• 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

With every new post I read in the impression thread, this game gets longer and longer.

First it was five hours.

Then six hours.

Then eight hours.

Then ten hours.

Then twelve hours.

Then fourteen hours.

At this rate it's going to make Skyrim look like Portal in terms of length.

Honestly, there's nothing wrong with a game being five hours. Super Metroid, a game many laud as one of the best ever, is about a five hour game (granted it only has like 3 minutes of cutscenes while The Order probably has more). The issue is that not many people want to pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game, especially one extremely cutscene heavy. If you do, then go for it, but I would much rather get at least 20 hours of gameplay if I drop sixty bucks.
 

Stimpack

Member
Aug 14, 2012
3,611
0
410
What a ridiculous question!
There's a very simple thing that you and those who feel this way, can do, don't buy the game. No amount of arguing playtimes or going back and forth is gonna change a thing. You vote with your wallet, you're scared the game's gonna be 5.5 hours, you think it's too cinematic than don't buy it. And for everyone else arguing with people who don't want to buy it for those reasons, why do you guys care so much what other people buy?

You enjoy cinematic games, buy it
You don't enjoy them, don't buy it, rent it if you want or watch it on youtube
You act like I wasn't already planning to do that. I'm not yelling at, or demeaning people who buy it. Are you telling me that I should shut up and just keep my opinions to myself? There's a discussion in place, and there are two sides to it. Err, there are multiple sides to it.
 

Altima

Member
Dec 19, 2013
1,713
0
0
"I know there are numbers out there," he said. "I know why the question comes up. I know numbers have been put out there that are actually not right. It's impossible to finish the game in that time, so we know the numbers are wrong.
He did not mention what number he really denied. Maybe he denied 2-3 hours not 5 hours.
 

AnthonypUK

Member
Feb 18, 2014
1,199
0
0
When was the last game to get some many peoples panties in a bunch? I've been lurking a while and i think the closest i can think where we had threads like these was destiny I wonder if it'll start up on bloodbourne come next monday once the order is out of the way,
 

King_Moc

Member
Sep 19, 2010
11,647
0
690
England
Gee guys, would you pay 'full price' for games like Metal Gear Solid or Resident Evil 2 if they got released today? Those are typical single player games with 8 to 12 hours of content, less if you rush it, more if you're a completionist. Personally I'm fine with an 8 hour campaign; and it will probably take me a bit longer since I like to look around and play it on hard. If you don't think it isnt offering enough value for your money just pick it up in a sale.
Resident Evil 2 was £30 at launch in the UK. The Order is £47. My first playthrough Of Resi 2 took 8 hours, and there were 4 different ways of playing through it, plus bonus modes afterwards. It's not much of a comparison.
 

Bishop89

Member
May 13, 2013
16,288
5
470
even if i mainly buy cod for its mp, i would still pay full price for the campaigns because they are just fun and a rollercoaster ride.

Vanquish is short, as well as plenty of other sp only games.
 

Altima

Member
Dec 19, 2013
1,713
0
0
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with a game being five hours. Super Metroid, a game many laud as one of the best ever, is about a five hour game (granted it only has like 3 minutes of cutscenes while The Order probably has more). The issue is that not many people want to pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game, especially one extremely cutscene heavy. If you do, then go for it, but I would much rather get at least 20 hours of gameplay if I drop sixty bucks.
I think you are genius if you can beat Super Metroid in 5 hours in the first try.
 

GeordieMark

Member
Dec 10, 2013
6,565
2
375
The original god of war was only 6 hours.....and was one of the best $60 i ever spent.


Edit: nvm they were $50 back then
6 hours of pretty much non-stop gameplay though. The issue I personally have with this being potentially very short is that it seems a large portion of the overall length are cut-scenes
 
Aug 29, 2013
6,096
0
0
You act like I wasn't already planning to do that. I'm not yelling at, or demeaning people who buy it. Are you telling me that I should shut up and just keep my opinions to myself? There's a discussion in place, and there are two sides to it. Err, there are multiple sides to it.
No, I'm not telling you not to voice your opinion and that wasn't just aimed at you. I'm just talking in general. Diversity of opinions is a good thing, sad thing is a lot of people don't seem to accept other evidence that contradicts this 5.5 hour claim.

My personal opinion, it probably can be beaten in 5.5 hours, there's video evidence of it, but I also believe others that say it took them 9-10 hours. I have a feeling from my play style and my playing on hard that it will take me 7 at the very least and that's good enough for me.
 

Mendrox

Member
Jan 4, 2012
6,394
0
0
Sorry Ready at Dawn, but I like to not waste my money. I will rent the game for one day and play through it in that time without a hinch it seems. Saved money and got the movie experience. The game loooooks really good, but short content won't get me to buy it. :(
 

Carn82

Member
Jan 15, 2014
4,115
2
375
You should compare games to games which are out today.

Does Order give enough value for its money compared to other games on the market?

And hopefully it is 8+ hours but what if it's less? Like 6 hours or 5? A poster above says he saw the whole game played in 5.5 hours. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
I get your point, but you should compare it to similar games. There arent many that compare well on current-gen; (possible only Tomb Raider and TloU, or one of the AC games). It's not like that you can compare a well crafted single player 3rd person adventure/shooter with sandbox games like GTA5, or RPGs like DA:I. I do agree that it might be on the short side, but on the other hand, it does ooze a level of quality we havent seen before. In the end, vote with your wallet.
 

Bornstellar

Member
Jan 18, 2012
7,361
0
0
6 hours of pretty much non-stop gameplay though. The issue I personally have with this being potentially very short is that it seems a large portion of the overall length are cut-scenes
I'd wager 20-30 percent is cut scenes.

Very pretty cut scenes mind you.
 

Koh

Member
Jun 14, 2014
894
0
0
I don't have a problem with a 5 hour single player game. A game like portal comes to mind. However, its not worth 60 bucks to me. I'll certainly give it a try at a cheaper price.
 

Langdon Alger

Banned
Nov 9, 2014
3,443
1
0
Super Metroid, a game many laud as one of the best ever, is about a five hour game (granted it only has like 3 minutes of cutscenes while The Order probably has more). The issue is that not many people want to pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game, especially one extremely cutscene heavy. If you do, then go for it, but I would much rather get at least 20 hours of gameplay if I drop sixty bucks.
No way was Super Metroid 5 hours long.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Jun 10, 2004
59,901
1
0
Windsor, UK
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with a game being five hours. Super Metroid, a game many laud as one of the best ever, is about a five hour game (granted it only has like 3 minutes of cutscenes while The Order probably has more). The issue is that not many people want to pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game, especially one extremely cutscene heavy. If you do, then go for it, but I would much rather get at least 20 hours of gameplay if I drop sixty bucks.
But why would you rather have 20 hours just 'because'? If Super Metroid is one of the best games ever and is 5 hours long, it is still one of the best games ever. Why artificially limit yourself based on length?
 

Mass_Pincup

Banned
Feb 25, 2014
8,155
0
0
Paris
There's a hostile reaction, but I personally think it's a good thing. I don't want full-priced glorified movies taking over the AAA gaming space. I don't want devs thinking that the market is alright with this line of thinking. But, hey, that's just how I see things.
Good thing no one cares about what you want. Don't like those kind of games? Don't buy then, simple. Let people play what they want and stop acting like a selfish kid.
 

danowat

Member
Aug 30, 2014
13,499
1
0
Will this shitstorm ever end!?, the OT and review thread are going to be carnage!.

Just what is it about this single game in isolation that has gotten the community is such a tizzy?
 

EventHorizon

Member
Jul 15, 2013
3,586
63
460
Yea...Ok...But...

1) From what I hear the story isn't all that good either.
2) If the game's that short with little replay, why wouldn't it be better for gamers to rent it instead?
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
14,274
2,648
1,975
I do find it amusing how it seems such an enraging thing for so many people if games are not 20-50 hours long and at the same time the stats tell us that a lot of gamers do not complete their games and/or have huge backlogs of games they bought and have yet to start.
 

CircleOfFire

Member
Dec 22, 2008
398
0
830
I don't understand this cost per hour thinking that is present in this thread and all over the place. If I pay X and at the end of my time with a game am happy with how much I paid, then great.

Do people only buy movies once they are in a deal for the same reason, because the cost per hour goes below the threshold they hold things up to?
 

matrix-cat

Member
Jan 9, 2009
10,072
1
0
Personally, $60 for less than six hours isn't worth it to me, no matter the quality. If it's the kind of game I'm going to replay then that changes things, but I tend to think of one-and-done, Call-of-Duty-length games as $5 Steam sale purchases.

Yeah man but 5 hours is such a great number to cling on to.
The Youtube playthrough is right there. I'm watching it now; it's just a regular, first-time playthrough, unrushed, deaths and checkpoint reloads here and there, no cutscenes skipped. Five and a half hours.
 

Sodding_Gamer

Member
Nov 13, 2013
3,100
0
0
Fuck it. Just play through it the weekend and trade it in on the Monday. You'll get at least half your money back which can go towards Bloodborne ;) that's what I'll probably end up doing anyway. Unless the games story and atmosphere floors me that much then I'll keep it just as a sort of memento to play every once in a blue moon.
 

VeeP

Member
Jan 14, 2013
3,691
0
430
I get your point, but you should compare it to similar games. There arent many that compare well on current-gen; (possible only Tomb Raider and TloU, or one of the AC games). It's not like that you can compare a well crafted single player 3rd person adventure/shooter with sandbox games like GTA5, or RPGs like DA:I. I do agree that it might be on the short side, but on the other hand, it does ooze a level of quality we havent seen before. In the end, vote with your wallet.
Definitely agree with you. I did find the AC games and TLOU long, I haven't played Tomb Raider (and TLOU had excellent multiplayer).

However, like you said, maybe this game oozes quality. I haven't played it yet. I don't know what RaD put in for reply value, maybe there's nothing maybe there's something. We'll see soon.
 

vesvci

Banned
Oct 17, 2014
1,218
0
0
Can't wait to play this game. All the trash talking about it makes it even more promising. Same thing happened with Driveclub and the game is fantastic.
 

The Freeman

Member
Jan 14, 2014
267
0
0
I'd wager 20-30 percent is cut scenes.

Very pretty cut scenes mind you.
I watched 6 chapters of that YouTube playthrough last night which ran to about 90 minutes. The amount of cut scenes in those 6 chapters was insane, there was maybe 25/30 mins of gameplay and the guy playing was not rushing (he certainly died a few times during the QTE stealth kills)

I want to play the game as I love the aesthetic and its steam punk vibe, but I'm not sure I want to pay £50 for a game in which most of the time I wont actually be doing anything.
 

Bornstellar

Member
Jan 18, 2012
7,361
0
0
Fuck it. Just play through it the weekend and trade it in on the Monday. You'll get at least half your money back which can go towards Bloodborne ;) that's what I'll probably end up doing anyway. Unless the games story and atmosphere floor some that much then I'll keep it just as a sort of memento to pay every once in a blue moon.
1. Doubt it.
2. Graphics and sound... *drools*.
 

plasmawave

Member
Aug 28, 2013
11,109
157
515
Was this game really in devolpment for five years?

I can't believe it.
Those graphics look real expensive and I bet they take a lot of time to create those assets.
And it's RAD's first big console game so I'm sure they had to spend a fair amount of time in R&D.
 

Skux

Member
Aug 28, 2014
9,904
8
430
Those graphics look real expensive and I bet they take a lot of time to create those assets.
And it's RAD's first big console game so I'm sure they had to spend a fair amount of time in R&D.
It's an in-house engine too, developed from the ground up.
 

Carn82

Member
Jan 15, 2014
4,115
2
375
Resident Evil 2 was £30 at launch in the UK. The Order is £47. My first playthrough Of Resi 2 took 8 hours, and there were 4 different ways of playing through it, plus bonus modes afterwards. It's not much of a comparison.
I know; but you could could play through The Order two or more times because some of the interactive stuff might be different; or if you didnt platinum it on the first playthrough.

I think the pricing should be a different topic; games have gotten much more expensive; it's not like a huge game like DA:I was selling for cheap at launch. I agree that a single player game like The Order should sell for less (but not half prices or anything, just a bit less).. Main reason for me picking it up at launch is that I have have a discount voucher lying around and that I want to have a game to show of the PS4; and I'm pretty sure I`ll play through it a bunch of times.
 

El_Cinefilo

Member
Jun 22, 2014
650
0
285
For me it wasn't a great response, it was putting the issue aside.

As someone who happily paid £20 for Ground Zeroes because of all the replay value (I've had at least 10-12 hours out of that game and still haven't done everything). I have serious reservations about paying a full £45-£50 for a game that may last 5-6 hours including a heavy amount of cut scenes on a standard play through and have nothing to make me want to go back to it afterwards. His response didn't really address that concern properly for me.
 

Decarb

Member
Dec 6, 2008
4,597
1
875
Wow someone spent 5+ hours on youtube watching an entire playthrough from start to end? I hope he didn't do it just to prove the point.
 
Nov 19, 2013
2,159
0
0
Denmark
So if it takes about 5 hours and 40 minutes running through the game without looking for collectables, I will probably take around 8 hours if you try to get all the collectables.

I think that's a fine playthrough time. A well paced game with a good story certainly doesn't need to be any longer than that.
 

John Bender

Banned
Jun 21, 2014
3,505
0
0
Will this shitstorm ever end!?, the OT and review thread are going to be carnage!.

Just what is it about this single game in isolation that has gotten the community is such a tizzy?
My guess is, some people want this game to fail, because it's one of these "cinematic" games. And... you know... these "cinematic" games are kiling all the other ordinary games.
So "cinematic" games are teh evil.

All this hate that some of these "cinematic" games are gettin' ... it's hilarious.
You could think one of these games killed Super Mario.
 

Stimpack

Member
Aug 14, 2012
3,611
0
410
What a ridiculous question!
No, I'm not telling you not to voice your opinion and that wasn't just aimed at you. I'm just talking in general. Diversity of opinions is a good thing, sad thing is a lot of people don't seem to accept other evidence that contradicts this 5.5 hour claim.

My personal opinion, it probably can be beaten in 5.5 hours, there's video evidence of it, but I also believe others that say it took them 9-10 hours. I have a feeling from my play style and my playing on hard that it will take me 7 at the very least and that's good enough for me.
I know what you mean. It happens that often times people refuse to look at the other side of an argument, and are usually rather unreasonable in their stance, especially when they're on the "negative" side of things. While I reserve my right to an absolute judgement until I get my hands on it personally, I'll say that I've often been disappointed by very short games. If I can pop in the game and beat it in an afternoon, that's not okay at a $60 price point. Some of these Metroid, MGS, and RE comparisons are kind of crazy to me, because I spent well over a day playing those games.

But I think a lot of it comes back to the whole "cinematic experience" business, of wanting to make a movie rather than a game. I personally feel that if that's the way a developer chooses to make their game, that's fine, but expectations should be tempered and set from the very beginning. There should be no two ways about it. If you know that's the type of game you're making, you should do your part to tell people about it.

Anyway, it's a rather difficult discussion to have in the first place. Everyone has their own idea of what they want from a game and what they expect for their money. Ultimately, as you said before, people will vote with their wallets. I'll be sad if that vote is skewed due to some people being "tricked", but hopefully the reviews will come out soon enough and people will know what they're getting into before they make the decisions.

Good thing no one cares about what you want. Don't like those kind of games? Don't buy then, simple. Let people play what they want and stop acting like a selfish kid.
You're not adding to the discussion, and your remarks only serve to paint yourself as the childish one. I'm not forcing anyone to do anything, I'm voicing an opinion, and it's one I'm not alone in. If you're tired of hearing from unreasonable people, I understand that, but don't paint with a broad brush. I don't believe I've said anything to deserve your comments.
 
Aug 29, 2013
6,096
0
0
Thank you for stating the obvious. Indeed that was my post and my opinion which is indeed completely up to me.
Apparently it wasn't obvious to you because you said "where is the response?" Even though there is one and it's bolded right at the top for you.