Night Angel
Member
I'm with you. Games should be reviewed for what they are, not for what they aren't. It's like the "- Not Open World" bullshit with DC... it just makes no sense.
The Order: 1886 Gets New Direct-Feed Screenshots From Obama
- Thread starter DarkLordMalik
- Start date
- Status
While I agree that such criticisms are unfair, I think it's totally fine for someone to say they were unsatisfied with the level they can interact with the world. For example in Bioshock Infinite where they crafted such a beautiful setting yet the only way to interact with it is in the form of a linear action heavy shooter. The Order does seem to be varied enough to avoid such a pitfall, but we'll see.
chromatic9
Member
I'm thinking more in-between, like its okay and pretty neat experience. Might just hit a the right time and have enough quality.
XxRampage07xX
Member
Even if this game can only get one or two 8s review scores from the press, it is already a big achievement for RaD. This is their very first game developed on a console after all. Even when it is imperfect, it is still worth a lesson in which RaD can learn from their mistakes. So, I don't expect this game to be critically acclaimed. But I still buy it anyway because I find it interesting to play and I want to support RaD so that they can make more products in the future.
Net_Wrecker
Member
The 1st impression is important, but the really special works, to me, are the ones where you can get something more or new out of them on subsequent playthroughs/watches/listens/reads/whatever. That 1st time through is always a mix of hype and experiencing something unknown, so I find it to be almost unreliable when the reaction is too extreme in one direction or the other. That 2nd time though, that's where you look at the experience more critically and can really put your finger on why the game is so good, or reevaluate and temper your hype because maybe some of it doesn't work so well.
Obviously this is harder to do with longer games, but those titles also have their own issues that come to light when you play them for more than 20 hours which essentially give you the same feeling you'd get from replaying a shorter game.
still haven't decided if i should preorder or not
I'm in the same boat as you. I'm edging towards waiting until the price goes down.
loaf of bread
Member
I really hope this game reviews and sells well. The latter is all but assured at this point. RAD deserves better.
jellies_two
Member
Too many people seem to be putting their hopes not in the game as a game, but the game as a system seller, or a weapon in platform wars, or something weird like that.
Have some respect for RAD and enjoy it on its own merits!
Very probably if you enjoy playing it, there will be more in future.
Have some respect for RAD and enjoy it on its own merits!
Very probably if you enjoy playing it, there will be more in future.
ReplacementPelican
Member
People hope it sells well for RAD's sake, not because they want the PlayStation 4 to sell more, I'm not sure where you even get this from.
I've pretty much read every post in this topic, this is the first post that mentions "system seller" or mentions anything regarding platform wars.
People want this game to turn out well or their own sakes (who doesn't want a good game?) and if that's the case, sell well for RaD's sake. It really sucks when a good game doesn't sell well. System Seller, platform wars etc don't enter into the equation at all.
jellies_two
Member
I know it isn't stated because that is verboten. But for some it is a factor behind the wishfulness.
Even if it is "just for RAD's sake" good grief, spare the tears till you get the game and actually have a case that it is wonderful, but terribly unappreciated by mainstream reviewers.
And if it is that kind of weird title, then RAD will probably still do well just like Girls on HBO keeps getting renewed even though the audience is shrinking, because it has artistic merit or wins awards or something.
ReplacementPelican
Member
So its just a baseless assumption? You talking about people complaining about reviews is irrelevant because that happens no matter the game, no matter the exclusivity and no matter the companies involved.
You just waded into a thread which it would appear you have not been following and just made a silly claim.
the_batman
Banned
LOL, wow, 54 pages for a screenshot thread. that's crazy. if the game gets this much attention in the real world it should sell like hotcakes.
jellies_two
Member
I'm following the topic, and will buy the Order, unless reviewers that I trust, say it isn't good. Which appears unlikely at this point in time.
What I'm complaining about is the excessive HAND WRINGING visible over the possibility that it won't get 8s or above even though the people involved seem to be sold on the game already. And I think this is much more visible when the stakes are higher, and the stakes are higher when the game is a platform exclusive. It isn't nearly as obvious for cross platform games.
The score thing seems to be part of the enjoyment, and how did it come to that.
Like its a good game AND IT GOT GREAT SCORES wow does that make it better? no.
Sorry I don't buy the concern over RAD - and I doubt they care for it either, because they'd surely prefer people enjoy it, for itself, and not hinge their mood on review scores.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
The biggest thing that will hurt this game in reviews is the lack of MP, and deservedly so.
SlasherJPC
Banned
I couldn't disagree more. Every game does not NEED mp.
littlemagician
Member
not every game has to have multiplayer.
the_batman
Banned
it could use co-op though.
Nah. In a world where the majority of games tack on mediocre multiplayer... I would much rather have one hell of a single-player campaign* that received 100% of their attention.
I mean, just look at the game. They don't have a "The Order: 1886 Season Pass", or practically ANY DLC outside of a couple costumes you get for preordering. RAD is such an outlier right now, and I'll give them my money because of that.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Why should the lack of multiplayer hurt the games review scores? The lack of a single player campaign didn't hurt the scores of multiplayer only games.
Also I don't think anyone needs to preemptively defend this games scores as I would be very surprised if it doesn't do very well across the board.
loaf of bread
Member
Even worse
jellies_two
Member
Agree - most games do MP badly.
I mean really. They fail so much at it, especially in the first six months. The unreliability tends to undermine the whole game.
I think that Wolfenstein proves that many reviewers aren't necessarily opposed to lack of originality in terms of gameplay nor lack of mp.
As long as this game is well paced, plays well and has a compelling narrative (much like the new order) I can see it scoring well.
Plus obviously it looks incredible
As long as this game is well paced, plays well and has a compelling narrative (much like the new order) I can see it scoring well.
Plus obviously it looks incredible
ReplacementPelican
Member
I'll reply to this because otherwise I feel like I'm re-treading ground.
People genuinely do care, they have been digesting every piece of information about this game and a large part of that is seeing the same people openly and gleefully discuss their vision and hopes and with that comes an appreciation of these people and a wish for them to deliver it. Whether you 'buy' it or not is moot, people have been following the game for years now and part of that is caring about the product regardless of how you perceive it.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
Not saying every game does. But a linear 10 hour TPS certainly would benefit from it. Gears and Uncharted manage to deliver on both fronts so I would expect a game like The Order to as well.
First I hope that doesn't happen. Second, why does it "deserve" such a criticism? This is why we can't have nice things.
Some of the best new IPs of last gen didn't have any kind of MP. Bioshock, Mass Effect, Uncharted, Alan Wake, Mirror's Edge, Portal, Assassin's Creed, Bayonetta and the list goes on. $60 games, no MP, memorable as fuck.
WordsintheWater
Member
I agree for horde co-op, but not storyline wise, co-op stories add too many restrictions. Especially when you are trying to tell a cinematic, well thought out story. I'd rather not have someone running around with me and hearing them in my mic while I'm trying to pay attention and soak in the atmosphere. Of all the games that need story co-op, a cinematic TPS with emphasis on story, is not one of them
Agreed 1000000% sick and tired of everything having some tacked on multiplayer.
LookAtMeGo
Member
To be fair, Uncharted never had MP with its first entry. At the same time though, it has become much more common for games to have MP nowadays. But games like Wolenstien prove that a SP only games can still deliver, and be worth the asking price.
Agree with this. Adding co-op to story based games is a real immersion breaker and usually far less enjoyable than a mode tailored to it.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
The only similar games you listed are Uncharted and maybe Alan Wake (never played). Uncharted 2 was certainly a much more valuable product with the inclusion of multiplayer.
Jigolo
Member
Yeah but this is The Order: 1886. It will get critizied and heavily penalized in scores due to this very reason and because it's 8-12 hours long. (Bayonetta 2 and BioShock infinite didn't get criticized for this though but this game will)
illmatic22
Banned
Well, I imagine they were praised because those 8-12 hours were good.
the_batman
Banned
yeah i meant a separate horde mode, or even mini-story type sections like in Uncharted 2.
LookAtMeGo
Member
Ya but did they get penalized for not having MP? I honestly don't remember.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
No one expects a game like Bayonetta 2 to have MP. Different genres have different expectations
viveks86
Member
I don't remember the last SP game that got penalized in reviews for not having MP. I think that particular idiocy traces back to classic consumer behavior
WordsintheWater
Member
I'd imagine RAD would add a MP mode with the second installment. New IP and their first console game probably had a lot to do with them not having it in. Uncharted didn't have multiplayer its first go around either.
LookAtMeGo
Member
Sure, I can understand that. How about Wolfenstien? FPS games are prime for MP.
I'm just curious. I do believe that this will be one of the things 1886 will be criticised for. I agree that with a good MP component, it would increase the value ofthe game but I don't think it is necessary to be included if the SP is good enough.
I don't remember either. I don't know for sure that The Order will be. I just have a sneaking suspicion that it will be from a few outlets.
While I think this game is perfect for MP, I'm not too upset that the first game doesn't have it. Get your priorities down straight and then add to it if there's a sequel, just like the Uncharted series.
A separate coop mode would be really neat as well and I honestly expected one after seeing how many people they have in your squad so to speak, but as long as the SP is fun, it can follow the same gameplan ND had with Uncharted which I'm sure was on their minds. Nail down the fundamentals and see how the game does and then go from there with coop or MP with a bigger team having the safety of knowing the first game did well and that the new additions should add to it.
I really hope there's a chance for a sequel just for the setting alone. Even if this doesn't review well, we've seen quite a few new IP's struggle in the beginning just to come back and blow everyone away with a great sequel.
A separate coop mode would be really neat as well and I honestly expected one after seeing how many people they have in your squad so to speak, but as long as the SP is fun, it can follow the same gameplan ND had with Uncharted which I'm sure was on their minds. Nail down the fundamentals and see how the game does and then go from there with coop or MP with a bigger team having the safety of knowing the first game did well and that the new additions should add to it.
I really hope there's a chance for a sequel just for the setting alone. Even if this doesn't review well, we've seen quite a few new IP's struggle in the beginning just to come back and blow everyone away with a great sequel.
the_batman
Banned
the single player would at least need to have a sense of replay value.
LookAtMeGo
Member
I can agree with that.
A good game that has good shooting mechanics already has replay value to me. Unlocking harder difficulties is enough to offer replay value if the core game is solid enough.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
Wolfenstein would have most likely been a better product with MP and I do remember reviews pointing out the lack of MP. It's not like the game reviewed that highly. I'd prob still be playing it if it the MP was good and there is value in that.
This game is gonna review well. I wish people would chill out about the future review scores and preemptively defending it against the critics like it's their baby or something. It's already got something like 250k preorders, the heads of the company are already talking sequel. The pre-release buzz in the last week has been fucking ecstatic. Everyone just chill, RAD got this.
XxRampage07xX
Member
More than that, I think huge amounts of cutscenes and QTEs will also be mentioned as flaws in most reviews too. But for me, I love them (pretty weird huh? =D). I am not sure about others though. Some people just want to take control of their characters most of the time to participate in gunfights and battles.
- Status