James Wynne Writes: If The Order: 1886 is a new branch in the evolution of gaming, I hope it’s an evolutionary dead end.
Lame. Making the argument again that the cost of the game should factor into its reception, when this hasn't been considered seriously in gaming since its inception. Also once again treating context-sensitive button prompts as qtes, instead of just being atypical of control schemes for games. Lame.
Was price not considered in past games like Titanfall when it was revealed that the game would only have multiplayer? Many people questioned the full price of the game when there was no SP or other features (which were later added). Context sensitive button prompts are not QTE"s but are now atypical control schemes? I guess those full motion video games of past years for Sega CD should be considered as movie interactive fun watch time with option directional movement atypical to its control genre. Lets redefine everything in video game history just for the sake of defending this game.
A multiplayer only game takes less work to make in comparison to a game with a single player story so your reference to Titanfall, while revealing, isn't very relevant to the subject. Shall we go back through gaming history and downgrade scores for single player only games? That's what needs to be done if your logic is the right way to think.
What!? Please provide proof that a multiplayer game which has just as long as a development cycle, animation, programming, marketing, QA, not to mention balancing, multiple maps, stress testing and voice work takes less time than a single player game. "Shall we go back through gaming history and downgrade scores for single player only games? That's what needs to be done if your logic is the right way to think." How is that my logic? No where did I ever suggest that ever. I think it's your logic that needs to be questioned here.
Defense of this garbage is lame.
Calling a game garbage when it's not is lame exaggeration. The game got a mediocre reception. That doesn't make it garbage. I've played games with worse gameplay and higher scores many times through the years.
"The Order: 1886 is a new branch in the evolution of gaming" ....the fact that anyone is saying this just means they play a bit too many console games. I game on both, and on PC many, many exploration titles exist, story focused titles etc. They are short, limited in game play, focus on story etc. Many games do this that are trying to focus on other things vs just shooting stuff. The Walking Dead, Heavy Rain, Beyond Two Souls etc Gaming is diverse, most who don't get The Order, likely haven't play much games if they really ,really think this is something new.
What are you talking about? Pricepoint is allways important relative to what you get. It's called Bang for the buck. It decides, if you feel you made a bargain, if a price is considered fair or if you feel ripped off. X1 for 199$. <<< Awesome. Give me two. PS4 for 799$ <<< Keep your overprized garbage. The reception of a product is very dependent on the price. Look up the recent articles on the Steam Machines. Everybody would be totally hyped, if they wouldn't be so expansive compared to a selfbuild gaming rig. Or remember the reception, when Sony revealed the PS4s pricepoint? To get on topic: The Order would have gotten better reception for a lower pricepoint. Like it or not; for 60$ you just get better games (maybe not more beautiful).
No so much. PS3 outsold 360 with a cheaper price point.... For some years, the 360 was cheaper then the Wii.... Yet it was in 3rd. A lot of it has to do with what are you offering. Folks will pay the price if they feel the product warrants it. " The Order would have gotten better reception for a lower pricepoint. " The Order would not have as I feel what most reviewers felt about the game was based on experiences with other games outside the genre of what the order actually is to begin with. The died hype behind the Steam machines is due in part to the actual specs of them, not just the price. Some of the specs are not even meeting 2X PS4 or XONE specs which is rule of thumb what one wants to seek if the wish to even meet next gen performance. Without optimization, that is what PS4 and XONE's would actually cost if they were more PC then console.
enough of the bad publicity. the controversy is only going to make The Order sell well. if it got 6/10 scores and no one cared it would have flopped the way it deserved to. remember controversy creates cash. let this trash rot in the bargain bins were it belongs.
How very intellectually stimulating of you!
Great game...I hope there is a sequel!!!
You don't have to hope, there WILL be a sequel, it's probably almost finished already!
I highly doubt that....but I'm sure they can take away what they learned about the 1st game, and look at the constructive criticism and not the bashing for the hell of it ones. Then the 2nd one might trump the 1st...
no. I hope they merely make a sequel to what they delivered with The Order. I see no reason to turn the game into something its not. If I played The Walking Dead 1 and felt it should be open world, have MP, co-op, skill tree etc. Should they make Walking Dead 2 this way? Soooo make it the way you wanted it to be? Maybe you should actually just play a game that has those features, you might have missed the point of the game entirely.
I'd love a sequel that gives more freedom in weapon choices, has better AI, less QTEs of the pointless variety, and more interactivity. I don't want multiplayer, but if the story is short I either want a price that reflects that or reasons to put the game back into my PS4 after the credits roll, something the first game failed to provide.
Great article, some very valid points here.
I'm looking forward to the eventual sequel. The Order was a fantastic experience.
I was really hesitant to buy this game because of the bad publicity but I'm glad I did. It wasn't amazing but it wasnt a waste of time either. It's one of only three games I have on the PS4, because I play mostly on the XB1. I'd say given the ryse comparison The Order was more engaging but way less gameplay. The story is slow in the beginning but gets really good and I'm hoping for a sequel.
The problem I see with this author and is common now days with many mainly young gamers is that they think that a game is useless once you clock it. This mindset is new in gaming and is problematic. As now you see many dev are mostly focusing on adding tacked on MP or looking at ways to artificially prolong game play times. Some are even producing mostly paid DLC and micro transaction to further prolong game playtime. What is ironic is that these same gamers in turn complain about these same things. What then we end up with is the death of focused SP games that has been the hallmark of gaming since the 3rd generation of console gaming. I still play defenders and missile command on my atari from time to time the same way I still replay MGS and MGS 2 on my PS2. Their value is not tied to any artificially inflated game mechanics. If the future of gaming is about long hours of slog so that I can get a legendary item or leveling up my character so that I can feel great about myself then count me out. I honestly don't have the time to do such useless things and my time is better use somewhere else. I will just continue to replay my classic games from time to time while you kids waste your time increasing your online egos.
Hello, I'm the writer of this article. You seem to have gotten confused somewhere in the article. Nowhere did I champion useless add-ons to a single player game. I almost exclusively praised single player games in my comparisons. In fact we both seem to enjoy replay value in our single player experiences more than gaudy additions and shoehorned multiplayer. My complaint about the game is that it has nothing to really justify the price tag. The game is really short and has virtually no replay value whatsoever. The Order 1886 isn't like MGS2 where you can go back and play different encounters, fool around with different enemies, use a sizable arsenal of weapons, find secrets and easter eggs,unlock bonuses, etc. I compared The Order: 1886 to DMC: Definitive, because both are single player AAA games. DMC didn't have tacked on multiplayer, online isn't forced down your throat, and though it did it have DLC it didn't need it. DMC to me is the same as those "classic games" as you put it. I can pick up a controller right now and enjoy myself for the next four to six hours. I can't do that with The Order: 1886, which was the point of my article. You may counter that comparison by saying that people will pay a much higher price for a much smaller portion of a great steak, but that only applies when you actually make a great steak. To me, The Order: 1886 was the equivalent of Wolfgang Puck trying to cook a frozen dollar store steak. You can make it look pretty, but it's still not worth $60. However, that's another discussion altogether, and Angry Joe recently did a much more thorough break down than I could do in this comment section. Now I'm aware some people really love this game, and more power to them. I myself got the game for free from an acquaintance that I don't really care for, and I felt bad that he spent sixty bones on it. I then gave it the Sonic Boom treatment: I sold the game and donated the money to the Ronald McDonald House charity so I could feel like something good came of the whole ordeal. Thank you for your time.
Its a slippery slope if you go that route. GTA5 for example offers way more content than most regular games so should it be priced more say 100?. How about Star Craft or Age of Empire?. A AAA a game meaning a blockbuster/high production game that cost a certain amount should be cost accordingly and that cost right now is the standard 60. The Order is not an indie game. It is a Sony AAA production game. AAA games budget is normally north of 10 million nowdays. It is why when certain games reach this threshold in budget they are priced accordingly. Any dev can tack on MP and add co-op and completely skim on graphics, story and production values. Should that game still cost at $60 because it has MP and co-op meaning more playtime but c grade production value?. My point is the price for these games is not necessarily about the game play length as most people like you are using against games like the Order. No, the price is determined on mostly the production value which is tied to the budget. Normally the higher the budget the higher the production value the higher the production value means AAA production game and such is priced accordingly. Again. This mindset you have that once a game is clocked then it's of no use is wrong. Since the 1st gen of gaming a game is played and finished like a movie. You play it then replay it later when you want to the same way you can re-watch movies if you want to. It is the reason why we old time gamers have what we call a game collection.
If it's not worth it to you at $60, then shut up and wait for it to come down in price or rent it. This is not rocket science. You don't have to complain online about how much you don't understand about adopting games.
That's a pretty narrow point of view. The purpose of being a critic of games, or anything really, is to inform the consumer. If a consumer finds a critic that matches their tastes, instead of just blindly following a pointlessly stupid aggregate score, and weighs said critic's opinion when considering their decisions, then the consumer can make a more informed choice as to whether or not a game is for them. As such, critics should be telling people a game isn't worth their money when they feel it isn't worth their hard earned $20, let alone $60. A critic that shares similar tastes with you can save you a lot of money and disappointment. It's not like I want to tell people The Order 1886 is a below average game with above average looks. I'd much rather be telling them that RAD did an amazing job with the game and earned every cent of that $60 price tag, but I'd be lying if I said I thought it was anything more than a pretty face.
So, maybe halo and cod should be 3/10 games if you don't play multiplayer by the same consideration as they have short, crap campaigns, which are also linear with generic gameplay and replayability?
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.