[OT] The Order: 1886 (Post Your Impressions, Questions etc.)

Ghost

Administrator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2009
13,788
303
83
[QUOTE="Nerevar, post: 6423770]That's pretty funny actually. I've heard the cutscenes can take up almost half the game time. If true it deserves to be called out.[/QUOTE]

It was from the review thread apparently. Yeah, call it out in the review, posting shit like that on your Facebook page is BS. I've unsubbed from the ign YT channel and won't be bothering with their site anymore.
 

Locomotive

Dedicated Member
Feb 25, 2012
1,033
6
0
All I know is that it's somewhat surprising that the game is getting a low metacritic score.

That said...I don't really care. I loved Destiny and that game got shit scores across the board. I have an open mind and I love cinematic games so I'll see this one through.

Can't wait until tomorrow.
 

SkarEffect

Superior Member
Jun 9, 2013
670
3
0
Georgia
www.gameority.com
[QUOTE="Peregrin8X, post: 6423741]really disgusting the way the media are attacking this game. no shame.

all the gaming press wants these days are open world game #13455 and shooter #23447.

looking forward to getting my copy tomorrow[/QUOTE]

It's because all these gaming press are pissed off that their checks have stopped because of gamergate. :)
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,883
191
63
48
Down Under
[QUOTE="Admartian, post: 6423746]He's not wrong. There are always exceptions.[/QUOTE]

He is absolutely wrong.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/release-date/new-releases/ps4/metascore

Top 10 Meteacrtic PS4 Games
1. Grand Theft Auto V 97
2. The Last of Us Remastered 95
3. flower 91
4. Diablo III: Ultimate Evil Edition 90
5. Rayman Legends 90
6. Fez 90
7. Dragon Age: Inquisition 89
8. Minecraft: PlayStation 4 Edition 89
9. The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth 88
10 Guacamelee! Super Turbo Championship Edition 87

Seriously this line about "oh critics only like open worlds or shooters" is just crap.
 

Abdou23

Forum Elder
Sep 16, 2008
2,757
10
0
Egypt
Just wanted to my opinion here in general:

1- If a game like DA:I is 70+ hours, should EA price it at 85$ ?
2- This game can't get any cheaper because obviously that amount of visuals cost a lot, it has been in development since 2011, just because it's somewhere between 7-9 hours then it doesn't mean cheap to develop.
3- You judge a game by the overall experience not the amount of time, by this logic a game like Minecraft should be priced at 200$ !
4- When you go to the movies you don't judge the movie by how long it is, you judge it by the overall experience, you pay same ticket price whether it's 1:30 hours or 3 hours, or 5 parts that could have easily been made in only 2.
5- Games like this give the industry some diversity instead of turning every game into an open world re-skinned game with some towers to climb.
6- Some people are idiots, if you don't like something simply don't buy it, you don't need to bash or insult it, because there are other people people who like it and accept it as it is.
 

Lethal

Administrator
Staff member
Nov 14, 2007
14,974
325
83
41
Metal Gear Solid 4 has the longest cut scenes in any game I have ever played. Nobody complained about that game being more like a movie than a game.

I also thoroughly enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. So I am sure I will enjoy this title.
 
Likes: mistercrow
Jul 8, 2013
423
24
0
orange county
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6423792]He is absolutely wrong.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/release-date/new-releases/ps4/metascore




Seriously this line about "oh critics only like open worlds or shooters" is just crap.[/QUOTE]

lol
your reading too far into what i was trying to say

[QUOTE="miamiman, post: 6423748]You make a good point. This game is catching a lot of flack for being what it was designed to be.

Demerits for:
Too many cutscenes
Being linear
Quicktime events

... when that's what was advertised from the outset if I remember correctly.[/QUOTE]

someone on gaf even had the nerve to make a thread stating that he hopes other devs stop making these kinds of games. it's sickening and repulsive mentality to have
 
Last edited by a moderator:

billm0066

Elite Member
Oct 30, 2006
1,638
20
38
[QUOTE="Lethal, post: 6423799]Metal Gear Solid 4 has the longest cut scenes in any game I have ever played. Nobody complained about that game being more like a movie than a game.

I also thoroughly enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. So I am sure I will enjoy this title.[/QUOTE]

I hated the cut scenes!

My copy of 1886 is arriving tomorrow. If the game sucks I will sell it on Craigslist or trade it in. Worst case is I lose $20 out of the deal. Woop de doo.
 

Mopey.

Sandy Claws
Apr 19, 2008
4,610
4
0
Ontario, Canada
Yeah I'm getting a little annoyed by the vocal minority of people who publicly denounce any game that they feel threatens "conventional gaming", going as far as actively searching out opportunities to cry out in protest at its mere existence.

So what if it's 7 hours? Who cares if it's linear? If you don't want to play it then don't buy it. I for one applaud differences in game design and am glad that somebody is making something unique, even if it didn't work out amazingly well.

I'm still on the fence about the game personally. Reviews seem extremely mixed in certain areas. Some laud its pacing and meticulous world building while others sit polar opposite and absolutely hate the pacing and feel the world is flat. Some say it's the best looking game ever, others say it looks okay at times (this kind of disparity I really don't understand; everyone can clearly see that it looks good, but I digress). Regardless, I am still interested. I may purchase it this weekend. I may wait a few months for a price drop or borrow it from a friend.
 
Likes: mistercrow

shepard

PSU Live Streamer
Dec 21, 2006
2,703
46
0
41
My early impressions on the game...

So I'm home now and had a bit of time to play before hockey starts so I fired up the game with the intention of putting in an hour of play time. So keep that duration in mind.

First thing I noticed, no hefty game install. No install at all really, just a brief update.
Second, the developers quite obviously wanted to create an atmosphere and ambiance to this game.
Third, attention to detail for members of the order are pretty meticulous. Shame civilians and enemies don't appear to have the same treatment.

Moving forward I'm quite impressed with the unique gun designs, their function, their feel. The voice acting and motion capture seem very well done. Facial expressions are also good.

Particle effects, volumetric fog, lighting, shaders and cloth animations are all great. Likewise reflections on mirrors and puddles look nice...though they never seem to reflect your character. Light shimmers on the screen as one would hope it would. At proper angles some lighting will give the appearance of dust in the air.

Next, film grain and camera/distance blur. Game has a lot of it....like, a LOT. I knew they wanted that cinematic approach with the letterboxing video, but wow....at this point I'm concerned they put too much effort into making this 'game' play out like a 'movie'.

On to Pacing...Game takes your standard storybook approach of: Prologue, Intro, Chapter 1,2,3, etc. Heres the thing though. I literally went through Prologue, Intro, Chapter 1 and 2 in one hour flat. I put the game into my PS4 at 4:30pm. I reached Chapter 3 at 5:30pm. That is ridiculously fast. And in that hours worth of game time, I spent 90% of it with the controller on my lap. I swear I had maybe only 10mins of meaningful playtime. Then maybe another 10mins of walking linear paths, entering in QTE events and picking up items for closer inspection. Thats how it felt anyway, I didn't put a clock to it. My earlier concerns with it being presented too much as a movie began turning into the realization that I was sitting on my couch watching my game more than I was playing it. The game was obviously setting the stage for how the story was to play out...so I'm not holding that against the game just yet.

With so much need to sit and watch I figured I'd be given a clean and crisp cinematic experience, not the case. Scene transitions are not always smooth. Clothing meant to drape over a character 'dances' and settles down again when the scene shifts too abruptly. Shadows sometimes flicker. And in situations where the next scene has dialogue, it sounds like it starts a second too fast...as if a frame or two was dropped and the scene sped up.

I'm only an hour in....keep that in mind. Pacing may change in Chapter 3 yet. Fingers crossed.
 
Last edited:

Bigdoggy

Master Guru
Jan 24, 2008
7,250
58
0
41
meh, see I skipped MGS4 because of the more movie like and less gameplay elements, I think I may skip this one. Linear with most of your time with the controller on your lap? I think I'll pass on this game.
 

shepard

PSU Live Streamer
Dec 21, 2006
2,703
46
0
41
I'm hoping it was just a long drawn out 'set the stage' intro, with a bit of tutorial 'get your feet wet' gameplay experience. Chapter 3 started with me in control and suited up. For all I know it could have been the start of some decent time spent controlling my character. But hockey is on now...so thats on hold lol.
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,883
191
63
48
Down Under
[QUOTE="Abdou23, post: 6423797]Just wanted to my opinion here in general:

1- If a game like DA:I is 70+ hours, should EA price it at 85$ ?
2- This game can't get any cheaper because obviously that amount of visuals cost a lot, it has been in development since 2011, just because it's somewhere between 7-9 hours then it doesn't mean cheap to develop.
3- You judge a game by the overall experience not the amount of time, by this logic a game like Minecraft should be priced at 200$ !
4- When you go to the movies you don't judge the movie by how long it is, you judge it by the overall experience, you pay same ticket price whether it's 1:30 hours or 3 hours, or 5 parts that could have easily been made in only 2.
5- Games like this give the industry some diversity instead of turning every game into an open world re-skinned game with some towers to climb.
6- Some people are idiots, if you don't like something simply don't buy it, you don't need to bash or insult it, because there are other people people who like it and accept it as it is.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="Lethal, post: 6423799]Metal Gear Solid 4 has the longest cut scenes in any game I have ever played. Nobody complained about that game being more like a movie than a game.

I also thoroughly enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. So I am sure I will enjoy this title.[/QUOTE]

Pretty clear neither of you have actually read reviews, because not one of the ones i have read has mentioned length of the game as any reason it got the score it got.
 
Last edited:

mistercrow

Ultimate Veteran
Nov 10, 2007
24,742
238
0
Texas
[QUOTE="Lethal, post: 6423799]Metal Gear Solid 4 has the longest cut scenes in any game I have ever played. Nobody complained about that game being more like a movie than a game. I also thoroughly enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. So I am sure I will enjoy this title.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE="Mopey., post: 6423813]Yeah I'm getting a little annoyed by the vocal minority of people who publicly denounce any game that they feel threatens "conventional gaming", going as far as actively searching out opportunities to cry out in protest at its mere existence. So what if it's 7 hours? Who cares if it's linear? If you don't want to play it then don't buy it. I for one applaud differences in game design and am glad that somebody is making something unique, even if it didn't work out amazingly well. I'm still on the fence about the game personally. Reviews seem extremely mixed in certain areas. Some laud its pacing and meticulous world building while others sit polar opposite and absolutely hate the pacing and feel the world is flat. Some say it's the best looking game ever, others say it looks okay at times (this kind of disparity I really don't understand; everyone can clearly see that it looks good, but I digress). Regardless, I am still interested. I may purchase it this weekend. I may wait a few months for a price drop or borrow it from a friend.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE="Abdou23, post: 6423797]Just wanted to my opinion here in general: 1- If a game like DA:I is 70+ hours, should EA price it at 85$ ? 2- This game can't get any cheaper because obviously that amount of visuals cost a lot, it has been in development since 2011, just because it's somewhere between 7-9 hours then it doesn't mean cheap to develop. 3- You judge a game by the overall experience not the amount of time, by this logic a game like Minecraft should be priced at 200$ ! 4- When you go to the movies you don't judge the movie by how long it is, you judge it by the overall experience, you pay same ticket price whether it's 1:30 hours or 3 hours, or 5 parts that could have easily been made in only 2. 5- Games like this give the industry some diversity instead of turning every game into an open world re-skinned game with some towers to climb. 6- Some people are idiots, if you don't like something simply don't buy it, you don't need to bash or insult it, because there are other people people who like it and accept it as it is.[/QUOTE] +rep
 
Last edited:

Abdou23

Forum Elder
Sep 16, 2008
2,757
10
0
Egypt
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6423826]Pretty clear neither of you have actually read reviews, because not one of the ones i have read has mentioned length of the game as any reason it got the score it got.[/QUOTE]

I watched several reviews and the main verdict at the end was how the game is "Not worth 60$" and they definitely mentioned the length and half of the game is cut-scenes. Anyway i haven't played the game yet but i was just talking in general.

[QUOTE="mistercrow, post: 6423827]+rep[/QUOTE]

:)
 
Likes: mistercrow

-Dj-

Veteran
May 8, 2009
4,450
52
48
31
[QUOTE="shepard, post: 6423823]I'm hoping it was just a long drawn out 'set the stage' intro, with a bit of tutorial 'get your feet wet' gameplay experience. Chapter 3 started with me in control and suited up. For all I know it could have been the start of some decent time spent controlling my character. But hockey is on now...so thats on hold lol.[/QUOTE] well this game is better then the maple leafs
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,883
191
63
48
Down Under
[QUOTE="Abdou23, post: 6423830]I watched several reviews and the main verdict at the end was how the game is "Not worth 60$" and they definitely mentioned the length and half of the game is cut-scenes. Anyway i haven't played the game yet but i was just talking in general.[/QUOTE]

Jim probably sums up what I take away form reviews...

The Order‘s real problem, however, isn’t that it’s short – it’s that it does so very little with the time it has......Five hours of tight storytelling can be justified, but this is all just a big tease with no payoff. The whole thing comes off more like the first installment of an episodic series than a complete title in its own right
I've cut some out because there are some likely spoilers in between.

But that the thing I get from all the reviews, its not the length its just what you get to do in that time.

I love shorter games, my favorite Halo campaign is ODST and that is about 5 hours long as well.

I really don't think the reviews marked it down due to length. Its not the impression I get form the reviews Ive read.

Id rather play an amazing 5 hour game than grind through 10 hours of boredom.
 

Lethal

Administrator
Staff member
Nov 14, 2007
14,974
325
83
41
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6423826]Pretty clear neither of you have actually read reviews, because not one of the ones i have read has mentioned length of the game as any reason it got the score it got.[/QUOTE]

Pretty sure you did not watch IGN's or Gamespots review as they specifically say the game plays more like a movie than a game.

Thus the score....

And your assumption is completely wrong. I was not responding to any 1 review, and I was responding to the remarks of the game having more cut scenes than game play.

No offence, but you really do take things the wrong way often.
 
Last edited:

Admartian

Wibbly Wobbly
Nov 28, 2006
13,613
105
63
New Zealand
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6423826]Pretty clear neither of you have actually read reviews, because not one of the ones i have read has mentioned length of the game as any reason it got the score it got.[/QUOTE]
Yes - they lambasted it for what it set out to be. Rightly or wrongly.
 

AsterPhoenix

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2008
2,166
221
63
30
In the end of the day an opinion is just a opinion and a review is just a review. If you want to judge the game just give it a play if you don't want to play it then don't. I'll rent this game when I have a PS4 in the future.
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,883
191
63
48
Down Under
[QUOTE="Lethal, post: 6423833]Pretty sure you did not watch IGN's or Gamespots review as they specifically say the game plays more like a movie than a game.

Thus the score....

And your assumption is completely wrong. I was not responding to any 1 review, and I was responding to the remarks of the game having more cut scenes than game play.

No offence, but you really do take things the wrong way often.[/QUOTE]

How on earth do you go from "it plays more like a movie -> thus the score"

What has that go to do with the length of the game or the length of cut-scenes, thats not what they marked it down for..they said specifically that the cutscene are constantly switching between cut-scene and QTE's. Thats what they marked it down for, not the length of cut scenes.

And they specifically marke dit down for the generic cover based shooting as well.

I have no idea how you guys read these reviews and come up with what you do.

The basic conflict at the heart of The Order: 1886 is that considerations for a cinematic approach are prioritized above the needs of basic gameplay. Its best aspects are its stunning looks, atmosphere, and style – which are truly fantastic – and entertaining fiction. But the shallow, slow, and generic quick-time event-riddled gameplay make it feel like an experience that would've been better served by a non-interactive movie than a game. With no multiplayer, and no reason to revisit the short and stunted single-player campaign once it’s been completed, there just isn’t a lot to it.
Wheres the length of the games of the length of cut-scenes even remotely discussed?

And no one complained about MGS because in between cut-scenes were not QTE's.

Its like your focusing on this aspect and not the actual meat of the gameplay, which as I have read over and over alternates between a poor coverbased shooter and QTE's.

I dont understand why poeple seem to foucs on what they played in other games and that was ok because... in stead of focusing on the because.

Yes MGS has lengthy cut-scenes.
No it didn't matter any more than it does in this game cause it's whats IN BETWEEN that you play.

You don't have to agree with them, you have every right to play the game and enjoy it, but I just don't understand the disconnect between what the reviewers are actually saying and what some people take away from their reviews.
 
Last edited:

mistercrow

Ultimate Veteran
Nov 10, 2007
24,742
238
0
Texas
[QUOTE="AsterPhoenix, post: 6423839]In the end of the day an opinion is just a opinion and a review is just a review. If you want to judge the game just give it a play if you don't want to play it then don't. I'll rent this game when I have a PS4 in the future.[/QUOTE] Yep exactly. Amazing how many people just fail to grasp such a simple concept.
 

MATRIX 2

Forum Sage
Jul 29, 2005
8,554
109
63
D.C.
Destiny 2.0

Not looking good considering ubisoft's questionable performance. (for the Division and RS: Siege) DICE handling battlefront is also iffy. And while H5 multiplayer was decent, SP is up in the air.

Could this be another year of disappointment?
 

shepard

PSU Live Streamer
Dec 21, 2006
2,703
46
0
41
[QUOTE="MATRIX 2, post: 6423845]Could this be another year of disappointment?[/QUOTE]

Too early to tell. Dying Light was well received by the general public at least.
Sky doesn't start falling for me unless Bloodborne and Witcher 3 are bad.
 
Apr 28, 2005
2,837
4
0
Maryland
[QUOTE="shepard, post: 6423846]Too early to tell. Dying Light was well received by the general public at least.
Sky doesn't start falling for me unless Bloodborne and Witcher 3 are bad.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I don't see Bloodborne receiving lackluster reviews. Not with From Software's history.
 

Admartian

Wibbly Wobbly
Nov 28, 2006
13,613
105
63
New Zealand
[QUOTE="MATRIX 2, post: 6423845]Destiny 2.0

Not looking good considering ubisoft's questionable performance. (for the Division and RS: Siege) DICE handling battlefront is also iffy. And while H5 multiplayer was decent, SP is up in the air.

Could this be another year of disappointment?[/QUOTE]
It is if you only go by reviews. I liked Destiny for when I played it. It's not necessarily it's fault that I (or other people) don't. Same with Titanfall etc.

If you're disappointed because you*'ve tried it yourself and didn't listen to what a loud minority is crying about, then more power to you. But if you're just doing it without even testing the waters, then why are you even talking about it.

Gamers too quick to label, expectations always shifting when it doesn't match "perfection".















*General 'You'



[QUOTE="PhillyPhreak, post: 6423847]Yeah, I don't see Bloodborne receiving lackluster reviews. Not with From Software's history.[/QUOTE]


Yep -looks interesting.
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,883
191
63
48
Down Under
[QUOTE="MATRIX 2, post: 6423845]Destiny 2.0

Not looking good considering ubisoft's questionable performance. (for the Division and RS: Siege) DICE handling battlefront is also iffy. And while H5 multiplayer was decent, SP is up in the air.

Could this be another year of disappointment?[/QUOTE]

If they mess up Battlefront, then there is no hope.
 

MATRIX 2

Forum Sage
Jul 29, 2005
8,554
109
63
D.C.
[QUOTE="Admartian, post: 6423848]It is if you only go by reviews. I liked Destiny for when I played it. It's not necessarily it's fault that I (or other people) don't. Same with Titanfall etc.

If you're disappointed because you*'ve tried it yourself and didn't listen to what a loud minority is crying about, then more power to you. But if you're just doing it without even testing the waters, then why are you even talking about it.

Gamers too quick to label, expectations always shifting when it doesn't match "perfection".















*General 'You'






Yep -looks interesting.[/QUOTE]

Well I went as far as bungie allowed in the beta. Seemed to give me a reasonable idea of what the game was like.
 

Lethal

Administrator
Staff member
Nov 14, 2007
14,974
325
83
41
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6423840]You don't have to agree with them, you have every right to play the game and enjoy it[/QUOTE]

Then please quit crying. I said I am going to play it because I enjoy games with long cut scenes. Who are you to go off on a rant because I am not listening to the reviews?

I will play the game myself and give it my own damn review.

Chill the hell out.