Reviewer Brandin Tyrrel discusses Ready At Dawn's third-person shooter with IGN's resident werewolf hunters.
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."
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
"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."
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.
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.
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!
Exactly. What a weird metric that suddenly was important and then, within a few months, no longer mattered.
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 😅
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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..
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.
Exactly. I came to post exactly this. The game was torn apart upon release. It's not shocking that a sequel was denied.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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
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.
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.
@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
@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?
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.
@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.
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.
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.
Yea and there was/is a PC version of 1886 too in 2016 ... but now maybe collecting dust in some dev's hardrive.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Interesting. Y'all love this short linear experience but hated HB2 short linear experience? What's the difference again?
Incorrect. I loved HB, HB2, and The Order.
It's not an either/ or.
Wasn’t it longer than the original Gears of War? The hate on this game started before people got to play it.
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
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.
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
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.
They hated on it hard. It was unjust criticism for the most part and started prior to its release.
It was probably for the best.
If a sequel for that game was released today, many idiots would be calling it woke garbage.
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?
Can't see any reason why "many idiots" would call it woke. It was perfectly fine story-wise.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
This video seems like a really fair assessment from gamers who have actually played the game. It gives insight as to why scores are low/average, that so many other seem to be wondering about. I am looking forward to playing this game monday, but I am much happier to have realistic expectations.
Seems really weird to have so much of the gameplay, which is kind of limited as is, be restricted to just walking down hallways though. I hadn't realized how prevelant it was.
I've just finished the game. Really enjoyed it. The atmosphere and attention to detail are really the strong points of The Order 1886. The world feels believable. The story is good even though the pacing could've been better in my opinion.
I really hope it sells well enough to make a sequel possible. There definately is a lot to improve on however I feel like the potential of this franchise is immenesly high. If they can take the strong parts of this game and give the player more freedom that would make a really great game.
The only reason why haters are complaining about "false advertisement" is because they hyped the game up to a point it could never live up too. Its a shame a decent game is getting trashed hard for no reason.
Here's the thing. It's a linear game. It plays like The Walking Dead or Outlast. The game flows in one direction. It's not COD, it's not Far Cry 4, it's not Assassin's Creed Unity, it is a linear game that is COMPLETELY story driven. If you're not into games that are controlled and guided by the story, this game is not for you. Just because YOU don't like it doesn't mean that other people will hold your point of view. Is that fair to say?
Check Collin and Greg review of this game. I think it is the most honest review i've seen for The Order.