How Come Nobody Complained About The Long Hardline Cut-Scenes?

Everyone bashed The Order: 1886 for having long cut-scenes and for being linear. But a very similar title just came out, and we're not seeing the same flak.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
KiwiViper851516d ago

Because the majority of the community buys Battlefield for multiplayer, and a single player campaign is just icing on the cake.

The order has no cake, just icing. Sure it's delicious but you get sick after a couple of wooden spoonful's.

DarkOcelet1516d ago (Edited 1516d ago )

You eat your cake by a wooden spoon lol. Thats a first. JK.

OT: The MP is bad in Hardline btw.

KiwiViper851516d ago

Icing with a wooden spoon.

Cake with a shovel.

Dan_scruggs1516d ago

Yeah and after 6 mediocre hours of a campaign in The Order the is no multiplayer at all. So what would you rather have.

SolidStoner1515d ago

battlefield is a multiplayer game, sorry but if you buy battlefield for single player you must be missing something... I hardly do not recommend to buy it for single player since its childish, unrealistic arcade shooter with unrealistic characters and similar scenes from TV show.. same goes almost for almost all battlefield and COD single player stories.. all fake, all boring, all with unrealistic battles, explosions.. its just stupid.. you have to be a retard or a 9 year old to play these things..

at least in multiplayer battles are hold down by real players who do realistic things... and they can kill you, so no one man army there.. you have to work in team, and that's adds lots of immersion.. I talk about hardcore mode conquest of course!

WitWolfy1516d ago (Edited 1516d ago )

Did you ever watch Angry Joe's review on Hardline??? Because Hardline's MP is like a 1/10th in scale compared to BF4 FOR THE SAME PRICE!!! So your sad excuse of MP is where its at come back is such a fanboy retort.

andibandit1515d ago

So Hardlines MP isnt particurlarly good, we already knew that. You could still sell Hardline if there was no single player because there is a market for the MP portion.
Hardline with no singler player is a dead horse, and it would get slaughtered in reviews problably below 6/10 all around.

so yeah MP is where it's at, for alot of games.

WCxAlchemist1515d ago (Edited 1515d ago )

I thank the Lord above i dont base games i want/should play off a review from a guy on youtube..

Thank you Jesus for common sense and allowing me to think for myself

On topic: This is the WORST comparison ever LoL why not we jus Compare The order to skyrim better yet those cutscenes from Gta5 LoL. Not suprised this article came from a site called psxextreme.

freshslicepizza1515d ago

you are talking about two separate issues. hardline is getting poor reviews because it's not a very good battlefield game compared to the others. with the order the game is short to begin with so of course the (unskippable) cutscenes are more of an issue because without them the game is even shorter. if they added online multiplayer it would have added more replay value.

Apollosupreme1515d ago (Edited 1515d ago )

This was only my second Battlefield game; the last being BF3. The reason I bought it was the cops and robbers angle with battlefield elements intrigued me. Not to mention EA gives you 24 hours for full refund if you're unsatisfied. I gamed the hell out of it the first day I bought it to make sure I liked it; like five hours of MP and it was enough to make me want to keep the game.

Now 25-30 hours in I still really enjoy the game. I love the maps and modes. I've experienced virtually no technical problems as well.

I have not played a single minute of the campaign but based on MP I would give it a 90/100. It checks all the boxes for me: gameplay, game modes, consistency, quality, performance, graphics, overall fun and enjoyment. I really like the game but no one is perfect so a 90% grade is very fair.

I am getting my moneys worth and I have no desire to go through the campaign yet. This makes me question whether reviewers should approach this types of games differently with three scores: 1. Single player score, 2. Multiplayer score and 3. Overall score *influenced by overall enjoyment of the reviewer when playing the game.

This game has Battlefield in the name but never claims to be your typical Battlefield and didn't come out at a time of year you typically get a regular Battlefield. Yet here we are seeing people penalizing the game for essentially not being Battlefield 3 or 4 with a fresh coat of paint. Get past the name and get to the game. You may highly enjoy what you experience.

*I own the PC version.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1515d ago
joab7771516d ago

Yeah. I think the answer to this question is obvious.

And I had no issue w the Orders cutscenes and story. It was damn good. My problem lie in the filler they called comabt, the simplicity of boss battles and collectibles, and the fact that they didn't even add trophies for replayability.

I rented it for 5 days and returned it two days later. It could be great! I don't want them to give up on the IP, but damn.

It IS a PS4 tech demo. Thats what it is! They need to play Resistance, Gears, Mass Effect, and The Last of Us (especially).

Septic1515d ago

Who writes this nonsense? Seriously? The clue is in the name of the website I guess but the victim complex is just lame. The Order was cack. Battlefield Hardline is NOT a very similar game ffs. The lengths people go to give their tears some weight.

isa_scout1515d ago

Preach brother. I feel the exact same way. I platinumed it in about 11 hours. That was two roughly 6 hour long playthroughs. Now what? I traded that poor excuse of a game in on Tuesday for Bloodborne. And even though I've got my ass handed to me at least 30 times it's still a much more fun game.

thief1515d ago

Because adding a mediocre, done it before a dozen times, generic multiplayer with a few maps is enough to make a game great

Funnily enough though, when killzone launched with an excellent, slightly offbeat but different multiplayer, all the reviews focused on the single player (which was admittedly average, but still better tthan the usual cod / battlefield nonsense. Any guesses why?

starchild1515d ago

Maybe, but if you'll read the reviews, many thought the multiplayer wasn't that special either.

parentsbasement1515d ago

"The order has no cake, just icing. Sure it's delicious but you get sick after a couple of wooden spoonful's. "

that may be the best analogy of this game I ever read ....

3-4-51515d ago

* How come nobody is complaining ?

Because we aren't Lying Media Click Bait Wannabe Hack Journalists who try to instill fear into ever living human being just to sell their agenda or make ad money.

It's like the video game media can't handle when we are happy.

It's like they NEED drama.


+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1515d ago
DarkOcelet1516d ago

"I'd just love an explanation for this obvious double standard. But I imagine I won't get one."

Its funny that this question is coming from the ones who were bashing The Order 1886 and Sony with worthless clickbait articles. Double standard much.

And to answer the question, most likely people will say because it had Multiplayer which was quarter the content of what BF4 had.

krypt19831516d ago

Totally different hardline sets and ends the episodes with cut scenes while the order is littered with them everywhere period. why are you fan boys still butt hurt about the order jesus go play bloodborne and move on

Volkama1515d ago

"bloodborne is going to get terrible reviews too, journalists are already preparing the excuses because it is a Sony exclusive" - Those same conspiracy nuts, 2 weeks ago

Death1516d ago

72 minutes of cutscenes according to the video. The Order was more than twice that. The other difference is in replay value. Without the addition of an online mode, The Order doesn't offer much more. Hardline's multiplayer mode adds as many hours to the game as you want.

maniacmayhem1516d ago

Also these articles have to understand that The Order being linear and long cut scenes were just a couple of problems in it's long list of problems that a lot of people complained about.

And yes, Hardline has it's multiplayer which gives users a choice and gives the game extra legs that The Order never offered it's users but should have.

thief1515d ago

Which is why grim fandango, order of the colossus, thief 1/2, half life and resident evil were all crappie games

Spotie1515d ago

The Order is a story-heavy single player game; it SHOULD have more cutscene than Battlefield. That's called being relative.

Similarly, replay value wouldn't come from an online mode, because it's a single player game. Like a movie- and recall that it IS intended to be a cinematic experience, so that applies- replay value is in enjoying its story. Not necessarily immediately, either, though that appears to be the only way that "gamers" judge things these days. Trying to say The Order needs online in order to have replay value is silly.

The point is that The Order was criticized for its many and lengthy cutscenes, though this should have been in relation to its genre and story. On the other hand, Hardline has a considerable amount of cutscene, more than your average fps- a genre that doesn't usually need much in the way of cutscenes, particularly when the draw is multiplayer instead of single player- and nobody even cares.


Death1515d ago

The Last of Us is an excellent example of a story driven single player oriented game. The story is very good and told very well without relying on cutscenes as heavily as the Order did. TLOU didn't "need" a multiplayer component, but the inclusion of one enhanced the replay value of the game.

You say no one cares about Hardline's single player component. I guess that is why no one is complaining about having cutscenes. Do you think if the Order had some type of multiplayer element it would have been better received? Apparently people can forgive a lackluster campaign if there is a decent multiplayer mode. What is hard to defend is a lackluster campaign with no additional modes of play.

magiciandude1515d ago

Well then that's why The Order 1886 got a low critical reception. The game doesn't have much going for it other than some relatively short story-driven single player mode with relatively shallow game mechanics, abundant cutscene, and an easy platinum for the completist type. The game tried to be more of a movie than an actual game. How surprising that gamers didn't judge the game how you wished...

maniacmayhem1515d ago

Your continued defense of why this game is lacking is truly baffling, it makes absolutely no sense.

You say the replay value is in enjoying the story, but what if there's no joy in the story, not everyone enjoyed that clichéd story as much as you pretend. Especially when that same story left so many holes and plot points wide open for the all to well-known sequel that [email protected] will obviously make.

"The point is that The Order was criticized for its many and lengthy cutscenes,",that were drawn out, boring and served no point but to hide the loading of the next scene or to throw in a surprise QTE the gamer's way.

Your last paragraph is equally puzzling as you start to make up what is required for a specific genre. Where is this rule written?

And nobody even cares? Wow, that strawman! Just a minute ago I read from some on here and also you that you prefer single player more than multiplayer. Could this game be trying to cater to both crowds? Naaaaw, I guess "gamers" only want one or the other.

DemonSlayer4201516d ago ShowReplies(1)
OB1Biker1516d ago

In May, The Witcher 3 graphics 'downgrade' vs The Order.
In June, Galahad didn't become Batman at the ending of the Order and nobody complained?
In July, The Order QTE vs GOW

Show all comments (61)
The story is too old to be commented.