270°
5.5

The Order: 1886 Review “I REALLY didn't like it” - GamerCenterOnline

GCO: "If The Order: 1886 where an action movie it would hit almost every emotional cord; some on purpose, some not. Everyone wants this game to live up to its potential, but we are in the business of games not “creative cinematography.”

Read Full Story >>
gamercenteronline.net
ritsuka6663744d ago (Edited 3744d ago )

I expected this game to turn out mediocre.I compared it to those 'full motion video' games of the 90's, based on the 'gameplay' trailers that were shown, they wowed people with visuals, but delivered bad gameplay.

georgenancy3744d ago

yeah they game seems disappointing and we get it you expected the game to be mediocre.No need of you mentioning it in each and every article

Khronikos3744d ago Show
RedSky3744d ago

Same as me. Hey, on the plus side we're getting better at seeing through distributor marketing.

ritsuka6663744d ago

This game is everything I hate about some games in these days. More focused on being a movie...linear gameplay.

t-hall7853743d ago

YouTubing the whole game right now. Wayyyyyy cheaper option in my book

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3743d ago
Rimeskeem3744d ago (Edited 3744d ago )

I honestly couldn't tell if this was an opinion piece or review from that headline.

hulk_bash19873744d ago

Reviews ARE just glorified opinions. So you will either agree or disagree. I will in fact be purchasing the game tomorrow and make my own judgements. I've enjoyed RADs other games and these types of games in general so I'm expecting to enjoy the experience.

Rimeskeem3744d ago

I also love R@D work and will be playing this game as well. I just think the headline could be of a constructive criticism rather than a flat out bashing on the game.

Summons753744d ago

They SHOULDN'T be glorified opinions though. They should be an unbiased analysis of the gameplay and the technicality of it all. If you don't like it, that's fine but don't sit there and bash it explain what you didn't like about a game and explain the things that did work in a game. If there is something that is broken then there isn't an opinion about it, it's broken. If you just don't like story focused games then you either shouldn't be reviewing it or you should really set those feelings aside for an opinion article about why you hated the game. Reviews are supposed to be unbiased and informative so readers can get an idea of what they game is and if they should spend their money on it. Sitting there saying "it sucks" the whole article while other sites are saying it's good is only going to confuse buyers ultimately losing sales.

JoeReno3744d ago

@summons75 Perfectly said +1. I wish more people would approach reviews this way and set aside personal tastes.

Aceman183744d ago

i don't care what other say about this game or any other game it's my money and i'll spend it on whatever game(s) i want to play.

i wanna play the Order so i had no problems dropping 60 on the game, no one can tell me how to spend my money or what to spend it on.

GCO Gamer3744d ago

@Summons75 I agree with that fact, I really do.

Instead of talking about the environments and characters, I decided it would be best just to destroy the game. Because, believe me, I was excited when I first got it. Then, I played it and it was not good.

There's literally nothing good about the game to me. I can say the graphics are outstanding, but I really didn't care about the graphics. When I was writing the review, I kept remembering an interview with one of the higher ups at Nintendo calling cinematic experiences "boring."

This is the biggest problem with gaming the last couple years, stories are good but experiences and moments are better. If you want to play a movie, I recommend Telltale's games. There's only a handful of developers that can develop moments and experiences, Ready at Dawn was in over their heads.

There's literally been nothing to play this generation. I wanted The Order: 1886 game to be good, really good. But, I literally couldn't stand the long cutsense and QTE. Gameplay is king, always will be.

Sony has gotten away from titles that do gameplay the best, that's why there are no hallmark exclusives yet and that's fine. We'll just have to wait. But, I'm going to force myself to like crap just because it's "pretty." It's crappy because its horrible, the story isn't even good. And I can't really even detail it.

People please understand, I've been playing games for along time. The Order last generation would have been good; it's the same quality as the original Assassin's Creed.

I just don't believe its good now in todays market.

HammadTheBeast3743d ago

It's not bad at all. Sure, it's not amazingly innovative or anything, but its a fun game with an engaging storyline. Easily a 7/10.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3743d ago
RedDevils3744d ago (Edited 3744d ago )

I will expect this to be like Drive Club where real gamers doesn't give a F what these arm chair on the internet think and will buy and enjoy the games regardless. So don't be surprise if this game will sell very well and probably end getting a sequel in the future

t-hall7853743d ago

@GCO bravo mate you hit the nail on the head. Let's get back to GAMING!!! All this who has the best specs crap needs to end. PC trumps all in that category anyway. Who cares about specs if all that gets us is pretty games that are shallow on the inside. Or completely broken games that can't even be played online. This generation needs to get off of GRAPHICS because both systems are strikingly similar. No one can tell me they can tell if a game is on ps4 or x1 just by looking at it. NO ONE. That only happens when you are looking at eurogamer's side by sides 3 inches from your computer monitor while squinting. Once all these trolls start talking about gameplay again we will start to see games worth our 60 bucks. Till then I'll be watching this game on twitch while watching all the cutscenes on youtube

Adexus3744d ago

“I REALLY didn't like it”

Yet an above average score? What? If you don't know how to use review scores, please don't.

RealisticGamer3744d ago (Edited 3744d ago )

I think you don't know how reviews work. Just because he didn't like the game, doesn't make it an automatic 0 or bad score, maybe he didn't enjoy it, but he still has to give credit for things he realizes it does well. (runs well, amazing graphics, decent story) The game isn't broken and unplayable, it still deserves credit for some aspects.

Death3744d ago

5.5 out of 10 is not an average game. Most games sit closer to the 70 mark with very good games hitting the 80's and exceptional games the 90's. Most gamers won't touch a game in the 50's and below. Metacritics scoring system is flawed in the fact it converts review scores to their system. If you look at IGN's descriptions they clearly state gamers should not waste time or money on games in the 5's. http://www.ign.com/wikis/ig... I find it hard to believe anyone would consider the "average" game as a waste of money. It seems like most decent or average games are games in the 7 range.

ABeastNamedTariq3744d ago

Well it's a good thing it's closer to the 70 range huh (65)

Death3744d ago

Yeah, at 65 the description is

"These recommendations come with a boatload of “ifs.” There’s a good game in here somewhere, but in order to find it you’ll have to know where to look, and perhaps turn a blind eye to some significant drawbacks."

Still not a terribly exciting way to look at a game and hopefully not what to expect from average games.

qwerty6763744d ago ShowReplies(2)
Father__Merrin3744d ago ShowReplies(2)
Show all comments (66)
120°

The Order: 1886, a Ten Year Reunion

WTMG's Leo Faria: "After finally playing the now decade-old The Order: 1886, what do I think about it? Is it really worthy of all the hate it has received over the past decade? Or is it some kind of hidden gem? I honestly think it falls somewhere in the middle. I loved the setting, the story is initially fine, the combat isn’t half-bad, and the potential for some awesome world building was there. It was all bogged down by too much ambition against a tight deadline, as well as poor marketing. As a result, it’s short, full of plotholes, infested with QTEs, and not exactly memorable as a whole. As a game you can grab for less than ten bucks today, I absolutely think it’s worth checking out. It’s one hell of a wasted potential, but for such a discount, I had some fun with it, and I’m sure you will too."

Read Full Story >>
waytoomany.games
SimpleSlave90d ago (Edited 90d ago )

Great setting, great graphics, even decent gun play, but what a trash of a game. The fuck were these people thinking? We could've had something like an Alan Wake 2 meets Mass Effect 2 style game. With investigations, creepy locations to uncover and explore, people to talk to and even recruit, clues to uncover and connect, monsters to slay, side quests to get lost in, and a more expansive lore to go with it.

Instead we got a shitty AAAAAAAAA Third Person Pew Pew snoozfest. Awesome.

_SilverHawk_90d ago

The order 1886 was one of the best games I played on ps4. Within a top 5 best ps4 games I'd put the last of us 2, the order 1886, days gone, horizon zero dawn and God of war.

SimpleSlave89d ago

"The order 1886 was one of the best games I played on ps4. Within a top 5 best ps4 games..."

Jesus H. Christ, bud. You just sound like a Sony apologist. What the fuck? Anyways. Good luck with that or whatever.

coolbeans89d ago

God. The "what could've been" you're describing would've been way better than just being the most empty cinematic shooter slop of that generation.

SimpleSlave89d ago

Right? I mean, I can understand people enjoying this thing ironically. Knowing that it sucks but still enjoying it for what it is. I get that. That's fine. We all have our guilty pleasure no doubt. But to come here and actually pretend that this is a top 5 PS4 game? Wow!

To pretend that this barely there game is anything more than an "empty cinematic shooter slop of that generation," as you said, is beyond ridiculous. But I guess Self-Awareness is some expensive ass DLC still.

Espangerish89d ago

I really enjoyed this game and also think it was one of the best PS4 games. It’s weird to me that this makes you so angry. I’m not a Sony fan at all by the way, very much pc player.

SimpleSlave89d ago

"and also think it was one of the best PS4 games"
"I’m not a Sony fan at all by the way, very much pc player."

Yeah, OK. You want to lie to yourself? You do you, bud. But like I said to the other Sony apologist, "good luck with that or whatever."

-Foxtrot89d ago

Jesus, it had some flaws but you're acting like it was unplayable.

It built a foundation, a rocky one but a sequel is where they could have refined things.

Personally my only issue is I feel like the "Gears of War" like over the shoulder gameplay, especially getting into cover and the like didn't really fit the game as much. In Gears you understand that kind of gameplay because they are wearing super heavy amour and guns but in the Order these guys are super human, they should feel more of a breeze to control, easily jumping over things and being allowed to climb whatever similar to Uncharted.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 89d ago
Inverno90d ago

Im back again to simp for The Order, if ya like games well grounded in their reality with consistency in everything it does then I recommend it if ya haven't played it. Play it thru emulation or on your PS it don't matter just play it.

1nsomniac90d ago (Edited 90d ago )

A great game run down by the media for it's price vs length - Which was understandable, but it shouldn't of been the be all and end all.

At the right price this was a great game & deserved a sequel!

thorstein90d ago

Exactly. What a weird metric that suddenly was important and then, within a few months, no longer mattered.

andy8590d ago

I enjoyed this. I think the complaints were the length if I remember. Nothing wrong with a short good game, at least to physical copy owners 😅

Rebel_Scum90d ago

Put the thing on PS plus already!

Show all comments (16)
310°

The Order: 1886 Dev Pitched a Sequel to Sony, But Was Denied

Co-founder thinks bad reviews were to blame.
Ready at Dawn co-founder has revealed the now-shuttered studio pitched a sequel to PS4 exclusive The Order: 1886 to Sony, but was denied the chance to make it.

Read Full Story >>
pushsquare.com
_SilverHawk_100d ago

I can't believe sony turned down a sequel to the order 1886 which ended basically on a cliffhanger. The game is amazing and I would love a ps5 pro enhanced version just like I'd like a driveclub ps5 pro enhanced version.

DodoDojo99d ago

About 2 million sales and not the greatest of reviews, I can believe it.

Tbh there's a lot of dormant Sony exclusives that are more deserving of a sequel.

ravens5299d ago

Have you played it? Just curious.

ABizzel199d ago (Edited 99d ago )

2 million probably wasn’t enough to make a strong profit on, and the mid reviews didn’t help, even though it was a solid game just short, and could have expanded way more on the creature mythos.

Days Gone: +7 million / mid reviews (no sequel)
Infamous SS: 6 million / mid reviews (no sequel)
Killzone SF: +2 million (4 mo.) / mid reviews (no sequel)
Driveclub: +2 million (2015 / leaks say 5m) / mid reviews (no sequel)

Basically it looks like for the PS4 generation budgets were getting out of control and Sony made the decision

sales + reviews - budget = sequel or no sequel

goken99d ago

Whatever the number, can’t be worst than concord

SimpleDad99d ago

Glad that Alloy Lego is doing great.

Toecutter0099d ago

Two million in sales for a new IP is pretty impressive. The world-building was in a class on its own. Any moron could see this IP had mad potential and the fact that Sony balked on it makes one question their competence and leadership.

Cacabunga98d ago

Nothing to do with sales. It’s all about the broken vision that Sony is having lately.
Days Gone sold great but they still don’t want a sequel to it.
Sony wants Easy money and they saw it in gaas and lazy games like lego horizon and countless remasters..

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 98d ago
pwnmaster300099d ago (Edited 99d ago )

Idky you can’t believe it.
This game was shitted on by everyone besides some PS fans.

Don’t blame Sony on this one. Blame everyone who wanted to see this burn. Sony does a lot of stupid shit with their IP and waste a lot of them like bloodborne and days gone, but don’t be surprised with this one.

Outside_ofthe_Box99d ago

Exactly. I came to post exactly this. The game was torn apart upon release. It's not shocking that a sequel was denied.

S2Killinit99d ago

Not “upon” release. There was a whole campaign “prior” to release.

In my opinion they should have made it a bit less linear and it would have been great. I did enjoy it. But the reception it got makes sense that Sony wouldnt want to risk a sequel if it was going to open up a can of worms with people who wanted the first one to fail.

99d ago
Christopher99d ago

I played the game. I 100% believe Sony turned down a sequel.

blackblades99d ago

Well pretty obvious when it was left on a cliffhanger. Many sequels get turned from companies as someone else said above blame the SOB's that always whining.

Sabbath131399d ago

i 100% agree with you, both of those games were amazing

Bathyj99d ago

What's so hard to believe? Don't you remember this game was crucified by the media.. it was DOA. It's a shame because it was a really fresh new IP it was gorgeous and a play really well . it had some issues but it wasn't the only game with qte repeated bosses and a playtime under 10 hours.

TheEroica99d ago ShowReplies(2)
mkis00799d ago (Edited 99d ago )

It was panned because of the graphics hype. Kind of similar to Ryse and hellblade 2...although the story was pretty interesting in all 3.

As a matter of fact I think Indy's success is partially due to the fact the graphics were not hyped up pre launch.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 98d ago
-Foxtrot100d ago

It’s strange though Sony would be so proud about their work and overall quality but wouldn’t give them an extra year to, give them that quality.

Anyway he talks about if it was in the 70s they’d have had their sequel but Days Gone is at 71 on Metacritic and we don’t have a sequel.

Both games should have one, I think they deserve a second chance at refining and building onto that foundation already laid out.

neutralgamer199299d ago (Edited 99d ago )

Definitely days gone 2 should happen. Who knows maybe now Sony will let them make it since bend had to cancel its live service game. Days gone 2 for PS6 sounds amazing

As far as order 1886 sequel it would be have been interesting. I think if this game was a RPG with 15 hour story it would have done so much better. Don't get me wrong game is great but you can tell the potential is there if they were allowed to make some drastic changes

Sadly this new Sony is not the PlayStation they are suits and spreadsheet guys. Playstation has lost its touch with gamers. I miss Shawn jack Andrew house etc

At the launch of PS4 Playstation was at its full strength with gamers running the company but not anymore. No we have a guy who loves horizon above every thing else and is willing to fund projects based on that IP

Redemption-6499d ago

So an IP that actually sell? Sony moved away from the type of games you saw during the launch of the PS4 because many gamer didn't support them. I hear people crying more about say Japan Studio closing than actually supporting their games when they were open. Wasn't it shawn layden who said many of these games fail and you hope a few like horizon to make up for the failed games. Maybe if gamers actually supported these games there would be more of them. Shocking right?

Redemption-6499d ago

There is no sequel for Days Gone because it didn't sell. The director himself said "If you love a game, buy it at f****** full price. I can't tell you how many times I've seen gamers say 'yeah, I got that on sale, I got it through PS Plus, whatever'.”

Majority of the sales from days gone came from when it was heavily discounted, and I have seen many gamers say they will not pay full price or the game isn't worth full price, but they will buy it when it's discounted. Yet they get triggered when the studio decides to move away from a game they refused to support at full price

jwillj2k499d ago (Edited 99d ago )

What this is showing is that the majority of people don’t like the price. It doesn’t mean they don’t like the game. Two different dimensions.

Example: The company Take Two took advantage by selling NBA 2K at $20, completely undercutting NBA live to become the most popular basketball game. High priced games isn’t the only way they can make money.

-Foxtrot99d ago

Well. If we are going to go off that director apparently Days Gone hit 8 million sales around the same time frame that Ghost of Tsushima later did.

https://x.com/JakeRocket/st...

One was considered a failure, the other a massive success so I don't think it just boils down to sales.

Redemption-6499d ago

@Foxtrot

Hey, maybe you clearly know more than the director/writer. If memory serves me right, Days Gone went on sale faster than Ghost. Also, please know budget is a major factor. There is a huge difference between Ghost with a budget of $60M selling 8M, vs Days Gone, with a budget of $250M selling 8M after major price cut. One can be considered a success, because it had a much lower budget.

Don't Complain If a Game Doesn’t Get a Sequel” If You Didn’t Buy It “At F-cking Full Price, clearly shows the game didn't make the money it needed to make within the time frame it needed

Redemption-6499d ago

@jwillj2k4

What is shows is majority of gamers didn't think Days Gone was worth the $60 price tag and clearly Sony agrees with them. You can like a game, but if you don't think it is worth the price tag, why do you complain when the company decides to not invest in a game you don't think is worth what they are charging? They should release the game, lose money, cut the price and then you will support it?

jwillj2k497d ago

Reading is fundamental. I said start with a reduced price not cut the price after you’ve already released it. It was an example to show how there are other ways they couldn’t make money. The idea is that number of buyers is much greater at $20 than $60. I didn’t think I had the point that out to you.

Redemption-6497d ago (Edited 97d ago )

@jwillj2k4

The number of buyers being greater at $20 than $60 does not equate to more money. You literally have to sell 2-3 times more to makeup the difference. Starting with a reduced price for an AAA that costs say $250M is pure stupidity and again would have to sell 2-4 times more depending on the reduced price break even. Or include micro transactions. They can make it into a free live service game with mtx. Yeah, you are right, maybe they should follow the route 2K NBA took

Clearly many don't think the game is worth $60. Who knows maybe the remaster can give it hope. But it would be funny if they get a sequel and people refuse to buy it at full price. Highly doubt those who think the game isn't worth 60, will be lining up for 70.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 97d ago
S2Killinit99d ago

Days Gone deserved so much better than 71. I’ve noticed that some PlayStation games get attacked and it feels generated. Like money is behind the hate campaign.

-Foxtrot99d ago

Days Gone was that one game which wasn't really attacked by gamers but by journalists.

As soon as it was revealed they really didn't like it for some reason, it was made out to be because it came across as a generic looking open world game or another generic "zombie" game but at the time we had plenty of open world games and a fair few "zombie/infected" games that these journalists didn't bad an eyelid towards.

When the game released broken before the Day One patch it just gave these journalists a massive excuse to slaughter the game in their reviews.

On one hand, a game shouldn't have released in that broken state or at least they shouldn't have given journalists a copy without the Day One patch HOWEVER these are the same journalists who usually gloss over that kind of stuff with so many other games, take Star Wars Outlaws for example, the game was a buggy, broken mess at launch with plenty of issues, bad AI, some clear performance issues and a lot of quality of life improvements needed but it still did a lot better than Days Gone at launch.

Personally I think they knew they could get away with it more because Sony Bend weren’t that high up and respectable, they knew calling their game out as much as they did wouldn't hit them with any major consequences unlike if they hypothetically were like this towards NaughtyDog, Sony Santa Monica or Insomniac.

RaidenBlack99d ago

Yea and there was/is a PC version of 1886 too in 2016 ... but now maybe collecting dust in some dev's hardrive.

Relientk7799d ago

That's lame. It's not perfect, definitely a flawed game, but deserves a sequel. You already have the first game as a starting point just need to improve upon it. This could have been a much better sequel like the jump from Assassin's Creed to Assassin's Creed 2. The IP has potential.

S2Killinit99d ago

But Assassins Creed sold a lot.

Show all comments (57)
200°

Looking Back, The Order: 1886 Not Spawning A Franchise Is Absolutely Tragic

The Order: 1886 is a "hidden gem" PlayStation exclusive that had a lot going for it back in the day. Unfortunately, it did not have a future.

thorstein214d ago

The amount of online vitriol, even here on N4G, overwhelmed it. Execs use user and critics ratings too much.

It's a great game. Polished, few, if any bugs at launch. The ending made me think there would be DLC that would make the game episodic.

At the time, it was the "game to hate" and so much hatebait was written about it. Facts, as always, didn't matter.

z2g214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

The game wasn’t good. Period. It should have been counted as a fitness app, bc 80% of the game was just smashing buttons as fast as you could. The other 15% was walking on a rail thru a world you couldn’t actually explore, and the remaining 5% was actual fun gameplay.

The negativity you speak of that “overwhelmed the release” of the game was the simple fact that people were extremely disappointed with it. Not fun. Not engaging. Boring. Felt like a Disney attraction. It scored a 63 on MC. It’s like people were just being honest about a Sony exclusive that for once wasn’t at the level of others.

Sometimes it’s just as simple as ththat game not being that good. Nothing more, nothing less. I owned that game personally. After the first 3x playing it, it was hard to actually want to play it… so I stopped.

Pepsi_Man3000214d ago

Lol did the game kill your grandma or something?

Good-Smurf214d ago

I'm still replaying The Order 1886 on PS5 and never find any part the game that requires you button mashing.
I guess you're playing and talking on completely different game.
You won't be getting far in this game at all if you're 80% of the time button mashing it.

cbuc1125214d ago

Where exactly did the game touch you z2g? 🤣

RedDevils214d ago

@Pepsi I'm surprise it didn't.

anast214d ago

Don't play the game, instead, gather reddit's greatest hits and post on n4g.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 214d ago
RaidenBlack214d ago

On other note, that wonderful game engine's gone ... and now if any new studio do pickup the IP, sequel'll be an UE one.
Ready at Dawn also had a PC port ready, shown off at SIGGRAPH 2015 running at 60fps. Shame that maybe gone as well, if not somebody leaks it 5-6 years later.

Lightning77214d ago

Interesting. Y'all love this short linear experience but hated HB2 short linear experience? What's the difference again?

thorstein214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

Incorrect. I loved HB, HB2, and The Order.

It's not an either/ or.

StormSnooper213d ago

Wasn’t it longer than the original Gears of War? The hate on this game started before people got to play it.

Lexreborn2214d ago

There are several games that fit this narrative. Games aren’t being broken down critically, they are being broken down initially. If the initial trailer or dev interviews don’t fit certain groups interest. Those groups go to insane levels to crap on it, all the while using a game that they want as a standard as if somehow their hate spawned said game.

You will see people talk about how game A that released in January of current calendar year is everything no one asked for. Then talk as if game B that was coming out the same time is the right path even if it released in a month later.

But the whole time screaming Game A will kill game B, but the truth is the people wanting game B killed A only because they were afraid game B won’t get more games like it. However, their is absolutely no shortage of variable games just the hindsight of fearful people that others enjoying something different then them means they won’t be catered to anymore.

It’s a trash thought process that leaves plenty of franchises being buried and not allowed to grow

just_looken213d ago

It was the best out of alot of those new ip tech demos remember that xbox one with a roman theme?

I agree it felt like a dlc ending the lore building/story also seemed like in the background they were gearing up for a series.

Like driveclub sony just killed it instead of expanding on it making more cash.

Profchaos213d ago

I feel like we were spoiled for choice when it came out and bigger games overshadowed it I didn't play it until about 6 months ago but it was a decent game

Michiel1989213d ago

you're confusing "game to hate" with "not getting 9.5's all over the board" and if it actually was as good as you're trying to make it out to be, it's on sony for not greenlighting the sequel. Can't really blame people for not liking it and having their own opinion about it, but yeah same excuse train as Days Gone to no one's surprise.

Absolutely ridiculous that everytime a ps exclusive fails the ranch always makes it seem to be that it was only outside factors that made it fail, except with Concord you couldn't do that cause it was just too bad and too big of a flop. Sony had all the cards here, if they saw potential in it they could have greenlit a sequel, but either they didn't or they just wanted better sales from a different IP, either way it's only Sony's fault that there's no sequel.

StormSnooper213d ago (Edited 213d ago )

They hated on it hard. It was unjust criticism for the most part and started prior to its release.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 213d ago
Obscure_Observer214d ago

It was probably for the best.

If a sequel for that game was released today, many idiots would be calling it woke garbage.

thorstein214d ago

I was thinking of adding that to my comment above.

Well observed.

Michiel1989213d ago

they said that about HZD and Aloy as well and yet that game got 9+ all over the board, nice try. what's next, Haze was a masterpiece as well and was just misunderstood? the awful fps, gameplay and story was just mimicking the trip you got in the game from the drugs you injected?

ANIALATOR136214d ago

Can't see any reason why "many idiots" would call it woke. It was perfectly fine story-wise.

Npugz7214d ago

It’s a shame they never continued this game I absolutely loved it

Popsicle214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

Never had the chance to play this. In 2014 my budget was much tighter and I planned to purchase, but the reviews talked me out of taking the plunge. I was more trusting of reviews at the time. Maybe at $10 and at only 8 hours, it is worth taking the time to try it.

To those that have played it, do you think it is a fun game in 2024?

Espangerish214d ago

I replayed it just last year. Fun to play old school linear adventure. To me its a nice change from the current trend of massive open world and gaas games.Visually still looks good even by todays standards.

Psychonaut85214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

Absolutely. For like $10 it’s a no brained. A ton of what killed it wasn’t that it was bad, it was that it wasn’t enough for $60. It has a few issues, but at $10 it’s brilliant.

Inverno214d ago

The media hate campaign caused these guys to end up at FB making nothing until their eventual shut down. Over what? The game being too short? The game being linear? As if the standard at the time wasn't linear! Uncharted was practically leading the whole industry into making linear cinematic games. Do some proper research and you'll find that the game isn't actually 7 hours long, it's more or less the same length as U2/U3 which everybody scored mear perfect. So what was the reason really?

isarai214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

It was really just released at the wrong time, when it was released everyone wanted everything to be some online gaas thing cause that was new and the Destiny hype train was going full speed. Literally every review rags on the fact that it has no online features. If it were released now it would be appreciated much more

Inverno214d ago

Which is ironic cause it was around that time that people no longer wanted tacked on MP on mostly SP games. The other thing is what pisses me off the most, and it still happens today. Games are being reviewed with expectations that when they aren't met they get lower scores. But that's applied for some games while others get a pass, it's ridiculous.

mandf214d ago

You’re right about everything but u2 and u3 were not under 15 hours long screw your skipped cut scenes and avoid everything play through

Inverno214d ago

You bring up another thing that's also pretty common for reviewers to do. They skip thru games on easy missing a good chunk of content. That sort of stuff makes games significantly longer and is part of the overall experience, and The Order also had collectables. I was simply just counting the hours Uncharted takes in a first playthrough where most would likely focus on the story and not deviate from that.

mandf214d ago

Inferno no worries that’s how they view linear games. Start to finish the order took me 15 hours of enjoying my first play through 7 hours make it seem like they never even played it and most sheep just parrot the lie

Michiel1989213d ago

yall are crazy, if the devs add an easy mode for the game, its totally fair for the game to be reviewed on that difficulty or did they add an easy mode so players get a bad experience? then it's not on the reviewer but on the devs.otherwise there should be no easy mode or it should have been harder.

The audacity of: your opinion is not valid because we are better at the game than you is so stupidly crazy. If your online identity stops revolving around a plastic box you can maybe see some nuance. So you can only review games now if you play them on the highest difficulty, so can you also only review Starcraft 2 if you're in the top 10 players of the world? I wonder who on here gave an opinion about God of War 3 but didn't finish it on chaos mode, they can't really give a valid opinion about it then if they only played it on hard, damn noobs.

Show all comments (51)