Or you could just be another anti-order guy who hasnt played it and is spouting nonsense
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ready at Dawn responds to "concern" over The Order: 1886 campaign length
- Thread starter DarkLordMalik
- Start date
Or you could just be another anti-order guy who hasnt played it and is spouting nonsense
Because its a pic.
Where did you get the Normal info from?
Also I got closer to an hour and a half piggy backing off someone else's calculations, but even if your figure is accurate, how can this YouTuber be an hour or more wrong on the cut scene thing? Something is off about that. It's also still a little strange to me that he intentionally ignored every additional tertiary element of the game.
Game length after game length lol.
Shining Sunshine
Banned
Yeah well I beat it in an hour on my first playthrough because the puzzles are so easy.
Just an example of how playthrough time is different for each person.
GHG
Member
Yeh I'd rather just watch it on YouTube.
I mean why actually fuck models when you can sit and watch porn all day for free?
Haters gonna hate. I'm all for devs doing their own thing without listening to their customers.
Portal 1 was not a full priced game.
GeordieMark
Member
I can get pretty sunsets for free every evening, just by looking out of my window.
Yep. A pic that serves to demonstrate no point whatsoever.
Pop
Member
Also remember that little ol' game called Halo 3. That must've took me 12+ hours to complete but what ya know.
There's someone out there that's beat it in under 2 hours on legendary. But it's got mp and the Order doesn't, value saved I guess.
-MD-
Member
A gaffer earlier said the uploader stated on one of the video's comments that he was playing Normal.
And it was just a small piece in what is still one of the best gaming values of all time.
Pacing is a thing.
I think if you have the pacing of a game like The Last of Us or Resident Evil 4 and you're a 7-8 hour game that might be in on the shorter side.
Alternatively a game with pacing like Vanquish or recent Call of Duty games a 7 hour campaign would probably be considered just right.
The number alone isn't adequate to say much of anything other than "Expect to see the credits roll _ hours into the game".
sturgboski
Member
Ugh, seriously? I would be okay at the 8-10 hour mark, if like 2 hours of movies. But at 5.5 hours with 3 hours of cinematics and interactive QTEs, that is a huge problem. I preordered digitally because, well, I believed the rumors a few weeks back of 10+ hours. Man, I really wish there was something to make the most of this game. Is there a need to replay the 5.5 hour? Now I am really concerned on the lack of an multiplayer. I was passively agreeing with a lot of the comments in here that length shouldnt be a huge issue if its a tight game, but if its only 2-3 hours of gameplay for $60 then that is a huge, huge ripoff.
Pay full price then finish it in a weekend then sell it on. It's what I'll likely do unless it's amazing and something that I want to replay.
It originally released in Orange Box right? So it came with like 3-4 other games iirc.
Nope, not really. Atleast now people can judge and decide for themselfs if the marketing hype and shilling justifies spending their hard earned bucks on this particular type of gameplay experience. Otherwise you'd have alot of pissed off people scammed into buying a game that didn't fulfil their expectations.
UberTag
Member
We can get those for free?
Then, why the hell have I been throwing money out of my window each night?
Those squirrels must be rich.
Link? Just curious because whatever difficulty it is, seems a bit easy.
Snapshot King
Member
Herbspiceguy
Member
Is there a trend of gamers becoming increasingly emotionally involved wether an AAA+ game fails or succeeds?
On console it did yeah. On Steam I think it was like £15. Something like that.
VindicatorZ
Member
This Is laughable . Now people are taking away more hours from the game. It's only 3-5 hours! God, give it a rest.
-MD-
Member
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152271689&postcount=73
I just went to go find the comment myself but his videos are covered in comments now, can't be bothered
I am actually very excited to play the game. I am excited to see what RAD did, and the production value of the art behind it.
But i guess i kind of know what i am getting into on this one, and can't complain about the duration of it. I do expect some interesting story and characters, since thats what they are all about.
But i guess i kind of know what i am getting into on this one, and can't complain about the duration of it. I do expect some interesting story and characters, since thats what they are all about.
Officerrob
Banned
I think the 3 hours is the time of actual gameplay people are referring to
SuperSonic1305
Member
Wow
Pop
Member
The fact is most games can be completed at an insane pace way before the majority of people finish.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
GAF is really losing it over this game. Not long until it's out, why not wait until you play it or have read the reviews before going all in one way or the other. This shit is just not healthy.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152271689&postcount=73
I just went to go find the comment myself but his videos are covered in comments now, can't be bothered
Hard is probably the way to go forward then. I hope they add in a harder difficulty later the way ND did with LoU. A 'Grounded' of sorts.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
That's not even remotely close to what he's saying.
The Last of Us was paced extremely well, same with Uncharted and RE4. The length of those campaigns are justified and work will with the game and story.
Instead of having filler shit, or bogging down the story/game with stuff just for the sake of padding, he prefers a game to cut all the bullshit and tell a story that requires X amount of length, and lets face is, tons of games have padding for the sake of artificial length.
Also, the amount of bullshit people have produced over this game, and the volatile natures of The Order threads be all like
ArkkAngel007
Member
What else are we supposed to do, play games?
You'll never get GAF Gold with that attitude.
GHG
Member
So any transitional section of a game where you are not directly engaging in an activity such as combat/stealth/etc is like watching porn now?
cleveridea
Member
Still buying since target deal makes it $45 ($60 but $15 off a PSN Card, which I will use for revelations 2)
I am not against a game being padded in length but 1.5 hours does sound very short. Glad they were sold out of the best buy CE (have GCU) since it makes me not want to pay near $60
I am not against a game being padded in length but 1.5 hours does sound very short. Glad they were sold out of the best buy CE (have GCU) since it makes me not want to pay near $60
I havent read the whole thread but picked up on most points mentioned. Those that feel $60 for a 5 hour game is anti-consumerist/not worth the value, thats fine, you well and are truly titled to your opinion.
But I dont wanna get into a name calling but I recognize names from the Ubi threads outraged that a company could release a product in such a state (Unity). Here we have a game that has no bugs, no day 1 patch (as far as I'm aware), never seems to drops below 30fps (based on impressions) and giving us one of the worlds most detailed and rich experiences I've seen this gen (subject opinion I know).
AAA development is obviously difficult, but with some of the releases that we've had the past few years (Battlefield, Halo, Driveclub, Unity list goes on) if a game is a little shorter than what we would have ideally liked doesnt that pale in comparison to some of the other issues we've been having?
And again I'm not saying you shouldn't critique the game for being short, just put it into perspective I'd say.
But I dont wanna get into a name calling but I recognize names from the Ubi threads outraged that a company could release a product in such a state (Unity). Here we have a game that has no bugs, no day 1 patch (as far as I'm aware), never seems to drops below 30fps (based on impressions) and giving us one of the worlds most detailed and rich experiences I've seen this gen (subject opinion I know).
AAA development is obviously difficult, but with some of the releases that we've had the past few years (Battlefield, Halo, Driveclub, Unity list goes on) if a game is a little shorter than what we would have ideally liked doesnt that pale in comparison to some of the other issues we've been having?
And again I'm not saying you shouldn't critique the game for being short, just put it into perspective I'd say.
Kinda off-topic, but do we know if there are any behind-the-scenes or making-of videos included with the game? Despite my reservations about the game, I think it absolutely looks fantastic and has great animation and acting, so it'd be cool to see a bit of the mo-cap work they did and stuff like that.
DarkLordMalik
Member
Wat?
Scammed how? Did they promise gameplay like Gears of War? They were always on point about how cinematic their game is supposed to be. If people were magically expecting a game that is like Gears of War, it's on them and them alone.
Also if the videos are useful, why did people still buy games like Destiny, Watch Dogs, Halo: Master Chief Collection and Assassin's Creed Unity?
freenudemacusers
Member
on the flip side, we have dudes going full prerelease damage control hype, with an air of insider authority, all across the forum so eh
Officerrob
Banned
I wish developers would make the difficulty the game was meant to be played on "normal". Lots of them are guilty of the "it's meant to be played on hard" garbage. If that's true, hard should be the default, just make easier options available for those who want/need it
BadAss2961
Member
I think he meant standing around for 5 hours using photo mode.
hastethedav
Member
Man, people have been complaining about game length since the PS2 launched. Back in 2001 it was Onimusha that caused all the turmoil. It was considered one of the first few big PS2 titles and it took "only" 6-8 hours to finish. This was before the price bump too , so you went out and paid 49.99 USD (lucky yanks, it was 80$ canadian for a ps2 game in 2001) and you could marathon the game through in a day if you so desired. There were a few things extra to do but , coming off the PS1/N64 generation of 15-20 hour titles being the norm it was a big complaint.
Last gen we got the privilege of paying 59.99 USD for new games that looked 2-3 times better than the previous generation and game length seemed to average out at around 8-10 hours for any single player titles (counting 1 run through on normal difficulty that see's the player watching all of the cutscenes and possibly dying a few times). Now, we've got games that have again bumped up the visual quality 2-3 times and so far , game length hasn't suffered - The Order is merely the end game of what happens to a narrative driven title with the presentation set through the roof.
Could it have been longer ? well sure, but it would have been at the expense of the visuals or lead to more monotonous level design. Why ? well, they aren't going to create tons of expensive new art assets just to add new and interesting levels to the experience , instead padding a game like The Order out would have involved building larger levels out of existing art assets and re-using the same few enemies and encounters even more than I'm assuming it already does.
We are also forgetting another piece of the puzzle here. This expectation of game length is a strange thing in gaming , it wasn't always there. From the 70's through to the mid 90's games tended towards shorter , challenging experiences. The marios, Ninja Gaidens and megamans of the world back in the were all titles that could be completed in 2-3 hours on a first play through. Games which were even shorter tended to have other walls to prevent an easy win - limited lives and continues, 1 hit deaths. As well, some titles that could be finished fairly easily would also have difficulty settings , play through them again and again.
Some of you might be thinking - "yeah well, those old games only cost a few bucks on virtual console". Well, they didn't cost that when they first came out. In fact paying 50$ for a game that last 2 hours on the NES was considered a pretty good purchase. Every game cost 50 $ until pretty late in the NES life cycle. SNES / Genesis games were still mostly the same length for the same price but - they looked and sounded better and with the extra buttons offered on the controllers - played better too.
Basically, the short length of the Order shouldn't be a factor in whether it's cinematic experience is worth it to you. Want a longer game ? go play the boring and repetitive Destiny instead and waste 100's of hours replaying the same short stages to get an ugly helmet.
There has to be room in the gaming world for titles which don't fit the bill of "6 -1.5 hour long stages with 1 hour of cutscenes + the same multiplayer you've had since doom". Not everyone has to like playing an interactive movie or even give it a chance but stop complaining about it costing to much. It doesn't deserve that.
A final aside - at 6 hours of length, the Order is almost like a trilogy of films or even a multi part HBO mini series. A season of game of thrones on bluray costs 60-80$ when it comes out and 3 bluray movies are also worth 60-80$. So what I'm getting at is , even when I look at the price - compared to other mediums it's still pretty much par for the course.
Last gen we got the privilege of paying 59.99 USD for new games that looked 2-3 times better than the previous generation and game length seemed to average out at around 8-10 hours for any single player titles (counting 1 run through on normal difficulty that see's the player watching all of the cutscenes and possibly dying a few times). Now, we've got games that have again bumped up the visual quality 2-3 times and so far , game length hasn't suffered - The Order is merely the end game of what happens to a narrative driven title with the presentation set through the roof.
Could it have been longer ? well sure, but it would have been at the expense of the visuals or lead to more monotonous level design. Why ? well, they aren't going to create tons of expensive new art assets just to add new and interesting levels to the experience , instead padding a game like The Order out would have involved building larger levels out of existing art assets and re-using the same few enemies and encounters even more than I'm assuming it already does.
We are also forgetting another piece of the puzzle here. This expectation of game length is a strange thing in gaming , it wasn't always there. From the 70's through to the mid 90's games tended towards shorter , challenging experiences. The marios, Ninja Gaidens and megamans of the world back in the were all titles that could be completed in 2-3 hours on a first play through. Games which were even shorter tended to have other walls to prevent an easy win - limited lives and continues, 1 hit deaths. As well, some titles that could be finished fairly easily would also have difficulty settings , play through them again and again.
Some of you might be thinking - "yeah well, those old games only cost a few bucks on virtual console". Well, they didn't cost that when they first came out. In fact paying 50$ for a game that last 2 hours on the NES was considered a pretty good purchase. Every game cost 50 $ until pretty late in the NES life cycle. SNES / Genesis games were still mostly the same length for the same price but - they looked and sounded better and with the extra buttons offered on the controllers - played better too.
Basically, the short length of the Order shouldn't be a factor in whether it's cinematic experience is worth it to you. Want a longer game ? go play the boring and repetitive Destiny instead and waste 100's of hours replaying the same short stages to get an ugly helmet.
There has to be room in the gaming world for titles which don't fit the bill of "6 -1.5 hour long stages with 1 hour of cutscenes + the same multiplayer you've had since doom". Not everyone has to like playing an interactive movie or even give it a chance but stop complaining about it costing to much. It doesn't deserve that.
A final aside - at 6 hours of length, the Order is almost like a trilogy of films or even a multi part HBO mini series. A season of game of thrones on bluray costs 60-80$ when it comes out and 3 bluray movies are also worth 60-80$. So what I'm getting at is , even when I look at the price - compared to other mediums it's still pretty much par for the course.
SargerusBR
I love Pokken!
Wait what? I thought this was coming tomorrow.