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

Forums - Sony - The Order 1886 Review Thread - Meta: 66

VanceIX on 19 February 2015

I said it multiple times in the past and got shut down each time for it, but turns out I was spot on with my assessment. Any game that thrown around words like "cinematic" and "QTE" should never be trusted with a pre-order, unless the developer is someone like Naughty Dog. It's essentially the Ryse for PS4, with slightly better graphics and a slightly more generic story.

Let this be another in a series of lessons to not pre-order games.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
Euphoria14 on 19 February 2015
Normchacho said:

So just for fun I've been doing some...I guess you could call it analysis on the reviews so far (44 on meta).

The exact same number of reviews gave the game between a 60 and 64, as gave the game between an 80 and 84. (Which I count as a personal win since I predicted the game would be quite divisive)

Removing both the highest and lowest score only changes the average by about .34 points.

Half of all reviews are at or below 70, the other half are at or above.

Edit: since I started typing more reviews have been added, one at 50, the other at 80. (see, divisive)

Edit 2: This game could easily become a poster child for why I don't use meta to make purchasing decisions.

I noticed the same last time I checked Metacritic. It was something like 18 green and 22 yellow reviews.

Games like this are almost always very divisive. It's a love it or hate it title.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

dukerx2 on 19 February 2015

Well this is disappointing..But il wait till I play it till I play it before passing judgement.



Normchacho on 19 February 2015
Angelus said:
thismeintiel said:
Angelus said:

Not if you also take off the ridiculous above average scores 

Lol, those aren't ridiculous.  If those reviewers thought it was that good of a game, then they are more than welcome to give it that.  However, one cannot objectively give it a below average, especially a 20, while talking about how well the game performs technically and visually, without losing credibility.  If you think it's just an average game with great visuals, then fine, rate it that way.  But to rate it so low, either to try and make a point or just for the clicks, is the reason why people are slowly turning away from gaming sites.

Ohhh I get

People can objectively have a very high opinion of incredibly mediocre games, but they can't objectively have a very low opinion of them. That does make more sense now that I think about it

His reasoning makes no sense, but I sort of see the point he's getting at. The highest score, is 9 points higher than the second highest score. The lowest score is 20 points lower than the second lowest score.

Also, 40% of the remaining review scores sit within 20 points of that highest score. The point being that the low score is a far greater outlier than the high score.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

thismeintiel on 19 February 2015
Angelus said:
thismeintiel said:
Angelus said:

Not if you also take off the ridiculous above average scores 

Lol, those aren't ridiculous.  If those reviewers thought it was that good of a game, then they are more than welcome to give it that.  However, one cannot objectively give it a below average, especially a 20, while talking about how well the game performs technically and visually, without losing credibility.  If you think it's just an average game with great visuals, then fine, rate it that way.  But to rate it so low, either to try and make a point or just for the clicks, is the reason why people are slowly turning away from gaming sites.

Ohhh I get

People can objectively have a very high opinion of incredibly mediocre games, but they can't objectively have a very low opinion of them. That does make more sense now that I think about it

Lol, let's not BS here.  People sometimes use their scores to make a point or for the clicks.  If you are the least bit objective, which I don't expect you to be about this game (I mean you are defending a 20), there is no way to rate this below average.  Average?  Fine.  But, hey, if you want to start knocking off the top scores, I'm all for that if we are also including XBO games.  Ryse definitely didn't deserve that 86, right? 



 

Around the Network
jlmurph2 on 19 February 2015
Acevil said:
jlmurph2 said:


Really? lol no game? Ever?


Well they used the word literally.


Which is baffling since that includes the best looking PC games.



deskpro2k3 on 19 February 2015

I was expecting 1 and 2s, but 5.5 and 8 is higher than I expected.



jlmurph2 on 19 February 2015
shikamaru317 said:
jlmurph2 said:

Which is baffling since that includes the best looking PC games.

Yep, it's silly. The Order looks good, but it doesn't look as good as Crysis 3 running on a high end PC. 


How is anyone supposed to take that review seriously? Not even the people in its own comments do.



sundin13 on 19 February 2015
dukerx2 said:
BMaker11 said:

And, like I predicted, this game didn't do that great, critically. I dunno what Polygon was talking about, R@D having a "rock solid track record". They have no track record when it comes to original ideas. Only taking other people's games and repeating the formula (Daxter from J&D, GoW PSP games, and an Okami port). We have no precedent to think that their own IP would be "rock solid".

Glad I didn't get my hopes up for this. Yes, we should try and support new studios and cultivate new ideas/IPs, but when your forte is re-hashing established IPs, with proven formulas, I take your "original" idea with a grain of salt. Because they probably thought highly of themselves based on their resume (their previous games at 80+ metas) and thought that that would translate into their own game. That rarely works.

What are you talking about. The game is getting praise for its story, atmosphere, and the world it creates. The Order is original when it comes to those areas. 


I've heard reviews state ceaselessly "the characters are forgettable", or "the world is shallow", or that the interesting plot threads often fall by the wayside...I don't think original is really what reviews are saying. Pretty, sure, but original? I think most reviewers concede that The Order's story is often cliche and predictable, and certainly doesn't hold up to its lofty visions



Angelus on 19 February 2015
thismeintiel said:
Angelus said:

thismeintiel said:

 Lol, those aren't ridiculous.  If those reviewers thought it was that good of a game, then they are more than welcome to give it that.  However, one cannot objectively give it a below average, especially a 20, while talking about how well the game performs technically and visually, without losing credibility.  If you think it's just an average game with great visuals, then fine, rate it that way.  But to rate it so low, either to try and make a point or just for the clicks, is the reason why people are slowly turning away from gaming sites.

 

Ohhh I get

People can objectively have a very high opinion of incredibly mediocre games, but they can't objectively have a very low opinion of them. That does make more sense now that I think about it

Lol, let's not BS here.  People sometimes use their scores to make a point or for the clicks.  If you are the least bit objective, which I don't expect you to be about this game (I mean you are defending a 20), there is no way to rate this below average.  Average?  Fine.  But, hey, if you want to start knocking off the top scores, I'm all for that if we are also including XBO games.  Ryse definitely didn't deserve that 86, right? 


It most certainly did not.

And I'm not defending anything. I'm sarcastically attacking your logic. Get your facts straight.