-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The Order 1886: Shooting & melee, graphics, thick atmosphere, explorable alleyways
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
And that was perfect. Need nothing more.
Plus, for those who missed awesome Game Informer coverage:
The Origins of The Order: 1886
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdt-TuWY6NI
Inside The History of Ready at Dawn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ_OcS4gAGw
Fried Food
Banned
Very excited for this.
I have no problem with a game that is a great EXPERIENCE as long as you don't purposfully go off the rails and try to break it.
I have no problem with a game that is a great EXPERIENCE as long as you don't purposfully go off the rails and try to break it.
gotta point out you probably didnt play the game because it had points with exploration and secrets. I played through the game twice. I know what it has. It is not cod linear.
RaD has a great track record, and this game looks super promising, what's not to be excited about?
Phat Michael
Banned
LOL yeah. Imagine being his room mate? You'd have the suicide hotline on speed dial I'm sure.
I have to agree with this because the application of soft-body physics to everything in the game actually opens up a hell of a lot in terms of gameplay variety. I need to wait for actually gameplay footage, but having realistic environmental interactivity where pretty much anything can be shattered, warped, or outright destroyed opens up a lot of possibilities on how to approach a combat situation.
Plus, for those who missed awesome Game Informer coverage:
The Origins of The Order: 1886
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdt-TuWY6NI
Inside The History of Ready at Dawn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ_OcS4gAGw
holy hell look at that cloth sway!
I hope the flashlight is not like that though. Needs to be more like a weak flickering lantern for max suspense. Totally different game but they really nailed the lantern in zelda in the dark dungeons.
So it's not open world at all? Is anyone at Sony willing to do open world games besides Sucker Punch? It kind of sucks that they're the only first party making games I want to play. I just can't get in to uncharted and TLOU beyond an initial couple hours but I can play a game like SRIV, GTAV, inFamous, Crackdown, AC4, etc for hours.
Get on it Sony.
Get on it Sony.
perineumlick
Member
Why does every game have to revolutionize gaming? Why can't some games just be enjoyed for what they are? You have games like No Man's Sky being made, amongst others, that are trying something new; The Order is what RaD wanted to do, and there are plenty of fans that love third person, story driven shooters. I don't understand why people want every game to be a certain way, makes no sense to me.
You sure are on edge for a game you barely know anything about yo. Its fair to ask why people would be so hype under the same standards but the road goes both ways too.
You sound like you're on the dev team or you've had some backstage look at the game.
Dragon1893
Member
You're full of shit son.
That building in the gif reminds me of the university in TLOU.
Team ico. Believe.
But really sony is just covering all bases. It has a studio ready for every genre.
fatigues_gasolini
Member
Am I the only one who is annoyed at people trashing a game that has literally no media out for it and releases in a year? Not just the order, but other games too.
It's a linear third person game. I can enjoy those, so hooraaaayy! Bring on cinematic, rogue-like, open world, linear, narrative, puzzle, fighting game, multiplayer, MMO, arcade, FPS, TPS, and brawling experiences. Maybe my palate is too large for its own good (I don't think there's a genre of game that I don't like), but I'm really excited for this.
Somehow I don't get the cinematic TPS fatigue. There's so many varieties of games out there I play and enjoy, and highly produced linear TPS that scream at me to play them don't really seem to come by that often, to be perfectly honest. There are a set of expectations I have, both strengths and weaknesses, to come with any given title, but I'm not going to wave it off because a certain genre confirms its strengths.
It looks amazing and I hope it plays really well too (not that worried though, considering the developer).
Somehow I don't get the cinematic TPS fatigue. There's so many varieties of games out there I play and enjoy, and highly produced linear TPS that scream at me to play them don't really seem to come by that often, to be perfectly honest. There are a set of expectations I have, both strengths and weaknesses, to come with any given title, but I'm not going to wave it off because a certain genre confirms its strengths.
It looks amazing and I hope it plays really well too (not that worried though, considering the developer).
Can't agree more. There is plenty of room at the table. This is a safe and proven formula, but if the game built around that is great, then I am all for it. I want new and exciting experiences as well, but that does not mean I am going to shun other big-budget games just because they are not trying to reinvent the wheel.
They've been emphasizing it as a single player experience, so I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Triggerhappytel
Member
You corporate apologist. If a game isn't striving to revolutionise the industry then it automatically becomes the Worst Game Ever. Being a good game isn't enough any more.
Plus, for those who missed awesome Game Informer coverage:
The Origins of The Order: 1886
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdt-TuWY6NI
Inside The History of Ready at Dawn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ_OcS4gAGw
jacksepticeye
Member
Sounds like a linear shooter that doesn't want to sound like it's a linear shooter
RaD isn't a huge studio, so some of you have unrealistic expectations. If the game is like Uncharted, TLoU, gears or Tomb Raider that should be pretty great. Sales have dictated that there are plenty f fans out there, like me, who like those games. GTA V is great, but took five years and a monster budget to make
iceatcs
Junior Member
Finish the level, but I have to go to other side of the city to complete the mission! Such exploration.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
IF this game turns out to be a big hit then Sony should scoop this developer up.
They have already proven themselves on PSP.
They need to replace the developers they shut down the last few years.
They have already proven themselves on PSP.
They need to replace the developers they shut down the last few years.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
So by your examples you want a big uninteractive city with cookie cutter buildings and small smatterings of enemies to deal with as you make your way to a marker on the map which then triggers the linear mission?
Night Angel
Member
It really is a shame that they've built up so much hype as an open world, exploratory experience full of exploration and open world-ness only to deliver a linear, cinematic TPS. Damn them!
/s
I really don't get the upset some of you have about the game at this stage. The devs have been very upfront about what kind of game it will be. As for why people are hyped:
Graphics
Setting/Subject
Characters
Developer
New console
Is that not enough?
RDR also took very large team, 5 years of work and supposed $75 million production budget.
RAD is sub 100 people, with clear ambitions to make awesome 3rd party action adventure that will surpass Uncharted 2. That is a great goal, we'll see if they will succeed.
Magic Mushroom
Member
Yeah, I think linear games often have better design than open world ones. They're more focused.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
The lack of gameplay footage is farcical at this point.
At this rate, the game consists of looking at stills and people telling you how great it is.
At this rate, the game consists of looking at stills and people telling you how great it is.
CosmicGroinPull
Member
If it's Uncharted or RE4 levels of exploration, I'll be disappointed. TLOU levels, I'd be perfectly happy.
Pristine_Condition
Member
Wow. What a shockingly bad post.
Photographers and cinematographers more often than not have actual, "real" lighting at their disposal and choose not to use it. This is the case now more than ever, due to the steady development of more sensitive film emulsions--and now, with the advent of digital, sensors that can shoot in low light conditions that film could never touch.
Why?
Because lighting is an art unto itself and artistic control of light is a powerful storytelling tool.
This "nonsensical rules and standards of another medium" argument of yours is daft. You are talking about needlessly and recklessly tossing aside a progression of artistic technique, handed down from artists for hundreds of years. Videogame artists pulling techniques from CGI>CGI pulling techniques from cinematography>cinematographers pulling techniques from photography>photography pulling techniques from painters. And now that the "language" of using light is developed and established, you see techniques from the "younger" medium informing and influencing the "old" media.
The reasons ideas get handed around is because THEY WORK. A soft light makes something feel a certain way, hard, long shadows make it feel another way. You can not only vastly change how something looks...you can actually push emotion with lighting. We should be looking into more ways to inject emotion in the videogame medium, not throwing away great visual techniques that work from others.
If you want to take this to it's natural conclusion, we'd better eliminate soundtracks too. Those came from opera and theater and are used in film and TV. We'd better eliminate color grading, because that comes from film, which got the ideas from painting and printing. Really, we should eliminate all plots in our games too, because those come from fiction writing, and that's like really really old.
Good post, Pristine.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
What has this generation done to people? Do we really think that the only structures games can have any more are linear cinematic experiences or huge aimless open worlds?
Chill Penguin
Member
I just wish this game wasn't a shooter. Give me a sword, axe, club, bat, whatever, but guns have been done to death. The other weapons would provide a newer gameplay experience at least. I'm fine with the linear scripted experience type of game, but i feel like i've played the third person cover shooter a thousand times already.
The essence of his post is about as appropriate as having a thing against linear cinematic shooters. What has this generation done indeed.
I believe it's also melee heavy.
This is good stuff. Seeing Rembrandt's Night Watch for the first time in-person was a revelation to me. The use of light and shadow is absolutely astonishing, and transforms a group portrait into something that's emotionally stirring. Here's a large pic, but it's really something worth seeing in person, if you ever find yourself in Amsetredam
MADGAME
Member
A good alternative fit for this game would be weaponized tea. Boil and throw in enemy faces for varying effect.
Errol Gray - Burn your enemies with this acidic concoction
Black Tea - Blind your enemies with burning liquid
Green Tea - Healing properties
Herbal Tea - combine with crumpets for mega mustache buff
etc.
You're putting words into my mouth, buddy. Or well, maybe I also worded my post a little sloppily, but either way, what you're implying I said is not quite what I meant to say.
I am not saying that we should completely discard ideas just because they've been used in other mediums. I'm saying that I find the idea (and having read other interviews with RaD where they've talked about the cinematic aspects of The Order, I get the strong feeling that that's what's happening here) of having to adhere to filmic lighting, specifically, simply because the audience is used to that kind of visual from movie productions silly. I don't think lighting always has to be realistic (I'm a huge fan of games with absurdly colourful lighting, for example) and I do realise, more than you might think, that lighting - like pretty much everything - can be a powerful storytelling tool. However, one also has to realise that games and movies are two very different mediums and not everything that works well in a movie works well in a game. In a movie you can (and often have to) completely change the lighting from one shot to the next, for example, even though there's no actual story reason behind this change. In games where players are free to move around the environment, oftentimes even move the camera, this kind of technique simply won't work most of the time because you can see where the light is coming from. Some people might not notice it but I would think that a lot of people would see that there's something wrong when you've lit the scene with three or four different lights but there's only one visible light source around. I'm not against using the lighting experience amassed during the relatively long history of filmmaking and photography. I'm against using it without second-guessing if, how, where and when it works in a game and simply for the sake of creating a more "filmic look". If you use it, use it for the right reasons.
But really, I don't think I would've taken as much offence at this had it come from another developer talking about another game. Ever since RaD proudly revealed that they have built a virtual camera lense into The Order to mimic lens distortion I'm especially sensitive towards them talking about cinematic aesthetics and such. I mean, that's the epitome of useless film aesthetic integration in a video game.
I don't know why everyone's just now flipping out. We've known it was aiming to be a cinematic, cover-based TPS since E3. Well, I suppose there was a lot of different info from different games being released that week. I guess some people just couldn't keep up.
That said, I'm still pretty disappointed by the genre choice myself. I'm not going to dump on the game just because of it's genre, but Sony already has Uncharted as it's cinematic, cover-based TPS. And they clearly aren't ditching Uncharted since they announced a new game the night of the PS4's launch. So why did they need another one of these? It's going to be like when they had both Resistance and Killzone going on the PS3 where there was different setting/atmosphere and characters, but both chasing the same gameplay archetype.
I guess I just prefer it when Sony spreads the wealth across all the genres like they usually do. And since Ready at Dawn did Daxter and the PSP God of Wars, they can clearly handle other types of games. It also doesn't help that I'm not big on shooters, but oh well.
That said, I'm still pretty disappointed by the genre choice myself. I'm not going to dump on the game just because of it's genre, but Sony already has Uncharted as it's cinematic, cover-based TPS. And they clearly aren't ditching Uncharted since they announced a new game the night of the PS4's launch. So why did they need another one of these? It's going to be like when they had both Resistance and Killzone going on the PS3 where there was different setting/atmosphere and characters, but both chasing the same gameplay archetype.
I guess I just prefer it when Sony spreads the wealth across all the genres like they usually do. And since Ready at Dawn did Daxter and the PSP God of Wars, they can clearly handle other types of games. It also doesn't help that I'm not big on shooters, but oh well.
NullPointer
Member
"Its a ride".
Yep.
Edit: Just to be sure I'm not asking for open world. But I've played more "rides" than I can count, and production values seem to be the focus above and beyond all things. My expectations are now calibrated to "engine demo".
jackissocool
Member
This is my only real concern. It seems like it's so fit for a 4 player campaign.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Except that I haven't seen a lot of people disappointed its a linear shooter saying "it should have been open world instead" (okay there have been a couple). Its a false choice, pretending like the only options are "narrow linear cinematic game" or "huge empty world where you trek back and forth"