The Order 1886 Gameplay Footage

AzaK said:
Man, I'm finding it hard to get excited about footage of shooting mechanics in games. They're all just so alike. Hide, shoot, Hide, shoot shoot. That doesn't excite me about a new game.
Click to expand...

I find that too. I hate that like 70% of new games have some sort of gun mechanic. Its just so done. What would you have liked to see instead? Magic? Thats been fairly done as has sword combat.
 
Loudninja said:
Hmm?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...he-history-bending-art-of-the-order-1886.aspx
Click to expand...

Just quoting you but my reply is aimed at all that replied. Guys how is it possible we are not able to agree the guns in this game are fantasy and futuristic for 1886? I'd think thats an obvious fact really, wth do you want to discuss here, Faraday?

All I said is I'd prefer if the game used standard weapons of the time, to me these guns are as unfitting as having neon lights all over the buildings of 1886 London. It's all fantasy and why not, but I hope it's fair to have an opinion about it.
 
David H Wong said:
If you research it, you'll actually find that the past was not sepia toned like that, that's just a limitation of the photography equipment of the time. Color actually did exist in that era! Don't take my word for it, ask around!
Click to expand...

Ugh, no.

dadbandwandcolour.jpg
 
Regardless of the colours the graphics are still so gorgeous.

What will Sony Santa Monica Do?

What will Naughty Dog do!?

WHAT WILL QUANTIC DREAM DO!?
 
KORNdoggy said:
Wtf...lol. So because a piece of paper isn't modelled with physics the realism has gone to hell? You do know real time visuals are about tricks and compromise. I realise the PS4 is a powerful bit of kit, but it isn't an unending power house. What would you rather have, cloth physics that you see all the time? Or modelled bits of paper of the floor that serve absolutely no purpose and you pass by in a matter of seconds.

Is this really what some people expect of next gen?
Click to expand...

yes this is the kind of things that for me screams next gen, realism of the world where you play. Because in a realistic game like the order, painted detail and objects texturized on the ground are atrocious, detach so much from the rest of the graphics!!! I don't pretend physics on these object, maybe script movement, but if not possible at least real geometry. And in the first trailer you can see sheets of newspaper rolling on the ground...so something it's possible!
 
SpeedOfNuts said:
Just quoting you but my reply is aimed at all that replied. Guys how is it possible we are not able to agree the guns in this game are fantasy and futuristic for 1886? I'd think thats an obvious fact really, wth do you want to discuss here, Faraday?

All I said is I'd prefer if the game used standard weapons of the time, to me these guns are as unfitting as having neon lights all over the buildings of 1886 London. It's all fantasy and why not, but I hope it's fair to have an opinion about it.
Click to expand...

Your opinion conflicts with the core premise of the game. Their alternate version of the industrial revolution gives rise to these "futuristic weapons (as you want to call it)" that tips the centuries-old stalemate in the order's favor. The story is about that change in course. What you are asking for is a different game with a different story. Obviously you will get a lot of people to disagree with you. It is always fair to have opinions, but that doesn't automatically make your opinion fair.
 
Not crazy about another cover based shooter, thought last gen killed that shit enough.

Branching QTEs looks cool though, but honestly, after the new Castlevania allows us to turn them off completely.... any game that does not let us do that is pretty backwards in my head.

Love the cinematic look of it all though. Hope its a game I would want to play and not watch though...
 
Valkerionseven said:
Not crazy about another cover based shooter, thought last gen killed that shit enough.

Branching QTEs looks cool though, but honestly, after the new Castlevania allows us to turn them off completely.... any game that does not let us do that is pretty backwards in my head.

Love the cinematic look of it all though. Hope its a game I would want to play and not watch though...
Click to expand...

But that SHOULD be in every single game were guns are involved. It was a mistake making it a genre in my opinion. In every war, in every country, in every era, with whatever weapon, people will have hidden behind cover to fight the enemy. It's as natural and as necessary as pulling a trigger. Unless you're making a robocop game that is.
 
GribbleGrunger said:
But that SHOULD be in every single game were guns are involved. It was a mistake making it a genre in my opinion. In every war, in every country, in every era, with whatever weapon, people will have hidden behind cover to fight the enemy. It's as natural and as necessary as pulling a trigger. Unless you're making a robocop game that is.
Click to expand...

So you're saying games like Max Payne 1 & 2 shouldn't have been made, which are some of the best third person shooters out there?

I'm sorry but every game with guns does not need cover. Especially causes these are GAMES. It doesn't matter what the fuck happens in real life, developers should instead be concerned with making fun gameplay systems instead of going with what happens in real life.
 
Valkerionseven said:
Not crazy about another cover based shooter, thought last gen killed that shit enough.

Branching QTEs looks cool though, but honestly, after the new Castlevania allows us to turn them off completely.... any game that does not let us do that is pretty backwards in my head.

Love the cinematic look of it all though. Hope its a game I would want to play and not watch though...
Click to expand...

Yeah let's just have a shooter that has absolutely ZERO cover, with no objects and all you do is circle-strafe each other.
 
GribbleGrunger said:
But that SHOULD be in every single game were guns are involved. It was a mistake making it a genre in my opinion. In every war, in every country, in every era, with whatever weapon, people will have hidden behind cover to fight the enemy. It's as natural and as necessary as pulling a trigger. Unless you're making a robocop game that is.
Click to expand...

Lol if were going with logic vs. gameplay, 95% of the stuff getting thrown at you in these games should be destoryed after a few rounds.

Either way, I don't disagree, but seriously, the game type needs something to make it interesting. Hiding behind sandbags and cinder blocks aint doing it for me anymore.
 
noobasuar said:
So you're saying games like Max Payne 1 & 2 shouldn't have been made, which are some of the best third person shooters out there?

I'm sorry but every game with guns does not need cover. Especially causes these are GAMES. It doesn't matter what the fuck happens in real life, developers should instead be concerned with making fun gameplay systems instead of going with what happens in real life.
Click to expand...

It doesn't need cover for sure. They could have done something else but it would have to be really creative like MP 1 and 2. Something that requires a defensive posture. I would argue at this point "bullet time" is just as played out as moving from cover to cover so they would have to invent something new. That's a tall order for a new IP. Even Quantum Break looks like it's going to combine cover and bullet time.
 
noobasuar said:
So you're saying games like Max Payne 1 & 2 shouldn't have been made, which are some of the best third person shooters out there?

I'm sorry but every game with guns does not need cover. Especially causes these are GAMES. It doesn't matter what the fuck happens in real life, developers should instead be concerned with making fun gameplay systems instead of going with what happens in real life.
Click to expand...

While MP1 and 2 were great for its time, I actually think that having a third person shooter without some sort of cover today is going backwards.
 
noobasuar said:
So you're saying games like Max Payne 1 & 2 shouldn't have been made, which are some of the best third person shooters out there?

I'm sorry but every game with guns does not need cover. Especially causes these are GAMES. It doesn't matter what the fuck happens in real life, developers should instead be concerned with making fun gameplay systems instead of going with what happens in real life.
Click to expand...

If those games were made today, they would have cover. It's become a standard feature of third person shooters. I don't see how having cover elements in a game somehow makes it worse than not having cover elements. I can't imagine that taking cover against some werewolf is going to be all that effective when it's rushing you.
 
Akauser said:
I find that too. I hate that like 70% of new games have some sort of gun mechanic. Its just so done. What would you have liked to see instead? Magic? Thats been fairly done as has sword combat.
Click to expand...
Actually, a third-person shooter that uses magic instead of guns could be pretty neat.
 
I feel like this preview wasn't indicative of what the game-play is like. I was expecting it to be like a hands on 10 minute + that showed brief game mechanics and whatnot. Instead, we just got random scenes, some fire fights and QTE. I'm disappointed in the footage, not how it looks, just how it was presented.
 
Ricky_R said:
While MP1 and 2 were great for its time, I actually think that having a third person shooter without some sort of cover today it's going backwards.
Click to expand...

Man I still play Max Payne 1 & 2 atleast once a year and I think they hold up really well and I have more fun playing through those games than any cover shooter I've played.

I guess I just don't like the gameplay loop of jumping from cover to cover, hiding behind cover as your health regenerates, and then popping out of cover to play what I honestly consider just a shooting gallery. IDK I guess I just like moving around instead of always being forced to be behind cover.

Also it just feels like older games had more going on in the level design like having different pathways and having way more secret areas to find and stuff to do.

This somewhat has to do with no third person cover shooters having a jump button. You're basically regulated to traverse flat levels with waist high cover strewn about the environment.
 
noobasuar said:
Man I still play Max Payne 1 & 2 atleast once a year and I think they hold up really well and I have more fun playing through those games than any cover shooter I've played.

I guess I just don't like the gameplay loop of jumping from cover to cover, hiding behind cover as your health regenerates, and then popping out of cover to play what I honestly consider just a shooting gallery. IDK I guess I just like moving around instead of always being forced to be behind cover.

Also it just feels like older games had more going on in the level design like having different pathways and having way more secret areas to find and stuff to do.

This somewhat has to do with no third person cover shooters having a jump button. You're basically regulated to traverse flat levels with waist high cover strewn about the environment.
Click to expand...

Never played uncharted? Never played Uncharted
 
Valkerionseven said:
Lol if were going with logic vs. gameplay, 95% of the stuff getting thrown at you in these games should be destoryed after a few rounds.

Either way, I don't disagree, but seriously, the game type needs something to make it interesting. Hiding behind sandbags and cinder blocks aint doing it for me anymore.
Click to expand...

Then the genre shouldn't be defined by something that's natural, it should be defined by something that's not the norm. The norm is to hide behind cover when you're using a weapon. Ask every single person that's ever been unfortunate enough to go to war. It's crazy that something we should expect now is defining a genre. Call it 'bullet sponge' games or 'pillocks who like to die a lot' games or 'COD'. Things need to make sense no matter how fantastical the world are. I thank Christ that TLOU has finally shown people what a game should be. And hopefully, The Order will do the same.
 
GribbleGrunger said:
Then the genre shouldn't be defined by something that's natural, it should be defined by something that's not the norm. The norm is to hide behind cover when you're using a weapon. Ask every single person that's ever been unfortunate enough to go to war. It's crazy that something we should expect now is defining a genre. Call it 'bullet sponge' games or 'pillocks who like to die a lot' games or 'COD'. Things need to make sense no matter how fantastical the world are. thank Christ that TLOU has finally shown people what a game should be. I And hopefully, The Order will do the same.
Click to expand...

wut
 
Andrea Pessino stated that at this point (through his twitter), the AI is still a bit rough and that it will get better soon. Hence the limited gameplay footage we've seen.

I'd be worried if this game was about two months out, but there's still a ways to go. And after watching the documentary on the Last of Us, I also have a better understanding of the process of getting the AI and everything together and how close they beat their deadlines. So I'm not too worried yet, hopefully my optimism pays off when they show some hands on footage, whenever that may be.
 
Ricky_R said:
While MP1 and 2 were great for its time, I actually think that having a third person shooter without some sort of cover today is going backwards.
Click to expand...

sp3000 said:
What a stupid idea. Gameplay should not emulate real life war. This is why shooters have become dumbed down from Halo and UT into the present day garbage that you eat up.
Click to expand...

I don't understand either side of this debate. Why should games fit any mold, with or without cover?

I get preferences, but I don't get people who sound convinced that a gameplay mechanic (or the lack of it) determines the quality of the game.

Games are not cars. The cover system is not bluetooth. Its presence or absence does not automatically mean any level of advancement of the medium.
 
GribbleGrunger said:
But that SHOULD be in every single game were guns are involved. It was a mistake making it a genre in my opinion. In every war, in every country, in every era, with whatever weapon, people will have hidden behind cover to fight the enemy. It's as natural and as necessary as pulling a trigger. Unless you're making a robocop game that is.
Click to expand...

What a stupid idea. Gameplay should not emulate real life war. This is why shooters have become dumbed down from Halo and UT into the present day garbage that you eat up.
 
Phatosaurus said:
I don't mind 30FPS so much, but only 30FPS and not even full 1080p? No deal.
On top of that, I've personally had my fill of chest high wall simulators.
Click to expand...

The difference here is at least it has the same IQ...It is not upscaled. That is a bigger deal to me. Of course I wouldnt want most games at this res.
 
sp3000 said:
What a stupid idea. Gameplay should not emulate real life war. This is why shooters have become dumbed down from Halo and UT into the present day garbage that you eat up.
Click to expand...
what is this nonsense discussion? no one should limit gameplay to something. i wouldn't want all shooters to be like unreal only, or medal of honour only. i would want both. i want a spectrum of different shooters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dying Light: The Beast hands on with gameplay footage
41
654
12Goblins replied
REPLACED: Gamescom 2025 dev interview, new gameplay footage
11
362
Buggy Loop replied
Skywind Livestream - Creation Mod Con 2025 new gameplay footage
1
103
SomeNorseGuy replied
VGC: The Order 1886 sequel would have offered bigger fights and multiplayer
37
1K
ChorizoPicozo replied
I Am Alive - leaked gameplay footage of Darkworks cancelled version of the game
Retro Trailer 
1
96
RagnarokIV replied
Top Bottom