The Order 1886 vs Bioshock Infinite

[Iwata]

The Order and Bioshock Infinite really feel similar. That is, they both have shallow gameplay, little replayability and endings that made me want to hit something.

Heh. I have no desire to play The Order because it represents to me everything wrong with modern games. Much like Bioshock Infinite did. It wasn't just the completely abhorrent mess of a plot, it was the fact the game portion of it was shallow and tedious. It looked good. Yay. Okay. it was garbage in every other sense.


I'd say to anyone considering these two games, pass on them, play Dishonoured. That is a game, and not a schlocky movie masquerading as one.

I love Dishonored. As I posted elsewhere, I love it so much, in fact, that I got the Mark of the Outsider tattooed on my left hand.

But I also loved Bioshock Infinite. And I am quite enjoying The Order: 1886, which despite people bitching about length, I actually haven't finished yet.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Shit vs Shit?

I think shit wins that battle

 

[happyninja42]

Two short(ish... results may vary, but generally about the same length) shooters, set in steampunkish alternate histories, with supernatural elements. That also boil down largely to shooting samey looking average guys in predefined areas for most of the game.

B:I is relatively praised though, while The Order seems to be getting (IMO somewhat unfair) amounts of negativity. Is it the lack of the franchise weight to give it gravitas? Rabid Ken Levine worship? Cutscene QTE's just make people want to tear their eyes out? (I think Infinite did have a few though).

Spoiler: My long-winded opinions

For my personal opinion, the Order has a slight edge in gameplay, chest-high walls notwithstanding, with some basic platforming/minigame stuff to break up the shooting spree. Infinite kind of relied entirely on the Tear mechanic, which was fairly limited, and somewhat obtrusive (Everytime you see Tears, you know you're in a firefight zone) and Skyhooking (again rather limited by their infrequent appearance (and several that simply serve as transition mechanics to new areas).

The shooting is probably a no-contest for The Order. Infinite's was passable, but didn't feel like they put a huge amount into it. The Vigors give it some diversity that The Order doesn't have (outside of a few specific guns), but its a very basic effort.

Storywise, the Order does put more directly on the table, compared to Infinite. The story is very much in the course of gameplay, if a bit trailed off at the end. Its voicelogs are more dedicated to world building (probably to setup the likely inevitable Order 1887 or whatever it'll be called). Bioshock's story requires a bit more aimless searching to find some key voicelogs to really assemble, and still relies heavily on simply rewriting timelines a few times over to bring its conclusion about.

Character-wise, and I'm probably igniting the flames, but I'd give it to The Order as well. The four mains are well-developed, and get lots of screentime (Possibly a little too much, their is a bit of Kojima-style over-cutscening going on), along with steady banter in missions. Infinite gets a reasonable rapport with Booker and Elizabeth (although her later game brooding phase, and tendency to act as a plot macguffin to push you to a new timeline start to lose points), but leaves most other characters spread thin, even with its voicelogs.


I wouldn't necessarily put either of the games in my high favorites or especially rate one over the other, but its curious to see how two generally similar games get such radically different responses.

Eh, I didn't really find B:I all that interesting or compelling to be honest. The "big twist" ending didn't really blow my socks off, when it was revealed I was like "Um, ok....and?" And then it just ended. So yeah, to me the game was sort of meh, but I was also really getting tired of the blatant racism and jingoistic nature of that city. I get that was the point, but the fact that you meant to force me to walk through the ideal racist town, lost in time from the turn of the century, doesn't mean I'm actually going to like going through it.

Haven't played The Order, and don't intend to. Wasn't really keen on it in the first place, and from the reviews, I'm less inclined to bother, even on a steam sale a year from now.

 

[Aerith]

I think that it's fair to say that The Order wins when it comes to story, whilst Bioshock wins when it comes to gameplay.

But, to be fair, Patience can beat out Bioshock when it comes to the story. So ... there's that.

 

[Zannah]

I haven't played the order, but short of consisting of nothing but Southland Tales Re-runs, there is no way it could be stuck anywhere near as far up it's own ass as Bioshock Infinite. B:I also looses fifty million points by virtue of utterly failing to understand the concepts and big-boy words it throws around like a first-grader drunk on cough syrup.

So I guess as far as squandering a pontentially interesting Setting goes, B:I probably still wins.

(And while it's true that B:I is ~7-9 hours long, depending on how bad you are at videogames, that bonus doesn't really count, if six out of those hours would vanish if the enemies had even semi-appropriate healthbars. Then again, in this day and age, the order probably did it too.)

 

[CaitSeith]

Two short(ish... results may vary, but generally about the same length) shooters, set in steampunkish alternate histories, with supernatural elements. That also boil down largely to shooting samey looking average guys in predefined areas for most of the game.

B:I is relatively praised though, while The Order seems to be getting (IMO somewhat unfair) amounts of negativity. Is it the lack of the franchise weight to give it gravitas? Rabid Ken Levine worship? Cutscene QTE's just make people want to tear their eyes out? (I think Infinite did have a few though).

Spoiler: My long-winded opinions

For my personal opinion, the Order has a slight edge in gameplay, chest-high walls notwithstanding, with some basic platforming/minigame stuff to break up the shooting spree. Infinite kind of relied entirely on the Tear mechanic, which was fairly limited, and somewhat obtrusive (Everytime you see Tears, you know you're in a firefight zone) and Skyhooking (again rather limited by their infrequent appearance (and several that simply serve as transition mechanics to new areas).

The shooting is probably a no-contest for The Order. Infinite's was passable, but didn't feel like they put a huge amount into it. The Vigors give it some diversity that The Order doesn't have (outside of a few specific guns), but its a very basic effort.

Storywise, the Order does put more directly on the table, compared to Infinite. The story is very much in the course of gameplay, if a bit trailed off at the end. Its voicelogs are more dedicated to world building (probably to setup the likely inevitable Order 1887 or whatever it'll be called). Bioshock's story requires a bit more aimless searching to find some key voicelogs to really assemble, and still relies heavily on simply rewriting timelines a few times over to bring its conclusion about.

Character-wise, and I'm probably igniting the flames, but I'd give it to The Order as well. The four mains are well-developed, and get lots of screentime (Possibly a little too much, their is a bit of Kojima-style over-cutscening going on), along with steady banter in missions. Infinite gets a reasonable rapport with Booker and Elizabeth (although her later game brooding phase, and tendency to act as a plot macguffin to push you to a new timeline start to lose points), but leaves most other characters spread thin, even with its voicelogs.


I wouldn't necessarily put either of the games in my high favorites or especially rate one over the other, but its curious to see how two generally similar games get such radically different responses.

No mention about the graphics? Lots of people who speak positive things about The Order 1887 seem to be mentioning the graphics.

 

[Random1]

God, you guys love criticizing without any solid arguments just for the sake of it, don't you?
Please, stop trying to be the 'smart' guy who doesn't like anything that is either famous or new, and instead, try understanding why people like it (or not)... You know, sometimes there's a reason. I see no use of playing a game/seeing a movie/reading a book without even giving it a chance - like lots of people did here as I see; when they actually played those games (some here didn't and still, are hating/blaming them, or one of them).

When I say that, I'm reffering myself specially to Bioshock Infinite. Ok, it doesn't have a great gameplay and even much clever mechanics/combos/strategies, but it DOES have breath-taking graphics, art direction, settings, colors and atmosphere... Not to talk about the characters, specially Elizabeth and the Lutece, as they are pretty damn well built; and the freaking story, that is pretty mindblowing and ends totally unexpected (have you ever seen any other "I am you" good and well explained twist?... I bet you haven't). And yes, it does explain most of things that happens there, and if you have half of a brain and pay attention; instead of being ignorant and just rushing the game out to say it's a piece of shit or sort of it, like some stupid comments above; you can understand most of it (the finger,that luteces are not 'brothers', why comstock olds so fast, elizabeth's powers, why columbia flies and etc). It has indeed some plot holes, like: Why if someone looses his finger in other world, that same one would earn tear-opening powers; and leave some questions, such as why the particle that never falls never falls and etc.
Thought, I've never seen a story (movie, book or game) handling time/alternative worlds travel and fatalism with so perfection, so few flaws and potraying an interesting backstory and characters that actually have something to do with it (where it kind of started, and when a kind of loop happens), you know...

But, to be fair, Patience can beat out Bioshock when it comes to the story. So ... there's that.

Shit vs Shit?

I think shit wins that battle

Yea, those are pretty good example of a pointless and no-argument post... some kind of immature too (the last one).
And I'm not saying you must like the game, I just see no reason to hate it, if you see, tell me why... I'm just saying to put valid arguments, instead of just saying "Oh, bioshock/B:I story is full of plotholes and its a horrible game" when you (maybe) didn't pay attention to its details or didn't understand it completely.
And if you just don't like fiction, physics and etc related games, you can't say it is bad JUST because you don't like its themes.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Well Bioshock may have received a mix of good and bad reviews, but the general consensus was it was at least fun, if not pretentious.

The Order was just bad. No one liked it and no one had any fun with it.

 

[SonicMTD]

I personally disliked Bioshock: Infinite but then again it's because the overall logic of the ending is flawed. Where as The Order: 1886 was a complete and total waste of time.

 

[shrekfan246]

How is five hours "generally about the same" as ten hours?

I have little else to say on the subject that hasn't already been brought up by other people (except to reiterate that if you played Bioshock Infinite on a console, that might explain a lot about why you didn't like the gameplay), but ten hours is factually twice as long as five.

I mean, I suppose you can breeze through Bioshock in six or seven hours if you're ignoring everything and just shooting through to the next story beat, but that seems like a counterproductive way to play the game to me (and, based on what I've heard, playing The Order in the same way would cause it to be over in less than five hours).

 

[Random1]

I personally disliked Bioshock: Infinite but then again it's because the overall logic of the ending is flawed. Where as The Order: 1886 was a complete and total waste of time.

Well, not trying to say the end is flawless, but it's acyually impossible to do an ending with such themes without any flaws, specially because humans can't travel between alternative worlds, so how the heck could anyone foresee what would happen? So, by that way you can't either say it's a flaw or it has no flaws, since not every thing has to be logical (following our logic)... It just happens. And honestly, I see no problem in having some imagination to suppose what would happen (like the game ending did) or 'creating' a logic for a story (since it's just fiction...).
The only annoying flaw I've seen in it so far (that compromises the own game's logic) was the very burial at sea; how the heck only One comstock would still exists? (since he could kill elizabeth in many accidental ways, not just cutting his head in that special way). Other than that you can't really say that the game breaks his own logic.