"The Order: 1886 was a huge let down for a lot of PlayStation gamers — like many games, it didn’t quite live up to the hype. The game also released at a time when PlayStation exclusives weren’t nearly as dominant as they are now. It received a ton of criticisms due to its length — the game could be completed in around five hours. The Order was obviously meant to be a series, the last cutscene ends on a cliffhanger. Sadly, we’ll probably never know the events that were supposed to transpire. I rather enjoyed The Order: 1886 — What exactly did I like about the title? I rarely do this, but I’ll list out the good the game had to offer." -- PlayStation Enthusiast
Hanzala from eXputer: "On this joyous 8th anniversary of the Ratchet and Clank reboot, it's about time Sony considers reviving the originals to complete the saga."
It's not the ideal situation but Sony does offer them on ps plus. I to would just like a big ass compilation on doscto though
Insomniac roadmap leaked a while ago and they are making another, they’re doing the best they can and these games, especially the last two, are master pieces
Digital Foundry : Released in February 2015, The Order: 1886 was a stunning PlayStation 4 game at the cutting-edge of rendering technology, with visuals that still hold up today. The game's release pre-dated in-depth Digital Foundry coverage, something we're looking to address with this new video! Ready at Dawn's game never received a sequel and never received a PS4 Pro upgrade, but thanks to developments with exploited, older firmware PS5 consoles, we can now show you the game running locked at 60 frames per second.
The gameplay was bland and extremely frustrating at times with unnecessary QTE combat at points. But the world and the lore and the characters and the story were fantastic. I’ve always wanted a sequel. I still hope Sony will surprise us one day.
And let's not forget,
Ready At Dawn showcased The Order 1886 running on PC at 60fps at SIGGRAPH 2015
https://www.dsogaming.com/n...
I still stand by my theory that this game just released at the wrong time. Almost every outlet spent a lot of time in their reviews ragging on the game for not being an online experience, everyone was in the Destiny hype train and at the time they wanted EVERY game to follow suit, bashing any game that didn't. If this were released after everyone realized how much that wasn't future, people would've appreciated it more. I loved it, and I'm always disappointed that we'll never get a sequel
That doesn't seem to be true about outlets complaining on the lack of online. The review summaries on Metacritic are very consistent: Amazing graphics, but shallow gameplay and a very short length with little reason to return.
Here's an example of how *little* time IGN spent talking about multiplayer:
"With no multiplayer, and no reason to revisit the short and stunted single-player campaign once it’s been completed, there just isn’t a lot to it."
It's the final sentence. They don't even take the time to say "online multiplayer"
"Amazing graphics, but shallow gameplay and a very short length with little reason to return."
You are right, that's what everbody was saying at the time, never heard anything about it not being online.
I've been thinking about trying this game for years, I may get it now that it's dirt cheap, no big loss if it sucks
Oh, add to that bad enemy AI, I remember that from the reviews, I saw a video of a wherewolf boss fight with a very weak AI
And there we glowing reviews for shorter games. It was one of the times where hating this game was "cool."
Can you show me the reviews that rag on it for not having an online experience?
I’m not doubting you or anything. I’m just being lazy.
That's also fake news, isarai. Again, the game was consistently criticized for what it was (Pretty but extremely short, extremely linear, hand-holding, no replayability), not for what it wasn't (multiplayer/open-world)
Nope, every review uses the term "linear" several times as if it's some inherently bad attribute. Not fake news at all. Since then there's veen plenty of short and sweet single player linear games that get lots of praise, again after the reality of everything being open world set it and it wasn't as great as everyone thought. But at the launch of the last gen everyone had open world fever, and especially the first couple years "linear" was a con in many games reviewed
That's your own contortion assuming criticism of its extremely linear design is suddenly a call for it to have been open world.
You totally made up a claim regarding an overall review consensus that isn't true. And, instead of just ignoring being called out for it, you respond with "oh actually i ment to say OPEN WORLD". Which literally isn't true either. You can't show us one review that bashed the game for "not being open world". And, somehow the other guy is getting downvoted. Over a bullshit liar.
Games were being criticized at that time for any game that wasn't open world or online. So yeah I got one mixed for the other, doesn't change my argument one bit that it would've been received better if it released later. People are agreeing because if you were not riding the "online and open world" hype train at that time, it was blatantly obvious there were biases in play for how games were criticized. Now after all that has happened since people want to say "oh wait these games were actually pretty good" cause they know better now
The gameplay was very shallow and when one says repetitive, it is by the very definition for some fights. As in, completely identical but different setting.
The game has amazing potential.
The graphics, the lore, characters…
This could most definitely have been all corrected with a sequel and became a franchise hit…
Still would love to see an attempt.
Ie fantastic premise and moments that shine…
But it had its downfalls that deserved the negative marks.
It was the "game to hate" when it launched. And right here, on this site, we saw people posting stories that were outright fabrications about the game. It was weird. The game launched, it was fun, a really cool game but the hate was too much. And so were the lies.
It was just too short....but I loved every minute of it....double dipped and grabbed the ultimate CE
That isn't true. I remember people talking about how incredibly short it was and the somewhat janky gunplay.
First I'm hearing of this. I don't know what multiplayer has to do with anything. The game was just dull. Amazing graphics, great narrative, great lore, boring gameplay sprinkled in pieces between cutscenes, and lackluster AI and controls.
People cried this game was too short. No people are crying because games are too long.
Games like Ubisoft open worlds not enjoyable lengthy games like Elden Ring or Baldur's Gate III
I get it, but people also complain about the main stories being too long or just games being too long in general because they are "adults".
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart hardware issues are a huge problem for AMD users
Strange with the ps5 being amd based it would of been more optimized for amd gpu's.
Lets see just how widespread these issues are... doesnt make a bit of sense because the game was made for amd hardware.
: oh its just complaining over amd's poor implementation of things on the pc side.
Maybe you are not up to date on the current state of AMD's Raytracing support and FSR.
Please tell me were you got never sony from in my comment?
"Please tell me were you got never sony from in my comment?"
This is a first party title.
Released and poorly optimised. You jump straight to AMD being completely at fault as if TLoU PC port didn't happen.
@Generic with the cope:
From DigitalFoundry,
"The comparison, which was shared by Digital Foundry, was accompanied by a written analysis that goes over some of the port's best features, such as good scalability, which allows players with the proper hardware to enjoy much better visuals than on PlayStation 5 and those with underpowered machines to have still a decent experience barring some stuttering, and issues, such as missing transparency effects at max settings, texture loading issues, shadows issues with ray tracing enabled, stability issues and more. With the additional disabling of ray tracing on AMD GPUs due to stability issues, it feels like this is yet another port that was launched in an unpolished state and that will require multiple patches to be in a truly acceptable one."
"it feels like this is yet another port that was launched in an unpolished state and that will require multiple patches to be in a truly acceptable one."
This is not solely an issue with AMD, the port is "yet another" with missing features.
AMD has always been crap compared to Nvidia. The only advantage they have is price.
And power efficiency. And arguably better performance on 1080p/1440p cards. And availability.
Nvidia cards really aren't worth hunting high and low for when there are very comparable AMD cards that are cheaper. I really have to give credit to AMD for their very frequent and consistent grind with RDNA. This issue I reckon is a developer level problem.
Can't really miss with either, but considering Jensen and Lisa are relatives, they probably laugh about these debates over a very expensive holiday dinner.
Naw AMD have had instances of being good, Nvidia do have better features, raytracing and AI performance if you play with software that uses it though.
@DarXyde
Power efficiency is not true at all this gpu generation. Nvidia‘s 4000 series is more power efficient that AMD 7000
I believe AMD offers higher vram at lower price points compared to NVidia. We have found out that this generation needs at least 8GB to load the highest detail textures at 1080p.
This issue with the drivers will eventually be fixed for Ratchet and Clank, however, the vram issue NVidia has on their midrange and entry level cards can only be fixed by spending more money on a higher end card.
AMD has already confirmed it's a driver-related issue on their cards. Besides, AMD 'users' can't stop telling us how not important Ray Tracing is, how they always play with it off, and how it's an 'Nvidia gimmick.' This shouldn't be a problem for them I believe.
On a side note, kudos to Nixxes and Sony for releasing one of the best PC ports in 2023. Amazing graphics with Ray Tracing, great performance, detailed system requirements, plenty of graphics options, all upscaling technologies (DLSS, FSR, and XeSS), DirectStorage 1.2, and native Mouse and Keyboard support.
Not surprised by an AMD driver issue... I love they are in the market and help keep Intel honest but I've had some whacked driver issues with then so I always just go with Intel anymore.
I'm sure they'll have it fixed in the coming days, if it even takes that long, just one of the joys of PC gaming.
No issues at all on PS5 and some already called me being trolling yesterday.
No telling how well it will run on my PC because there's too things that can go wrong there being High End Nvidia stuff and everything.
Consoles are highly limiting; and when devs screw up optimizing their games on console, you're screwed. You don't have the option of powering through it.
That's why always wait and see what the game plays like on any device before you buy.
I think they've done a good job porting it to pc, but it needs to be able to run on lower end cards and should have a ram indicator to show how much video ram is being used.
That’s why I play on PS5. The user base is so big, devs can’t afford to screw up optimizing their games for it.
Looking at the overall state of PC gaming and its ports of AAA games for the past 3-4 years vs consoles ports.
Not really helping your case.
People never listened when I said that this game doesn’t use “real” ray tracing on PS5. I believe it uses a very clever advanced/modified screen space reflection system. Which is why the real ray tracing doesn’t work on pc.
Does it matter? I thought we were past this "real" nonsense. The end results matter more. If you can't distinguish, who cares. If it allows for better/more stable frame rate who cares. MS f'd everything when they started using terms like "true" and "real" in their marketing when they launched the One X last gen. People are finally starting to realize that "True 4K" doesn't matter if you have to sacrifice framerate to achieve it. In the end something always has to give if you are truly pushing the hardware.
Raytracing reflections are used on PS5 as they are in Spiderman, Same engine. tested by professionals with first hand knowledge.
PC Ray-tracings problems are bugs and on AMD side a driver issue.
Lastly if AMD want to compete in the RT space, they need to come up with a solution. As in a unique chip to do it, not just make the gpu with some driver things help it. It's miles behind Nvidia.
I liked it but if it'd been priced say $29.99 or so it would've fared better! That or they should've took more time and lengthened it. It's a shame because the world and lore was ripe for a franchise!
It either needed to be cheaper or longer. Maybe $40 or make the campaign a couple more hours or add a multiplayer component. How great would a Horde mode have been!
I enjoyed it. But then again I got it for 5.
That game got shafted bad. Game "journalists" had a QTE fever and were having none of that. I still say the graphics were awesome, the story was pretty cool, the gameplay really good, but yeah, uneven. The length of the game wasn't that bad. Was it perfect, not at all, I'd say it's a 75-80 game. At the end of the day, that uneven gameplay is what I hated, it felt that some elements were like a real good looking sundae but I was told I could only take a sppon out of it. I really hope they can fix this in a greenlit sequel.
Yes. It would have been much better received in the 20-30 dollar range.