• 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

M

MercuryLS

Banned
Mendrox said:
Well... it's true. Friend got his copy this morning and he already traded it back in. Finished at 6 1/2 hours on hard with almost everything to collect so I guess I will rent it this weekend for the pretty graphics.
Click to expand...

This really is one of those play once and that's it games. I'm going to beat it soon and trade it in towards bloodborne. The campaign is decent but it doesn't have the replayability of a ND game for example. The campaign just isn't that compelling. Sure is pretty through.
 
N

nobodyshero

Banned
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained experience; if you want a higher budget, you'll likely need to sacrifice game length, unless you're one of the already well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for which the budget is essentially unlimited.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily think you're wrong, but there is also the option that RAD had free reign to do whatever they wanted, and this is simply the style of game they wanted to make, no sacrifices. We've never been lead to believe this was a super open game.
 
B

Badpsychometry

Member
I'm so scared now. I blindly pre ordered from The PSN store and I am the kinda person that likes to get mileage out of a game. Especially if it's full price....
 
J

jpax

Member
Oneself said:
If you're rushing through games (aka the 6hours people) this one definitely isn't for you.

If you enjoy taking your time, exploring etc. I garantee you'll enjoy the fuck out of The Order. I have yet to reach chapter 4 and played approx. 3hrs and a half.
Click to expand...

Are they playing it wrong?
 
E

EightBitNate

Member
Oneself said:
Well, I've been PLAYING the game since yesterday buddy.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm only responding to you saying you must be rushing if you finish the game in 6 hours. There's concrete proof that what you're saying isn't true. I don't know if it's taking you longer, but I'm not trying to argue about that.
 
O

Osahi

Member
Heavy said:
I don't get cliffhanger criticism, either. I love cliffhangers in TV shows and movies. The only justifiable knock I could see for a cliffhanger is if the sequel to that movie or game took several years to make. If RAD can knock out a sequel in <2 years, I see nothing wrong with a cliffhanger. Didn't hurt LotR or Hunger Games.
Click to expand...

It's not really a cliffhanger either. More of a stinger/teaser/set-up for the next adventure. If you look at the main conflict/mystery, that gets resolved with some loose threads. (Some of those threads do feel as if they should have been tied up though,) So yeah, I don't really get the critisism either.

STORY SPOILERS:

The stories main arc is how Galahad starts to doubt the Order, sees his loyalty tested and in the end goes rogue. That's a rounded narrative with a clear beginning, middle and end. The overall conflict outside his character still rages on, but his arc is complete at the very end of the game.
 
B

Barack Lesnar

Banned
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained experience; if you want a higher budget, you'll likely need to sacrifice game length, unless you're one of the already well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for which the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...
I take "natural end point" means the last of its kind. Agreed, I don't see another game of this type (expensive, short, singleplayer only, linear game) being made again unless a sequel is greenlit.

Osahi said:
*snip*
Click to expand...
That doesn't sound bad.
 
Kacho

Kacho

Member
This game will probably open up a lot of interesting discussion when it gets released. I'm looking forward to it.
 
O

Opiate

Member
nobodyshero said:
I don't necessarily think you're wrong, but there is also the option that RAD had free reign to do whatever they wanted, and this is simply the style of game they wanted to make, no sacrifices. We've never been lead to believe this was a super open game.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think it is the style of game they wanted to make, but this style of game demands sacrifices, just like any other does.

Do you want to make a puzzle game a la Tetris? Then you probably have to give up on telling a story. Do you want to make a game with a lower production budget? Then you probably have to give up on making a game as pretty as The Order.

I think some people view games as a medium with unlimited potential. I don't think that's right, but even if I did, my point here is that no single game can tap all of that potential at once. Doing X means you can't do Y; doing Z means you can't do A. Choices need to be made, and those choices limit your other options.

That's really all I'm saying here. I'm saying that this particular style of game has its strengths, but that these strengths create natural weaknesses, as well. Whether you happen to personally like those strengths/weaknesses is a matter of choice for both you and for Ready At Dawn.
 
N

nib95

Banned
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained, corridor-ish experience, as well as a shorter game, unless you're one of the few well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for whom the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...

I think the bolded is especially apt. Though I do feel as though studio's such as RAD, can expand their vision and grow from titles like this, the way Naughty Dog did from Uncharted (1) for example.
 
Denton

Denton

Member
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained, corridor-ish experience, as well as a shorter game, unless you're one of the few well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for whom the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...

I think you might be surprised with The Witcher 3.
 
A

Abounder

Banned
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained, corridor-ish experience, as well as a shorter game, unless you're one of the few well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for whom the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...

This game is a caricature of the AAA landscape especially if it only has ~2-3 hours of gameplay for $50. The Order is the type of game that enthusiasts have been lamenting against; sort of like Bayonetta vs Ryse, but to each their own.
 
R

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained, corridor-ish experience, as well as a shorter game, unless you're one of the few well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for whom the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...
I think this game also says a lot about why sequels and franchises are so important to the gaming landscape. RAD went into this game not having an engine ready for AAA development or a TPS core to build on and refine and as a result had to spend considerably more work getting the basics together than they could on creating content.
 
O

Osahi

Member
Heavy said:
I take "natural end point" means the last of its kind. Agreed, I don't see another game of this type (expensive, short, singleplayer only, linear game) being made again unless a sequel is greenlit.


That doesn't sound bad.
Click to expand...

I think he means storydriven games has reached their endpoint in looking for a way to blend story with gameplay. He means that the only way to get this kind of experiences where a great story is welltold, is to sacrifice some gameplay and freedom for a more directed experience. These kind of games will keep beging made and are a certain genre in the wider game spectrum

I don't think that it is entirely true that this is the end-point. I think there is room for a storydriven experience where there is a little less sense of being heavily directed (allthough that feeling will keep existing). I have the feeling Naughty Dog for instance is experimenting with more open ended gameplay combined with a heavy story focus, like Last of Us did in partys and U4 seems to do too. I can see games coming out with a great story and gameplay, that adapts a little to how you play. Also, I believe the way games like Gone Home tell a story trough environments and clues will find it's way more and more into triple A action games like this too.

Also, in an entirely other discussion. I don't think these games are bad for doing it. It's just a way to tell a story in games and give a certain experience. This will not make core games like Bloodborne go away, They will live side by side.
 
E

Exile20

Member
RoboPlato said:
I think this game also says a lot about why sequels and franchises are so important to the gaming landscape. RAD went into this game not having an engine ready for AAA development or a TPS core to build on and refine and as a result had to spend considerably more work getting the basics together than they could on creating content.
Click to expand...

And this is special how?

Many devs started the same way and succeeded.
 
R

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
Freeman said:
Was this discussed somewhere?

http://www.develop-online.net/inter...y-at-dawn-talks-quality-over-quantity/0203245

"We have this uncanny 'haterade' for our game no matter what. People are looking for something to throw at our game, some reason to hate it. I'm excited to hear what people who have actually played the game think about it, how do they feel about the quality and the quantity? I think by and large that most people are going to be satisfied."
Click to expand...
GAF shoutout LOL
"we have a joke where someone will post on the website NeoGAF something like "Sony released new screenshots of The Order" and we place bets on what post number we think is going to be the first one where someone says something unfoundedly negative. Like 'oh looks like it's going to be failboat' or something like that, and we'll guess 'maybe it's going to be post 20' and we'll see how close we are."
 
O

Oneself

Member
jpax said:
Are they playing it wrong?
Click to expand...

Definitely not. But I truly enjoy the details in that type of games and I am blown away in most places I get to in The Order. I look around, read the memos I find, take screenshots, listen to the NPCs discussions etc.
To give an example, that Tesla lab you see in the video took me around 7 to 10 minutes to go through... I know you can walk through it waaay faster than that without missing any "pick ups".
 
M

Marcovaldo

Member
Abounder said:
This game is a caricature of the AAA landscape especially if it only has ~2-3 hours of gameplay for $50. The Order is the type of game that enthusiasts have been lamenting against; sort of like Bayonetta vs Ryse, but to each their own.
Click to expand...

this. it really does seem like the game took almost everything that felt like an anathema to gaming and rolled it into a single product: limited player agency, super linear, large amount of cutscenes (that can't be skipped), quick time events, is another shooter and not a lot of gameplay. i'm sure once the dust settles/there are other exclusives this will be forgotten by most
 
B

Barack Lesnar

Banned
Osahi said:
I think he means storydriven games has reached their endpoint in looking for a way to blend story with gameplay. He means that the only way to get this kind of experiences where a great story is welltold, is to sacrifice some gameplay and freedom for a more directed experience. These kind of games will keep beging made and are a certain genre in the wider game spectrum

I don't think that it is entirely true that this is the end-point. I think there is room for a storydriven experience where there is a little less sense of being heavily directed (allthough that feeling will keep existing). I have the feeling Naughty Dog for instance is experimenting with more open ended gameplay combined with a heavy story focus, like Last of Us did in partys and U4 seems to do too. I can see games coming out with a great story and gameplay, that adapts a little to how you play. Also, I believe the way games like Gone Home tell a story trough environments and clues will find it's way more and more into triple A action games like this too.

Also, in an entirely other discussion. I don't think these games are bad for doing it. It's just a way to tell a story in games and give a certain experience. This will not make core games like Bloodborne go away, They will live side by side.
Click to expand...
I hope you're right. Story and production is important to me. As much as I love online and f2p gaming, I wouldn't want the entire landscape to evolve into that.
 
Freeman

Freeman

Banned
Conduit said:
"we-needed exactly 10 hours and 48 minutes on the normal difficulty setting."
Click to expand...

Denzel-Washington-Boom-Gif.gif
 
S

Shengar

Member
RoboPlato said:
GAF shoutout LOL
"we have a joke where someone will post on the website NeoGAF something like "Sony released new screenshots of The Order" and we place bets on what post number we think is going to be the first one where someone says something unfoundedly negative. Like 'oh looks like it's going to be failboat' or something like that, and we'll guess 'maybe it's going to be post 20' and we'll see how close we are."
Click to expand...

That's a pretty awesome bet to be honest
I can imagine someone make a fortune already by putting their bet on the first post.
 
M

MercuryLS

Banned
Shadow_FFVI said:
All of this just makes me appreciate why The Last of Us had such a good reception by the players and critics alike.
Click to expand...

Tlou had a good mix of gameplay and storytelling. The actual mechanics and scenarios were top notch. It was also a really long campaign. The gameplay to cutscene mix is not good in the order, the mechanics are good but the gameplay scenarios are boring. Also there is too much reliance on qte for the "epic" parts of the gameplay. Tlou is far more enjoyable in just about every way.
 
D

Dragonborn

Member
Abounder said:
This game is a caricature of the AAA landscape especially if it only has ~2-3 hours of gameplay for $50. The Order is the type of game that enthusiasts have been lamenting against; sort of like Bayonetta vs Ryse, but to each their own.
Click to expand...

I'm an enthusiast and I do not lament it. In fact, I welcome these types of games with open arms and hope for more. You don't speak for everyone
 
BiGBoSSMk23

BiGBoSSMk23

A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
Opiate said:
This game typifies the current AAA landscape to me. That doesn't mean it's bad -- that's a different topic -- but rather that this is the natural end point of this sort of game development.

If you want more story, you'll need less gameplay and less choice; if you want more special effects, you'll need a more contained, corridor-ish experience, as well as a shorter game, unless you're one of the few well established studios (e.g. Rockstar) for whom the budget is essentially unlimited.

Again, to emphasize: this doesn't mean the game is bad. I'm just saying this game shows what sacrifices need to be made to achieve this particular style of game design.
Click to expand...

Well, first ventures always see compromises to make up their areas of success.

Games like these are necessary stepping stones to raise standards of quality.

Creation of tools, optimization time, IP establishment , etc...are things that take up the bulk of the development period the first time around. The second time is when those elements you mentioned all come together.

It's not a matter of AAA Dev problems, it's part of the sequel effect.
 
D

dwix

Member
Badpsychometry said:
I'm so scared now. I blindly pre ordered from The PSN store and I am the kinda person that likes to get mileage out of a game. Especially if it's full price....
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, you can cancel a pre-order on the PSN store, I've done it. I think you may have to call them, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What are the best COD single player campaigns?
2
72
2K
FunkMiller replied
Phantom Blade 0 Game Length Is 30-40 Hours, Features Multiplayer
News
16
2K
Rain432 replied
Gameplay density matters.
2
85
4K
Jaybe replied
Modern Warfare III Campaign is 3-4 hours long
News Drama 2 3
101
6K
SHA replied
  • Poll
Fighting games; much loved but quickly abandoned. Do you play them more than 1 week?
Poll 2
68
2K
EverydayBeast replied
Top Bottom