hours long to do well?
Especially when (MAJOR SPOILERS)
The last boss is the same as the first encounter and it ends with a QTE.
A pretty game does not compensate for poor gameplay and story, and developers thinking they can make games that are "movie-esque" is also a big fallacy. You can never bring a true cinematic experience in video games, games are more than just storytelling, it's interactive and as a result relies on various mechanics that movies do not bring to the table.
I'm also baffled how the devs could play the game and think this would be good, or at the very least a 8/10 (which I assume devs strive for that or higher) when it comes to reviews.
The whole champagne scene is the cherry on top, yes I'm sure you are glad you are done, but if I played this game and saw it for what it is, I don't think I would be celebrating, I'd be a nervous wreck personally.
Also after 5 years, this is what they come out with? All this money sunk into what amounted to a bad game; there is some serious mismanagement going on at the top if this is what the final product came out to be.
Someone really needs to be held accountable for release this...this thing, there is no way anyone in Q&A or otherwise that though, "Man this is awesome, ground breaking, easily a GOTY contender". But I digress, in the end they are losing money and fans, not me.
Did any of the reviews mention materials based destruction/physics being absent?
Quote from Amir0x sums up my thoughts.
In the start of The Order's unveiling to the world when it was in Game Informer I think, they went on and on about how one of the most major elements of the gameplay will be based around material-based destruction. How significant is it in the final product? As far as I'm aware, it barely plays a role at all. They never explained why this element of their vision evaporated, but it was one of the major reasons I was initially excited and they never said they changed their vision. I was dragged along for the entire year as they kept saying they had many other major gameplay elements to unveil thinking maybe it was behind the curtail, but instead the final product is even more routine than expected. It's OK to change things in development, but I don't like the announcing a feature and then just going radio silent on it so that the audience has to solve whether it will be in the game or not like a puzzle until the last moment.
Yeah, I'm supremely bummed out that the game didn't live even halfway up to expectations. It looked like such an intriguing premise and world from the moment it was unveiled, but all these criticisms of short longevity, non-existent replayability and control taken away from the player at regular intervals are just impossible to ignore now.
I thought my copy was going to arrive through the post today but it didn't. Now that the reviews have dropped, I have no idea what to do with it once it's in my hands. I have no qualms with paying £30+ for a short game as long as it delivers, but £36 for a tiny single player campaign that isn't even supposed to be very good is just too costly for so little. I think I'll just send it back to the site and get a full refund, then pick up the game in a couple of months time when it's inevitably reached bargain bin prices.
Open World
Co op
Multiplayer
Fetch Quest
Can switch to first person shooter on the fly
Micro Transactions
Most content cut for day 1 DLC incentives
Leveling and Crafting system
Full Screen
Day 1 10GB patch
Still wont work
The order has good elements like the story and setting but they are brought down by incomprehensible conceptual choices. The attention has been focused on meaningless debates about the lenght of the game when the real issues with The Order are how little fun it is to play and how simplistic the game mechanics are.
For what it's worth, the game delivers in terms of audiovisual presentation: It's incredibly good looking
+ The story is good and keeps you interested
+ The setting is amazing: dark, lugubrious and oppressive
+ Audiovisual presentation is almost like 11/10
- It's not fun to play, and action scenes are too scarce
- Too many cutscenes that hurt the pace
- Lots of dissapointing areas: Stealth, monsters, final boss...
- On the short side, specially since it has no multiplayer
Legs will depend how quick the second-hand market floods with copies. If by Sunday or Monday morning GameStops start to get in a handful of used copies, then legs won't be long. And that is one of the issues with the game: with no known campaign DLC planned, there is no incentive to keep the game upon completion since its replay value is basically nonexistent.
Yep I agree, and that's what my gut feeling is saying about legs as well. I'll be honest I hope it performs better than I think it will, as we could always use new healthy IP's in the industry, and who knows maybe with a second crack at it RAD may make a much better game.
But yes my early thought's echo what you posted quite a bit.
You need to pay at least a little bit of attention to the gaming zeitgeist. If everyone and their mother rages about how much they hate QTEs online, it might be a good idea to avoid making QTEs 10% of your game.
I think this needs to be highlighted, because it really is the reason why people are being so hyper negative about The Order in particular. Failures are particularly common in the industry, they only generate a big response when either:
a) People overwhelmingly wanted it to succeed.
or
b) People overwhelmingly wanted it to fail.
The Order managed to fulfill both criteria in different ways. It's strong marketing presence and interesting premise managed the former while it's "cinematic" focus and abysmal PR managed the latter.
Yes, because as I said within the same post about the way scales are viewed nowadays, with anything below a 70 being worthless to many, it does seem sensational.
Yes, I know that it's a fake account. Doesn't mean I can't still feel bad for them because they put thousands of hours towards a project that involved making the game they wanted to make. The best thing for them is to properly interpret the criticism and improve on what they're doing in the future.
Unfortunately that may be difficult to do for them because they'll have to filter out the shitty criticism from non helpful reviews and trolls who haven't played the game.
The part of the screen that is actually being used looks amazing but I am disappointed this didn't turn out better. I was looking forward to a good cover shooter. Ill keep it on my gamefly Q and get around to playing it someday.
