250°

The Order 1886 Is A Game For Me, Not You

TQ author writes: Being an avid listener and reader to many great gaming podcasts and websites I couldn’t avoid the harsh reviews and impressions The Order 1886 was getting dealt with. It was truly a huge surprise to me after playing and beating the game, how much I disagreed with these so called experts of the industry; as much as I wanted to find justification to accept the arguments on some of the game’s flaws. I just couldn’t.

Jimboms3766d ago

Interesting thoughts mate.

NewMonday3766d ago

I felt sad after finishing it, only feel that way with really good games

Stiffler3766d ago

Is the game pretty interesting? I reckon it looks pretty sweet. Doesn't seem to be the longest but that has never instantly ruined games before by default so I really want to try it.

Interesting article and a nice read :)

Ozmoses3766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

@stiffler

than try the game...

I mean you end your paragraph with "so I really want to try it"

and you begin with "Is the game pretty interesting?"

just try the game and find out for yourself... you obviously already know a little about what to expect with your comment on the games length...

just go try instead of asking people "if the game is interesting" I mean hell you can watch a "TRAILER" and tell if a game is "INTERESTING" or not depending on your personal tastes.

I get so sad seeing people constantly ask random people on the internet their thoughts of a game... None of us know each other... Use your own judgement for once...

The point of articles, trailers, reviews, pre-views, babble, speculation, hype.... all of it is for the consumer to analyze their potential purchase..

Basically I'm saying don't let other people decide for you.

OT: I was really sad when the game ended. I choked up during the succession scene with Lafayette. Poor Perceval. Galahad deserves answers!

Stiffler3766d ago

@Ozmoses

Wow, calm down chap. I was simply asking the people who've actually PLAYED the game if it's interesting.

No need to get mad and write a 10 page essay about it. I was asking a question out of curiosity.

"I get so sad seeing people constantly ask random people on the internet their thoughts of a game... None of us know each other... Use your own judgement for once... "

You know what's really sad? Getting mad at people for asking a question about a game over the internet.

In summary, take anger management lessons and learn to comprehend what people type. I obviously am yet to get the game and before I try it I want to ask around and see what multiple people think. Got a problem with that? Then get out of this thread.

Ozmoses3766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

hahahahah

mad??

there wasn't a hint of "anger" in my comment..

I simply don't see your logic...

you come and comment to ask people their thoughts on the game...

is it interesting??? obviously you find The Order: 1886 interesting if you are coming on N4G to look at articles about it..

it's funny because you obviously can't wrap your mind around the logic...

that's the whole point I'm trying to get across...

you come here on N4G looking for the opinions of other people to help "you" decide if "you" want to play The Order...

not mad... not angry... I just want people to make their own damn decisions...

keep relying on the information of other's to make your decisions in life and get back to me in 5 years...

your way of thinking is just going to set you up for failure...

use your own mind in all financial matters.. it's that freaking simple...

so sorry I'm trying to help you become a smarter consumer...

never trust another person when it's "YOUR MONEY" on the line.

that way if you make a bad purchase you can only blame yourself...

I mean I thought that was straight up common sense... but obviously it isn't... or you just have none...

but you'll just try to pull apart my comment and say I'm angry and mad...

just trying to help people purchase games on their own ground...

whoever told you had to listen to reviews lied to you....

Jimboms3765d ago

That's encouraging for me then.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3765d ago
Snookies123766d ago

This is one of those few games that just seems like an 'experience', more than anything. It's not something I'd buy at full price personally (very few games do that for me), but I really can't wait to check it out when I get the chance.

3766d ago
bnoyes3766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

What do you value more: quality gameplay and level design, or visual fidelity and production values? If it's the former, I'd keep your expectations low, since The Order has very little to offer in terms of an engaging and well designed gameplay experience. But if you like sleek production and gorgeous scenery and character models, you'll find a lot to appreciate.

In terms of story, I think it's a wash. The premise is cool and the voice acting is good, but the plot has no resolution and the characters are all caricatures you've seen a hundred times before.

I think the game is so polarizing because it does a few important things really well, and other important things really poorly. So whether you like it will depend on your priorities. I think the reviews are so low because it's the actual "gaming" elements and design that seem to have been afterthoughts.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen3766d ago

@bnoyes
Why are you constantly trying to convince people not to buy this game? 76 posts total and 33 of them are downplaying The Order. Did Ready@Dawn gang rape you or something? Give it a rest.

Snookies123766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

I can enjoy both sides of gaming. Sure, I value gameplay and longevity more than pretty graphics. However, I value games that go out and do something different. How often do we see something with this kind of setting/premise? I really like the atmosphere, and I'm sure it'll be more than worth at least a playthrough. The insanely pretty graphics are just a sugar coating on top.

Like I said, I may not pay full price for it, but it's something I plan on picking up at some point. I'm also very hopeful they'll work on a sequel as well, as this universe is already so intriguing to me even knowing as little as I do about it.

Jaqen_Hghar3766d ago

How about both? The Order has plenty of visceral, impactful combat. There's no reason to trash on the numerous long and fun gunfights in the Order. Also the characters are deep and have many hidden motives. The only one that's cliche really is the Lord Chancellor as the annoying authority figure. Still even he gets some pretty nice development as the story goes on. Lots of emotional moments especially towards the end.

nosferatuzodd3765d ago

idiots need to remember that games are made for recreational purposes not buying a game and see how much fault it has, if the game give you some kind of enjoyment kudos to you the game did its job of bringing some fun and enjoyable to you . but now a days all people care about is 1080p and mechanics this the game doesn't do that..

Why games of to fallow a certain pastern to be a game? art is art its the feeling not oh it has to look like this are play like that to be a game look at journey you hardly do any fighting in that game yet that game capture my imagination in ways i cant even comprehend the media is bias no if buts or suppose if it doesn't have a certain corporation logo then it will be nit pick until kingdom come thats just the sad but true facts

Taero3765d ago

Actually I think that the plot does have a resolution for that particular arc, obv not going to spoil it but it wrapped up a number of threads and left a number open for a sequel.

The gameplay is nothing unique really as far as a third person cover shooter goes though it handles well, my biggest gripe over the game is the easy as anything lycan fights, you literally cannot lose if you can spam X while also aiming and shooting and the stealth kills (the triangle prompt isn't timed linearly so I missed it some times and later stealth stages can be punishing in their checkpoints :P).

Bought for $60, trading in for $30, feel like I got my moneys worth for $30.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3765d ago
WelkinCole3766d ago

I am the type of gamer that buys games for enjoyment from time to time. I still have my NES collection and still pop contra and double dragon 2 and 3 from time to time for short gaming fix.

It is the same for the order for me. I have a family and I have a full time job. I do not have more than 3hrs a day to grind or improve my stats and what not.

As such I prefer quality experience over quantity. The order in this sense is perfect for me.

I mean don't you guys pop in MSG or Uncharted from time to time as well?

I honestly do not understand why people now days think that once you finish a game it is useless. When did this happen?.

I agree with the author although I would compare the order to a mix of heavy rain and Gears.

It is a bit different/fresh in this sense and why I love it. Its not another gaming using the same exact gaming formula from last gen like like say Uncharted.

uth113766d ago

Same here. I'm actually more likely to buy shorter games than longer games because time is a factor. I can't even say what the last RPG I played was.. I'm interested in Witcher 3, but I'll probably skip it due to length.

These reviewers act like we don't exist and all gamers have infinite amounts of time to play games.

LOGICWINS3766d ago

I like shorter games as well for the same reasons u mentioned, but shouldn't these shorter games be priced accordingly?

nX3766d ago

So you value a game only by it's length? I don't even want to know what the budget for this game was but I'm pretty sure that it's not easy to make a profit out of it, even at full price.

LOGICWINS3766d ago

I don't think a game should be valued ONLY by its length. But it should play a major factor in price. Whether or not the game is a remaster should also factor into the price obviously. If the game is a complete edition of a game that has already been out for a year then it should be $30 max. $20 if its a short game.

Griever3766d ago

And what if a game is 100 hours long? Or has hundreds of hours of worth of content? How much would you pay for it? Let us say something like Skyrim or Witcher 3? Are you willing to pay more than $60 for a single game as well? Because the logic would apply both ways. If you want a $60 game to be 30 hours then you should pay $120 for a 60 hours game or $240 for a 120 hour game. You know that argument goes against gamers' interests.

LOGICWINS3766d ago

^^Most gamers wouldn't allow publishers to charge anything over $60 per game overnight. It doesnt work both ways because very few gamers would be okay with $100 games all of a sudden(its technically already happening with DLC, but people dont want to pay that $99.99 all at once). Conversely, 97% of gamers would be okay with prices dropping for titles with less content.

wsoutlaw873766d ago

So you think a game that throws a ton of boring, repetitive, fetch quests should cost more than a game that focused on the quality rather than adding fluff or a pointless open world? I would pay 100x more for the last of us than dragon age (haven't tried the newest one yet). The order could have had you do each mission forward and back multiple times with slight variations, and that would increase the price for you?

Im sick of this trend that gamers think games should be open world, with pointless side quests, and nonsensical map layouts for "variety" to be good. Skyrim wasn't worth the money too me. It was big and had hours of going into caves that were almost all the same and predicable, but had terrible combat, a stupid story, bad ai, and a nonreactive world. The vast majority of people don't finish these long games because they get bored, but still want them. It does seem like some games that put a ton of work in to their missions and story telling, like the witcher, could justify charging more though. A lot do charge more by cutting parts and selling it as dlc (DESTINY)

Taero3765d ago

I actually managed to finish this game out of my huge backlog! For the same reason I bought the $44 Telltale game package as I can finish each episode in a night.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3765d ago
Tankbusta403766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

Most games these days have Multiplayer, therefore when you beat the campaign you are no longer forced to keep replaying it unless you want to. I enjoy a good single player experience as much as the next guy, but this game lacking Multiplayer made up my mind to wait. A game such as this should have awesome 3rd person Multiplayer. You brought up a gears of War comparison... Well gears had a short campaign... But it always had infinite replay ability due to Multiplayer.

I am older as well... 31 with a full time career... But when I spend I'd rather get more out of my purchase than 7 hours. Yes you can play the game 100 times if you want but most simply wont

Silly Mammo3766d ago

I barely ever touch the multiplayer on games that were clearly meant to be a single player game but the developer felt the need to have additional content to seem more of a "value". I tried my hand at Uncharted's multiplayer a couple of times but it didn't hold my attention very long.

ger23963766d ago

True, but very few games offer a quality multiplayer experience. Alot of the time it feels tacked on.

Jaqen_Hghar3766d ago

A man isn't forced to replay them because Uncharted and all that have MP but he never touches it for more than a week at launch. It takes a great SP that a man will go back to at least annually to make a game truly have value and last forever. A man only keeps great SP games in his permanent collection.

wsoutlaw873766d ago

How many games do you need with the same generic, tacked on, multiplayer. As you said gears had it. The order would have be just like that or all the other third person mp games that no one played longer than a week. Why waste time putting that in the game.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3766d ago
Bathyj3766d ago

Shorter games have their pluses.

I mean this whole replayability debate. I'm actually more likely to replay an 8 hour game like The Order than I am a 150 hour game like Skyrim, because I just dont want to go through all that grind again. I loved Skyrim, I sunk weeks into it, and now it sits on my shelf and I'll probably never touch it again for a couple years at least when I want to look back at it with nostalgia and remind myself how good it was.

But a game the length of The Order (which I would call average, not short) I can pick up and play on a weekend to relive it, just like I would watch The Godfather or Lord of the Rings over and over.

Its a lot easier to pick up a game for a second playthrough knowing you can finish it in a few sittings compared to a game you wouldnt pick up again unless you just broke your leg and were going to spend 3 months in bed.

Subaruwrx3766d ago

@Bathyj I agree. I've sunk hundreds of hours into some RPGS and thoroughly enjoyed the experience but I rarely play them again because they take so much time to complete. However, I play games like the Uncharted 1,2,3, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us and Infamous 1,2, SS again and again because they don't take forever to complete. The only 40 plus hour game I've replayed is Persona 4. I played the original PS2 release and am now replaying the Golden version on Vita 6 years later.

nucky643766d ago

I keep my SNES just for mike Tyson punchout - techmo super bowl and "zombies ate my neighbors". keep my ps2 so I can play hotshots golf fore!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3765d ago
CuddlyREDRUM3766d ago

That is called having an opinion.

Dgander3766d ago

Stop damage controlling this rubbish ass game. Even the user score on metacritic suggest its overhyped, undelivered trash. Save your money for Bloodborne and The Witcher.

Majin-vegeta3766d ago

Oh you mean where any troll can make an account and give a game an underscore.Yea man cuz we all know those scores are from legit players *Rolls eyes*

Dgander3766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

We have all seen the play through on youtube. Who are you guys still trying to convince that this game is worth anything more than a pretty display of graphics to look at? Also that 5 - 8 hour play through.....wow. Keep damage controlling rubbish and thats exactly what youre going to get more of.

EDIT: @SoapShoes yeah im so jealous and hurt i dont have this game. Ohh how I wish i spent $60 on The Order and Knack. Those two games right there are so good im going to start a petition on change.org.

SoapShoes3766d ago

Try harder. It must hurt you knowing that people like the game. It must be so confusing to you. LOL!

Master-H3766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

"Even the user score on metacritic " annnd your zero credibility even managed to go into the negative right there.

MysticStrummer3766d ago

Using Metacritic user reviews as evidence of anything about a game's worth…

Priceless

I've played the game and enjoyed it. You admit you haven't played the game, yet you feel so strongly about it you're here trying to convince others it's not good according to your lofty standards. You're just a joke, man.

ger23963766d ago (Edited 3766d ago )

That's your opinion. Out of curiosity, what games do you play?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3766d ago
Show all comments (62)
210°

The Order: 1886 Sequel Would Have Featured Larger-Scale Battles & Multiplayer

A sequel to Sony and Ready At Dawn's action-adventure game, The Order: 1886, would have featured larger-scale battles as well as multiplayer.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
pwnmaster300025d ago

I missed it when games use to have a multiplayer to them.
Hope Sony revives the game at one point

KyRo25d ago

Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, TLOU, Motorstorm. Great times. Its a shame how far they've fallen this generation

Muigi25d ago

Oh they still do…its just the whole game now 😂.

-Foxtrot25d ago

Why add multiplayer when the single player (despite enjoying it for what it was) had flaws?

You'd work out the issues with how you craft the single player then once you’ve perfected it do multiplayer after.

RaidenBlack25d ago

https://www.videogameschron...
"Two sequels were planned for the franchise, The Order 1891 and The Order 1899. While the third game was never in development, Weerasuriya says he had planned where the story of the franchise was planned to go, if he had been able to develop the full trilogy."
...
Alas, we'll also might never get the PC version of 1886, which is currently residing in some dev's hard drive, nearly ready for a release if required.

Charal25d ago

It’s a shame we didn’t gave its chance to this franchise.
Game world was very interesting, and gameplay could have evolved to a major hit with sequels.
Not even speaking about graphics that were way ahead of their time.

Reaper22_25d ago (Edited 25d ago )

If "we" is sony, i agree. I liked the game but it was metacritic that contributed to it's death. It's a shame.

AshleeEmerson25d ago

No, we are "us," the gamers who rated it so low on Metacritic, hurting... Killing its sales. I agree it is a shame. I loved this game.

Charal25d ago

No it is not, it is us has a community which crucified this game, which is happening much too often.

CrimsonWing6925d ago (Edited 25d ago )

I think MP being co-op would’ve been awesome. Essentially, I always viewed this as Sony’s take on the Gears series.

However, it really failed to measure up to what I expected. I definitely saw the potential but there were some things that really bogged it down for me like the forced slow walking segments (which I know was to hide loading), the repetitive warehouse werewolf fights, not enough variety in enemies, oddly we fought more humans than Darkstalkers, and the stealth sections were infuriating.

One thing there’s no denying though, this damn game was a looker. Such a shame at the wasted potential.

Show all comments (16)
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
SimpleSlave122d ago (Edited 122d 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_122d 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.

SimpleSlave121d 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.

coolbeans121d 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.

SimpleSlave121d 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.

Espangerish121d 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.

SimpleSlave121d 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."

-Foxtrot121d 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 121d ago
Inverno122d 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.

1nsomniac122d ago (Edited 122d 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!

thorstein122d ago

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

andy85122d 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_Scum121d 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_132d 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.

DodoDojo131d 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.

ravens52131d ago

Have you played it? Just curious.

ABizzel1131d ago (Edited 131d 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

goken131d ago

Whatever the number, can’t be worst than concord

SimpleDad131d ago

Glad that Alloy Lego is doing great.

Toecutter00131d 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.

Cacabunga130d 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 130d ago
pwnmaster3000131d ago (Edited 131d 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_Box131d ago

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

S2Killinit131d 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.

131d ago
Christopher131d ago

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

blackblades131d 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.

Sabbath1313131d ago

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

Bathyj131d 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.

TheEroica131d ago ShowReplies(2)
mkis007131d ago (Edited 131d 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 130d ago
-Foxtrot132d 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.

neutralgamer1992131d ago (Edited 131d 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-64131d 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-64131d 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

jwillj2k4131d ago (Edited 131d 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.

-Foxtrot131d 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-64131d 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-64131d 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?

jwillj2k4129d 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-64129d ago (Edited 129d 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 129d ago
S2Killinit131d 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.

-Foxtrot131d 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.

RaidenBlack131d ago

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

Relientk77131d 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.

S2Killinit131d ago

But Assassins Creed sold a lot.

Show all comments (57)