Top
420°

Last Chance to Play | The Order: 1886

A critical retrospective on Ready at Dawn’s 2015 PS4 exclusive.

Read Full Story >>
zerolimitgames.com
The story is too old to be commented.
ArchangelMike372d ago

Here's hoping for a PS5 sequel.

NecrumOddBoy372d ago

Agreed. Minus the less than favorable pop-up combat and extremely short linearity, The Order 1886 was a masterpiece elsewhere. Incredible story, dialogue, sound, weapons, lore, environment, visuals, and Sir Gallahad was an incredible hero in this wickedly dark Victorian world. Open the game up a bit, give it more dynamic combat and clean up the little issues; a sequel could be Uncharted huge.

coolbeans371d ago

I'm still totally lost why the story would get such high watermarks from the community, especially one that's a clear example of being incomplete.

ziggurcat371d ago

@coolbeans:

Not a valid criticism. That's akin to criticizing a TV series' story as being "incomplete" because it didn't wrap everything up in a tiny little bow by the end of the very first episode.

DOMination-371d ago

I guess I'm alone on this but I thought the guns in combat were great. It sounded and felt as good as any TPS I played. What was there was really good IMO (minus the stealth level) but there just wasnt enough of it

371d ago
Powerhug371d ago

I'm sorry, but linearity in this day and age is breath of fresh air. Everybody is making MMOs and huge open world games out of every title and they end up being so watered down and empty, that it's just exhausting running all over the place doing the same thing 50 times.

coolbeans371d ago

@ziggurcat

Except that's a false comparison. For starters, [email protected] didn't bill The Order as a 'TV series' to begin with. The second, more important, point is that you're equivocating my 'incomplete' criticism as a season-ending sizzler. The question that hangs in the air of an ongoing TV show is a powerful, BUT good stories don't earn that until the season's main arc comes full circle. This is not accomplished with The Order: 1886. There's the equivalent of a 3rd act missing, a lacking resolution to the previously transpired events.

FlavorLav01371d ago

This “game” was simply amazing! It was marketed poorly and should have sold for $40 at release as a premier Sony “Experience”. It would be a shame to let this IP wither with such ripe potential. Agree with everything stated in your comment :)

ziggurcat371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

@coolbeans:

"@ziggurcat

Except that's a false comparison."

No it's not. You're criticizing a story that was clearly meant to be told over a series of games, not a singular one. You can't expect them to have explained everything away in the first game.

"For starters, [email protected] didn't bill The Order as a 'TV series' to begin with."

They have/had plans to expand on the story via sequels:

“We’ve built this franchise to be much bigger than just one game. There are stories that have been told in the game, but there are stories that haven’t, and stories about what happens after the events of this game.” Weerasuriya goes on, “Absolutely, though, I would love to get the chance to tell more stories with sequels and other things that we can do with the intellectual property.”

https://thegamefanatics.com...

coolbeans371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

@ziggurcat

-"You're criticizing a story that was clearly meant to be told over a series of games, not a singular one."

That is a dishonest presumption of how I'm approaching this criticism, as detailed by my expanded explanation that you conveniently ignored. I'm judging a story that, regardless of how many sequels it is/was meant to have, is still obligated to tell ITS OWN beginning, middle, and end. I believe The Order: 1886 clearly fails in that respect (as I've explained in my long-winded user review posted on N4G). In neither of my comments have I put forth the demand for "everything to be explained" in the first of what they wanted to bill as a franchise.

-"They have/had plans to expand on the story via sequels"

For the sake of being pedantic: this guy never evokes language of it being a "TV Show." Nevertheless, if one feels so strongly about building a franchise and creating sequels, the point I'd previously made about story structure still stands, right? You can still craft a story that FEELS wholly satisfying to the audience without giving away all the answers. The way one makes a story feel incomplete is by failing to reach that subjective threshold. That's where my criticism lies.

So, now the question comes back to you: where do you wish to go from here? Do you wish to build up boring arguments that falsely reframe my actual point or engage me in respect to WHY I've reached that criticism?

If the former: you have no standing if you're just going to keep arguing past me. I'll re-explain how I want a story that feels as though I've experienced a game which feels 'whole' by the time the credits roll and you'll say something to the likes of "it's unfair to demand the first game complete everything all at once."

If the latter: Awesome! I'm at least a bit more open as to hearing your take as to why you thought what you got was 'whole' and worthwhile. Granted, it's not fresh in my memory. 10th-grade writing assignments-turned-story like The Order tend to fade from my memory at a quicker rate, BUT I'm willing to re-jog my memory if I see you're dedicated to pursuing this.

ziggurcat370d ago

"That is a dishonest presumption of how I'm approaching this criticism"

No it's not. That's what you're doing: criticizing a story based on the first episode/first chapter/etc... decrying it for having the "equivalent of a 3rd Act missing" when the story hasn't reached that point yet or complaining about unresolved "previously transpired" events - events that would invariably be resolved at later time in... wait for it... a sequel.

"I'm judging a story that, regardless of how many sequels it is/was meant to have, is still obligated to tell ITS OWN beginning, middle, and end."

It's only the beginning, it's not obligated to tell its own middle or end yet.

"In neither of my comments have I put forth the demand for "everything to be explained" in the first of what they wanted to bill as a franchise."

You certainly have:

"I'm still totally lost why the story would get such high watermarks from the community, especially one that's a clear example of being incomplete."

"The question that hangs in the air of an ongoing TV show is a powerful, BUT good stories don't earn that until the season's main arc comes full circle. This is not accomplished with The Order: 1886. There's the equivalent of a 3rd act missing, a lacking resolution to the previously transpired events."

---

"For the sake of being pedantic: this guy never evokes language of it being a 'TV Show.'"

Semantics. He made it clear that the whole story wasn't intended to be told in one game, and that there were aspects of the game's story that have yet to be addressed.

"You can still craft a story that FEELS wholly satisfying to the audience without giving away all the answers. The way one makes a story feel incomplete is by failing to reach that subjective threshold. That's where my criticism lies."

Sure. And you can also be patient, and allow the story to completely unfold before criticizing it for not giving away all of the answers.

There's no point in you trying to explain the "why" of a criticism that is - in its own nature - already invalid.

coolbeans370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

@ziggurcat

*Sigh*...why am I not surprised to see you decided to go with the former. Anyways...

-"No it's not. That's what you're doing: criticizing a story based on the first episode/first chapter/etc."

I mean...thinking about the overall runtime, I consider it a humorous Freudian slip how much you attribute it to the 'first episode' or 'first chapter'. Once again, I'm criticizing a story presented to the mass audience for $60 (retail) for not ending in a satisfactory way BECAUSE it was incomplete. No sensible person puts down hard cash for the "what will be" of the story later on. No, you have to EARN that up front. How? With good writing and reaching gamer's subjective threshold for what feels like 'enough' of a whole story. Some plot threads can be left up for--wait for it--a sequel too.

-"It's only the beginning, it's not obligated to tell its own middle or end yet."

My god...what is your threshold for what's unacceptable in this respect then? Because I've got news for you: very few gamers are willing to put with forking over a lot of cash for a AAA game that is structurally little more than an opening act. This is such a bad take.

-"You certainly have..."

I can now say for certain you're deliberately misreading my point in order to gain an upper hand here. There is nothing -- I repeat NOTHING -- within my previous statements that demands "everything in the first game needs to be explained." You have quoted me, you somehow thought you caught me, and your assessment has come down as incorrect. Now, I will repeat myself within this comment to unequivocally reject your interpretation of what I'm saying: I don't expect any 'first' in a planned series (be it book, game, movie, etc.) to "explain everything away." Fin.

At the same time, there is such a thing as having too little explained to the point where the story you've literally invested money & time into feels incomplete. Going back to TV shows, successful seasons are ones where developments established early on receive payoff by the end. Not every single part has been resolved, but the seasonal arc has.

-"He made it clear that the whole story wasn't intended to be told in one game, and that there were aspects of the game's story that have yet to be addressed."

That's part of the problem: having a script that's the equivalent of swiss cheese to be filled in by the next game is an easy sign of bad writing. Hundreds of scripts for planned trilogies have been written. Screenwriters, execs, etc. know that in order to reach the end of said trilogy (or series) you need to really nail that first story.

-"Sure. And you can also be patient, and allow the story to completely unfold before criticizing it for not giving away all of the answers."

1.) Again...false personification with "completely" and "not giving away all the answers."
2.) By all means, try selling this idea of an incomplete story in a $60 game to the masses without some exclusivity deal. "Be patient and pony up more cash for the next one where I decide to actually resolve some critical story developments."

-"There's no point in you trying to explain the "why" of a criticism that is - in its own nature - already invalid."

Hah...such nonsense. You've relied on peddling this fake narrative and then finish up your argument with the equivalent of some school-yard argument versus challenging my point. "I don't HAVE to explain anything...you're just wrong because I say so."

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 370d ago
northpaws371d ago (Edited 371d ago )

I feel like they could have done more post launch support something similar to no man's sky, making the game longer would be hard, but perhaps make a PS4 pro patch, or a horde mode to see how long you can survive, to put a better image in gamers' mind. Personally I love the game and can't wait for a sequel, just they need to show their commitment too.

371d ago Replies(3)
Rylo_Ken371d ago

I actually love that game. It’s short but so well executed i didn’t mind the length. We need a sequel 🙏🏻

RebDomine2371d ago

Barlog said he was thinking of a sequel 1887!

CatCouch371d ago

I bought the expensive collector's edition and then got the platinum trophy in one session. Game was only in my PS4 for one day.

And you know what? That's cool. I enjoyed it!

Show all comments (49)
The story is too old to be commented.