Okay, I just wrapped up the latest Uncharted game and it was amazing. It certainly deserves all of the critical and fan love it's receiving. With that being said however, how in the heck are some of these same critics falling all over themselves with their praise of "Uncharted 4," while also having been so harsh on "The Order: 1886?" Many of the chief complaints that critics had of "The Order:1886" are being praised in "Uncharted 4."
Two great examples of negative critiques for "The Order: 1886" that are positive critiques for "Uncharted 4" are, use of cut-scenes and total length of game. Time and time again I read the "The Order's" use of cut-scenes was gratuitous and the sheer amount of them inhibited the enjoyment of the game. I would strongly disagree with that criticism, but I can certainly respect it. Conversely, the use of cut-scenes in "Uncharted 4" is lauded nonstop as a device that really brings out the motivation and feeling of the characters. So in one game, it's over-the-top and in the other it's pitch-perfect?
The short length of "The Order's" campaign has been lambasted over and over. Again, a criticism I strongly disagree with, but again, I can respect it. Why then, isn't there the same outcry regarding "Uncharted 4's" short campaign? To be fair, "Uncharted 4's" length is a couple of hours longer, but it certainly isn't at the top-end of campaign style games. If I recall correctly, it took approximately twelve hours to beat "The Order:1886," and approximately fourteen hours to beat "Uncharted 4."
And just as an aside, I've read some "Uncharted 4" reviews that claimed it has supplanted "The Order" as the best looking game on the PS4, and I have to disagree whole-heartily. Yes, "Uncharted 4" is a graphical masterpiece for the PS4, but it is not better than "The Order." What sets "The Order" a notch above is the graphical brilliance within actual gameplay, not just during the cut-scenes. "Uncharted 4's" cut-scenes are on par with "The Order's," but it loses something when it switches into gameplay. In "The Order" there are no differences between cut-scenes and gameplay. Heck, I remember times playing "The Order" that I didn't even realize the game had switched from a cut-scene into gameplay. I remember looking at the screen waiting for something to happen before finally realizing, oh wait, It's time for me to take control. This is definitely not the case with "Uncharted 4." Like in almost every campaign style game, you know exactly when a cut-scene is over and when to start playing. Also, while in gameplay, it appears that "Uncharted 4" loses some of its shine.
I am not writing this post as a criticism of "Uncharted 4," because as I stated in my opening paragraph, it really is amazing, but more as a criticism of critics themselves. The apparent ease at which one game is negatively critiqued and then that same critique is used as praise for another game in confounding. I really wish that some of the critics that gave "Uncharted 4" great scores and "The Order: 1886" poor ones, would now go back with the same critical lenses they used for the former and use them for the latter, Something tells me if they did that, then they would see "The Order: 1886" in a whole different light.