Approvals 10/3 ▼
Relientk77 (3) - 367d ago Cancel
moegooner88 (3) - 367d ago Cancel
crazychris4124 (1) - 367d ago Cancel
TheNerdopotamus (2) - 367d ago Cancel
Liqu1d (1) - 367d ago Cancel

Defending The Order: 1886, The Unfairly Hated PS4 Exclusive

Making the case for The Order: 1886 when nobody else will.

Read Full Story >>
Create Report !X

Add Report


+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)


Changed from Pending to Approved
Community367d ago
The story is too old to be commented.
367d ago Replies(23)
Nyxus367d ago

Define game. You could say the same about Telltale's The Walking Dead games and they win GOTY awards.

PhantomTommy367d ago

You're right, the difference is that the first Walking Dead game was at least somewhat entertaining and very rarely removed your ability to run through long non-interactive stretches just to artificially lengthen the game. The Order looked great and had some fairly solid combat but it was an absolute chore to play through. You can let this one go lads, the PS4 has plenty of good games at this point -- you don't need to pretend anymore.

Nyxus367d ago

@ PhantomTommy: I'm not pretending, I genuinely thought it was a good game. Why else would I play through it twice?

Relientk77367d ago

I find the Telltale "games" incredibly boring. I like games I can actually play

crazychris4124367d ago

Telltale games are $25 and people know what they are getting. The Order was marketed as a triple A 3rd person shooter for $60. Game was nowhere near worth $60. Should have launched at $30, worth no more than $10 now.

nix367d ago Show
367d ago
madforaday367d ago


The Order was advertised as a story driven game that resembles a movie. That is exactly what it was so people knew what they were getting themselves into. Everyone knew about the length and everyone knew it just had SP and nothing else. I do believe you that it wasn't worth 60 bucks. They should of made it 49.99 at first just have a different price and people wouldn't jump the hate train.

syphon32367d ago

I think what ZaWarudo is saying is that it had lacked certain elements that accompany 3rd person action adventures games these days....but of course it was "a game".., but with all the good they did for it, there was just as much that they didn't...

EatCrow367d ago

Zawurdo comment is just a troll comment. Ignore it.
Nobody has the right to define what a game is or isn't. It is entertainment media. It can evolve to whatever it wants.

But the problem is Telltales games are about the story and choices you make. Thats the premise of the game. It doesnt try to be a shooter, action, adventure, thrid person story driven game.
It focuses on the one thing it does well. And they do it well. If not people wouldnt rate them so high. It's also a method that works with other plots and stories as we can see.

The order on the other hand was trying to be a third person shooter, story driven cinematic game. So if we consider that and rate them based on what they were trying to acheive then that is where the low ratings come from. Its action was poor, the enemy AI poor, the story was poor although the premise and lore was a 10/10 but that premise and lore and what we wanted to see was not in the game.

still think it deserves a sequel. Because I enjoyed it enough that I wouldnt mind playing the next one.

modelgod366d ago (Edited 366d ago )

No. He means in what they tried to wasn't a game. When you purchase(d) Telltale games you know EXACTLY what your getting into. You Sony Fanboys need to cut it out,What are you going to try to defend next, Driver's Club?

NapalmSanctuary366d ago

I'll say that about Telltale's games. That said, Telltale games are up front about what they are and they cost much less than $60.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 366d ago
Deep-throat367d ago

It's a game, 100%. But it was hot trash though.

367d ago
Nyxus367d ago

It was a great game that succeeded at what it wanted to do. It was made with a lot of polish and attention to detail, had an intriguing story, awesome presentation and a unique setting. Played through it twice.

LP-Eleven367d ago (Edited 367d ago )

"Succeeded at what it wanted to do".

You'd be hard-pressed to find many that agree, but I certainly do. The only thing wrong for me was a lack of content (I wanted so much more when the credits rolled). Then again, this is a good thing, because, at its core, The Order was a very polished experience with little-to-no bugs to speak of, unmatched visuals at the time, the game-play was incredibly entertaining (important), solid voice acting + performances, and a strong enough story to get the job done.

Was it treated unfairly? In my view - yes.

yeahright2367d ago

I agree with him. It wanted to be a show piece. a "look what the PS4 can do". and the game is gorgeous.

TankCrossing367d ago ShowReplies(1)
Irishguy95367d ago

So, it didn't want to have engaging gameplay? It didn't want to be fun?

rainslacker366d ago

I felt the game was unfinished. The graphics were super polished, and the game play was solid, although not flawless. But the incomplete parts existed in the lichens, and there were sections that seemed set up to have fights where they never particular the vampire stuff.

I do agree with the rest of your sentiments though.

chaimera086366d ago

Reasonable thinking for sure. The game was not perfect, and I am under no illusion that it was, but I do think the very minor flaws were not enough for this game to be attacked like it was. Victim of hype and expectations for the game to be something the developer never claimed the game to be.

rainslacker365d ago

Much of the hate, at least on forums was a curse of it being exclusive. Was a pretty heated time since it was so close to launch, and at the time, the XBox was not doing all that well, so it was an easy target. That 5 hour completion video right before release just turned into a landslide of that being indicative of it being a terrible game, and any negative aspect that may have gotten reported on was conflated to mostly greatly over-exaggerated proportions.

I think the reviews overall were kind of understandable though. It'd be a hard game to review because of how incomplete it was, and even some of the low reviews did say where it did really good....which I respect. The ones that put it well below average though I think were unreasonable, because the game wasn't broken or even bad, and what was good was worth playing IMO.

The biggest problem with the game, beyond it being incomplete, was just the lack of varied content. What content was complete though was pretty decent.

chaimera086366d ago

Agreed. I played through it 3 times, after getting the platinum on the first playthrough. I just think it's a really good game, and I dearly hope that they get the chance to fix the few issues it had (mainly using the same boss fight twice) in a sequel. RaD are great developers, so here's to hoping that E3 holds some surprises.

Imalwaysright366d ago

If mediocrity was what RAD wanted, then I guess I have to agree with you.

coolbeans366d ago

"...that succeeded at what it wanted to do."

I guess a central conflict with this notion would be what if what it wanted to do wasn't actually beneficial to the player experience. Pouring a bunch of resources into a game so hard-pressed on being 'filmic' to the point of actively trying to remove any sense of player agency. There are dozens of ways to craft a linear walk-a-thon, but when the artifice is readily obvious I can't help but disagree w/ the notion of such a game being great--let alone worthwhile.

I get showing interest in the lore, but I don't get how the story was anything noteworthy--aside from seeming like some 10th-grader's creative writing assignment (his first draft at that) with some great voice acting talent.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 365d ago
Rimeskeem367d ago

If the game was 20$ I am positive it would have been recieved well. What was there was great, but there needed to be a lot more for $60 price tag.

367d ago
yeahright2367d ago

Yup, it was the value proposition that was the problem. It was a 5 hour game, that's fine. but the lack of content was not. Other than that, my only real gripe was the repetitive QTE boss fights.
But this and Ryse are my go to examples on one end when ever I make the case for not all games costing a standard $60. (the order should be less than $60 while something like witcher 3 should be more).

Nyxus367d ago

I disagree. That would only encourage publishers to demand filler and obligatory 'open world' mechanics to be put in every game just so they can ask a higher price. But not every game needs to be open world or 60+ hours.

yeahright2367d ago

Oh, it's pie in the sky now, for sure. But it didn't used to be all games came out with a standard price. But I acknowledge that it won't go back to that. We've already spoiled the publishers by gobbling up their DLC and season passes. and they won't let that money go. So even if EA charges $80 for mass effect, there'll still be dlc and micro transactions. Now CDPR would be the exception, but sadly they wouldn't be nearly enough to cover the EA's and Ubisoft's of the gaming world.

EatCrow367d ago

It gets really tricky when you go into content = price or does it, territory.
I think the price by value isnt the problem. Its the economy. Most people thing 60$ is a tad bit expensive for a game and therefore decide that they must focus on content over quality in order to ensure their 60$ was worth it.

If people had a lot more money then the 60$ wouldnt seem so bad now would it?

The problem is people take their own economy and use that to price a videogame. Some people are rich, some poor, some in between, some care and others dont. We shouldn't use economy to determine the value of a game which isnt grounded on that same economy.

Some games that are short I've enjoyed more then games that are super long. Does this mean they should've priced the short game higher? No.

The value of the game should be determined by the cost of the game plus profit. If we decided what the cost should be it is possible that some of these companies would disappear because they sold at a complete loss and never made their money back.

ninsigma367d ago

It's worth more than 20$ but I agree it was worth full price. It was 75 euro in Ireland. I think 55 euro would have been a better price for it.

ninsigma367d ago

Meant wasn't worth full price.

CorndogBurglar367d ago (Edited 367d ago )

The AI was certainly not great.

Werewolves ran straight at you, then ran straight back to where they came from, then ran straight back at you, then ran back where they came from. Easiest enemies in the game.

Your idiot teammates did NOTHING. I don't think I saw one kill anything the whole game.

Some of the enemies were broken, like the armored shotgunners.

The environments were boring and walking around in them was pointless.

Most of the pickups were pointless and did nothing to add to any lore or story.

The end boss was a cut and paste of a previous boss. Which, ironically enough, just so happened to be the only two bosses in the game. Or does that make it one boss? Either way, it was barely a boss fight because it was just a QTE.

Weapon variety was terrible.

Way too many QTE's.

Graphics and story were good, I'll give it that. But for a $60 game people expect WAY more, even if it had been released 2 generations ago.

I'm not sure I can agree with "What was there was great". If it was $20, I'm pretty sure all the same flaws would have been pointed out, but with the disclaimer, "What do you expect for $20?"

Movefasta1993367d ago

where it ended,that would have been the perfect set up for the next half of the story.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 366d ago
Liqu1d367d ago (Edited 367d ago )

I enjoyed it but there was definitely room for improvement. Content was lacking and the lycan battles were underwhelming. I loved the setting and the story though, the weapons felt powerful and good to use. Hopefully Sony greenlight a sequel because I'd love to play a sequel that has all the necessary improvements. If I had to rate it I'd give it a 7/10.

ninsigma367d ago

Yes! The lycan battles were really my biggest gripe. Having one qte boss fight would have been fine but to then have the same boss fight at the end was poor and the normal lycan fights where they run at you was badly done I thought. Everything else was great.

367d ago
spicelicka367d ago

Which is around the average rating it got. I think that's fair.

Ethereal367d ago

Exactly. The Lycan battles really stood out like a sore thumb in comparison to the rest of the game's quality. Shame really, with better boss encounters and not reusing the same mechanic in a different setting would have propelled this into a whole other realm.

Knushwood Butt366d ago

Pretty much this.

I also loved the atmosphere and just walking round looking in shop windows etc.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 366d ago