Support NeoGAF

[James Scott]

What is up with that EGM review?

The Order: 1886 is a paper-thin PS4 launch title delivered 15 months behind schedule

It was never promised/announced to be a launch title.

This aint DriveClub.

Launch titles are usually not know for their quality, they just focus on showing off some of the new aspects of the system.

 

[EmptySpace]

I just finished the game, have to say while it's far from perfect it's hard to believe what some sites wrote about it.

I don't have as a big of a problem with the overall metascore as I do with what reviews said about it being unfun, but I supposed that's where the subjectivity comes in.

Maybe this game just doesn't appeal to the majority of gamers or critics, but I liked what I played.

game site opinions/reviews only matter to devs because those articles affect purchasing decisions of consumers.

have you ever heard devs say, "oh we read the reviews from ign and gamespot so we fixed this in the sequel"? no. they always say, "we listen to player feedback" because that is what's important to them.

too bad because people are going to write this game off based on reviews. people saying, "oh they're just opinions" well consumers just look at the score and don't buy the game. too bad most people don't go to gaf and read some impressions.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

I'm always curious what great perspective people think they are offering when they post in review threads about the quality of a game without actually having played it.

 

[Armaros]

game site opinions/reviews only matter to devs because those articles affect purchasing decisions of consumers.

have you ever heard devs say, "oh we read the reviews from ign and gamespot so we fixed this in the sequel"? no. they always say, "we listen to player feedback" because that is what's important to them.

too bad because people are going to write this game off based on reviews. people saying, "oh they're just opinions" well consumers just look at the score and don't buy the game. too bad most people don't go to gaf and read some impressions.

You mean some impressions that agree with reviewers and others that disagree?

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

It's saying it's bad, like a launch title.

Reading comprehension.

Then they should write "The Order is like a paper-thin launch title that was delivered 15 months late".

The wording makes it sound like one of the titles promised for launch that was delayed.

This was not. Reading comprehension? No! This needs better communicative writing.

 

[Meccanical]

game site opinions/reviews only matter to devs because those articles affect purchasing decisions of consumers.

have you ever heard devs say, "oh we read the reviews from ign and gamespot so we fixed this in the sequel"? no. they always say, "we listen to player feedback" because that is what's important to them.

too bad because people are going to write this game off based on reviews. people saying, "oh they're just opinions" well consumers just look at the score and don't buy the game. too bad most people don't go to gaf and read some impressions.

The fact that you think GAF impressions are some golden beacon of objectivism is hilarious.

Because it's not like reviewers are human beings too, Gaffers are clearly superior and have the best taste and opinions.

Oh those poor plebeians and there inferior intellects, if only they had the same mental veracity we do!

 

[Anung]

I'm always curious what great perspective people think they are offering when they post in review threads on their opinion of the quality of a game without actually having played it.

b-b-b-b-but I watched it on youtube 4/10.

 

[GVA1987]

So you are assuming that physical interaction with the controller and seeing the game in it's full glory is the same experience as watching it on YT just because you don't like the game? sure

I actually enjoy the game. Just making a point that it is something that can be enjoyed without a controller. I can think of quite a few games I enjoyed watching being played. Last of Us, Ryse, Wolfenstine:TNO as a couple of examples. Not everyone needs to have a controller in their hands to enjoy the experience. Hell my gf can't play a FPS to save her life but loves watching me play them. Each to their own.

 

[SolidChamp]

I'm always curious what great perspective people think they are offering when they post in review threads about the quality of a game without actually having played it.

Quoting this for truth and for spite.

Fuck those people. Seriously.

 

[EmptySpace]

You mean some impressions that agree with reviewers and others that disagree?

The fact that you think GAF impressions are some golden beacon of objectivism is hilarious.

Because it's not like reviewers are human beings too, Gaffers are clearly superior and have the best taste and opinions.

Oh those poor plebeians and there inferior intellects, if only they had the same mental veracity we do!

taken from the other thread, but relevant.

here is what i hate about reviewers today, especially the games media and where my problems lie.



1) they all have the same tastes, almost always. they all like one type of game over the other, they all seem to lean towards one genre over the other. which leads to...


2) all their reviews sound the same for every game. what do i mean by this? no one reviews a game like gran turismo the way they review other games they are familiar with or care about. when was the last time you have seen an in-depth review of street fighter from any of these major sites? you see, they respect the games that they don't care about, but they do not review them as concisely, as directly, and as clearly as other genres (i.e. tps, fps, action-adventure, etc.). they can't call out the negatives for those games because they're incompetent at them so they end up giving them higher scores or blatantly ignorant impressions. i have seen this in games like nba 2k, etc. where they don't scrutinize every detail because they do not care about it but at the same time they brush off any negatives or positives. how can a reviewer notice the bullet drops on battlefield but can't figure out how to do a simple drift in gran turismo? see, that is one of the problems here.

3) which is why i fear that our games will be funneled down to mostly the same game designs merged into one. we are already seeing it. rpg elements and stats in games, open world concepts, collectibles, filler content, etc. i do not want to play the same game masked in different genres. i want to play vastly different games that would offer me vastly different experiences. of course i am talking about the triple a space.

4) frankly, they are inconsistent and/or hypocrites. they do not apply the same standard across games, or even games in the same genre. they overlook things in a game and they scrutinize the same thing in other games. they fear the big publishers more than they stand up to them. they have business mixed in with integrity and that is not something that is 100% trustworthy. yes, even the new yorker has ads now to be able to stay afloat. still, it really is hard to believe that even though the games media say their editorial and sales are separate divisions, that one is not informed by the other and vice versa.


my advice? look at gaf impressions. they offer so much more. it's simple statistics. more data and info to look at, the better your prediction/outcome will be. why fixate on 5-10 reviews when you can have dozens. newsflash, gaf peeps have different tastes. in almost all ot threads there are people who will love, like, dislike, and hate the game.

 

[Neuromancer]

I finished the game last night and loved it from start to finish, with the exception of the instafail stealth mission late in the game which was mildly frustrating. The game looked incredible, the gunplay was surprisingly satisfying and I enjoyed the story, especially the Lafayette character. This is why it's important for me to form my own opinions rather than listen to reviewers, otherwise I might have skipped this game (had I not gotten it for free) and missed out.

 

[Vroadstar]

I'm always curious what great perspective people think they are offering when they post in review threads about the quality of a game without actually having played it.

Apparently according to a one poster here, watching The Order on Youtube is the same experience as playing it, talk about great perspective. I'm not surprise though when you check their post history.

 

[RoboPlato]

The fact that you think GAF impressions are some golden beacon of objectivism is hilarious.

Because it's not like reviewers are human beings too, Gaffers are clearly superior and have the best taste and opinions.

Oh those poor plebeians and there inferior intellects, if only they had the same mental veracity we do!

My opinions rarely line up with reviewers these days and more often line up with GAF impressions. Obviously they're not more objective but they're certainly a much better guide for me than professional reviewers.

 

[Toxi]

User reviews will usually lean more positive than critical reviews because the majority of people who buy a game are those who already enjoy that type of game. Critics generally review for a wider audience and don't always review the sort of game they're already going to enjoy.

See: Dynasty Warriors

 

[AngryMoth]

Ok I will try make this argument even if I'm gonna get laughed at. I'm not saying watching it on youtube is the complete experience but in this case where it is so linear and the mechanics are so derivative that yes, I do think you can get very big chunk of it. I'm not about to start throwing around opinions on the feel of the shooting. But why can I not say that the pacing is bad, I don't think the way it handles QTEs is good game design, the amount of forced slow walking is frustrating, and that no game in 2015 should have insta fail stealth section, just because I wasn't physically holding the controller?

 

[Meccanical]

User reviews will usually lean more positive than critical reviews because the majority of people who buy a game are those who already enjoy that type of game. Critics generally review for a wider audience and don't always review the sort of game they're already going to enjoy.

See: Dynasty Warriors

The user reviews are the same on metacritic.

 

[Toxi]

While you can't pass judgement on many aspects of The Order just from a youtube watch... You certainly can pass judgement on some aspects, like the shitty ass story. The story doesn't magically change for the better when you play the game.

The user reviews are the same on metacritic.

Metacritic user reviews don't require you to actually purchase the game.

 

[Vroadstar]

I actually enjoy the game. Just making a point that it is something that can be enjoyed without a controller. I can think of quite a few games I enjoyed watching being played. Last of Us, Ryse, Wolfenstine:TNO as a couple of examples. Not everyone needs to have a controller in their hands to enjoy the experience. Hell my gf can't play a FPS to save her life but loves watching me play them. Each to their own.

So you are saying you enjoyed watching 7-10 hours game? For TLOU in particular it took me 15 hours to finish it.

So I would assume you don't buy a lot of games for your preferred consoles because you are one of the few people ( a gaffer no less) who enjoy just watching someone play on YT.

 

[Cubed]

I wanted to make the exact same comment. Seems I can just about get the experience of The Order by watching it instead of playing it.

But you can't.

Say all you want about 50% of the game being cutscenes and QTEs, but the other 50% is far more engaging and varied than YouTube "Let's Plays" will show you.

YouTubers seem to just run through all the gun sections either guns a blazing or stop and popping; pretty standard, right? Makes the game look boring.

Know what I did in the first big shootout, in the plaza? I used a smoke grenade to disorient my enemies, ran out and blasted a guy with the M2 steam push alternate fire, then melee'd him face-first into the bar. I then took cover and popped out, shooting a guy in the head. As I ran up the stairs to the left, seeing the headshot victim tumble down the stairs realistically, I tossed another smoke grenade, bouncing it to the left and disorienting my covered enemies before melee-killing one and then shooting up the other with the M2. I then ran towards the other side of the plaza, steam blasted a guy into a glass case, shattering it, before shooting him up and down. Lastly, I vaulted over two walls, took cover at a table and then shot the last guy in the shoulder with my handgun before breaking his neck when grabbing him from behind.

This was all just 45 seconds of the hours worth of shooting gunplay, and early on, when I didn't even have the good weapons yet. There are a bunch of ways this fight can play out on replays (which are very easy to do because of the great chapter selection screen).

This is the experience you're losing when watching someone else play the game. The gun and fighting mechanics are varied enough, mixed with the solid physics system, that battles play out many different ways, and most of the YT playthroughs are robbing you of the depth and variance by just running and gunning or stopping and popping, usually with the same gun for half the time.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

So you are saying you enjoyed watching 7-10 hours game? For TLOU in particular it took me 15 hours to finish it.

So I would assume you don't buy a lot of games for your preferred consoles because you are one of the few people ( a gaffer no less) who enjoy just watching someone play on YT.

Not him, but I enjoy watching some lets plays and Game Grumps. I also play video games. But if you're going to make it sound like its a bad thing judging a game by watching it instead of playing it, youre going to have to explain why.

 

[3rdamention]

I'm always curious what great perspective people think they are offering when they post in review threads about the quality of a game without actually having played it.

Yeah, I cannot disagree with you Bruce..

I wanted to make the exact same comment. Seems I can just about get the experience of The Order by watching it instead of playing it.

 

[d00d3n]

Ok I will try make this argument even if I'm gonna get laughed at. I'm not saying watching it on youtube is the complete experience but in this case where it is so linear and the mechanics are so derivative that yes, I do think you can get very big chunk of it. I'm not about to start throwing around opinions on the feel of the shooting. But why can I not say that the pacing is bad, I don't think the way it handles QTEs is good game design, the amount of forced slow walking is frustrating, and that no game in 2015 should have insta fail stealth section, just because I wasn't physically holding the controller?

So the sensation of actually using a QTE in a game is irrelevant if you are trying to figure out if it is a good system?
The amount of forced slow walking (not being able to run) is not possible to accurately determine based on a video. I did not run much in the game due to the uncomfortable placement of the run button (press left stick).
The stealth sections are few and far between. Don't have a major impact on the flow of playing the game. Condemning the game based on seeing insta fail stealth does not seem fair.
I guess you have a point about pacing, though. Could possibly be determined by watching a video.

 

[Orca]

My opinions rarely line up with reviewers these days and more often line up with GAF impressions. Obviously they're not more objective but they're certainly a much better guide for me than professional reviewers.

Only if you ignore any dissenting GAF opinions/impressions, which you could just as easily do with reviews.

 

[RexNovis]

Check my psn trophies and try actually refuting the points.

Your profile is set to private. Can't view your trophies. But I'll assume you have trophies from the game. I assumed you ahadn't played because you were so vehement with your criticisms prior to release based on the youtube videos. Why would you purchase a game you were so up in arms about?

As far as your criticism goes let's break it down shall we?

The walking dead doesn't have nearly as many unexplained plot threads,

What unexplained plot threads? There are some plot threads left unresolved at the end of the game but I don't recall any that go entirely unexplained. Unresolved plot threads are presumably to be addressed in further entries in the series.

it also has closure,

Ths story is clearly not meant to be a one off. There is closure in the game it is just not complete and the credits scene makes it clear that the intention is to address the remainder in future releases. This game is the introduction to the franchise its now a contained one off game. Think of it like AC's current day storyline. It's something that has slowly developed over the course of multiple entries.

and the characters most definitely to not have anywhere near as much depth,

This I completely disagree with. Some the inspectable items in the game hint at character backstories that provide more depth to some characters motivations and it's clear that we are just touching the surface for some of the main characters. It all boils down to personal opinion on this front and in my opinion the characters are one of the strongest things about the game.

like the awful AI,

I suck at TPS in general so the game was fairly difficult for me but I really didnt see any questionable AI behavior except for a few occasions with companion AI. In my game I got rushed and flanked by enemies regularly and they used heavily armored units as a distraction to attempt to flank me. That doesnt seem like terrible AI to me. Certainly not the best out there but not terrible.

the overly linear level design

I really dont understand this complaint. It is a liner game. As per definition it is a genre that uses linear level design. Even despite that there are a handful of explorable areas and rooms that have no bearing on the main story line. Could there have been more? OF course but that's not what a linear game is about. This isn't an open world game its a story driven linear game and as such it will have linear level design. If that's not your cup of tea than of course you won't enjoy it. Some people do however.

and lack of any kind of gameplay variety, {/quote]

What does this even mean? It has shooting, it has stealth, it has some brutal knife fights, it has some qtes. For a third person shooter that seems pretty varied to me. What exactly were you expecting? In all honesty I think the game wouldve been better off just sticking to shooting and minimizing the other aspects but thats neither here nor there.

the misleading advertising since we spend not even 5% of the fights fighting lycans,

What misleading advertising? They never claimed the game was mostly werewolf fights. They showed werewolf gameplay in response to the clamoring for it online. Aside from their initial reveal trailer which was a reveal trailer and is meant to introduce the setting and general concept of the game they havent shown or talked up werewolf fights as being the main crux of the game. Certainly they have talked about half breeds being the main crux of the story which is why they were featured in the reveal trailer. If there is anything RAD is not guilty of it is misleading advertising.

lack of any replay value

This is again personal preference. I am personally on my second playthrough and I plan on having friends over to play the game as well. I will likely pick up and replay the game again when photomode comes out. Replay value does not rely solely on added game modes, padding, or collectables for some. To insist that the game has absolutely 0 replay value is to insist that your ideals of what replayable means are absolute. They are not. But hey dont tak emy word for it look at this guy

Man this thread. It's all about personal perspective. Speaking on AC Unity for example, I was one of the few that really enjoyed it, warts and all. I've not finished The Order 1886 yet, but for me it's already more replayable to me then AC Unity or most AC games for that matter. That gunplay is just too good for me. AC Unity was another typical AC story/playground with open world checklists that mostly sticks out due to its location. I've not even bothered playing the DLC yet and I know another AC game is another 8 months or so away. I probably won't be bothered to replay it either due to its length. The Order 1886 I see myself going through a few more times this year due to its shorter length and cinematic presentation. It's all about what we're looking for out of our gaming experiences.

Is he wrong to enjoy replaying the game? Would you maintain that the game has 0 replay value for him?

the awful instafail stealth where the guards can apparently easily overpower an ancient order of knights extremely easily until the story deems that it's not necessary anymore,

Oh you mean the infiltration mission? Honestly that was one of my favorite parts of the entire game. The only complaint I have there is the necessity of killing all the guards to progress. That is a dumb design decision but having a stealth mission wherein discovery or ill timed takedowns spells game over is not a flaw. Some people dont like insta fail stealth missions that's perfectly fine but they arent bad just because you don't like them.

the overabundance of cutscenes for every menial action

The use of intermediate and uneccesary cutscenes is a flaw and obviously a hallmark of inexperience on the part of RAD. It's actually something I commented on in my review here but while a bit disorienting and frustrating at times it never got to the point of ruining the game for me.

no way of tracking collectibles, no way to turn off tutorials with the game even somehow thinking that you forgot how to sprint at some points and teaching you the same mechanics over and over again,

These are both valid points but hardly major complaints. One is a quality of life issue for people who wish to treasure hunt everything or get the platinum trophy the other is a minor immersion breaking annoyance that I also commented on my review as being amateurish in design. Their affect on the game as whole is quite minimal.

baffling design decisions like not being able to take cover while holding a lantern

I cant remember needing to take cover while holding a lantern. In the one section where you fight whist holding one there is plentiful standing cover to maneuver behind. Certainly its a puzzling design decision but again this is not something that "broke" the game for me.

All in all the complaints and criticisms levied at this game seem completely overblown. especially since, unlike yourself, the most prolific and avid detractors appear to have never actually laid hands on the game and frankly it's infuriating. I'm getting sick of it and you bore the brunt of that so apologies for the overreaction it's just really depressing seeing the debut console title of such a promising developer get invariably shit on by people who speak with such absolute authority on the matter but have never actually played the game.

 

[AngryMoth]

So the sensation of actually using a QTE in a game is irrelevant if you are trying to figure out if it is a good system?
The amount of forced slow walking (not being able to run) is not possible to accurately determine based on a video. I did not run much in the game due to the uncomfortable placement of the run button (press left stick).
The stealth sections are few and far between. Don't have a major impact on the flow of playing the game. Condemning the game based on seeing insta fail stealth does not seem fair.
I guess you have a point about pacing, though. Could possibly be determined by watching a video.

Fair point about slow walk, although am I not right in thinking it's quite a lot?

What I don't like about the qte system usually theres just a single option, sometimes it's insta fail, and the ones that amount to "press triangle to proceed" are pointless. No, I don't think I would suddenly see the light if I had to hit the prompt myself.

So please tell enlighten us what great game did you worked on to make a judgement on what good game design should be? Because it sounds like you have this great perspective on this game just by watching on YT compared to most of us in here who actually played and enjoyed it. You are even talking about QTE when the very core of it is to have a physically interaction with the controller.

So what is it saying now, watching on YT is now not a complete experience, or is it a complete experience or where's the goalpost now?

So you think someone has to work on a great game in order to have a valid opinion on game design? That would shut down half the discussion on gaf. And I don't see how I moves the goalposts re: the complet experience thing.

 

[Vroadstar]

Ok I will try make this argument even if I'm gonna get laughed at. I'm not saying watching it on youtube is the complete experience but in this case where it is so linear and the mechanics are so derivative that yes, I do think you can get very big chunk of it. I'm not about to start throwing around opinions on the feel of the shooting. But why can I not say that the pacing is bad, I don't think the way it handles QTEs is good game design, the amount of forced slow walking is frustrating, and that no game in 2015 should have insta fail stealth section, just because I wasn't physically holding the controller?

So please tell enlighten us what great game did you worked on to make a judgement on what good game design should be? Because it sounds like you have this great perspective on this game just by watching on YT compared to most of us in here who actually played and enjoyed it. You are even talking about QTE when the very core of it is to have a physically interaction with the controller.

So what is it saying now, watching on YT is now not a complete experience, or is it a complete experience or where's the goalpost now?

 

[Toxi]

So please tell enlighten us what great game did you worked on to make a judgement on what good game design should be?

Glad we see we're reaching the "You can't criticize a game if you aren't a great game designer" defense.

 

[Anung]

So please tell enlighten us what great game did you worked on to make a judgement on what good game design should be?

And with this you negated any chance you had at making a valid point.

A laughable argument.

 

[Draper]

Damn it guys. I still wanna try this. Think I'm gonna go out to target now and pick it up so I can then resell it. I have off tomorrow so Im gonna try to plow through it tonight.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

And with this you negated any chance you had at making a valid point.

A laughable argument.

Ayup, someone tried to use that on me earlier. Its always funny to see that.

 

[ver_v3rtigo]

Check my psn trophies and try actually refuting the points.

Your trophies are listed as private

personally have a hard time believing you even own a ps4

 

[boeso]

Know what I did in the first big shootout, in the plaza? I used a smoke grenade to disorient my enemies, ran out and blasted a guy with the M2 steam push alternate fire, then melee'd him face-first into the bar. I then took cover and popped out, shooting a guy in the head. As I ran up the stairs to the left, seeing the headshot victim tumble down the stairs realistically, I tossed another smoke grenade, bouncing it to the left and disorienting my covered enemies before melee-killing one and then shooting up the other with the M2. I then ran towards the other side of the plaza, steam blasted a guy into a glass case, shattering it, before shooting him up and down. Lastly, I vaulted over two walls, took cover at a table and then shot the last guy in the shoulder with my handgun before breaking his neck when grabbing him from behind.

Really looking forward to the weighty feel of the guns too. And the meaty industrial sounds.

 

[Frillen]

As far as your criticism goes let's break it down shall we?

Could you please break down my complaints as well? No you're not, they're my opinions.

1) Too short (3-4 hours of pure gameplay). Not only is it short, but it has zero replay value. Like there's nothing after you beat it. Other games in the same genre either have a multiplayer mode, co-op mode, challenge mode, or hell even a new game+ mode. The game couldn't even have a new game+ mode though since there's no unlockables or even an upgrade system.

2) Too bare bones in its gameplay structure. Cut scenes followed by sections of regular shooting/cover sections. Nothing special outside of a few forced stealth sections, which are more annoying than they do good. Rinse and repeat. No upgrade system when it comes to weapons, nothing.

3) Hand holding gameplay. There are times when you can't even move in a 3D space, because the game wants you to do exactly what they want you to do. There are times mid game where you think you're still playing the tutorial. There are times when the game takes the control away from you for no reason at all.

4) Some QTE heavy segments, especially in the beginning. Last part spoiler: the last boss is a QTE boss, basically.

5) The Lycan encounters are very repetitive and are probably the least interesting enemies in the game, even though they really shouldn't be considering the competition.

6) When the game introduces new weapons, they suddenly take them away from you a few minutes later. The Thermite weapon is cool. Unfortunately you only use it three times during the game.

7) Unskippable cut scenes are annoying if you want to do a second run or you want to collect collectibles. The game doesn't even track what collectibles you've collected.

8) There are chapters in the game where you don't even control the character. This is a video game. Yeah, I know, cinematic experience yada yada... Still.

9) It's super linear. There are times when the enemies can't even flank you because the pathway ahead is too linear.

10) Underwhelming story. That ending...

 

[Steel]

Not him, but I enjoy watching some lets plays and Game Grumps. I also play video games. But if you're going to make it sound like its a bad thing judging a game by watching it instead of playing it, youre going to have to explain why.

That's an easy explanation, you're watching a minimum of 5 hours of someone else playing a game. Personally I'd much rather just watch a movie or do something else with my time.

 

[0.1.1.2.3.5.8.13.21.34.55]

I didn't think the story was shitty, I though it was actually pretty captivating... It's just a shame so much was left unresolved. The groundwork is laid, now I'm left with a longing for more.

Edit: feels like act 1 (episode one), wished it had been priced as such.

 

[antitrop]

Ok I will try make this argument even if I'm gonna get laughed at. I'm not saying watching it on youtube is the complete experience but in this case where it is so linear and the mechanics are so derivative that yes, I do think you can get very big chunk of it. I'm not about to start throwing around opinions on the feel of the shooting. But why can I not say that the pacing is bad, I don't think the way it handles QTEs is good game design, the amount of forced slow walking is frustrating, and that no game in 2015 should have insta fail stealth section, just because I wasn't physically holding the controller?

I like The Order and I would say you would probably be able to absorb about 80% of the experience by watching someone else play it. It's just that type of game. I feel the same way about David Cage games, although I don't like those at all, because I think the stories are bad.

 

[Vroadstar]

Not him, but I enjoy watching some lets plays and Game Grumps. I also play video games. But if you're going to make it sound like its a bad thing judging a game by watching it instead of playing it, youre going to have to explain why.

I watch them all the time just to get an idea of what it looks like and how the gameplay is but I don't go to Gaf and lambast a game because I watched it on YT. Watching and judging a game when you actually haven't played it versus people who actually played the game and enjoyed it, who do you think is more credible? Experience is the best teacher huh?

So are you also in the same camp of sitting 7-10 hours watching a game on YT is the same experience playing it?

 

[Conkerkid11]

That's an easy explanation, you're watching a minimum of 5 hours of someone else playing a game. Personally I'd much rather just watch a movie or do something else with my time.

But once again, why aren't you capable of judging that game based on footage of someone else playing it, whether or not you think it's worth your time?

 

[Chuck]

I finished the game last night and loved it from start to finish, with the exception of the instafail stealth mission late in the game which was mildly frustrating. The game looked incredible, the gunplay was surprisingly satisfying and I enjoyed the story, especially the Lafayette character. This is why it's important for me to form my own opinions rather than listen to reviewers, otherwise I might have skipped this game (had I not gotten it for free) and missed out.

worth 60 bucks?

 

[SmokedMeat]

User reviews will usually lean more positive than critical reviews because the majority of people who buy a game are those who already enjoy that type of game. Critics generally review for a wider audience and don't always review the sort of game they're already going to enjoy.

See: Dynasty Warriors

Not only that but how much time is given to actually play through the game before the review is needed?
We all play games for enjoyment, and at our convenience. They're reviewing a game as part of their job, and there could very well be times they've got to plow through a game that they're just not in the mood for, because a review is required.

I'm sure in a case like that they may be a bit less tolerant of things.

 

[gregor7777]

Oof. Terrible reviews.

 

[RexNovis]

Could you please break down my complaints as well? No you're not, they're my opinions.

yes exactly the key word there being opinion. I would never object to someone posting thier opinions of a game they have played. If you haven't actually played the game then yes I think its reasonable to object and call into question the validity of anything you say in regards to said game. You also arent responding to the thoughts of someone who actually played the game and claiming they're invalid because you have criticisms and they are absolutely 100% undeniably true for everyone who played the game. There is a big difference between offering your thoughts as you have done and saying someone is wrong for liking the game because you personally think it's bad. One is a reasonable critique the other is absolutely absurd.

 

[Vroadstar]

Glad we see we're reaching the "You can't criticize a game if you aren't a great game designer" defense.

Ah pointing out something is now a defense? glad to see you are on the offense with nothing to back up what a good game design should be. Please let us know what a good game design should because it sounds like you are an expert. Go ahead...

 

[Kerned]

Your trophies are listed as private

personally have a hard time believing you even own a ps4

Crossing Eden is not on trial here.

 

[Myggen]

4) frankly, they are inconsistent and/or hypocrites. they do not apply the same standard across games, or even games in the same genre. they overlook things in a game and they scrutinize the same thing in other games. they fear the big publishers more than they stand up to them. they have business mixed in with integrity and that is not something that is 100% trustworthy. yes, even the new yorker has ads now to be able to stay afloat. still, it really is hard to believe that even though the games media say their editorial and sales are separate divisions, that one is not informed by the other and vice versa.

This is silly. First of, The New Yorker has always had ads, as have most other magazines and newspapers. Secondly, the separation between business and editorial is fundamental in both traditional media (The New Yorker's parent company has actually recently tried to tear that separation down a bit by having editorial write some ads, but TNYer is apparently exempt) and the games media. The only time we know that it has failed is when Jeff Gerstmann was fired from Gamespot.

There's no reason to believe that the games media lets pressure from publishers impact reviews, saying otherwise without evidence is conspiracy theory. Also, Sony is one of the biggest publishers out there, and that didn't stop a lot of publications giving this game a bad score. Allegations like that one always come out when publications give bad scores to a game people like, and it's pretty pathetic.

Ah pointing out something is now a defense? glad to see you are on the offense with nothing to back up what a good game design should be. Please let us know what a good game design should because it sounds like you are an expert. Go ahead...

It's a dumb argument because it implies that you can't criticise games without having made games yourself. Rogert Ebert is widely considered to be one of the best film critics of our time, and the one film he made was fucking terrible. But that didn't take away from him being an amazing critic. That defense is always used by people who want others to stop criticising something they like, and it has always been nonsense.

 

[AngryMoth]

I watch them all the time just to get an idea of what it looks like and how the gameplay is but I don't go to Gaf and lambast a game because I watched it on YT. Watching and judging a game when you actually haven't played it versus people who actually played the game and enjoyed it, who do you think is more credible? Experience is the best teacher huh?

So are you also in the same camp of sitting 7-10 hours watching a game on YT is the same experience playing it?

Well I would say the person who's played it is more credible, although if the person that watched it made well reasoned points I wouldn't dismiss their opinion.

Once again, I ain't saying watching it is the same thing, I'm just somewhat irked by the "you didn't play the game therefore your opinion is invalid" sentiment.

 

[Rain City Gamer]

OK I finished it up yesterday and overall I enjoyed it and thought it was better than what it was given credit for based on what I had been hearing, reading, watching. I will not be writing a review for the site because my friend is already doing it so here are some informal notes I took while I played and my end synopsis. I played on Hard and it took me about 10hrs to complete it.

**POSSIBLE SPOILERS**

Good
-graphics are amazing, Right up there with DriveClub.
-Seemless transitions from cut-scenes / gameplay
-Sound is incredible, like the gun shots as well as the nuanced reloading metallic noises.
-Art design is second to none
-Voice Acting great and characters are likeable and interesting
-Presentation is top notch
-great use of touchpad for morse code to airship
-Lock pick mechanic was cool (Been done before but I liked it)
-cool revive mechanic using the blackwater when downed
-Tesla's involvement is well implemented, very Q-ish from Bond universe.
-Gunplay feels really, really good.
-Great Weaponry (Although under utilized)
-Loved the Open ending to sequel and "The Dark Knight-ish" Epilogue

Bad
-Cinematic presentation may not be for everyone
-Stale, aged 3rd person stop and pop cover gameplay
-Can't switch Shoulder when aiming???
-AI is mediocre, and predictable. barely reacts to grenades being thrown.
-Cover mechanics can get a little wonkey.
-Recordings are cool and add to the lore, but I want to listen to them outside of menu.
-Is there a reason I need to inspect everything I pick up?
-Love the different newspaper articles but there is no way to read them easily, would be nice if I could see the text in an easier to read format, maybe a button to overlay the text of the article.
-Don't like that gun is only out when needed, takes some of the suspense away.
-QTE Lycan fights (Or just any of the Lycan fights) Awesome at first, but become stale very quickly. All they do is charge and run away, how are they such a threat again?
-Severe lack of variety in enemies and encounters with those enemies, Lycan fights especially. All it is: Enemies in cover with rifles / pistols, Enemies that charge with Shotguns, and Enemies that stay back with Snipers and Grenades. The Thermite and Arc guns are used sparingly by the enemy, huge missed opportunity to spice things up. Should have added some specialty units like Gears of War has. They have the foundation to do it, but they just chose not to. Never really had that "Oh shit here comes a boomer/Reaper/Corpser" type moment
- Zero replayability even a trophy run is tough with no tracking of collectibles.

Observations
-Why am I only allowed to walk / run / sneak when they allow me to? Tends to telegraph everything because the mechanics shift for you instead of letting you deciding how to approach situations
-Why can't I disable the help tips? and better yet why do they show the entire game?
-Why No upgrade / progression system? Could have been great for gameplay and building relationship with Tesla.
-Why can't I turn the lantern off/on?
-no photo mode?
-why are there sandbags on the bridge during the bridge mission? Seems convenient and lazy to me.
-Why no challenge mode / Game + / Horde Mode? Would have been perfect and add some playtime / replayability.
-Why do I need to be stealth in the stealth sections?? No real Narrative behind it other than "Just because".

Overall I liked the game and would recommend it. Whether it is worth $60 is up to that person, I got it for $30 after using a gift card and didn't feel bad at that price, may have been on fence for $60 however. There is close to zero reason to play through it a second time and NO reason to play through it after that (especially once you get trophies). Starts slow but from Chapter 3 it gets better. I don't mind the shortness, or the stale 3rd person stop and pop gameplay, or the QTE's, or insta-fail stealth sections, etc. My biggest complaint is the severe lack of caring RAD had for the person with the controller in their hands. It is apparent that they did the bare minimum for gameplay at every turn, even to the point where they would force you to constantly do it their way. Other games do this too, but they at least try their best to disguise it so the player FEELS like they have some freedom. The Order does none of this, it just spits in the face of the player and never looks back. Walk in this section only, Ok you can have your gun out now, OK now you can stealth but only until we tell you not to, etc. It makes me wonder if RAD even play tested it to get a feel for how the experience was on the controller side. Seriously, the Help hints being up the whole game just shows they had NO trust in the player and never even wanted to allow us to gain that trust. It had to be their way or the highway, no questions asked. It was worse than hand holding by RAD, because you were handcuffed to RAD. This is the games greatest downfall. Which is disappointing because there is a ton to like within the game, the graphics are unreal, storyline, lore, characters, presentation all top notch. I hope they get a sequel green lit and learn from their gameplay mistakes because this is a series that could define the PS4 (Uncharted series for PS3 for instance) if done right.

7/10

 

[d00d3n]

Fair point about slow walk, although am I not right in thinking it's quite a lot?

What I don't like about the qte system usually theres just a single option, sometimes it's insta fail, and the ones that amount to "press triangle to proceed" are pointless. No, I don't think I would suddenly see the light if I had to hit the prompt myself.

I was annoyed by it when you are slow walking from the top of a building to your first objective right at the beginning of the game, but I can't remember being bothered by it other than that. A similar issue that is a bigger deal imo is the game arbitrarily deciding that you have to holster your weapons. You tend to squeeze the aim button in a third-person shooter, so the forced holstering is immediately apparent. You have my permission to use this example instead of the less relevant slow walking one in your quest to review the game based on videos!

 

[BreezyLimbo]

That's an easy explanation, you're watching a minimum of 5 hours of someone else playing a game. Personally I'd much rather just watch a movie or do something else with my time.

Alright then.

I watch them all the time just to get an idea of what it looks like and how the gameplay is but I don't go to Gaf and lambast a game because I watched it on YT. Watching and judging a game when you actually haven't played it versus people who actually played the game and enjoyed it, who do you think is more credible? Experience is the best teacher huh?

So are you also in the same camp of sitting 7-10 hours watching a game on YT is the same experience playing it?

Since Dynasty Warriors empires is coming out, Ima use that for my argument. Basically a game like the Order will have no replayability for me. I know what kind of game it is. Ive never replayed Gears of War either(except for the mulriplayer ofc). But I did play the GoW single player. Because the gameplay was thick. It greatly had more gameplay than cutscenes.

The Order has a ton of cutscenes, and alot of those scenes are interlaced with QTEs. I think thats why you cant skip cutscenes. It would mess with the gameplay. Watching the Order would suffice as the gameplay segments arent that varied. Yes Ive watched it on youtube. Now, I dont do this for all games. This is where Dynasty Warriors comes in. That game is worth playing for me because no two levels will be the same, because the amount of content, and the replayability. Watching someone play Dynasty warriors wouldnt lead to the same experience. The Order on the other hand? Other than picking different guns to face a situation or hiding behind different objects, suffice to say the experience of going through the game is the same as playing it. There is a place for linear single player games that only offer the story and nothing else, but if you want me to play it and not watch it, then price it at what its worth.

And the graphics dont do anything for me. I play Dynasty Warriors for petes sake. There just isnt enough content or variety in the game that would make it complete difference between playing or watching jt.

 

[SmokedMeat]

But once again, why aren't you capable of judging that game based on footage of someone else playing it, whether or not you think it's worth your time?

Ok, I've watched plenty of Alien Isolation videos but haven't actually played it. So based on my observations Alien Isolation is a dreadfully boring game of hiding, rummaging though drawers/lockers/etc and dealing with pita androids. There's an Alien in there, but there's no tense moments to go with it's appearance, or scares for that matter. The game has plenty of backtracking and overstays its welcome by being much longer than it should.

5/10 - A rental if that.

How did I do?