The Order: 1886, first reviews

[Pyro Yuy]

If Video Games were judged in a fairer way, then 65/100 would have indicated a pretty good game...
As it is, it means average...

Our scores as shitty as they are, are also broken.

To me 65 is failing in school.

Or in better terms, it's a barley passing cross dresser.

Also, if it were judged with 'fairer' standards, it would probably only get 40/100.

 

[Pyro Yuy]

I much prefer my take, if a cd is only 65% passable would it really be okay?

Because if I'm going to be fooled in a bar/club, I would much rather not feel stubble.

 

[Prince of Ales]

I think 10 hours even is a bit on a short side. I've bought games that length before, but not for full price. If it's a smaller or indie game, or it's on offer, I don't mind. But I'd be pretty pissed off paying £50 for something like that.

If people want that sort of thing, all power to them. Some people like shorter more cinematic games. Fair play. I didn't see any of the developers building this up for its marathon endgame, and I wasn't in any danger of accidentally buying it thinking it was anything other than what it was. Let people play what they want to play.

 

[Pyro Yuy]

I much prefer my take, if a cd is only 65% passable would it really be okay?

Because if I'm going to be fooled in a bar/club, I would much rather not feel stubble.

Except your take is not how movies, books and pretty much everything else is judged. There a 50/100 is medium.. average.

Also, again, this is NOT school. These are pieces of art and entertainment.

What you are saying also alludes to a possible 100/100. That is not possible. It has never and never will exist.

When did I mention school in that message?

And have you ever gone to Thailand and seen those Lady Bois? I think some of them are 100% passable.

And if it's something that I'm going to be burning several hours with, I don't want it to be something average, hence why most reviews use that scale, because to people 60/100 looks loads better than 50/100. This isn't just an issue with the reviewers, it's with the readers too.

 

[Pyro Yuy]

Rabble

You might be more familiar with Kathoey? Google it if not.

And I'm saying that it's a social issues that really can't be fixed. Because people see 50/100 as less than desirable.

And I don't do metacritic, instead I follow specific reviewers that I generally tend to agree with and use the scores they provide for my basis. And not just the score, I read the reviews they put up. Not only that I generally watch game play videos to determine if I'll actually buy the game.

As for prefect 100/100, it's all subjective to the individual. I don't understand why you can't accept that to me 65/100 is failing. I just used school because most courses put 59.9% as a fail, but I feel like a failure if I only get 65%.

 

[Alfredo Jones]

Looks to me like a Victorian version of Uncharted only without much of what makes Uncharted fun. I won't deny that the game looks gorgeous, my only visual gripe is that it doesn't seem as "steampunk-y" as I would like. Aside from the more exotic weapons I don't see much in the way of cool technology on display. As for the games length, it seems from what people are saying that it runs anywhere from 5-10 hours depending on how much you linger around to admire the set dressing. Not a bad length, but not one I think justifies dropping $60. Probably would be a better deal if it dropped somewhere from $25-40.

 

[Pyro Yuy]

What you meant then is Lady Boys. Not Lady Bois. I got confused that it is some kind of... art piece... with a strange and to me foreign name
No, human beauty is subjective too. My girlfriend is technically one of the prettiest people I have ever seen in my life, yet that does not mean everyone will agree (many do ).

50/100 to me means I might watch it and enjoy it. The score AFTER I watch/play something depends SOLELY on me. If people give it 30/100 and I think it is fucking great, then it is fucking great to me. The rest of the world be damned.

Fair enough on the critics part mate.

100/100 is not something that I can take seriously . It has never been done and never will be.
Most systems where I live use 49/100 as a fail. Not 59/100. What is more widespread is not really something I know.
I did not like your comparison because it devalues art to see it... passing and failing on some subjective soulless system.

I feel like an idiot if its less then an A or its equivalent.
But sometimes.. I also dont care as long as I pass (industrial chemistry...)

I usually see it spelled bois, but yeah...

I guess I see games as more of a consumer good rather than art, and that as a frugal person I'm more critical of what I spend my money on. And there are times where a game or movie will bomb with critics, and yet I absolutely love it. Case in point is the movie of Postal (based off Postal 2,directed by Uwe Boll), I normally despise the director, and a few of the critics that I follow hated it, but after watching a few clips I dove in and enjoyed it.

As for something 100/100, for me it will probably be the game 'To the Moon'. It's not what most people would consider great, but this game had me crying hard by the end. I'm sure there are things for you that are 100/100.

And yes, there are some classes that I don't care about that passing is all that matters... Any level of math.

 

[laggyteabag]

So basically, this AAA £50 game that only consists of a campaign that can last anywhere between 5-8 hours, or 10 hours if you are really pushing it. No matter how you spin it, it still doesn't sound like a worthy full price purchase, especially considering the more negative reviews (that are oddly absent from your OP).

I'm all for quality over quantity, and I hate shoehorned in modes, but if your game is only that long, and you are asking for the full current-gen AAA price for it, it isn't going to fly with me, im sorry. If the order was a 5-8 hour long £20 indie game, then things would be different, but as a full priced AAA title? No way in hell.

This is why you shouldn't pre-order videogames.

 

[Adultratedhydra]

So 7-8 hours for (what will be) 90-110 bucks australian at 30 fps with little replay value?

Bring on the next industry crash please preferably from Activision. By the looks of it though its going to be EA by the way they keep pushing Hardline as anything but a mod for Battlefield 4.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

If anybody cares, Sterling estimated play time at 5-6 hours and gave it an "Alright" score of 6.5/10.

http://www.thejimquisition.com/2015/02/the-order-1886-review/

 

[RJ 17]

Again, I do think people seem to be picking on this game for some particular reason. There is no shortage of games that are the same length - or shorter - and don't go through the same shitstorm. People grabbed that initial video and ran with it, and by now there's no going back. It's kinda like the anti-vax movement. No matter how many times it's disproved, people still believe it.

Like any of that matters. No matter how much "hate" is thrown at this game it's still going to do just fine.

Look at Evolve, for instance. People were raging about that game's DLC practices for months! To the point you'd figure it'd bomb hard on launch day but nope! It's doing just fine in the sales figures.

Really by making topics such as this, all you're doing is providing the "haters" with a platform to hate on a game that (I'm guessing) you're looking forward to picking up and playing yourself. And I hope you do, and I sincerely hope you enjoy it...I wish you all the happiness in the world with this purchase (if indeed you do intend to pick it up). Just a simple tip: you don't need to justify the purchase of this game to anyone but yourself. If you want the game, go out and get it and enjoy it to it's fullest, you don't have to prove anything to anyone.

All I'm saying is that this is the standard ebb and flow of the gaming community. Cries of outrage pre-launch followed by NOT "voting with the wallet". The bottom line is that if you were looking forward to this game and planning on picking it up, it's doubtful anything you could see or read about it pre-launch will change your mind. That's pretty much how things have always worked in the gaming community.

 

[wAriot]

snip

Uh? Evolve is bombing pretty hard, on PC at least. Hell, there are almost as many L4D2 players at any given time.

Also, who are you to say that "it's doubtful anything [...] will change your mind"? Are you capable of seeing the future somehow? I know many people that cancelled their pre-orders or decided not to buy it based on what they saw and heard of the game.

Again, I do think people seem to be picking on this game for some particular reason. There is no shortage of games that are the same length - or shorter - and don't go through the same shitstorm. People grabbed that initial video and ran with it, and by now there's no going back. It's kinda like the anti-vax movement. No matter how many times it's disproved, people still believe it.

No one is bashing this game exclusively for the length. And "that initial video" (supposing you are talking about the playthrough that appeared a few days ago) was perfectly fine, played without rush, basically a normal playthrough. I don't understand why people thought the guy was speedrunning or ignoring details or whatever.

 

[Iwata]

No one is bashing this game exclusively for the length. And "that initial video" (supposing you are talking about the playthrough that appeared a few days ago) was perfectly fine, played without rush, basically a normal playthrough. I don't understand why people thought the guy was speedrunning or ignoring details or whatever.

Because the video was 5-hours long, while almost every single review since has placed the game at 7-10 hours, AND because immediately following the video, there were a serious of responses saying that the game was NOT, in fact, 5 hours long. And not just from the developer trying to save face or anything, but from gamers like you and me that had early access to the game. And that's the sort of bad publicity that can hurt a game's chances before it even reaches shelves.

And while of course it's not an exclusive argument against this particular game, it did feel like it was being unfairly treated. I mean, you see this thing all the time nowadays, when a game gets buried under a mountain of criticism before all but a VERY select few have had a chance to touch it. And I usually don't even bother commenting on this sort of thing. But the fact that the rumours seemed to grow of their own accord based on that one video in proportion with the denials from dozens of other people baffles me. It's like people WANT to hate on a game!

I don't know. Scratch it to me working in news media, I suppose, and just being weirdly offended at a strange level by a rumour trumping the truth.

 

[Rednog]

Not much to say, lots of reviews are panning it for it being a meh game, and from the handful of videos I've watched it does look meh. I'll just wait, this is one of those games you know people are going to be trading in like crazy and will hit $35 in like 2 months.