By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - The Order: 1886 Attracts “Uncanny Haterade” Says Director

starcraft on 19 February 2015
Fusioncode said:
starcraft said:
Fusioncode said:
starcraft said:

I wouldn't call those poor practices. Poor design choices sure, it's not like the game is short on purpose and has day one DLC. A bad ending is the creative decision of the design team. The Mass Effect 3 ending was also terrible but if it's the ending that Bioware wanted to go with then it's their decision. As for QTEs, I don't like them either but apparantly the design team wanted to use it. It's their game, it's their choice.

Now poor practices should be reserved for games with terrible DLC, lots of microtransactions, and of course all the broken releases we've been getting recently. Now as far as I'm aware The Order doesn't have any of those things. If it did then I could understand why this game attracts so much ridiculous hatred. I understood the Driveclub bashing just fine. The MCC released completely broken at launch and still has tons of issues. I can understand that game being bashed as well. What I find a bit hypocritical is that I've seen you defending MCC quite a bit even though the game did far more harm to the industry than The Order being slightly mediocre ever could. So why are you confused as to why people defend this game? It's the same reason why you and so many others defended the MCC. It's another avenue for the console wars.

The Order isn't screwing consumers over in any way. It's a short, 3rd person shooter with competent mechanics and not much replay value. At worst the game will be mediocre. Why are so many people so personally offended that they need to bash the game and the team every chance they get? 

And using a Rol thread to shut down an argument? Really?

It is absolutely their game, it is absolutely their choice. And its a poor choice. The debate over whether something should be called a choice or a practice seems largely superfluous.

I don't recall ever, ever defending MCC releasing with launch issues. It was completely unacceptable, and I will thank you to stop trying to strawman me (and others in this thread) to try and win an entirely unrelated argument.

I think you summed it up best: "It's a short, 3rd person shooter with competent mechanics and not much replay value. At worst the game will be mediocre." Given the game's length, this was a fantastic opportunity to look at things like varied launch priced, $50 or even $40 for example. As we've just discussed, competent mechanics does not mean good mechanics. QTE's are an outdated practice, certainly on the scale they appear to be present in this game. Others have raised their relevance in games like God of War, where they perform a function normal gameplay could not - and to an extent I agree. That does not appear to be the case here.

But ultimately I have not taken a side in the way you appear to believe I have. People are defending a game they have not played, in a way that is clearly premature, just the same as others are attacking a game they have not played, in a way that is premature. The reason I highlighted Rol's thread is because it successfully articulates that point. People are attacking this game because its an exclusive, for sure. But an enormous number of people are also defending this game because its an exclusive.

We'll know more in just under two hours - but it won't surprise me if its immediately obvious that had this game been a multiplatform game, no one would ever have felt the need to discuss it - or buy it.

After that, and especially after I (hopefully) rent and play the game on Saturday, I am happy to discuss our impressions further.

I wasn't trying to strawman you.

But yes I agree, a $40 price point would have been a lot smarter for his game. But that's more an industry problem with their obsession with $60 price tags. Anything less than that and people will yell "lol indie game".

On this we completely agree.

This ridiculous notion that all games are created equal is insane. Dragon Age: Inquisition has greater value than Madden version 100.

And The Order - so many arguments about this game's length and value would be completely neutralised at $40...even $50 would help that cause.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
bananaking21 on 19 February 2015
Kerotan said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

 

Not even sure where to begin on how wrong you are.

1. Not all of those games on that list are games I bought. I Gamefly'd Wolfenstein. As well as Madden 25, since I already owned the PS3 version.  I can provide a snapshot of my GF rental history if you'd like. Why did I not buy Wolfenstein? Because I was not sure it would be worth $60. I ended up getting a ton of play time out of it and all 1000 achievement points. It was an awesome game.

2. Do not bother trying to compare the cut scenes and play time of Wolfenstein to that of The Order. Maybe you haven't watched any of The Order playthroughs on YouTube? I watched most of it while cleaning yesterday. It's like people trying to compare it to the QTE's in Ryse. They clearly do not know what they are talking about, and are in for a surprise when/if they ever play both games.

3. You seem to be under the impression I believe no one can buy The Order for $60 and not get their monies worth? I haven't said that. Bioshock is one of my all time favorite games, #2 on the recent "best 100 ever" list or whatever here, IIRC. And MGS was #1. Both of those games you can breeze through and finish in no time flat. However, both of those games has elements that allow for much longer play throughs, as well as replaying it entirely. From what I have seen, The Order has none of that. But that's not even the point. All I was addressing is what the thread is about, the "uncanny haterade". Gribble posted that list as if any game in the future that is guilty of any single one of those negative elements deserves the hate The Order has gotten. I am just saying it's guilty of all of them, at the same time, plus more he didn't even list. Throwing out a linear game I enjoyed like Wolfenstein won't change that. Mostly because I didn't buy Wolfenstein, but also because Wolfenstein does not also share all of those faults.

Hope that helps.


So you're saying you lied in the thread about how much you spent on Wolfenstein?  Unless it was a $60 rental. The reality is ryse and the order will have about the same amounts of gameplay.  Wolfenstein I can beat in about 6 hours on easy. It had a lot of cutscenes that took a good bit of time added up. 

 

Despite that long reply you've not proven anything except that you lied about spending $60 on Wolfenstein.  And according to the post is just linked you also spent $60 on ryse.  That's $120 for 2 linear campaign only games.  

 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6596935


BEST 


POST

EVER

 

ohh the lies and hypocrisy!!

 

no way out of this, you cought him red handed. and its clear why he is in here, just to bash the order. bravo sir, bravo. 



Aerys on 19 February 2015
bananaking21 said:
Kerotan said:


So you're saying you lied in the thread about how much you spent on Wolfenstein?  Unless it was a $60 rental. The reality is ryse and the order will have about the same amounts of gameplay.  Wolfenstein I can beat in about 6 hours on easy. It had a lot of cutscenes that took a good bit of time added up. 

 

Despite that long reply you've not proven anything except that you lied about spending $60 on Wolfenstein.  And according to the post is just linked you also spent $60 on ryse.  That's $120 for 2 linear campaign only games.  

 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6596935


BEST 


POST

EVER

 

ohh the lies and hypocrisy!!

 

no way out of this, you cought him red handed. and its clear why he is in here, just to bash the order. bravo sir, bravo. 

Hypocrisy, its what should deserve all this hate



Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:

 PS4: 17m   XB1: 10m    WiiU: 10m   Vita: 10m

 

tiffac on 19 February 2015

All I can say is...

THIS THREAD IS ON FIRE!!!! xD

The endless back and fort, personal opinions justified and downplayed. This is pure GOLD.

Someone needs to sticky this thread pronto. So when the crow eating, tear jerking starts. We can all look back and count the bodies. lol!



ofrm1 on 19 February 2015
Dana Jan said:

“It takes a lot more effort to say something nice than to say something negative, and I think people are excited to jump on some bandwagon of negativity.”

No it doesn't. It takes the exact same amount of effort.

 

“I just feel like these days it’s so easy to be negative and I think the internet is the new playground for bullies. Who goes out of their way to really go and say something positive, right?

“If you go out to a restaurant and you have a good time, do you go online immediately to post something? But if you have a bad experience, you’ll jump on because you want to warn people about it right? It takes a lot more effort to say something nice than to say something negative, and I think people are excited to jump on some bandwagon of negativity."

Not only is this patently untrue, it comes across as just tactless whining because you're receiving criticism.


“I don’t think people need to go out there and be unbiased supporters of our stuff or anything either. I want them to make up their own minds about the game period. It just seems like the pendulum swings the other way so frequently. I mean, we’ll see, right?”

Yeah. So how about we wait until the game releases before we write all people off as misanthropes who only see what's wrong with the world instead of what's right.

Thanks for making my decision not to buy your game that much easier by complaining about your target demographic.



Around the Network
forevercloud3000 on 19 February 2015

I think most of the hating is emanating from non PS4 owners who are looking for things to validate their non purchase. The allusion that nothing on PS4 is good enough or "It has no games" when it is entirely the opposite. I obviously have not played this game yet but it has been a long time coming with this kind of backlash. I am a bit torn myself on how to feel about this game...

-For one, the demoing and previews of this game were terribly done. The showed basically nothing for a year and when they finally did....... underwhelming. Some can see past this to know they were keeping cards close to the chest but others were like "Where is the gameplay? Pre0rder cancelled"
-Yet....... to play devil's advocate for a second, the game might actually have some huge flaws. Its kind of crazy when you think this game might have been in development for like 4+ years only to produce a game that is just over 5hrs long but visually stunning. Is that really enough? It doesn't even have multiplayer to spice things up, or at least an arcade-y hoard mode. I just think this game's closest kin, The Last of Us executed the balance they seemed to be going for perfectly. Between cinematic flare and heart pumping gameplay......in an experience that lasted over 15hrs first playthrough.....AND told a phenomenal story. This isn't even talking about the fact it also had multiplayer which it didn't have to cuz it was a 10/10 without it.
-Then again......I love Heavenly Sword, a game that takes like 6hrs to beat and has little to no replay value. It told a concise and amazing story that I still think about till this day. I am skeptical The Order can be that game for many tho.

I think the PewPewDie crowd need to understand that some enjoy games more refined than kill count twitch stuff yet Ready At Dawn should be taking all this negative input in....don't rest your entire game on the idea of being cinematic and end up forgetting that it needs to keep the player involved and if you are not going to have Multiplayer in this day and age you better be able to keep the player well invested for longer than a day(Free Story based DLC maybe? Or DLC Multiplayer that it should of had)



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

forevercloud3000 on 19 February 2015
RolStoppable said:
starcraft said:
Fusioncode said:

I wasn't trying to strawman you.

But yes I agree, a $40 price point would have been a lot smarter for his game. But that's more an industry problem with their obsession with $60 price tags. Anything less than that and people will yell "lol indie game".

On this we completely agree.

This ridiculous notion that all games are created equal is insane. Dragon Age: Inquisition has greater value than Madden version 100.

And The Order - so many arguments about this game's length and value would be completely neutralised at $40...even $50 would help that cause.

But you two realize that The Order 1886 has very high production values and development costs due to its graphics and extensive cinematics with motion capturing, right? A launch price of anything lower than $60 isn't even up for debate for such a game.

That's really the problem with this kind of game. What it's aiming for leads to a short length while at the same it costs a lot to realize its vision. If you compromised the vision, you could sell it for a cheaper price; but with such a compromise you would lose the selling point, so the cheaper price wouldn't raise the perceived value.

I love great graphics as much as the next person but personally I am getting stagnated with it all. Uncharted/TLOU lovel is more than good enough for me if it means they can spend more time creating actual content for me to play/experience and less tweaking shaders and lighting. This obsession some developers have with Technological Masterbation is just exhausting. COD is ugly as sin but sells millions, why? because many people find it fun. You can make a game that is Cinematic and it not have to use only the most top notch exspensive techniques to pull it off.

And price point is essential. To the consumer, we don't care you wasted billions creating realistic clothe physics, if your realistic cloth game only last 5hrs and has no source of replay value, it shouldn't be for full retail price when we are getting games with longer campaigns AND MP for the same price. I think I will really love The Order....but admittedly it doesn't seem worth 60 and I might grab it used now to save a few bucks.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

Insidb on 19 February 2015

I wasn't trying to strawman you.

But yes I agree, a $40 price point would have been a lot smarter for his game. But that's more an industry problem with their obsession with $60 price tags. Anything less than that and people will yell "lol indie game".

On this we completely agree.

This ridiculous notion that all games are created equal is insane. Dragon Age: Inquisition has greater value than Madden version 100.

And The Order - so many arguments about this game's length and value would be completely neutralised at $40...even $50 would help that cause.

Therein lies the problem: a Madden fan will thow DA in the trash and say, "What is this shit!? I wouldn't take it, even if you PAID me to play that nerd crap!" They would probably do this before or after the release of Madden 101, too (In all fairness, they already know what they're getting.). Value is relative to each individual's perception, and the perception is based upon experience. This game may very well be worth it's $60 pricetag, but everyone should bottle up until they have an actual experience to reference.



Insidb on 19 February 2015
RolStoppable said:
starcraft said:
Fusioncode said:

I wasn't trying to strawman you.

But yes I agree, a $40 price point would have been a lot smarter for his game. But that's more an industry problem with their obsession with $60 price tags. Anything less than that and people will yell "lol indie game".

On this we completely agree.

This ridiculous notion that all games are created equal is insane. Dragon Age: Inquisition has greater value than Madden version 100.

And The Order - so many arguments about this game's length and value would be completely neutralised at $40...even $50 would help that cause.

But you two realize that The Order 1886 has very high production values and development costs due to its graphics and extensive cinematics with motion capturing, right? A launch price of anything lower than $60 isn't even up for debate for such a game.

That's really the problem with this kind of game. What it's aiming for leads to a short length while at the same it costs a lot to realize its vision. If you compromised the vision, you could sell it for a cheaper price; but with such a compromise you would lose the selling point, so the cheaper price wouldn't raise the perceived value.

An analogy is Jurassic World without any actors, because they spent the whole budget on dinosaur CGI.

"But did you see the dinosaurs!? $20 please."