-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Order 1886 Review Thread
- Thread starter The Sarcastic Dude
- Start date
- Status
Necromanti
Member
The irony is when people with avatars representing the game in question beg people to take their curated impressions more seriously than a reviewer that supposedly has an agenda. I don't understand why people can't at least begin to humor the fact that their emotional investment may also be a factor in introducing bias.
Vire
Member
I haven't read the whole thread but this my favourite post, should make you feel better
This thread is clearly a treasure trove full of gold haha. I knew the fallout of the review scores for this game would be nothing short of insanity.
They should of made the release date for Tuesday and had the embargo lift day of release. Making this release alone on Friday was a horrible decision. Such bad word of mouth started spreading from early copies because of the dumb end of the week release date. Whatever marketing genius at Sony assigned these dates should be fired.
MegaSackman
Member
Yeah but I think that game doesn't have a big number of fans, it was more hyped by press than anything else... in the end it didn't live up to their own standards I supose.
I think that games like Bloodborne, The Witcher, and Batman are more in line with people, probably because they are proven franchises though.
Pestilence11
Member
Fixed that for you. It's by no means limited to consoles.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Evil Within wasn't that good.
I'd say a 20/100 is about as off the mark as the 9.5/10 it received from Gamepur. You're always going to have reviews that skew well off the mean.
Uhm, they're perfectly suited for giving first impressions if the people who are reading them recognize this perspective. I'm equally as excited for this game as they were, but had not been given the chance to pick it up early. For me, these impressions are a million times more relevant to assessing the enjoyment of the title than anything else would be, including these reviews. Since I share the same level of interest in the same things as those gamers, I trust them far more than any review site. Why wouldn't I? We're more akin than any reviewer I've ever read from anywhere. Reviews have always been trash to me. The tendency toward snark, the inevitable 'as edgy as possible language', and the love of scathing criticism is all I see in reviews these days - after all, these guys are in the business of page views. I don't trust the opinion of those who are in the business of page views. I'm not sure why anybody would.
-MD-
Member
Well you've convinced me.
Kacho
Gold Member
Sure it can. This reviewer scored the game with the arbitrary number he thought was appropriate based on his time with the game. The reviewer clearly did not enjoy the game and that's OK.
7DollarHagane
Banned
The problem isn't the length - a rollicking, fun, creative, and challenging 6 hours of third person shooting can get good scores and be enjoyed by people.
People still praise and replay the Max Payne games and im pretty sure those are barely 6 hours. But that's because Max Payne did something new and did it well.
You can also point to legions of samey third person shooters that ran 6 hours or longer and nobody remembers or wants to replay.
Look at a game like The Getaway from the PS2 era. A very impressive technical game that basically tripped all over itself in every other way that involved playing the game. Nobody makes LTTP threads about the Getaway or gushes about it with rose tinted glasses, because it was a mediocre game. And that makes it forgettable, just like The Order will be.
People saying this game is being crucified for not doing anything new are missing the point. Even if it does what it does reasonably well the game is forgettable.
People still praise and replay the Max Payne games and im pretty sure those are barely 6 hours. But that's because Max Payne did something new and did it well.
You can also point to legions of samey third person shooters that ran 6 hours or longer and nobody remembers or wants to replay.
Look at a game like The Getaway from the PS2 era. A very impressive technical game that basically tripped all over itself in every other way that involved playing the game. Nobody makes LTTP threads about the Getaway or gushes about it with rose tinted glasses, because it was a mediocre game. And that makes it forgettable, just like The Order will be.
Or games like Cold Fear that nobody remembers because it was a fairly generic shooter released in the mid 2000s.
People saying this game is being crucified for not doing anything new are missing the point. Even if it does what it does reasonably well the game is forgettable.
schaft0620
Member
We get the laughs. Then, as it goes on...it becomes something else. Something sad. =P
I would like to comment on one thing. The "Think of the developers!" mindset. That's nice and all but I believe they are big boys and girls. They can take care of themselves. You take the good with the bad in this industry and their game did not review well. Hell, they probably knew this. If you're a creator, you know if you make something that will be divisive. You take both the punches and the pats on the back.
I'm sorry but I just can't jive with that mindset. Be respectful to the person, but as a group... I don't think they were sitting around a table having a huge debate about "Think about the gaer. Their money. Their families. Their hard earned money."
The way the industry acts, very few of them actually do.
That's rich.
From the preview vids I always thought The Order looked mediocre gameplay-wise. Other than the visuals the game seemed to do nothing of interest to me. I even jokingly wrote this in one thread.
If you look at my post from a different angle you'll understand that I was talking about giving metascores too much credit in general. And that every game should be researched in some form before deciding on whether to buy it or not. The Order is no exception.
Ultra Numb
Member
Oh, wow. This thread sure blew up. So many pages!
Thought the game would be in the 70s.
Thought the game would be in the 70s.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Sweet.
Does this mean IGN will now pay me for game reviews? I think I have a future in it.
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
What the whaaaa?
Thanks for your support!
ArkkAngel007
Member
lol
Stop reminding me that I have to replay it!
Copies get shipped out and make it when they make it. Stuff came out before this week, so it wouldn't have changed a thing.
Miyukipedia
Neo Member
In other words: I only agree with reviews when they reaffirm my hype for the game and ignore anything else that questions that.
wolfhowwl
Banned
Oh I'm quoting it alright. LOL!
schaft0620
Member
Not that it really matters here but, some of the bonuses the devs get paid are based on scores.
This is one of the things that really sucks. Like how Fallout NV just barely made the cut. That the bonuses are based on someone else's opinion.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
The reviewer was just adding some levity to a harsh review. Not only did he not have any fun with it, he actively hated it, and felt the game has no merit to it outside of the presentation. Fairness goes out the window if you're trying to stay awake when playing.
Oh damn dude, sorry you had to go down that road. The first Lords of Shadow wasn't my flavor either and I purchased it despite my reservations due to GAF. That was my fault though, at the time I didn't have my list well organized so just sort of went with it
I make a list of GAFers whose impressions I can consistently trust because they are coming from a place of a genuine desire to critique something fairly.
To do this, I voice a detailed opinion about a game, and then wait and see if someone responds with a similarly detailed analysis about why they disagree with my position.
If someone's argument about why I am wrong is compelling and well articulated and I can respect their argument, that person makes my list. It plays to my theory that the mark of a good critic is not how often you agree with them, but in how well you can respect the merit of their arguments even when you disagree.
Haha, I have no ill will toward Mafia votes. I told you guys I gotta laugh because I'm Ordinary Tourist
Guys, I'm beginning to think I'm not on Ami's GAFer trust list...
Haha, many people are not on my list simply because they have not actually responded to a view I had (or shared) with a well articulated counter argument. I don't just add people I like on the list, they have to show a case history of well supported arguments that despite me disagreeing with them is well worthy of respect due to how well articulated their positions are.
Uno Venova
Banned
If you don't trust anyone in the businesses of page views you could have just said I don't trust anyone's opinion on the internet.
Mock reviews are a thing that you apparently don't know about.
Icyflamez96
Member
Not sure if this thread has simmered down, but I wanted to post this hours ago when I wasn't at home... So i'm posting it now.
Krappadizzle
Member
This was damn good. One of the better ones I've seen done. Biogamergirl killed me.
Why are you ignoring this part of his post?
Lemondish is interested in what like-minded individuals think of a particular game. Like-minded people who, time and time again, shared his opinion of titles that already came out. Seems like a reasonable and unbiased attitude to me.
And that's a different, yet equally sad, problem.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Which is probably why it's as high as it is; actual players have been beating it for the DLC and rightfully so.
I just don't want reviewers to take a piss on Bloodborn for no good reason; that's the one of the three easiest for them to do it on.
Something that should've been happening years ago. These guys can't slander a game that doesn't deserve it without paying the price.
Anyhow I've said my piece for the night; Order got picked apart like a carcass and it may have deserved it. But Bloodborn is looking like a healthy buck; vultures don't go after healthy bucks.
So if Bloodborn comes out like a dead carcass once the reviews are done it's going to look like one of those vultures surprised it with a bad meal and gunshots to both legs before it went out for its time in the desert (as all games do).
I'm sorry, but I actually laughed at this one compared to the other video with the forced laughing man. May this clip continue to provide me with much laughs.
If Bloodborne disappoints, PS4 must commit seppuku. We've all agreed to it, no take backs.
User 479360
Banned
I didn't like what I played of it very much, but quite a few Gaffers seem to love it.
*shrug*
Kacho
Gold Member
Well, I was actually responding to your question about whether or not I thought the game could score a 20/100. You still haven't explained why exactly you thought the review was poorly written. But it's quite clear that you didn't like the review simply because of the low score and not because you thought the review was poorly written.
It's a good thing for customers that they didn't, because fuck release date embargoes.
I think RE_Player was using "should" from Sony's perspective and not a customer perspective.
Not sure if this thread has simmered down, but I wanted to post this hours ago when I wasn't at home... So i'm posting it now.
This gif is property of KorraGAF, take it back there please
I'm still laughing at this.
I would agree here, but how are we supposed to play The Last guardian when it comes out if that were to happen?
Gtagentleman
Member
Sony needs to get their shit together, so much flopped AAA exclusives...
Croatoan
They/Them A-10 Warthog
Not gonna lie but a 5-7 hour game with no multilayer or replayability deserves sub 50 scores.
If this game were priced at $29.99 I think it would have reviewed better.
$60 for 5 hours is terrible. A $60 single player game with no multilayer should at the very least be 12, quality, hours long.
If you can't get that out of your game then there is something terribly wrong with your design or how you budget.
If this game were priced at $29.99 I think it would have reviewed better.
$60 for 5 hours is terrible. A $60 single player game with no multilayer should at the very least be 12, quality, hours long.
If you can't get that out of your game then there is something terribly wrong with your design or how you budget.
fluffydelusions
Member
I haven't personally played it but a lot of people seem to love it.
- Status