The Order 1886 and the smear campaign of hate

[insektmute]

It's less about that for many and more about whether there's good value.  Getting a 6 or 7 hour game with little replay value and no extras for 60 bucks is pretty poor in my opinion, unless that game is just crazy amazing.

The problem with that logic is that "value" is an entirely subjective term, and there is absolutely no way to provide the kind of guaranteed quality that people have come to expect. Attempts to satisfy that kind of selfish entitlement are exactly why so many games take a formulaic approach and target the lowest common denominator, contributing to the lack of diversity in an already homogenous market.

[fighterpilot562]

Good read OP. I was planning to get it, and you have helped me confirm my decision.

[GrooDWanderer]

I stopped reading reviews and going on websites like Gamespot and IGN a couple of years ago. I can't get past the fact that games with high review scores always just happen to have the biggest banner ads all over their websites. I don't believe that is a coincidence. Plus, there have been too many games where the reviewer's opinion and mine differed to the point where I found it hard to believe we played the same game. I wandered onto YouTube and after subbing and un-subbing from various channels, finally landed on channels where the YouTubers and I have similar tastes and outlooks on games. Below are links to first impressions videos to 2 such channels who's opinions on games I respect. And no, I am not affiliated with or know these people personally. I just like how direct and honest they are about their experiences with games and how they love to have fun while playing.

http://youtu.be/Ft9dIFlBrEk


http://youtu.be/lJeje5HhuoM


Also, I would like to add that I do not have the game but I will be buying it. I just know that if I buy it now, it will be just sitting there for a while due to lack of time.

[gf78]

Good read OP. I was planning to get it, and you have helped me confirm my decision.

I've been very interested in why reviewers have crapped on this game. So, I've been reading their reviews. It's become quite evident that many reviewers didn't bother to play very far into the game, let alone actually complete it. The first few opening chapters are full of hand-holding. For an experienced gamer, it may be a bit much but it's no more than just about any other game holds your hand at the beginning.

The game is linear, yes. The developers had a story they wanted to tell in a specific way and wandering around aimlessly didn't mesh with that. I don't see your "Halo's" getting knocked for pushing you from point A to point B.

The controls, aiming, etc are pretty spot-on. All the reviewers complaining about how Gallahad "lumbers along" must reeeaaaallllyyy have hated Gears of War. Oh, and they must never have bothered clicking L3 to run. Not an oafish "roadie run" either. I guess they are all Twilight fans who think running and climbing around as a large man adorned in armor, carrying heavy weapons should be as effortless as Edward scurrying up the side of a large pine with Bella on his back.

And I find it quite curious how all these reviewers talk about the Blackwater being an unexplained mixture (hint:  it's quite thoroughly explained a little past the halfway mark) and never once mentioning vampires (hint:  around the 65% mark through the story) can say they completed the game.

I've even seen one pro review criticizing the characters all breathing heavy. Gee, I guess they never get winded running around?  Oh, that's right. Most reviewers never figured out how to click L3 to run.   

[kamikazekeeg]

It's less about that for many and more about whether there's good value.  Getting a 6 or 7 hour game with little replay value and no extras for 60 bucks is pretty poor in my opinion, unless that game is just crazy amazing.

The problem with that logic is that "value" is an entirely subjective term, and there is absolutely no way to provide the kind of guaranteed quality that people have come to expect. Attempts to satisfy that kind of selfish entitlement are exactly why so many games take a formulaic approach and target the lowest common denominator, contributing to the lack of diversity in an already homogenous market.

Of course it's subjective.  My opinion is that anything under 10 hours is not really worth my 60 bucks.  I didn't buy Last of Us and only rented it cause I knew it wouldn't have much more than a regular run time of like 10 to 12 hours or so and not interest me much in replaying it again and that game has fantastic characters and a solid story for the most part despite my issues with the gameplay and the final level.  Played enough games to know what I'm looking for and what I feel is worth spending my money on.  How someone might value the experience is important and most people put a few factors into their purchase choice, especially if they have a gaming budget.  For me, I look how long the game might likely be, will have it some replay value after I beat it, does it have multiplayer that is worthwhile or not, what has the developer done before this, and probably a few other things if I can think of it.  If they don't fit some of my criteria, I'll hold off on getting the game, usually waiting for a sale till it's at a more reasonable price.

There are no pre-choreographed fights that are composed of purely timed button presses. When fighting the huge lycan, the game will present a symbol of the right stick indicating which direction to push to dodge an incoming attack. Your free to attack at will. It's not like God of War where the battle is a series of timed presses and missing a press resets that part of the fight. I have completed the game and attest to this.

I guess my point is that this game has been hounded from day one of its first showing by the gaming media and singled out. Is it the greatest game ever?  Nope. Does it deserve to get points knocked off some arbitrary number because it doesn't have a multiplayer mode?  I guess we should dock a point because there is no racing section? 

With the standards applied to this game, Ryse should be a 0 or 0.5/10 because of the prevalence of QTE's. Mario anything shoul be a 1/10 because they are all the same, don't innovate and are star and coin fetch quests. Gran Turismo and Forza should be 1/10 because there are no stealth sections and the controls aren't innovative enough. And Halo Master Chief collection should be 0.5/10 because it launched with completely broken multiplayer.

You can't say you shouldn't worry about what others think. This crucification the Order is receiving will undoubtedly assure no sequel gets made and that's a real shame. How can I ignore that fact?  How can anyone who loved a game that the press destroyed and it never received a sequel or the developer went under ignore that? 

I don't care who you are or what your opinion of a game is, but to score a game that isn't a broken, buggy mess a 1 or 2/10 like it's trash is nothing but pure hate and shows an agenda. Sorry if you guys don't see it that way.

And I said that anyone scoring it under a 5 is likely completely wrong, but not many reviewers are really doing that.  According to Metacritic,  only one has it down to a 2, with most giving it average and above average scores.  I think you might be blowing the criticism out of proportion.  There is no witch hunt here to take down The Order, there never has been.  You might not see the game as an average shooter that looks good, but a ton of people are.  It happens.  Of course a AAA title that doesn't live up to the hype is gonna get knocked around a good bit, that's expected.

And I watched that last boss fight.  It's just a QTE section.  The actual gameplay is barely there.  Sure you can slash when you want, but there isn't much to it.  I'd be pissed to have that as a final fight.  Especially since it's the same fight as the werewolf earlier in the game.

[gf78]

From Metacritic:

EGM:  4.5/10
Twin finite:  4/10
Game Revolution:  4/10
Giant Bomb:  4/10
Metro Game Central:  4/10
Digital Trends:  2/10

Any way you look at it, these are trash scores that only a broken, buggy, no redeeming value game deserves. They are click bait garbage, intentionally made to drag this game down. How did all these reviewers give a broken game like Halo the Master Chief collection such high scores?  Isn't basic functionality a prerequisite to get a good score? 

Again, I'm not saying the game is perfect and you and I agree that a 5/10 score or lower is bullshit. But in this rediculous world we live in, developers get (or don't) bonuses based on average Metacritic scores. And a click bait 2/10 score from some ignorant prick with a crappy website affects these people who gave it their all to make the game.

From everything I've read, these reviewers are criticizing the game for not having things it never claimed it would ever have. They never said it was a multiplayer shooter. They never said it was a stealth game. They never claimed it would have co-op. If you were disappointed with the boss fight, you must have hated the end fight in Arkham Asylum.

And as spoiler free as possible, the end of the game has Gallahad (you) make a choice earily similar to Batman's at the end of the Dark Knight when he chose to protect the memory of Harvey Dent. The game had a fine resolution that leaves it open for more. And I sure hope this smear campaign doesn't deter the developers and Sony from going ahead with a sequel and the chance to improve upon its shortcomings.

[gf78]

It's less about that for many and more about whether there's good value.  Getting a 6 or 7 hour game with little replay value and no extras for 60 bucks is pretty poor in my opinion, unless that game is just crazy amazing.

The problem with that logic is that "value" is an entirely subjective term, and there is absolutely no way to provide the kind of guaranteed quality that people have come to expect. Attempts to satisfy that kind of selfish entitlement are exactly why so many games take a formulaic approach and target the lowest common denominator, contributing to the lack of diversity in an already homogenous market.

Edit:  and with the order, it's a complete game. Not one that I paid $60 for and will have to buy a $30 season pass for a pack of guns and one new area to explore. 

Everyone has an individual opinion on whether something is a good value. Here's an example of my thinking. I paid $25 for American Reunion on Blu-Ray when it was released. The running time is 1 hour 53 minutes. There's some extras, but it's basically a two hour film. That's $12.50 per hour of entertainment if I only watched it once. To go to the movies and see it, it cost me $15 on average for a ticket.

Now it took me about 7-8 hours to get through my first play through of the Order. If I never play it again, I spent $7.50 to $8.50 per hour of entertainment. Better value to me than the passive entertainment of a motion picture.

[kamikazekeeg]

If you were disappointed with the boss fight, you must have hated the end fight in Arkham Asylum.

Why would I? There was actually gameplay going on with that.  Not that it was a great fight, but it had far more than that crappy werewolf battle.  You have to dodge multiple guys, explosives, the sides are electrocuted.  Joker himself though could've been so much better as an actual fight. It wasn't that good.  Arkham City actually made it much better by having you actually fight at the end and it was a multi-stage fight.  What The Order did, what Mordor did, what Dying Light did, are just lazy excuses for a climatic fight.  I'd rather it just be a cutscene than pretending I'm participating.

[betelgeuse]

Stop trying to defend the damn game already!!!! I really don't want this site to turn into an Xbox vs PS flame war.

Not everybody feels the same way about the games you like to play.

[gf78]

Stop trying to defend the damn game already!!!! I really don't want this site to turn into an Xbox vs PS flame war.

Not everybody feels the same way about the games you like to play.

Well, my apologies sir. Never once did I try to start an Xbox vs PS war, but ok. I guess pointing out inconsistencies in review criteria counts for starting a flame war.

I also never once told anyone to buy the game. Kamikazzekeeg and I were having a discussion and nothing more. But it's cool. I'll make sure to defer to you personally before making any posts that you may deem unworthy.

Edit:  My apologies for praising or discussing a PlayStation game. It's obvious why you felt angered after seeing your large collection of inferior Xbox games. 

[disgaeniac]

Stop trying to defend the damn game already!!!! I really don't want this site to turn into an Xbox vs PS flame war.

Not everybody feels the same way about the games you like to play.

But it's cool. I'll make sure to defer to you personally before making any posts that you may deem unworthy.

Edit:  My apologies for praising or discussing a PlayStation game. It's obvious why you felt angered after seeing your large collection of inferior Xbox games. 

cheap, trollish, juvenile, and uneccessary shots.

The whole My opinion = right...(and - I'm gonna' tell you why & because right here & now) is ALWAYS kindling for flame wars & arguments on the interwebz.

you're certainly entitled to like what you like, share your opinions, and tell us what you like/don't like about a game.

Being objective (I can, because - from my pov - you're both starting in equal standing); meaning that I really don't know either one of you very well --and-- neither one of you has said/done anything to make me dislike you.

I'm going to have to side with betelgeuse on this one, because:

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here, gf78, and say that this topic *might* have once been objective, well-intentioned, and not a troll-bait and/or flaming sort of topic & thread.

It's gotten well past that point...awhile ago.

You're now coming-off as (a pretty damned good:) salesman/advertiser for the game.

I can understand annoyance at this; Hell if you (or me, or anyone!) was on the other side of a topic like this about a game that they strongly liked/disliked...well, I won't presume to speak for everybody, *but* I know that I'd certainly understand & share betelgeuses' perspective, opinion, and feelings here.

Don't get me wrong! 

As the VGC resident Sensei of sarcasm, cynicism, verbal-shredding, and 'up-frontness' (everyone here that's known/interacted with me for awhile - will know that I'm speaking the truth when I say that those members that I like...know damned well that I do so, because: I've told them so 

'other side of that coin = theThose here that I dislike...also know damned well that this is the case, because...well, I've told himthem so to 

not trying to turn you off to posting here actively *or* even trying to disuade you from posting cynically, sarcastically, snidely, condescendingly, etc, etc, etc if, like myself, it's in your nature to do so 

Let's just try to keep it classier & stay above such childish types of shots/insults; whatever

[insektmute]

And this is exactly the point I was driving at in my post: VGC is a fairly positive, enthusiastic community that doesn't engage in trading insults, fixate on reviews, stir up the console war, or any of the stuff that permeates nearly every other gaming site. Quite a lot of us are friends, know each others real names, etc.

Threads like this are a black mark on the entire community, and antithetical to the spirit of what we've all tried to build here.

[disgaeniac]

And this is exactly the point I was driving at in my post: VGC is a fairly positive, enthusiastic community that doesn't engage in trading insults, fixate on reviews, stir up the console war, or any of the stuff that permeates nearly every other gaming site. Quite a lot of us are friends, know each others real names, etc.

Threads like this are a black mark on the entire community, and antithetical to the spirit of what we've all tried to build here.

you did that much more succinctly than I did, E!

but, yeah - QFT & amen, brother ^_^

[insektmute]

you did that much more succinctly than I did, E!

but, yeah - QFT & amen, brother ^_^

It's easy to be concise when I've only had one cup of coffee this morning. MOAR.

[disgaeniac]

you did that much more succinctly than I did, E!

but, yeah - QFT & amen, brother ^_^

It's easy to be concise when I've only had one cup of coffee this morning. MOAR.

caffeine cowboys;

yippie-ki-yay