Author Topic: The Order: 1886 (PS4)  (Read 4887 times)


Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #1 on: Monday, February 16, 2015, 04:07:41 PM »
From what I've read, it's completely linear, with whole chapters made of cutscenes, polluted with QTEs, and if it wasn't obvious by now, with minimal gameplay to move the story along.  And the Sony fanboys will crucify anyone who points out the facts, and are even suggesting that open-world gaming is a fad, on its way out.  It's like a religious crisis.  Just like Galileo had to contend with the Christian church, we now have to contend with a belief system that cannot admit this game is pure shit.  They need for their exclusives to be mana from heaven.  It's hilarious.

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #2 on: Monday, February 16, 2015, 05:00:00 PM »
I have no problem w/ it being QTE-heavy, cut-scene heavy, and minimal on gameplay. It's okay to have games that are cinematic experiences, like such.

My problem is: if this game is only 5 hr 30 mins (and many gamers take their time at finish it at this time-frame), this is short game for $60.
It sounds like it is way over-priced and might not have much replay value.

The question remains - does this game have multiple difficulties? New Game + Modes?
Even then, it still sounds like it's lacking content.
Next question - Any other ways to make it replayable for gamers?


Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #3 on: Monday, February 16, 2015, 05:52:06 PM »
I think that's an utterly ridiculous exaggeration, Cobra. Not every game needs to be open-world, and this is coming from a guy who prefers open-world games to linear ones. That doesn't mean linearity and cinematic stuff doesn't have its place. Granted, it's unlikely this one is going to live up to something like The Last of Us (which was linear as hell but also probably one of the best-received games of the last decade by both critics and fans), but there's little reason for anyone to start saying much about it yet as no real verdict is in. The game may well not be particularly stellar, but from everything I've read so far, most actual players of the game have been generally positive, and not in a fanboyish way at all. Most of the negative buzz I've seen has just been people who haven't even tried it complaining that it's too short or too linear or too <whatever>. Saying this is akin to a religious persecution or a battle between some underdog belief system and a religious superpower is more than a tad hyperbolic. There are probably near as many open-world games coming out these days as linear ones, and while that's generally my personal preference, even I have to admit that less and less interesting stuff is being done with the open-world premise. I'm more apt to write off a GTA clone or lackluster "free" RPG or generic action-adventure simply given the fact that so few of them do anything to distinguish themselves anymore.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #4 on: Monday, February 16, 2015, 09:10:52 PM »
I think that's an utterly ridiculous exaggeration, Cobra. Not every game needs to be open-world, and this is coming from a guy who prefers open-world games to linear ones. That doesn't mean linearity and cinematic stuff doesn't have its place. Granted, it's unlikely this one is going to live up to something like The Last of Us (which was linear as hell but also probably one of the best-received games of the last decade by both critics and fans), but there's little reason for anyone to start saying much about it yet as no real verdict is in. The game may well not be particularly stellar, but from everything I've read so far, most actual players of the game have been generally positive, and not in a fanboyish way at all. Most of the negative buzz I've seen has just been people who haven't even tried it complaining that it's too short or too linear or too <whatever>. Saying this is akin to a religious persecution or a battle between some underdog belief system and a religious superpower is more than a tad hyperbolic. There are probably near as many open-world games coming out these days as linear ones, and while that's generally my personal preference, even I have to admit that less and less interesting stuff is being done with the open-world premise. I'm more apt to write off a GTA clone or lackluster "free" RPG or generic action-adventure simply given the fact that so few of them do anything to distinguish themselves anymore.

I think what Cobra's saying is less about the virtues of open-world vs. linear and more about how IT SEEMS like there's very little actual gameplay - walk down hallway, cutscene, explore room, walk down hallway, cutscene, shootout, walk down hallway.   I haven't watched any of the videos and I don't know if it's true but I think that would be a valid criticism to a point.....for some people. 

Personally, I'll take a cinematic, linear experience over the majority of open world games we have today.  I'm not against the format by any means - I found Red Dead Redemption, GTAV, and Black Flag very enjoyable, but many open world games are becoming very formulaic to me. Sure, there's 10,000 square km of gameworld to play in, but most of it looks the same and most of it plays the same.  Hundreds of quests....that fall into 4 or 5 categories.  It's time consuming, it can be fun, and it's certainly a draw to some people, but I'll often find myself collecting some orbs, chasing after some chanty, or hunting down some enemies and all of a sudden realize I don't really care at all.  Give me a (solid) strong and cinematic story over that and I'll take it, but that's just me.  Uncharted, MGS4 (I shouldn't have mentioned story), Last of Us, Bioshock - all fairly linear and very enjoyable to me.

I don't think that's a point someone can successfully argue against - it's purely about personal preference.  I can't say that linear game-play is ultimately superior anymore than anyone else can say that open world is objectively better - apples and oranges.  I think what Cobra is saying is that the game is linear AND very sparse on gameplay, which is something that's potentially more deserving of criticism.  If you buy a game and get a movie you have every right to be disappointed.   Sure, it may not ruin it for ME if the game is solid enough in other areas but I can certainly see how it wouldn't be some people's cup of tea.

If you're rebuttal to "lack of gameplay elements" is that open world games suck anyways, you're kind of missing the point - which I think is what Cobra's saying about those Sony fanatics.

TL;DR - Thinking a game sucks because it's linear is purely subjective, but a lack of actual gameplay is a criticism that has a bit more merit, given the medium. People need to chill the fuck out and stop caring what other people like or dislike.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #5 on: Monday, February 16, 2015, 11:03:25 PM »
Well yeah, granted, if there's no gameplay then that's pretty shitty, and I would certainly not be on board with that. And maybe there really isn't enough and maybe that's a pretty major issue. However, just because there's not quite enough doesn't make the game immediately worthless (it's still subjective depending on the audience), and I think at this point it remains somewhat unfair to say that the game is a steaming pile. Or to declare that anyone who doesn't think so is defending something only out of religion-caliber fanaticism. Which was really my only point to begin with. I know virtually nothing about this game other than what I've seen ... well, pretty much here, and then poking around a bit afterward.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday, February 17, 2015, 12:19:04 AM »
Yeah, I agree with that.   I don't own the console but the game still appeals to me.  I think the main thing to walk away with is that the average gamer is a shit piece who loves to get on the internet and bitch - no matter what side they're on.


Well, that's the main thing I usually walk away with when dealing with these kinds of things.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #7 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 06:59:13 AM »
http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/the-order-1886-review/1900-698/

According to Jeff, it looks like it isn't so much an issue with game length or lack of content so much as it's an issue with the game itself just being pretty mediocre in general, and the story not living up to the fantastic presentation. Definitely sounds like a pass.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline PyroMenace

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3,930
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #8 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 01:20:47 PM »

Offline W7RE

  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,780
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #9 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 01:43:44 PM »
http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/the-order-1886-review/1900-698/

According to Jeff, it looks like it isn't so much an issue with game length or lack of content so much as it's an issue with the game itself just being pretty mediocre in general, and the story not living up to the fantastic presentation. Definitely sounds like a pass.

It's really a shame because victorian London + werewolves and shit + shooter = cool as hell. The game could have been amazing, and instead it seems like the only thing amazing are the graphics.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #10 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 04:45:39 PM »
Yeah it sucks. It's a cool premise, and they certainly had the force behind the production to make it FEEL right ... but watching the QL at GiantBomb, man, it was just quite boring. Nothing to grab you about it. And I'm with Cobra that QTEs really just need to die off already. They just really do. And I think this great-looking game is a great showcase for why. When you have a game that looks this good and moves this well, seeing a QTE in action is just so jarring. It just feels even more like it shouldn't be there, and even more dumb when you fail one and it just magically transports you back a few seconds so you can ... uh, hit the button again? So lame.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,182
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #11 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 09:01:40 PM »
Yeah it sucks. It's a cool premise, and they certainly had the force behind the production to make it FEEL right ... but watching the QL at GiantBomb, man, it was just quite boring. Nothing to grab you about it. And I'm with Cobra that QTEs really just need to die off already. They just really do. And I think this great-looking game is a great showcase for why. When you have a game that looks this good and moves this well, seeing a QTE in action is just so jarring. It just feels even more like it shouldn't be there, and even more dumb when you fail one and it just magically transports you back a few seconds so you can ... uh, hit the button again? So lame.

I can agree with QTE dying off.  When they first came out in Shenmue it was kind of cool - a way to blend gameplay and cinematics.  It's a bit overblown now and really hasn't evolved at all.  It makes sense for games like Wolf Among Us, but they really need to be removed or revamped considering how it's so common in games these days.

The opinion on Reddit is that if, by some amazing chance, the developer learned from their mistakes and still sold enough to warrant a sequel, that game could be pretty amazing.  In general it seems like people are complaining less about the length (most say closer to 8 hours, which may or may not be somewhat more acceptable - that's probably about the length of a few popular action games) and more about the pacing, the lack of gameplay, and the fact that the gameplay needs to be refined somewhat. Most say great things about the visuals, artistic design, the world itself, and POTENTIAL for story, but it just seems like they spent all their time on the visuals and design and little else.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #12 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 10:16:44 PM »
I'd sorta be surprised if it managed it ... then again, pretty games with high cinematic value do sometimes sell better than it seems they should.

I don't think QTEs are completely horrible, but the implementation is always crap. Like they can sort of serve the intended purpose of trying to keep the tension (or your attention) even when you're "just watching something". The problem is when they lead to failure, which they nearly always do. It's so pointless. It serves absolutely no beneficial function. The only way they really have a meaningful identity is if you don't get a do-over. Like say if every time you screw one up you simply end up in a slightly worse position than if you'd done it right. Like maybe a guy hits you instead of you hitting him, and at the end of the sequence, several missed prompts leave you at half health instead of full. Or maybe if you don't make the jump at the button prompt you slip and fall down to a lower path with tougher enemies. Something like that, something that's just a slight disadvantage or similar mutation of the "success" experience, would be acceptable because it has a purpose. Killing you and instantly transporting you back to the moment before you fucked it up is just facepalmingly pointless.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline W7RE

  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,780
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #13 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 10:33:46 PM »
In Ryse the QTE finishers give you timed buffs (health regen, bonus xp, etc). You can never do them if you want. You can do them poorly and get weak versions of the buffs. You can do them well, and get better buffs. These buffs last like 10-15 seconds.

Mass Effect paragon and renegade prompts are basically QTEs. They only happen in cutscenes/dialogue, and they alter the outcome. There's never a fail and start over situation for them either. (The ending of Mass Effect 3 might have one, I don't remember, but I think the that is also based off dialogue choices.)

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,920
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #14 on: Thursday, February 19, 2015, 11:48:47 PM »
QTEs, like any gameplay mechanic, can be used appropriately or be abused. They don't bother me as long as they're done right. Any gameplay mechanic can get frustrating or annoying when abused.

My favourite implementation is in the Batman Arkham games, QTEs are integrated into the combat so seamlessly.

Then you have games like Rock Band or Guitar Hero, which are basically entirely QTEs to the rhythm of music. With few exceptions, music games are really just extended QTEs.

Offline PyroMenace

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3,930
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #15 on: Friday, February 20, 2015, 02:32:01 AM »

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #16 on: Friday, February 20, 2015, 03:58:26 AM »

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,920
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #17 on: Friday, February 20, 2015, 07:50:05 AM »
That sounds a lot like the gripes of any audit-related jobs :P "I can't give you a perfect score! If I give you a perfect score it means I couldn't find any flaws in your operation and I could lose my job!"

Anyway, I'm sure The Order 1886 is at the very least a decent game. I can't imagine any campaign more disappointing that Destiny, but at least that game lean on its multiplayer like a crutch.

The Order 1886 doesn't have multiplayer, does it?

Offline MysterD

  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 18,049
  • OWNet 4 Eternity & Beyond
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #18 on: Saturday, February 21, 2015, 06:24:32 AM »
That sounds a lot like the gripes of any audit-related jobs :P "I can't give you a perfect score! If I give you a perfect score it means I couldn't find any flaws in your operation and I could lose my job!"

Anyway, I'm sure The Order 1886 is at the very least a decent game. I can't imagine any campaign more disappointing that Destiny, but at least that game lean on its multiplayer like a crutch.

The Order 1886 doesn't have multiplayer, does it?

The Order 1886 is SP-only.

Offline Xessive

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9,920
    • XSV @ deviantART
Re: The Order: 1886 (PS4)
« Reply #19 on: Sunday, February 22, 2015, 10:15:33 AM »
In my mind, the point of comparison jumps to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

Both games intended to be the "paragon" of their respective generation (PS3 & PS4). Both singleplayer-only games with a focus on the "cinematic experience" with 3rd-person shooting, QTEs, and exploration. Both with similar campaign lengths (averaging 7-9 hours).

When I make that comparison it becomes clear why The Order: 1886 seems like it comes up short. While it is a game with fantastic production quality the general opinion is that it "boring." It's not so much that it has a short campaign, just that very little that's interesting happens in it, especially when compared to the campaign in Uncharted.