The Order: 1886

[WaddupCouzin]

Re: The Order: 1886

Comparing the Witcher to The Order is Apples to Oranges, not in the same ballpark. The Witcher is an open world game that is going to encounter bugs, The linear nature of The Order is going to/should denote a very clear path of gaming, therefore there shouldn't be any bugs. I'm racking my brain right now trying to think of a linear game that had game crippling bugs, but I can't think of any.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[ricky24]

Re: The Order: 1886

Exactly. Hard to mess up a game like the order. It's not right to botch games at launch but when you have no online play or open world concept to deal with the game is obviously less prone to launch bugs.

[daniel77733]

Re: The Order: 1886

While none of the bugs and glitches in the Witcher 3 can be considered game breaking, the bottom line is that there's still problems. Doesn't matter if a game is linear or open world. If there's problems, you won't play the game. I waited for the last patch so the quests and XP problems could be fixed. The quest problem where objectives aren't listed as being completed even though they are is still a problem. The controls should be tighter. The AI for Roach is horrible. A lot of FPS and visual problems. I love it when it's raining and the drops are hitting the ground but yet, there's no actual rain. I had one quest where I was falling through the world, went down a hill and kind of reset itself only to do it again seconds later and thus, I had to reload.

Witcher 3 is an excellent game and very impressive but like the majority of games this generation, it needed another six months of development time. I would easily rate it a 9/10 which is higher than I would rate The Order but it doesn't matter how big the game is or how long it is if there's problems that shouldn't exist and thus decrease the overall experience and enjoyment of the game.

Games that get released with "problems" shouldn't be rewarded or praised or scored higher. That's simply not right. If it was EA or Ubisoft, the game would have been bashed to hell but it's a fan favorite so it gets scored higher. Perfect 10/10 and high 9's. Sorry but hmmm, no.

Again, the game is great and CDPR releasing patches quickly is good but the problem is that it's a widespread problem and the majority of games nowadays and that simply should not be acceptable in my opinion.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: The Order: 1886

The bugs in The Witcher are common with a lot of games, though. Even games back on PS1 had these same glitches and bugs without the benefit of being able to be patched post release - much less patched so quickly. Again, the game was playable at launch. Taking another 6 months to fix these relatively minor glitches and bugs would have drained money.

I can only speak for my experiences, but judging from the thread on here I'm not alone - nothing has kept me playing that game apart from a minimal amount of sleep and girlfriend obligations.

TW3 is nowhere near Bethesda or AC levels of release.

[kwebbvols4423]

Re: The Order: 1886

Daniel we get it, you think the Order is great.

[daniel77733]

Re: The Order: 1886

The bugs in The Witcher are common with a lot of games, though. Even games back on PS1 had these same glitches and bugs without the benefit of being able to be patched post release - much less patched so quickly. Again, the game was playable at launch. Taking another 6 months to fix these relatively minor glitches and bugs would have drained money.

I can only speak for my experiences, but judging from the thread on here I'm not alone - nothing has kept me playing that game apart from a minimal amount of sleep and girlfriend obligations.

TW3 is nowhere near Bethesda or AC levels of release.

Agreed but I just don't like that websites always seem to ignore this and thus, is never properly calculated into their reviews and scores.

Witcher 3 is an excellent game and I too, have been playing the hell out of it. Since Saturday, I have around 30+ hours and I haven't even scratched the surface.

Daniel we get it, you think the Order is great.

Good with the potential and sequel to possibly be great.

The line in bold is the crabmeat. Price doesn't affect the quality of the game, but it definitely affects the value. As a consumer, I'm looking for both. If money wasn't a limiting factor, though, the value wouldn't matter to me.

Wouldn't bugs, glitches and problems affect the quality of the game and thus, in turn, the value? Look at Unity. A cluster**** at launch yet it scored better than The Order. No ******* way!!!

Granted, Witcher was nowhere near the level of Unity was at launch and CDPR has done a great job patching the majority of problems but it's funny, I have seen more glitches and bugs with patch 1.04 (PS4) than I did with the release day patch. More patches equal more things that can go wrong elsewhere.

This is why games need to be fully tested and problems solved BEFORE release. Everyone can talk about value and whatnot but how much value can there be in any game when the consumer is basically the tester?

[Burns11]

Re: The Order: 1886

Everyone can talk about value and whatnot but how much value can there be in any game when the consumer is basically the tester?

In regards to Witcher 3, a whole ****ton more than The Order.

[ajblithe20]

Re: The Order: 1886

In regards to Witcher 3, a whole ****ton more than The Order.

Just saying, I've been absolutely loving the witcher (might end up being my favorite game of all time) but I would still pay $60 for the order knowing everything about it. Because it's a very good game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CubFan23]

Re: The Order: 1886

I absolutely loved The Order. Anyone hear of any possible DLC dropping?

[The JareBear]

Re: The Order: 1886

I was hoping for DLC news as well. Would be great if there was a solid expansion that added a few more hours to the game.

As far as the topic of the last few pages. I am trying to stay neutral.

Order is a good game. I am not gonna keep harping on the length, I have already posted twice about that. It is a good game in the sense that from start to finish, I think most people will enjoy what they are playing. That's a fair assessment to me.

I expected more of an epic, in the nature of other PS4 exlusives like GoW and Uncharted, and maybe that was my fault for not reading or doing research on the game beforehand.

Either way, I hope they made enough money to get approved for a sequel. I think this could become a great franchise.

[alifeincomplete]

Re: The Order: 1886

I bought this on a whim after a recommendation from my brother. I don't understand why people trashed this game so much. My only issues were with some mechanics, not the length. Production quality of this is off the charts, almost unrivaled in visuals and cinematic experience (TLOU is the only I can think of that I'd rate higher in that respect). No idea where people got 5 hours of gameplay from. I must have put 8, at least. Probably closer to 10, I would wager. Beat it last night. I would recommend it without reservation, and I wholly think it deserves a sequel.

[VTPack919]

Re: The Order: 1886

This thread should have had a change of subject when comparisons started being drawn to TW3. Crazy talk.

[thaSLAB]

Re: The Order: 1886

LOL yeah, it definitely got off the rails a bit.

htcONE [M8] 5.0 | Tapatalk

[daniel77733]

Re: The Order: 1886

Sorry about that.

In the end and in my opinion, The Order: 1886 is a good game in the eight range. The main negative is it being short but yet, still a damn good experience.

As for other games like Unity and Witcher 3, I just don't think that it's fair for a game like The Order which played near flawlessly and had no bugs or glitches to get so heavily bashed and criticized when nearly every current gen game was released six months before they should have been. Unity was unplayable for at least two months until they released several patches for the game. To a lesser extent, The Witcher 3 wasn't even close to being in the same category as Unity at launch but at the same time, releasing four patches (five for PC) in less than three weeks time isn't exactly a positive either because to release those many patches in such a short period of time shows you how much was broken in the game at launch.

Only difference between Witcher 3 and Unity was that one was playable and wasn't playable. And even after patch 1.04, im having more bugs and glitches than I did before. More patches equals more problems and things that can get screwed up with the game. People may think that patches are great and while they are in some cases, they're also a disaster in others. It's basically 50/50. Bottom line is that regardless of the developer, publisher and game itself, games must start being fully tested and played through BEFORE going gold, being manufactured and released. It's not right for me or any consumer to have to pay $60 for a game that we want to play but in the end, end up testing it instead while actually playing through it. To me, that's unacceptable.

And in this regard, the length of the game, it being linear or open world and how much content is in the game doesn't matter simply because it doesn't do the consumer any good if you can't fully experience it without running into various bugs and glitches and that is why in regards to value...all games nowadays are purely subjective no matter how high or low scores are. To me, gamers care more about online multi-player, co-op, etc. and how much stuff is in the game as opposed to if any and all of it works like it should.

That to me is number one. No matter how big or great a game is or said to be, it doesn't do me any good if I can't play it because of it's various bugs and glitches and im stuck waiting for patches just so I can play the game. Sadly, that's how this generation has been from the beginning and im expecting Batman, MGS V, Mad Max, AC Syndicate, etc. to all have the same problem - requiring numerous patches so you can actually play and enjoy the game the way it should be.

[ricky24]

Re: The Order: 1886

I swear I've seen that post 8 times.