The Order: 1886

By +Audioboxer
in PlayStation

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Author
  • Subscriber²
Posted

Developer response: http://www.develop-online.net/interview/made-to-order-ready-at-dawn-talks-quality-over-quantity/0203245

I guess this is their version of "We want Xbox players to feel special" or whatever Phil Spencer said and Don Matrick's infamous Xbox One/360 comment.

 

Maybe without the CEO smugness

 

So the original interview is mine, I conducted it for Develop Online. I just want to clarify some things because the uncanny haterade seems to be kicking in for some of you.

  1. Dana clearly says, about the steak analogy, "I'm not saying it has to be that polarising" recognising that there is a middle ground, that it's not either or. That's how analogies work, they simplify and clarify using comparisons.
  2. They weren't "allowed" to do the interview, Dana and Garret were in Sydney for the Aussie launch event of the game. I don't think I did the only interview. The 5.5 hours thing had only just hit reddit while I was walking to the interview, they hadn't seen it (because they'd been doing interviews all day I presume).
  3. Nothing they said came across as spin, and I've interviewed some real pro spin doctors before. They were genuine in answering the questions. There might be a little confirmation bias going regarding the haterade thing though.

I think the steak thing is a good analogy, if considered in the context of what they were trying to get across. It remains to be seen whether people consider it a fine ass filet mignon though.

 

 

 

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152645954&postcount=514

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

BajiRav

Posted
Posted

From what i can gather it looks like a fun qte game. Just not a system seller. Looks like the game takes around 8-10 hours to complete on hard. People doing it in 5 was probably playing it at normal or easy.

 

A sequel could be interesting i really like the gfx and design. The action just don't look that great.

A sequel is a given because apparently the game ends to be continued...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Hedon

Posted
Posted

First review I found at Forbes:

 

6.5/10

 

 

 

In conclusion

 

A few weeks ago I predicted that this game would be a huge letdown. In a sense, I
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

spacer

Posted
Posted

The review scores are about what I expected after reading some NeoGAF members' impressions earlier this week. The length of the game doesn't bother me at all. It was always the baffling lack of a co-op horde mode that put me on the fence about the game.

 

Now that it's confirmed that the game has some issues with gameplay/QTE/cutscene ratios and it's story ends with a cliffhanger, I've decided not to buy it full price. I really, really wanted to: it looked like a game right up my alley, and I would like to support RAD so that we may get a sequel. But, I just can't justify to myself now. I'll see if I can score a rental from one of the two Red Boxes in my town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Hedon

Posted
Posted

What I have been surprised about in the reviews is the blatant use of assets over and over. That really is the opposite of what I would have expected. I haven't heard anything bad about the controls, which is important to me. So I suspect the game will play very fluid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Showan

Posted
Posted

The review scores are about what I expected after reading some NeoGAF members' impressions earlier this week. The length of the game doesn't bother me at all. It was always the baffling lack of a co-op horde mode that put me on the fence about the game.

 

Now that it's confirmed that the game has some issues with gameplay/QTE/cutscene ratios and it's story ends with a cliffhanger, I've decided not to buy it full price. I really, really wanted to: it looked like a game right up my alley, and I would like to support RAD so that we may get a sequel. But, I just can't justify to myself now. I'll see if I can score a rental from one of the two Red Boxes in my town.

 

 

This game screamed "Campaign Co-Op"... 

 

So hoping that there is a sequel to this game that does have campaign co-op

What I have been surprised about in the reviews is the blatant use of assets over and over. That really is the opposite of what I would have expected. I haven't heard anything bad about the controls, which is important to me. So I suspect the game will play very fluid.

 

 

I think every developer is realizing that, how a game controls is a top 3 priority...

 

I've played plenty of bad games, but good controls (and camera) made the game(s) tolerable enough to finish them through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

soniqstylz

Posted
Posted

At a couple of points, you'll find yourself in some dark (very dark) warehouse or other, where you'll have to kill a couple of werewolves before you can proceed. They'll charge straight at you, and you'll have to shoot them a bunch of times. If you don't, they'll knock you over.

 

You do that a couple of times and that's it; that's the entirety of the monster-fighting in The Order: 1886. [spoiler!]

The one exception is a semi-interactive boss-battle against a werewolf near the start of the game, which is then repeated as the final boss battle. Yep, you heard right: The game's final boss is a semi-interactive button-matching fight more or less directly copied from an identical battle earlier in the game.

[End Spoiler]

So my takeaway from that is that more story needs to be patched in before a horde or co-op mode.  BITCH I WANT MOAR WEREWOLVES!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Experienced

lassekongo83

Posted
Posted

Kotaku and Polygon eviscerated the game.

 

It's never good to see new IPs get slammed in reviews or sell poorly, because then all we're left with is franchises that never take any big risks.  :/

It didn't look like this game was going to take a big risk from the start anyways. Looks like an ordinary generic duck and cover game with QTEs and too much moments you can't play. It's not like they hinted at any weird or unique gameplay mechanics from the start. It feels like these games are just made to be some sort of flagship monster to show pretty graphics on a new console. Not made to be fun to play.

  • +E.Worm Jimmy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Showan

Posted
Posted

Not reviewing so good.

 

IGN 6.5/10

Gamespot 5/10

Polygon 5.5/10

Giantbomb 2/5

Kotaku: No/10

Gametrailers 8.2/10

Gameinformer 7.75/10

 

 

 

These scores (outside of Gametrailers and GameInformer) aren't lookin to good....

 

I think some of these outlets (Looking at you Giant Bomb) are just going a pinch overboard with it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

LaP

Posted
Posted

These scores (outside of Gametrailers and GameInformer) aren't lookin to good....

 

I think some of these outlets (Looking at you Giant Bomb) are just going a pinch overboard with it...

 

Not really. They gave the same score to Ryse and honestly The Order looks a lot like Ryse. Good looking game worth playing for the gfx if you can buy it at 20$ or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Experienced

blerk

Posted
Posted

I haven't read enough reviews, but one thing that stuck in my mind was a few things that I read on Kotaku which basically said that aiming was poor due to the depth-of-field effect and that the "cinematic" effect made it hard to see over the cover you're hiding behind as well as seemingly unnecessarily restricting vision. 

 

That's pretty poor if true, IMO, for any third person shooter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Ironman273

Posted
Posted

The part I don't understand is how can you have the best looking console game to date according to various reviews I've seen so far, countless users here agreeing that it looks amazing, yet it runs at 800p and 30fps.  Then these same users go on to the infamous Resolution thread and make arguments on how they can distinguish pixels and anything under 1080 is unacceptable, blurry, and just plain unwatchable.  Oh, and anything below 60fps is a jittery mess.  You just can't have it both ways.

 

Another thing this proves (again) is that pretty does not a good game make.

  • BajiRav, Hedon and spenser.d
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Lamp0

Posted
Posted

The part I don't understand is how can you have the best looking console game to date according to various reviews I've seen so far, countless users here agreeing that it looks amazing, yet it runs at 800p and 30fps.  Then these same users go on to the infamous Resolution thread and make arguments on how they can distinguish pixels and anything under 1080 is unacceptable, blurry, and just plain unwatchable.  Oh, and anything below 60fps is a jittery mess.  You just can't have it both ways.

 

Just because people don't like the resolution/frame rate doesn't mean they can't say it looks amazing... because it does.

 

Also well The Order has a wide screen aspect ratio; it displays natively at 1080p, but it's got black bars on the top & bottom.

 

 

 

Another thing this proves (again) is that pretty does not a good game make.

 

Prove to who? Who is it that thinks good graphics make a good game?

 

Nothing wrong with admiring great graphics, art. In a game. I'll probably rent this game to do just that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Author
  • Subscriber²
Posted

The part I don't understand is how can you have the best looking console game to date according to various reviews I've seen so far, countless users here agreeing that it looks amazing, yet it runs at 800p and 30fps.  Then these same users go on to the infamous Resolution thread and make arguments on how they can distinguish pixels and anything under 1080 is unacceptable, blurry, and just plain unwatchable.  Oh, and anything below 60fps is a jittery mess.  You just can't have it both ways.

 

Another thing this proves (again) is that pretty does not a good game make.

 

It doesn't run at 800p. 800p is obviously less than 900p, and 900p is 1600x900 = 1440000 pixels. The Order is 1920x800 = 1536000 pixels.

 

None of the picture is stretched in any way like 900p games.

 

Really not hard to grasp http://tay.kotaku.com/why-the-order-1886-is-1080p-and-not-800p-1518902908

 

Ontopic gutted the games story can't hold it up. This is definitely a cheap pickup for a tech demo/atmosphere. Good luck with the sequel if it gets one RAD, a lot needs to change (besides the graphics).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing