110°
5.9

The Order: 1886 Review | 4Players

It looks awesome and the borders between movie and game get blurred once again. But the linear, very simplistic game design doesn’t even scratch the surface – be it in the firefights, the stealth or the useless interaction. Overall: A tremendous amount of potential gone to waste.

Read Full Story >>
translate.google.com
sobotz3730d ago

Played it for 3 hours, already near chapter 9. So far it was decent, but not as good as Spec Ops or Gears in term of mechanic and story.

Graphic is the best looking game right now tho

Monstar3730d ago

gameplay mechanics can be considered in the top of 3rd person sooters, IMO...it's fast, and so very fluid in transition from cover to cover...love it. graphics of course are the best on consoles SO FAR...issue is the poorly told story and overdone cutscenes and of course QTE's.

Shame...game had potential if they made it into a survival horror with main focus being the lycan/vampires, etc

breakpad3730d ago

i think in an era where indies are considered normal games ...normal AAA games are considered system sellers that was audience mistake not Order's ..the game is solid and fun but those hypocrites journalists wanted to present as never seen grounbreaking game that Sony is relying a lot upon it ..and obviously after that an onslaught of bashing the game was began also serving and benefiting other interest from competition

marlinfan103730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Yeah its a pretty good game. It should've been about $30-$40, at $60 there just isn't enough there. The shooting was great, guns looked and felt nice and powerful. The cover system was very well executed. I really thought I was gonna love the game until about half way through and the game really started dragging on. For me atleast. Not only were there too many cutscenes but the cutscenes themselves were too long. I felt like half, if not more of the time spent playing the game was watching cutscenes.

They needed more half breeds, and a better way to fight them also. It didn't seem like much thought went into the half breed battles at all.

showtimefolks3730d ago

its a good new IP like original AC was. I fully expect a bigger and better sequel. This was ready at dawns first game on home consoles so please cut them some slack

on one hand we whine about wanting new IP's than when a publisher takes a risk we bash it hard. Don't cry moving forward if all we get from big publishers are sequels while indies will be the ones taking the risk

but don't worry a new

Ac
cod
bf
mADDEN
mlb
nhl
fIFA

YEARLY RELEASE ARE COMING SO KEEP BUYING THEM BUT THAN THAN RIGHT BACK AROUND LIKE HYPOCRITES AND TALK ABOUT WANING NEW ip'S

magiciandude3730d ago

I think my brain is dying after reading this comment...

shadowT3730d ago

Graphics is bombastic. I like The Order 1886.

Gazondaily3730d ago

The graphics are jaw dropping. Really love the visuals on this

Gwiz3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

I rather have a game to be an actual game,don't need a cinematic experience 30FPS lol.All jokes aside... that line should not become any thinner than it already was in the 7th gen.

Pyro2000x3730d ago

Bloodborne on PS4 next month, but you don't even own a PS4 and you have not played The Order 1886 most trolls like you are just jealous Xbots pissed off that all of your exclusives will be out starting September 2015 while PS4 has over 40+ confirmed PS4 exclusives for 2015.My PSN I.D. is tech-boy-88 if you own a PS4 prove it by adding me.

Gwiz3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

LMFAO,ask Yewles.. :P

I don't need your approval

PraxxtorCruel3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

You're an embarrassment. So everyone is an 'XBOT' now 'cause their views of the game don't align with yours. Good to know.

u4one3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Who cares if the exclusives suck. I have an X1 and a ps4 and I am having more fun with the X1. I started playing the order on thursday and I'll tell you it's the most beautifully rendered disappointment I've ever played. It's just boring. The story is wasted opportunity, the gameplay is simplistic and minimal. I promise you when I say this, X1 fans are not and have no reason to be jealous of the order (with its average review score of around 55) when there are other games available to them that are just simply better, and more entertaining. The ps4s best exclusive right now is a PS3 game remastered. At least the X1 has new exclusive IP that is great and reviewed well on top of it. Just relax and don't take it so personally. You have no reason to insult people for a game you have nothing to do with other than buying it.

Smok913730d ago

Yeah, its not for everyone. We've known what 1886 is going to be like for months so if you don't like the idea of it, don't spend your money on it.

iamnsuperman3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Videogames are growing in audience and genre. Like films there is always place to try something new. You can still have your Birdman or Flith while still having your Avengers or Transformers. Not every game is for everyone an nor did that line become any thinnner

Man-Eee-Faces3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

All these 50s and 60s review scores can't be wrong. The game should have been only $30 to justify it's value to gamers. Shame because it has great graphics, some neay ideas and setting, too bad the gameplay, direction and value were second thoughts.

Smok913730d ago

Rent the game. Whala, a $7 game.

Man-Eee-Faces3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Already have it sent by Gamefly. Should be on its way.

I was really thinking to go all digital this generation but seeing disappointing games like The Order, AC Unity, Driveclub, and Watch Dog made me realize how much I need Gamefly and actual disc.

Cupid_Viper_33730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

"All these 50s and 60s review scores can't be wrong"

90+------ 1
80+ ------14
70+-------18
60+-------14
50+-------8
40+-------5
20+-------1

Out of 61 reviews on metacritic, 33 of them are 70+. which is more than half. So yea, actually all of those 50s and 60s CAN be wrong, they are in the minority.

It has as many 80s as it has 60s, and more 70s than it does 60s. It has more than double the number of 70s than it does 50s.

Lol, how about you stop trolling and stop speaking trying to speak for all "gamers" with phrases like "The game should have been only $30 to justify it's value to gamers."

You certainly don't represent my views, and I've probably been gaming longer than you have been alive.

Pogmathoin3730d ago

So, only reviews that agree with your opinion are valid? Maybe some just did not like the game, have that appeal to draw them in..... But just because one does not like it, does not mean it is bad, and vice versa...... Perspective.....

DigitalRaptor3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

@ Cupid_Viper_3

Sadly, your facts aren't going to get through to most people set in their agendas, and their sheep mentality is not going to be influenced by logic.

This is why review scores just need to be abolished. I'm not just saying this because of The Order's polarising reception (plenty of games I've liked have received bad scores, just like many of yours have probably too), but because people cannot be true to the facts.

Additionally, length and value should have no connection to how a game is scored because ultimately, games depreciate in price and will a Metascore based on price affect somebody's choice when they are buying it at bargain bin value in 5 years? Of course it won't, and I don't think we should be taking the scores of these hypocritical reviewers when they can't even grasp the basic logic I've just provided.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3730d ago
Smok913730d ago

Cupid_Viper_3, these kind of places aren't best suited for those who take offense to someone's opinion. I didn't know troll was code for someone who has a different opinion. Most people state opinions like he did as if its matter of fact because, it is to him. I guess some people don't understand that concept.

You're right. He probably doesn't represent your views by the simple fact that he's not you. The 50/60 scores may be wrong to you. They're peoples opinions bud. Those opinions may differ from yours.

I can see how someone should think this game should cost less than $60 because the gameplay hours to play through it are relatively short. Of course, this was known before release and we make the choice to rent or buy.

JoeReno3730d ago

why don't you stop talking about this game like you have played it and save it until then. seriously dude every thread. every single one.

SharnOfTheDEAD3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

It's funny, people complaining about the length, yet some said Alien Isolation was too long, imagine the shit storm that would have kicked off it could be completed in just 6 hours?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3730d ago
IGiveHugs2NakedWomen3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

The fact remains that it's a stunning piece of work that showcases PS4's GPU Compute. I'm 2 hours and 30 minutes in and I've just reached the airship. I think this game suffers because it has scaled back the fire fights and melee action and replaced it with cut scenes as well as the regenerating health, it makes the game too easy. I think they should have used more survival oriented mechanics which would have made the game more challenging. The other problems that some are mentioning don't effect the gameplay at all. The comments about the black bars and qtes are highly exaggerated. Uncharted, Tomb Raider, and TLOU all had these types of QTE's, but they didn't have the constant prompts to press triangle, or press x and the excessive number of visual prompts actually does effect immersion, but not so much as to rate the game a 1 or a 5, those ratings were obviously done to lure in clicks and nothing more. I'm trying to be as objective as possible by explaining what is actually going on in the game and not making judgements about things that don't affect the gameplay. Overall it's a well made game and I haven't noticed any glitches, but the excessive visual prompts(HAND HOLDING) does take away from the experience IMO.

Gwiz3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king,where are those using it the other way around? by going against the supposed click-bait maelstrom?.At this moment anyone praising it would receive more traffic by those opposing it and those that are agreeing with it.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen3730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Hey, if people want to be led around by the nose waiting to be told what to enjoy, more power to 'em. I play what I want, when I want and I like The Order 1886.

@Messiah23

"I enjoyed Ryse and it was a beautiful game and short as well. Its funny though reading fans who ripped Ryse for its length now supporting The Order for the same thing."

Please do not compare The Order to Ryse, the Order has stable frame rates and bugs and glitches are rare. The Order is on a completely different level when it comes to the quality of the game and level of detail rendered with the graphics.

Kribwalker3730d ago

@hugs

The order was also delayed to fix any issues, Ryse was a launch game, but it was a very similar experience. And what he says is true, the people hating on Ryse and its "tech demo, QTE linear short game with poor game play mechanics" are the same that are supporting the order and its "tech demo, QTE linear short game with poor gameplay mechanics." So it is completely justified to compare the two.

moe883730d ago (Edited 3730d ago )

Same here. Loving it so far. Gaming press has cried wolf too many times for me to give a crap about what they say. QTE aren't that common either. Reviews had made thinking the game is a QTEfest. Glad I got it, RAD nailed the atmosphere, and story is intriguing to say the least. So sick of open world repetitive crap that the sheep want.

Show all comments (40)
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
SimpleSlave78d ago (Edited 78d 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_78d 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.

SimpleSlave77d 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.

coolbeans77d 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.

SimpleSlave77d 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.

Espangerish77d 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.

SimpleSlave77d 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."

-Foxtrot77d 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 77d ago
Inverno78d 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.

1nsomniac78d ago (Edited 78d 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!

thorstein78d ago

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

andy8578d 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_Scum77d 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_88d 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.

DodoDojo87d 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.

ravens5287d ago

Have you played it? Just curious.

ABizzel187d ago (Edited 87d 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

goken87d ago

Whatever the number, can’t be worst than concord

SimpleDad87d ago

Glad that Alloy Lego is doing great.

Toecutter0087d 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.

Cacabunga86d 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 86d ago
pwnmaster300087d ago (Edited 87d 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_Box87d ago

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

S2Killinit87d 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.

87d ago
Christopher87d ago

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

blackblades87d 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.

Sabbath131387d ago

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

Bathyj87d 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.

TheEroica87d ago ShowReplies(2)
mkis00787d ago (Edited 87d 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 86d ago
-Foxtrot88d 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.

neutralgamer199287d ago (Edited 87d 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-6487d 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-6487d 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

jwillj2k487d ago (Edited 87d 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.

-Foxtrot87d 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-6487d 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-6487d 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?

jwillj2k485d 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-6485d ago (Edited 85d 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 85d ago
S2Killinit87d 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.

-Foxtrot87d 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.

RaidenBlack87d ago

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

Relientk7787d 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.

S2Killinit87d 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.

thorstein202d 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.

z2g202d ago (Edited 202d 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_Man3000202d ago

Lol did the game kill your grandma or something?

Good-Smurf202d 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.

cbuc1125202d ago

Where exactly did the game touch you z2g? 🤣

RedDevils202d ago

@Pepsi I'm surprise it didn't.

anast202d ago

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

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 202d ago
RaidenBlack202d 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.

Lightning77202d ago

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

thorstein202d ago (Edited 202d ago )

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

It's not an either/ or.

StormSnooper201d ago

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

Lexreborn2202d 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_looken201d 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.

Profchaos201d 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

Michiel1989201d 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.

StormSnooper201d ago (Edited 201d 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 201d ago
Obscure_Observer202d ago

It was probably for the best.

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

thorstein202d ago

I was thinking of adding that to my comment above.

Well observed.

Michiel1989201d 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?

ANIALATOR136202d ago

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

Npugz7202d ago

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

Popsicle202d ago (Edited 202d 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?

Espangerish202d 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.

Psychonaut85202d ago (Edited 202d 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.

Inverno202d 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?

isarai202d ago (Edited 202d 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

Inverno202d 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.

mandf202d 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

Inverno202d 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.

mandf202d 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

Michiel1989201d 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)