The Order 1886

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fat_moogle

I realise it's going to be a short game, I'm expecting that. I traded in a couple games for it, so I didn't pay full price. I wouldn't have paid the full £55 the shop I bought it from was asking for. I'd say £27 was reasonable though so I thought I'd play it and judge for myself.

---

Those games you traded in could have been used to lower the price of a different game though :p.

I might get it when it goes sub-20 dollars.

---

But there wasn't another game I wanted :p Type-0 is the next game I'm getting and I'm prepared to pay full price for that ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fat_moogle

I got to Chapter 4 today. It's definitely the best looking game that I've ever played, no doubt about that. I really like what it's trying to achieve with its cinematic style, the acting is top notch and there's a good atmosphere. Gunplay is also fast and fluid. Yes there are quite a few moments when you need to "tap x" or "press triangle" to auto-climb a ladder, but there's been nothing so far to diminish my enjoyment of the game.

---

My opinion has kind of changed. I'm on Chapter 9 now and the more the game progresses the less actual gameplay there seems to be. When there is gameplay it's good, but it's like you're not given a chance to properly get in to it before you're whisked in to another scene. In regards to The Last of Us that game definitely had a better balance of gameplay vs cutscene.

I've been playing for a couple hours now, and it's hands down the best in game graphics I've ever seen. When the opening ended at the gameplay started with no visual change whatsoever, my jaw dropped. It really has reached the point of looking like a pre-rendered FMV in game. I'm thoroughly impressed. I wasn't expecting it to look that good in action. The animations from the facial expressions to how your characters move are breathtaking. They look and feel like actual people. The voice acting and score are quite nice as well.

The cinematic nature of the gameplay is about what I expected. There's plenty of QTEs and cutscenes, but no more than say, the Uncharted games, or the God of War games. From what people online were saying, I was expecting an experience closer to Heavy Rain. Thankfully that's not even mildly the case.

The story is...yet to reveal itself? I mean it's there but it's all very cryptic with nothing explained yet. I suppose I'm too early on still.

I'm really enjoying it so far. Also I should note that so far, unlike most AAA releases as of late, everything is polished and perfect. No rampant bugs or glitches awaiting a patch that might never come. :p

My girlfriend just bought me a PS4 with this game, we just finished it. I loved the presentation, setting and story. It looks incredible, and I love how they made the gap between a cutscene and getting back into controlling the character was seamless.

The gameplay I could give or take, it was okay but I found myself getting frustrated at certain parts because the shooting mechanics just didn't seem that intuitive or interesting to me. Furthermore, the QTEs kind of felt like they were put in at the last minute and unnecessary (sometimes I found myself missing a button because I thought we were still in a cutscene, and it wasn't even a sequence of QTEs, just one button that needed pressing).

Not much replay value, it was the story and characters that made us keep playing. I'd definitely be interested to see them expand the universe, it's really interesting and well presented!

I just finished it. All in all, I really liked it. The ending wasn't a proper conclusion and left far too many loose ends and questions unanswered. It's screams for a sequel, which makes me sad because I'm not at all confident there will be one after the less than stellar reception the game has received.

It's a good game. Not great, but not nearly as bad as critics made it out to be. A solid 8/10 in my opinion. In fact, had it came out five or six years ago I have no doubt that it'd have received 9s and 10s all over the place.

I have a feeling that it'll be one of those games that retains a solid cult following but never actually gets any future attention from the people who made it.

But hell, even if you don't like cover shooters or heavily cinematic games, if you own a PS4 and can get a hold of this game for little to no money, you should. The visual spectacle and aw-inspiring technical achievements on display are worth a playthrough alone. It really is the best looking game I've seen so far.

Yeah, everyone who has actually played it, and not simply gone off of what "the internet says" actually seems to like it, and it makes me want to give it a shot. One dude I watch on YouTube made a point that Metal Gear Solid for PS1 was very similar. Cinematic with a lot of QTE's and could be beaten in one sitting and still launched at full price. And nobody's gonna give that game any trout. I still don't think game length matters much on the overall worth of a game, but I guess some people do. Sadly for this game, I was never really interested to begin with. Even now it's just more of a curiosity. So I'll have to give it a rental, and if I fall in love, I'll get it on a price drop and be one of those cult followers or something lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyk

Yeah, everyone who has actually played it, and not simply gone off of what "the internet says" actually seems to like it, and it makes me want to give it a shot. One dude I watch on YouTube made a point that Metal Gear Solid for PS1 was very similar. Cinematic with a lot of QTE's and could be beaten in one sitting and still launched at full price. And nobody's gonna give that game any trout. I still don't think game length matters much on the overall worth of a game, but I guess some people do. Sadly for this game, I was never really interested to begin with. Even now it's just more of a curiosity. So I'll have to give it a rental, and if I fall in love, I'll get it on a price drop and be one of those cult followers or something lol

---

See, I was interested in it originally. Then I just kept seeing this one trailer on YouTube. I can't even find the trailer anymore, but it's apparently a few snippets from their big, four minute live-action trailer. Mostly focusing around the last thirty seconds or so.

This bit.

It honestly looked so bland, uninspired, and completely unoriginal that I lost all interest in the game.

It should be obvious that this live action trailer has absolutely nothing to do with the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

It should be obvious that this live action trailer has absolutely nothing to do with the game.

---

At this point, it is.

Doesn't really matter though. They used it to promote the game. Very heavily, in fact, as I saw it several hundred times on YouTube over the course of a month or two.

If you are attempting to promote your game, you should pick something that is representative of your game, or at least gets people interested/engaged with it.

Bad marketing kills. If you marketing turns someone off the product, it's your own fault, and you have to suffer the consequences of that. Being unrelated to your product isn't an excuse that gets you away from that.

If anything, it makes it worse. They didn't have enough faith in the game to market the game on its own merits, instead promoting it with an entirely unrelated trailer. Despite having an incredibly awesome looking engine that can make people look so realistic, they lacked enough faith in it to market the game with it, choosing live action instead. The quality of their writing and world building are made suspect due to the incredible lack of skill they demonstrated in the trailer.

Quote:

---

They didn't have enough faith in the game to market the game on its own merits, instead promoting it with an entirely unrelated trailer. Despite having an incredibly awesome looking engine that can make people look so realistic, they lacked enough faith in it to market the game with it, choosing live action instead. The quality of their writing and world building are made suspect due to the incredible lack of skill they demonstrated in the trailer.

---

C'mon, Sky...

Yeah, while I agree with the idea behind the argument, it's not like the marketing guy wrote the script for the game. Or even probably for the commercial

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyk

Yeah, while I agree with the idea behind the argument, it's not like the marketing guy wrote the script for the game. Or even probably for the commercial

---

Probably not.

But I'm just using the argument to validate my feelings. The truth is, I saw that, and I stopped caring about the game. It wasn't really a logical thought. I wasn't malicious and thinking "wow, this trailer sucked, I'm going to boycott the game" or anything. I just watched the trailer and was completely turned off of the product it was advertising. It felt like it was advertising a boring, cliche, low budget movie that I've seen a hundred times and didn't want to see again.

Was it? Nope. But that's what the trailer put in my mind, and it's hard to dissociate that from the game, especially after seeing it so many times. Every time I see the game in a store or website ad, that's what I'm reminded of. It makes it hard to get enthused.

I may eventually buy it if a sale massively drops the price. I'm glad you guys are enjoying it. But I have no interest in it right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyk

One dude I watch on YouTube made a point that Metal Gear Solid for PS1 was very similar.

---

That's the biggest stretch since Stretch Armstrong stretched on a stretcher after over-stretching in the World's Stretchiest Man competition.

Quote:

---

Cinematic with a lot of QTE's

---

MGS...cinematic? Sure. But by "a lot of QTEs" does he mean 'that one scene where Snake is being tortured and you have to mash triangle'? Because that's only one QTE and it's also one of the worst parts of the game.

Quote:

---

and could be beaten in one sitting

---

And could be speedrun in one sitting. Morrowind can be speedrun in 15 minutes. When you're playing a stealth game like a stealth game it takes quite a bit longer, whereas numbers on The Order's length are relatively similar for everyone. MGS also has some replay value as there are lots of different mechanics to use and the levels are big and expansive and allow different ways to play.

The Order's sacrificing of everything else that makes a game in service of its graphical fidelity makes me so sad. Especially when it gets critical praise for that. Gametrailers for example gave it a higher rating than Deus Ex: Human Revolution, and what does The Order do that's remotely interesting? Some shiny graphical effects? It's so incredibly superficial.

It's King Arthur's Knights of the Round Table hunting down monsters and anarchists in Teslapunk Victorian London. If that's not "remotely interesting" then I really don't know what to say.

What are these things you keep saying the game is sacrificing? I'm not sure how many different ways those of us who played it can tell you - The Order really isn't any less gameplay-focused than the average AAA action game. At this point, I really gotta question why you keep posting in this thread.

The awesome thing about today's gaming industry is that there's all kinds of titles coming out for all sorts of tastes. There's no need to say you're sad because one of them doesn't pander to you or because people with different opinions are enjoying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

It's King Arthur's Knights of the Round Table hunting down monsters and anarchists in Teslapunk Victorian London. If that's not "remotely interesting" then I really don't know what to say.

---

The setting is OK, sure, I was referring mainly to the game systems or the structure of the storytelling. There's nothing wrong with the way it structures its storytelling (perfectly fine with cutscenes-a-plenty) but if that's the main focus of the game than neither is it particularly interesting. Put it this way: as you say, the setting is pretty cool. I would have loved to explore more of it through less narrow corridors.

Quote:

---

What are these things you keep saying the game is sacrificing?

---

Interesting systems. Stuff that allows you to think or experiment or customise or explore or influence the narrative. Stuff that allows the game to flow and change pace depending on your actions. The insta-fail stealth sections for example, the nature of instantly killing you when seen instead of letting it fall into a chaotic firefight turns stealth into a chore rather than a pleasant change of pace. Even stealth games don't instantly fail you when you fail at stealth. Remember that bit early on where they call for aerial bombardment? Let us use that like the Hammer of Dawn from Gears!

The thermite gun is an example of something I really like in this game. You use that in such a different way to other weapons and it poses a significant threat to you as well. A few more things like that might have made a world of difference, unfortunately it's pretty much unique in its interesting-ness. Everything else is just a normal old gun - even the Arc gun. Unfortunate that Tesla hadn't knocked out a few more prototypes.

Quote:

---

I'm not sure how many different ways those of us who played it can tell you

---

Since my colleague brought his copy into work I can speak from first hand experience about all this now.

Quote:

---

- The Order really isn't any less gameplay-focused than the average AAA action game.

---

Right, the average AAA action game. Except GTA and The Last of Us and MGS and Uncharted and Tomb Raider and Halo and Mass Effect and Shadow of Mordor and Evolve and Battlefield and Batman and Dark Souls and Titanfall and Borderlands and Dead Rising and Watch_Dogs and Far Cry and Infamous and Destiny and Dragon Age and Dying Light and Wolfenstein and Assassin's Creed. For example off the top of my head.

Now, maybe with some of those the cutscene/gameplay ratio is similar, but all of them have many more core game mechanics to them. Which is surprising considering that list includes Uncharted.

Quote:

---

At this point, I really gotta question why you keep posting in this thread.

---

Well my last post I mainly did to respond to that MGS comparison which just stood out as particularly weird. But beyond that I guess there are a couple of reasons. 1) I am frustrated with the game for many reasons and this is a place to express that. I'm sure anyone who has posted on FFXIII threads will be familiar with the desire to do that. 2) I want to understand better why all this stuff that bugs me about it doesn't have the same effect on other people. And I'm really hoping the answer to that isn't just because it's really pretty.

Quote:

---

The awesome thing about today's gaming industry is that there's all kinds of titles coming out for all sorts of tastes.

---

That is certainly awesome.

Quote:

---

There's no need to say you're sad because one of them doesn't pander to you or because people with different opinions are enjoying it.

---

I'm not sad because you're enjoying it, I'm glad you're enjoying it and I don't begrudge you your fun. How should I put this... I'm sad because it lacks ambition. It puts the bare minimum of tried and tested mechanics in to still pass as a game and somehow gets away with it. I doubt you'd be having any less fun (and I'd be very surprised if you didn't have considerably more) if they had better stealth mechanics, more open levels, more enemy variety, more weapon variety, more places of that interesting world to explore either during or between missions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

It's King Arthur's Knights of the Round Table hunting down monsters and anarchists in Teslapunk Victorian London. If that's not "remotely interesting" then I really don't know what to say.

---

The setting is OK, sure, I was referring mainly to the game systems or the structure of the storytelling. There's nothing wrong with the way it structures its storytelling (perfectly fine with cutscenes-a-plenty) but if that's the main focus of the game than neither is it particularly interesting. Put it this way: as you say, the setting is pretty cool. I would have loved to explore more of it through less narrow corridors.

---

I think that bit was directed at me.

Sure, that setting sounds interesting. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any of it. I've seen two trailers for the game, the original reveal trailer (which I felt was interesting, but not majorly hype-building or warranting a preorder or instant purchase), and the one that killed my interest.

If they'd had more trailers displayed online, or even through television, that highlighted more of the awesome setting, cool mechanics or whatever, I'd be hyped by it, and I'd overlook the bad trailer. But if they put out one bad trailer and nothing else, that's going to dominate my opinion. I've seen steampunk and Teslapunk before. Their other advertisement didn't show anything new, except a little bit better graphical realism, compared to most other media that covers the same topic. There were no plot hooks, no character focus, or anything else that would actually draw me to this game as opposed to any other depiction of a similar setting. There's nothing special to it, and nothing to counteract the poor opinion that the other trailer showed.


As a side note, after looking through their advertising in an attempt to hunt down that add, I have to say that any interest built up by the other ads is offset by this line:
"Crazy Ambitious and Highly Cinematic"
This is a quote from Entertainment Weekly, and I've seen it highlighted in several ads. It's another fantastic example of terrible marketing.

It is apparently one of the only positive lines they have about the game, as they've put it on at least six different ad videos.

Entertainment Weekly is not a particularly well-known source of solid game critique, as they're usually focused on movies and television shows.

Finally, the line itself is meaningless. "Crazy ambitious". Do you know what else is "crazy ambitious"? Trying to fly a jet plane through the sun. Does that make it a good idea? No. Does that mean that the team succeeded in reaching their ambition? Nope. It just means the devs had a lofty goal to which they pushed themselves. That goal could be anything, and they need not even have reached it for that line to be true.

Then, there's the other bit. "Highly Cinematic". That's great. If I were looking for a piece of cinema. I'm not. Entertainment Weekly may be (as I said, that's what they typically focus on), but I'm more concerned with other aspects than the cinematography. The characters, the story, the world-building, the gameplay. Heck, I'm more worried about the music than I am with how "cinematic" the game is. It's a game, not a piece of cinema.




It may not be fair to judge a game by its advertising. But then, that's what advertising is for. To get people to judge your game favorably, and be interested in buying it. Their advertising failed utterly in hitting that mark for me, and the incredibly polarized opinions I've heard since release have not convinced me that I need to buy it at this point.