Support NeoGAF

[CambriaRising]

I think people ought to learn the difference between a bad video game and a video game they won't enjoy, because, whoo boy, I remember when the games people called bad were actually giant fucking stinkers and not 'literally anything that doesn't align with their personal sensibilities'... I just got done giving Project X-Zone another shot. Now there's a bad video game. A game that is fundamentally broken and totally pointless. This appears to be something else entirely, at the very least a polished and purpose-built game if nothing else.

But my opinion is objective and therefore yada yada *fart noises*

 

[RoyalLaFlame]

It's disheartening, but there are countless projects in the real world that fail to meet their successful original vision. Think of the dozens if not hundreds of people who worked on L.A. Noire, Lair, Aliens: Colonial Marines, and other games that fell short of their objective.

Yeah but...

I would be really frustrated if my games receive such a huge amount of negativity before release.

This game is being criticized hard and it's not even out yet. Welp, gaming community is really brutal sometimes.




Listening to the OST. It's good, has a nice atmosphere to it.

 

[RBK]

Would be interesting to know how many of these guys actually have a PS4 or were interested in buying this game.

Don't own a PS4 yet, definitely interested in the game.

Spoiler

Not speaking for everyone else though.

 

[Kacho]

I think people ought to learn the difference between a bad video game and a video game they won't enjoy, because, whoo boy, I remember when the games people called bad were actually giant fucking stinkers and not 'literally anything that doesn't align with their personal sensibilities'... I just got done giving Project X-Zone another shot. Now there's a bad video game. A game that is fundamentally broken and totally pointless. This appears to be something else entirely, at the very least a polished and purpose-built game if nothing else.

I understand the difference. The Order 1886 looks like an objectively bad video game. A video game doesn't have to be broken to be bad.

 

[RSTEIN]

I wonder how RAD employees feel after all this. :/

They're probably not sweating it yet. GAF doesn't represent the average gamer. Look at the success of Destiny, Wii, Watch_Dogs, etc. We're also not saying anything they don't know themselves.

The Order has been marketed very successfully, it will probably do well. Not much competition out there right now.

 

[bananafactory]

I understand the difference. The Order 1886 looks like an objectively bad video game. A video game doesn't have to be broken to be bad.

I think you are confusing objectively with subjectively.

 

[djshauny]

So why is everyone hating on the game?

Can someone fill me in? Not going to read the whole thread.

 

[Neuromancer]

I wonder how RAD employees feel after all this. :/

I would hope they're confident enough in their product that people freaking out on the internet doesn't faze them.

 

[-tetsuo-]

I think people ought to learn the difference between a bad video game and a video game they won't enjoy, because, whoo boy, I remember when the games people called bad were actually giant fucking stinkers and not 'literally anything that doesn't align with their personal sensibilities'... I just got done giving Project X-Zone another shot. Now there's a bad video game. A game that is fundamentally broken and totally pointless. This appears to be something else entirely, at the very least a polished and purpose-built game if nothing else.

What about people who enjoy bad video games though?

 

[CosmicQueso]

Now? It doesn't matter how good a game is, I will likely not replay it for years if ever because I don't have enough time.

No kidding. The idea that I might be able to get through this in a couple sits, and maybe even platinum a game (for the first time ever)? This is super appealing.

This title is an obvious miss for the core of the core that spends tremendous time playing games, but for the mass market? Gorgeous visuals, controls that are seemingly not intimidating, with a big story idea? May be enough to make it a mass hit.

Guess we'll see. One would hope the market would be big enough for products of all types and sizes.

 

[Zukkoyaki]

I mean, there's still a fair chance it sells well and isn't critically panned

If i was RAD i wouldn't be hanging off the ledge just because of a few (pre-release) threads on NeoGAF

I think we can bank on this game selling well. Sony is marketing it way more than the average PlayStation game, it's a slow time of the year, it's an interesting new IP, and it has the luxury of being the most hyped PS4 game since Infamous: Second Son. I think it's almost guaranteed to move at least a couple million copies much to the dismay of some folks on the internet.

 

[CambriaRising]

I understand the difference. The Order 1886 looks like an objectively bad video game. A video game doesn't have to be broken to be bad.

I'm not sure you know the meaning of "objectively".

 

[Skux]

When does the review and OT threads go up ?

OT goes up morning of the 20th (New Zealand time), so about 48 hours from now.

Reviews some time tomorrow I think.

 

[Solid Samus]

I understand the difference. The Order 1886 looks like an objectively bad video game. A video game doesn't have to be broken to be bad.

Cool, you know what the word objective means and you still use it in this fashion so I know not to engage you in the future

But my opinion is objective and therefore yada yada *fart noises*

Boy you called it alright

I'm not.

It's not really up for discussion. It's a word with a dictionary definition that you're patently misusing by positing your own opinion, backed by your own personal sensibilities, as a universal objective standard. I imagine you won't get the response that kind of post really deserves because NeoGAF is too well moderated lol

This is, like, kindergarten shit. You'd think you wouldn't have to explain the concept of subjectivity vs objectivity to a GAF user (and not even a junior) but here we are

 

[Kacho]

I think you are confusing objectively with subjectively.

I'm not.

Cool, you know what the word objective means and you still use it in this fashion so I know not to engage you in the future

Cool. No skin off of my back.

 

[Nirolak]

This is a fair point. Games used to take 4-6 hours to beat in the 8 and 16 bit days. In fact, it wasn't until the PSX that game-length really started to balloon, and by the time Xbox/PS2/NGC were out it was the norm.

Games used to survive as single-player only games (or couch multi) by being phenomenally hard to beat and/or requiring they be beat in a single sitting. So, yeah you can beat Contra in less than an hour... but good luck actually doing it.

Now days there are games that cheat their way to 12 hours with back-tracking or an open world that takes 20 minutes to move between missions. Or, like a lot of open world games has 5 minutes of gameplay followed by 10 minutes of driving to the next spot for 5 minutes of more gameplay to complete a mission. Games have found ways to pad out their game time... sometimes for gamers benefits, but a lot of time not really.

To your point, the market answer seems to be to remove borrowing or used game sales and move to a digital distribution platform for these sorts of titles. Then it's a question of will people be willing to spend 40 dollars for a 3 hour game?

I do feel price point shifting (and obviously the production value cut that tends to come with it has actually been quite successful.

I don't see many people complain when an indie game that cost them $20 is a 5-7 hours long singleplayer experience, and some of them get to the million sales mark or beyond (albeit after notable discounts).

Of course, most of these games don't look like The Order 1886. When people pick up Shadow Warrior on Steam they understand that they're not going to get production values through the roof.

Similarly multiplayer only games have also adjusted to the market by heavily going f2p or at least with a notably lower intro price. Evolve seems to be struggling with its current state since it didn't embrace the trend.

Ultimately this threads and the Titanfall threads (debating whether a MP only game is worth full price) ultimately simply prove that value is inherently subjective. There's nothing wrong with considering the length of a game when making the decision whether to purchase or not. However I think some people tend to forget that the value they put on the length of a game is highly subject, and not an objective measure of the games worth.

Personally I'm not opposed to paying full price (for the right game) for either a MP only game or for a shorter single player game. However in either scenario it is slightly less likely that I will buy the game, and more likely I'll adopt a wait and see position - make sure the reviews are strong and the MP stays active.

These games also have to compete with the titles that do it all at the same price point or less.

GTA V offers a huge open world, tons of side activities, and expansive multiplayer all for $60. It seems like a tremendous bargain compared to buying something that's a short singlepalyer experience or content light online only game, and we see its sales volume respond in kind.

These games also have to compete with GTA going on sale for $40 or $20 eventually as well. Do I buy The Order or Evovle for $60, or GTA for $20? I can go back and buy something that has a lot of content like Mordor or Dragon Age for cheap too or boot up some League of Legends or Hearthstone for free.

No kidding. The idea that I might be able to get through this in a couple sits, and maybe even platinum a game (for the first time ever)? This is super appealing.

This title is an obvious miss for the core of the core that spends tremendous time playing games, but for the mass market? Gorgeous visuals, controls that are seemingly not intimidating, with a big story idea? May be enough to make it a mass hit.

Guess we'll see. One would hope the market would be big enough for products of all types and sizes.

Out of curiosity, which games do you feel have been notably successful with The Order's business set-up in the past ~2 years?

I'm curious about some recent use cases for comparison since I'm having trouble thinking of too many. Even TLOU had multiplayer and they did support that for a while post launch.

Though there is also the issue of how many games like that have even been made.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

I replay games very seldomly these days. So for me content is much more important than the points you're bringing up. Obviously we have different taste as to what replay value is, and that's fair.

This is me, too. Replay value isn't something I concerned myself with when it comes to any game, because I know damn well I'm going to finish it once, at best. If anything, when games have replay value that requires multiple playthroughs to see everything (say, branching and exclusive paths), it turns me off, because it basically means I won't get to see everything the developers created.

 

[That Stone Dude]

As hungry as I am for something to play on my new PS4 I'm gonna wait and see how this one ends up.

To me a 5-10 hr play time isn't automatically a deal breaker. Half that play time being cutscenes kind of is, especially in something being billed as an action packed third person shooter.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

So why is everyone hating on the game?

Can someone fill me in? Not going to read the whole thread.

The game is too short and even then 37.338% is cut scenes! It is also objectively bad cause reasons. The end.

 

[BadAss2961]

It's disheartening, but there are countless projects in the real world that fail to meet their successful original vision. Think of the dozens if not hundreds of people who worked on L.A. Noire, Lair, Aliens: Colonial Marines, and other games that fell short of their objective.

Considering everything RAD has said about The Order, and that most impressions applaud the visuals and overall glitch/bug free performance, I think they met their vision as much as any other AAA game.

 

[Beefy]

I'm still getting this game, as the whole setting and atmosphere looks great and has always appealed to me. I will judge for myself if the whole the game is too short or it has too many cut scenes.

 

[mrklaw]

Hopefully someone can do a good prostitiution analogy before Friday.

I'd prefer a blowjob over a couple of handjobs. Both would be around the same price, and the blowjob would be a much shorter experience but I'd enjoy it at least as much as the handjobs.

 

[Fixed2BeBroken]

GTA V offers a huge open world, tons of side activities, and expansive multiplayer all for $60. It seems like a tremendous bargain compared to buying something that's a short singlepalyer experience or content light online only game, and we see its sales volume respond in kind.

These games also have to compete with GTA going on sale for $40 or $20 eventually as well. Do I buy The Order or Evovle for $60, or GTA for $20? I can go back and buy something that has a lot of content like Mordor or Dragon Age for cheap too or boot up some League of Legends or Hearthstone for free.

THIS....

I just finished GTA V again on Next Gen/Current Gen consoles and I was just thinking the value that game offers is crazy....

 

[ironcreed]

I just like having different gaming experiences. Be it a sprawling epic in a huge open world that is a time-sink and a half, or a tighter, story-driven experience that can be beaten over the course of a day or two. Right now, The Order will fit nicely for me in that it looks like a fun, but more compact ride that I can enjoy without it digging a deeper pit for my backlog before games like Bloodborne release. Point being, games like this definitely have their place and I am glad they are there.

 

[Kinyou]

Spoiler

2 hours and 5 or so minutes. 2 hours and 15 if QTE's are counted.

It's not that bad, but I can't speak on how it feels. The review would imply that it felt like over 3 hours of cutscenes were in the game.

Ok, that doesn't that extreme. Uncharted 2 clocks about 1 hour and a half, though I guess the overall playtime is longer.

 

[VindicatorZ]

I think the game sounds and looks amazing. I'm fine with the length and linearity.

But what I was hoping for, and maybe it is in the game I just don't know, is a bit more openness in the level design. Think Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Eternal Darkness. More survival horror, less open world. How about making me bust out my map and explore a level? Something like the mansion from RE1, or the hospital from Silent Hill. Require some backtracking and puzzle solving. All of this can be done while maintaining the tight cinematic feel. It doesn't have to be on rails. And as far as the city, a little more open in the style of Arkham perhaps? I don't mean anywhere near that scale, but some open areas to explore, and some pubs and other buildings to enter and chat with NPC's, seach for items, get clues. Things that make the game feel open, but not at all "open world." I feel like the game actually has elements of this, it can just be taken further.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Haha... Like the game or not, no C-team delivers this kind of production and performance. RAD is clearly very talented.

This game has been worked on since since 2010. Unless they ended up scrapping whatever they had in the first couple years, that's 1 year for 1 and a half hours of gameplay. </sarcasm on that last part.>

But seriously what were they doing those 5 years.

 

[SlasherJPC]

So why is everyone hating on the game?

Can someone fill me in? Not going to read the whole thread.

Youtuber recorded his playthrough. Was around 5 hours and some change for time. Didn't stop to pick up any collectibles, read notes, etc. Just went from point to point. Game is too short. Gamespot, etc start making news bits claiming this is the length of the game. Forbes comes out and say it isn't. Massive critical flood of fucks starting flying all around. Suddenly the haters of The Order see the beacons signaling them much like batman along with the folks who only praise it and then well everyone else that's trying to have a normal conversation about it all got lost in the shit flood.

 

[Koh]

You could say you are getting a feature length movie with your game. That's quite the bonus content!

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

But seriously what were they doing those 5 years.

Making DLC that they will sell for $20 per hour of 60/40 split. Obviously.

 

[Phat Michael]

I'd prefer a blowjob over a couple of handjobs. Both would be around the same price, and the blowjob would be a much shorter experience but I'd enjoy it at least as much as the handjobs.

Are you saying the order sucks dicks?

 

[nib95]

Replay Value can also come down to a very simple question:

Do I have the money to play something else?

I replayed a lot of awful games when I was a kid, because they were the present I got at Xmas and it was the only game I was going to get for 6 more months. I replayed Mario 64 a ton because I enjoyed it, and I didn't have another game the N64 when it came out. Hell, I replayed Cruisin' USA a ton because I didn't have anything else until MK64 came out.

Now? It doesn't matter how good a game is, I will likely not replay it for years if ever because I don't have enough time.

I suppose that is true. Especially looking back at gaming in my younger days. My backlog is massive at the moment, so there is a chance I might not replay The Order for a very long time, if I don't end up replaying it straight away. Especially with Bloodborne, Witcher 3 etc around the corner. I am a bit of a graphics and art zealot though, so the draw to replay might be heightened by that. Ironically enough, in that sense shorter games I find are sometimes easier to replay.

 

[Beefy]

I just like having different gaming experiences. Be it a sprawling epic in a huge open world that is a time-sink and a half, or a tighter, story-driven experience that can be beaten over the course of a day or two. Right now, The Order will fit nicely for me in that it looks like a fun, but more compact ride that I can enjoy without it digging a deeper pit for my backlog before games like Bloodborne release. Point being, games like this definitely have their place and I am glad they are there.

Same here, if all I bought was open world huge 100hr+ games I would soon get put off.

 

[Loudninja]

This game has been worked on since since 2010. Unless they ended up scrapping whatever they had in the first couple years, that's 1 year for 1 and a half hours of gameplay. </sarcasm on that last part.>

But seriously what were they doing those 5 years.

Yeah cuz game development is very easy especially with a new IP.

 

[Curufinwe]

I waited till Vanquish was under $40 four months after release to buy it, and I'm sure I'll do the same with The Order. I don't know why the length is such a big deal when the review embargo is a day before release. If the reviews slam it for being short anyone concerned about value for money can cancel their pre-orders.

 

[HMD]

I just like having different gaming experiences. Be it a sprawling epic in a huge open world that is a time-sink and a half, or a tighter, story-driven experience that can be beaten over the course of a day or two. Right now, The Order will fit nicely for me in that it looks like a fun, but more compact ride that I can enjoy without it digging a deeper pit for my backlog before games like Bloodborne release. Point being, games like this definitely have their place and I am glad they are there.

EXACTLY! the game actually felt like a breath of fresh air because the last 4 games I've played were open world with a meh story. Though I'm expecting it to review like crap for not having any multiplayer/replayablity.

 

[ironcreed]

Youtuber recorded his playthrough. Was around 5 hours and some change for time. Didn't stop to pick up any collectibles, read notes, etc. Just went from point to point. Game is too short. Gamespot, etc start making news bits claiming this is the length of the game. Forbes comes out and say it isn't. Massive critical flood of fucks starting flying all around. Suddenly the haters of The Order see the beacons signaling them much like batman along with the folks who only praise it and then well everyone else that's trying to have a normal conversation about it all got lost in the shit flood.

LOL, the unstoppable force vs the immovable object. It sure sucks to get squashed in the middle of the impact.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Out of curiosity, which games do you feel have been notably successful with The Order's business set-up in the past ~2 years?

Though there is also the issue of how many games like that have even been made.

I'd identify a few games that are maybe somewhat similar. Granted, some of these had tacked on multiplayer that few (if any) people played. The Order could have tacked on a similar MP mode no one would have played. I geuss we'll see if that was a good or bad choice. Sometimes including something like MP is what you do in order to tick the consumer value box, not because you think people will actually play it or that it'd be particularly good.

Tomb Raider 2013 (12+ hours, MP that no one played)
TWD Survival Instinct (still sold really well despite being terrible) (5+ hours)
Dead Space 3 (13+ hours, with co-op so not the best comp)
Wolfenstein (12+ hours)
Riptide (11+hours, also not the best comp)​

I'll guess that The Order will fall short of Tomb Raider 2013 sales, but exceed the others on the list.

 

[astroturfing]

it's relatively short? cool, i might play it then. i don't understand why anyone would want a linear shooter to be anywhere near 10 hours long... shit gets tedious fast (i'm looking at you Dead Space 3 aargghhh).

The Last of Us was amazing though, and really long... hmmm.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Yeah cuz game development is very easy especially with a new IP.

We can extrapolate that Destiny was started being worked on 2010/2011, and despite the hate I give that game, it's a very well polished multiplayer game that's fun with a pretty lackluster story(But it has a story.).

So....yeah maybe RAD is just C-team status.

 

[Nafai1123]

This game has been worked on since since 2010. Unless they ended up scrapping whatever they had in the first couple years, that's 1 year for 1 and a half hours of gameplay. </sarcasm on that last part.>

But seriously what were they doing those 5 years.

I think what most people don't realize is that as far are assets go, it's a lot of work to do a linear SP campaign. All those areas you travel through are unique assets, compared to 10 MP maps that you play over and over again. This isn't the AC team with over 1k people working on it at all times.

We can extrapolate that Destiny was started being worked on 2010/2011, and despite the hate I give that game, it's a very well polished multiplayer game that's fun with a pretty lackluster story(But it has a story.).

So....yeah maybe RAD is just C-team status.

Destiny had a lack of content as well, with a larger team, bigger budget, and the prestigious Bungie title.

 

[Alienous]

I wonder why they didn't shove in some kind of challenge/arcade mode. Just let players fuck around with the guns they want on refashioned sections of the story levels.

Something like a Mercenaries mode. DLC, perhaps?

 

[vesvci]

Yeah but...

This game is being criticized hard and it's not even out yet. Welp, gaming community is really brutal

It's total bullshit IMO. If The Order is shipped out broken like Driveclub or MCC or Unity AFTER release, than by all means let hail and brimstone come down. But for fucks sake, the game is not even out yet and there's a lot of people "concerned" about the game's length. And what's ridiculous about this is that it's based on a video that's 5+ long, and who can really verify it? Only a person that has really played the game before release AND is willing to sit through a video of someone else allegedly playing it for 5+ hours.

This stuff is what leads be to believe that there's some agenda against this game, just like Driveclub before its release.

I switched from physical pre-order to digital pre-order because of all the negative talking about this game. I can't wait to play it. I'm supporting the devs here.

 

[ironcreed]

Same here, if all I bought was open world huge 100hr+ games I would soon get put off.

For sure. I love my open world time-sinks, but I already have a few sitting unfinished and more on the way. A short, but sweet experience will be so much easier to digest right now and I will probably enjoy it more for not dragging on.

 

[nib95]

I'd identify a few games that are maybe somewhat similar. Granted, some of these had tacked on multiplayer that few (if any) people played. The Order could have tacked on a similar MP mode no one would have played. I geuss we'll see if that was a good or bad choice. Sometimes including something like MP is what you do in order to tick the consumer value box, not because you think people will actually play it or that it'd be particularly good.

Tomb Raider 2013 (12+ hours, MP that no one played)
TWD Survival Instinct (still sold really well despite being terrible) (5+ hours)
Dead Space 3 (13+ hours, with co-op so not the best comp)
Wolfenstein (12+ hours)
Riptide (11+hours, also not the best comp)​

I'll guess that The Order will fall short of Tomb Raider 2013 sales, but exceed the others on the list.

Ironically, the same guy that did this Order 1886 play through that has everyone talking, also has a play through of Wolfenstein, which he completed in 7 hours. But as you've rightly stated, the average play time for the game is generally much longer than that.

 

[GatticusFinch]

It's total bullshit IMO. If The Order is shipped out broken like Driveclub or MCC or Unity AFTER release, than by all means let hail and brimstone come down. But for fucks sake, the game is not even out yet and there's a lot of people "concerned" about the game's length. And what's ridiculous about this is that it's based on a video that's 5+ long, and who can really verify it? Only a person that has really played the game before release AND is willing to sit through a video of someone else allegedly playing it for 5+ hours.

This stuff is what leads be to believe that there's some agenda against this game, just like Driveclub before its release.

I switched from physical pre-order to digital pre-order because of all the negative talking about this game. I can't wait to play it. I'm supporting the devs here.

Let's not start moving the goal posts of quality releases to "well, it's not horrendously broken and buggy, 9/10."

 

[BadAss2961]

Out of curiosity, which games do you feel have been notably successful with The Order's business set-up in the past ~2 years?

I'm curious about some recent use cases for comparison since I'm having trouble thinking of too many. Even TLOU had multiplayer and they did support that for a while post launch.

Though there is also the issue of how many games like that have even been made.

That's the thing, there is none.

It's almost like Heavy Rain (which was successful) in terms of how cinematic it is, but it also happens to be a third person shooter with like the greatest graphics ever. Can't be sure of what kind of draw it'll be.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I think what most people don't realize is that as far are assets go, it's a lot of work to do a linear SP campaign. All those areas you travel through are unique assets, compared to 10 MP maps that you play over and over again. This isn't the AC team with over 1k people working on it at all times.



Destiny had a lack of content as well, with a larger team, bigger budget, and the prestigious Bungie title.

Oh definitely, but the gameplay is fucking solid for that game despite the lack of content. The 1886's gameplay is looking to disappoint from the videos I've seen with all the...QTEs. I simply used the example of Destiny/Bungie because that other poster was like 'Game development is hard' for me calling out that they've been working out on 1886 for 5 years.

 

[Alienous]

Ironically, the same guy that did this Order 1886 play through that has everyone talking, also has a play through of Wolfenstein, which he completed in 7 hours. But as you've rightly stated, the average play time for the game is generally much longer than that.

Are you sure it was complete? I was only aware of an unfinished Bioshock Infinite one, and a linearly played Amazing Spider-Man 2 one.

 

[mrklaw]

I don't really think RAD would have deliberately gone for a small story with no multiplayer unless they were limited in scope by factors such as time, or getting up to speed with the technology as this is their first? home console game.

I hope now that they have their engine working nicely, then any sequel or whatever the next title from them is, has more content. I'd have thought a coop multiplayer mode reusing existing assets would be doable for relatively little extra time in development.

That isn't to excuse RAD for releasing something short, but I'm just thinking there may be mitigating factors. Fingers crossed they get the chance to do another game and they can flesh out their ideas.