Ready at Dawn responds to "concern" over The Order: 1886 campaign length

King_Moc said:
Why are so many people convinced that every game that is longer than the order is full of fetch quests and repetition? That isn't the case, so stop cherry picking.
Click to expand...

I was referring to people that return games the next day, see the quote.

I understand that other games have more length, I'm not an idiot.
 
Stormus said:
I like how people saying, "there's nothing wrong with a game of 5 hours"

Well, when it's single-player only and charging $60, there absolutely is.

Sure, quality over quantity but 5 hours for a strictly SP experience is ridiculous. Stop justifying it.

Note: I'm not saying The Order is only 5 hours, however these rumors are concerning.
Click to expand...
Why don't you let us all know what exact length is "justified" for a $60 game then? 7h23m ? or what about 10h43m12s ? Don't try to pretend price vs length isn't something very subjective.
 
Leafhopper said:
What does a "Risk" mean to you?
Click to expand...

I guess youll answer for him? In the case of TO it is taking a risk by being single player only and linear in an industry climate that is increasingly moving away from these sorts of games. Id like to know what the person I replied to definition of risk taking is.

EDIT: I see he answered.
 
Fury451 said:
Yes, padding equals bang for buck to people.

Funny thing is, I doubt most ever finish those bigger games.
Click to expand...

Which is most excellent, since it saves me from nearly tripling my entertainment budget when I can play a game for more than 10 hours. Maybe I am just a spoiled PC gamer, but I personally want more out of my $60 and tax. Not that this happened with The Order, I am still cautiously optimistic. Game looks fantastic.
 
Neuromancer said:
All reports?



http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=992687&page=1
Click to expand...

I find the insinuation that story telling "left gaming" and that this game is for "old-school" gamers to be quite a retelling of history and VG tropes. Anti-historical almost.
Neuromancer said:
Yeah there are a lot of high performing third person shooters set in Victorian London where your guys are fighting werewolves that this game is just riding the coat tails of.
Click to expand...

Not to turn the discussion elsewhere, but the setting being a unique one does not preclude the game using many conventions which are currently in mode among the AAA space.
 
ICPEE said:
Your last sentence there " Its our responsibility as the consumer to let them know when we dont like something". According to that we don't like cinematic games, 5 hour single player campaigns, cutscenes, black bars, quick time events or standard tps gameplay mechanics. If any devs paid attention to any gaming forums they would not have a game to make because we pretty much hate everything. Devs should stay out of these places and make the games they want to make.
Click to expand...

Haha, ya. There are some masochistic revs tho.
 
Alienous said:
Mild spoilers regarding that.

Of the 5 and a half hour playthrough there were 7(?) entire chapters of the game that consisted of only cutscenes, totalling around 40 minutes (I didn't calculate this, it was calculated by someone else in the spoiler thread). That's not counting the cutscenes between gameplay moments.
Click to expand...


Stop posting spoilers outside of the spoiler thread.
 
Dictator93 said:
I find the insinuation that story telling "left gaming" and that this game is for "old-school" gamers to be quite a retelling of history and VG tropes. Anti-historical almost.


Not to turn the discussion elsewhere, but the setting being a unique one does not preclude the game using many conventions which are currently in mode among the AAA space.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not but a unique setting almost certainly increases a games risk, wouldn't you say?
 
Alienous said:
Mild spoilers regarding that.

Of the 5 and a half hour playthrough there were 7(?) entire chapters of the game that consisted of only cutscenes, totalling around 40 minutes (I didn't calculate this, it was calculated by someone else in the spoiler thread). That's not counting the cutscenes between gameplay moments.
Click to expand...

Well that's better than I expected. So it probably is around 5-6 hours of gameplay.
 
DoubleTake said:
I guess youll answer for him? In the case of TO it is taking a risk by being single player only and linear in an industry climate that is increasingly moving away from these sorts of games. Id like to know what the person I replied to definition of risk taking is.
Click to expand...

Ah my bad, I can't answer for them. I was just curious what it was for you.
 
Damn, I was really thinking of picking this up after some of the latest footage. Dodging length questions like that and phrases like "leaning heavily on interactive cinematics and QTEs" are deal breakers for me though.

Looking forward to seeing user impressions and i will reevaluate when it hits $20-30.
 
King_Moc said:
Why are so many people convinced that every game that is longer than the order is full of fetch quests and repetition? That isn't the case, so stop cherry picking.
Click to expand...

It's true for Inquisition. Mass Effect was pretty well balanced in this regard though. Even Dying Light's main story can be finished pretty quick, but it has "padding". It's (mostly) fun padding though. Not all padding is fun, most isn't much beyond "collect x" or do a repetitive task repeatedly in a new location. See Saints Row IV for a non RPG example.

If The Order is only 5-6 hours, I'll be disappointed because that is short. But if it's a memorable ride, I'll enjoy it more than aimless fetching.

Apples and Oranges though.
 
I wouldn't mind it being short if it had at least co-op. The first Gears of War was really short but my friend and me racked up hours and hours of fun playing co-op on every single difficulty. A short game with co-op can be awesome.
 
DoubleTake said:
And undeservedly so. Im playing through it right now and its honestly one of the best FPS ive played in a good while. I wish I would have picked it up earlier to support what Machine Games managed to do.
Click to expand...

I think I'm going to have to get Wolfenstein soon - heard so many people giving positive opinions on it, and it sounds like the kind of game I would enjoy. Just need to finish my current backlog and will hopefully be able to pick it up for a bargain price.
 
Was it like this when Mirror's Edge released? Because Mirror's Edge is kinda short but it's still an awesome game.
It also lacked co-op and multiplayer, but still did well.
 
DoubleTake said:
You never answered my question. Any examples of a recent game that takes risks?
Click to expand...

Wolfenstein/shadow warrior bringing back an old ip and an older style of gameplay mixed with newer mechanics.

Wasteland 2 and Divinity Original Sin bringing back the old dnd isometric style rpgs.

Evolve/titanfall New project from experienced devs that was multiplayer only even though the outcry for them to do a singleplayer was loud. One featured a mix of past gameplay features into one awesome package and the other did a game mode style that hasn't been seen often.
 
I'm really glad to not be a part of this drama lol. Oy gevalt ist mir.

Triggerhappytel said:
I think I'm going to have to get Wolfenstein soon - heard so many people giving positive opinions on it, and it sounds like the kind of game I would enjoy. Just need to finish my current backlog and will hopefully be able to pick it up for a bargain price.
Click to expand...

Wolfenstein is awesome.
 
njean777 said:
I wouldn't mind it being short if it had at least co-op. The first Gears of War was really short but my friend and me racked up hours and hours of fun playing co-op on every single difficulty. A short game with co-op can be awesome.
Click to expand...

My exact feelings as well.
 
Quality is paramount, but I can't deny time isn't a factor. If a game is two hours long and story driven with no reason to replay it other than to experience the story again (which I rarely do) there is no way I'll pay $60. Even if it is a groundbreaking experience. Especially today when I know it will be available for $35 or less in months.

Now 5.5 hours is a little different. That time doesn't bother me so much but it's going to have to be a mind-blowing 5.5 hours for me to pay full price. I will definitely wait to read reviews (and more GAF impressions) before comitting to The Order. If it is that short there are enough people who will wait for a sale that I could see the price dropping quickly.
 
Fury451 said:
It's true for Inquisition. Mass Effect was pretty well balanced in this regard though. Even Dying Light's main story can be finished pretty quick, but it has "padding". It's (mostly) fun padding though. Not all padding is fun, most isn't much beyond "collect x" or do a repetitive task repeatedly in a new location. See Saints Row IV for a non RPG example.

If The Order is only 5-6 hours, I'll be disappointed because that is short. But if it's a memorable ride, I'll enjoy it more than aimless fetching.

Apples and Oranges though.
Click to expand...

He said stop cherry picking so you replied with cherry picking.

Amazing.
 
5 hour story driven games are A-OK, even if they cost $60. Why shouldn't a short game cost $60?

Now, if that short game is a pastiche of cliched narrative and well worn gameplay from the last 5 years of AAA design, that could be a problem.

But at least it looks great!
 
Neuromancer said:
Perhaps not but a unique setting almost certainly increases a games risk, wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...
Do you mean risky for a publisher to fund? This is not some arthouse game with a female protagonist and an "against the grain" backdrop or gameplay mechanics (like, escaping a warzone). It is firmly rooted in common VG-territory, you are a male lead who shoots stuff along with super natural elements in a historicized setting (wolfenstein, castlevania, heck Uncharted 1).

It is not COD levels of commonality, but werewolves and guns arent exactly risky setting types IMO.
 
Eggbok said:
Was it like this when Mirror's Edge released? Because Mirror's Edge is kinda short but it's still an awesome game.
Click to expand...

Mirror's Edge has quite good longetivity though with the time challenges. I think being short is totally ok, I just wish there was some new content for extra playthroughs.
 
Not worth your money for that lenght... wait a week to get it second hand for $40, and a month or so to get it for $20~25, 'cause this is what happens with single player only games...
 
Eggbok said:
Was it like this when Mirror's Edge released? Because Mirror's Edge is kinda short but it's still an awesome game.
It also lacked co-op and multiplayer, but still did well.
Click to expand...

As someone that absolutely adores Mirrors Edge, I wouldn't have been at all happy if I'd paid full price for it. It just shouldn't be full price.
 
Pankratous said:
If you don't understand the MW comparison then your reading comprehension is terrible.
Click to expand...
seriously. I don't want to quote people's name because that would be embarrassing, but well, the first couple responses are pretty embarrassing, I would edit them out actually. You guys completely missed the COD comparison, like completely. Stop react posting so quickly, it was a good response.
 
kpaadet said:
Why don't you let us all know what exact length is "justified" for a $60 game then? 7h23m ? or what about 10h43m12s ? Don't try to pretend price vs length isn't something very subjective.
Click to expand...

IMO a 5 hours game is fine, if you're not charging $60, or if there's a multiplayer component. Maybe The Order has tons of replayability. I'm just saying in general, it's too short for my taste.

For a SP, full price game I would expect at least 10 solid hours of gameplay, or else I'm waiting for a price drop.
 
JetBlackPanda said:
Is this why games like Dragonage has 30 hours of fetch quests? Or Bravely Defaults end section? Just to pad the numbers? If it makes someone feel better to grab 10 flowers to heal a sick kid or kill 5 wolves to save a village, more power to them I guess but I would have been fine with A tight story.
Click to expand...

There are good and bad ways to fill up a game with content. >.> But hey, Dragon Age Inquisition won GOTY was tons of places. So, that type of content is liked in some circles. I dug the game as well. It does not beat Bayo 2 in any way, shape or form though.

Do you have a lot of preorders?
Click to expand...

My little store has about 30. Which is surprising. Sony's 1st party games don't pre-order well around my area though. For example, Majora's Mask had around 60. Dying Light around 30. Same for Evolve.

Seriously? This happens often to you with people marathoning a game and then coming into your store the next day pissed off and returning it? What was the last game you remember where that happened?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say 5 hours is "Marathoning" (if we want to use this example...8 hours would be though). That's like two movies right there. That's pretty easy on a lazy Saturday or Friday night.

Want several examples where this happened?

Infamous Second Son
Wolfenstein: The New Order
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (remember, like half the people who buy this don't play online)
Ryse: Son of Rome
Dead Rising 3
Thief
Alien Isolation

I could keep going. =/
 
RedComet said:
It's 10 dollars, no unskipable cutscenes, no QTE's, has mods. Many more feautres than The Order 1886.
Click to expand...

Even better. Portal is simply an awesome game.

Like I said I didn't play the game and I'm almost just curious now but I'm not sure reviews are going to say "awesome" :/
 
N30RYU said:
Not worth your money for that lenght... wait a week to get it second hand for $40, and a month or so to get it for $20~25.
Click to expand...

Keep dreaming for those rates. Will take at least a month (likely 2) for the price to go down that quickly at resale. It's a first party game.

$20-25 5-6 months at the earliest.
 
Stormus said:
IMO a 5 hours game is fine, if you're not charging $60, or if there's a multiplayer component. Maybe The Order has tons of replayability. I'm just saying in general, it's too short for my taste.

For a SP, full price game I would expect at least 10 solid hours of gameplay, or else I'm waiting for a price drop.
Click to expand...

Pretty much every gaffer that's completed it has taken around 10 hours.
 
GHG said:
This is key for me.

I can't understand why suddenly so many people seem to want every game to do everything. More often than not, if a game does everything it becomes a diluted experience, the final product lacks focus. Yes all of those things can add to the perceived value of a product but what about the quality of your minute to minute experience with the game?

Value perception and value realisation are 2 entirely different things.

I personally value my down time enough to say that I would rather spend 5-10 hours with a quality product that I enjoy every minute of rather than spend 20-30 hours slogging through a game that lacks focus/quality and has been artificially prolonged.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the million dollar question is would you and many other people pay $60 for that little amount of quality?

Ive enjoyed my share of short, quality games, but nowadays I would not dish out $60 for them. There is so much competition in terms of the number of quality games that I have still yet to play that I can easily wait for a good price drop. That's what the order has to face.
 
Triggerhappytel said:
I think I'm going to have to get Wolfenstein soon - heard so many people giving positive opinions on it, and it sounds like the kind of game I would enjoy. Just need to finish my current backlog and will hopefully be able to pick it up for a bargain price.
Click to expand...

Keep expectations in chk, don't expect a $200 000 000 GOAT. Expect great level design, a surprisingly emotional story, and fun gunplay. Wolfie is worth buying.
 
Draft said:
5 hour story driven games are A-OK, even if they cost $60. Why shouldn't a short game cost $60?

Now, if that short game is a pastiche of cliched narrative and well worn gameplay from the last 5 years of AAA design, that could be a problem.

But at least it looks great!
Click to expand...

Well, I think there's nothing wrong with well worn gameplay if it's fun, but I think this is pretty close to how I feel.
 
Kintaro said:
Want several examples where this happened?

Infamous Second Son
Wolfenstein: The New Order
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (remember, like half the people who buy this don't play online)
Ryse: Son of Rome
Dead Rising 3
Thief
Alien Isolation

I could keep going. =/
Click to expand...

I must just be slow as hell because all of the games I bolded that I actually played took me a good week to finish. I don't have the time to really just sit down for a whole day or two and play a game though so that could be a big indicator.
 
This game went from a 60 dollar purchase to either a rental or 20 dollar purchase. These days I am a buget game so hours per dollar is important for me.
 
boltz said:
Yeah but the million dollar question is would you and many other people pay $60 for that little amount of quality?

Ive enjoyed my share of short, quality games, but nowadays I would not dish out $60 for them. There is so much competition in terms of the number of quality games that I have still yet to play that I can easily wait for a good price drop. That's what the order has to face.
Click to expand...

RAD has mainly done ports or handheld titles. It's probably the largest work they've done. Do they deserve criticism over length? Maybe, maybe not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ready At Dawn co-founder discusses failed The Order: 1886 sequel pitch
Game Dev  2 3
118
6K
hussar16 replied
Rumour : Ready at dawn had plans for a The Order 1886 sequel pre Meta acquisition
2
71
4K
MayauMiao replied
VGC: The Order 1886 sequel would have offered bigger fights and multiplayer
37
638
ChorizoPicozo replied
Meta shuts down developer Ready at Dawn (Lone Echo, The Order 1886, GoW Chains of Olympus/Ghost of Sparta, Daxter)
2 3 4
176
15K
Wonko_C replied
LTTP: The Order 1886: Sir Gigachad (56k warning, screenshots)
Hype  2 3 4
169
8K
Regginator replied
Top Bottom