Support NeoGAF

[dgrdsv]

Six hours packed with gameplay and story is fine by me. All games out there are having the same gameplay after the first hour or so anyway. I'd much rather play a short unique game than a long repetitive one.

But I understand why some people would be concerned over this as that's about 2 times shorter than an "industry standard" for such games.

 

[King_Moc]

Yeah but that wasn't exclusive so it gets a free pass

I don't understand this. I've been critical of The Order, yet I own a PS4 and don't have an Xb1. Am I magic?

 

[Iva Demilcol]

So, game's length is not 3 hours but 5. That's a big difference!


:/

 

[gelf]

While it's totally okay to have that view, just know that a lot of people don't share it. A 5 hour game can be made into a 12-20 hour without any padding. There are literally hundreds of games that prove it's possible.

Even most of the games that are 5 hours have some sort of multiplayer or bonus modes. $60 for the base game at 5 hours, plus the inevitable 3 hour, $20 DLC that I'm sure is coming, really is laughable.

A lot of my fave games of all time clock in at less then 10. That's not to say I don't like some longer games but I can't think of any game I've ever played for 20 hours plus that didn't have some really dragging sections that I wish weren't there, particularly in this genre. You can spread things out too thinly, it really depends on how tightly designed those short hours are if it justifies the price for the run time. I suspect The Order wont but I'll still defend the idea of short full price games in the future.

 

[Snapshot King]

Yup, this is as bad as when Vanquish was getting ripped before release for being too short/not having any multiplayer.

Vanquish has multiple difficulty modes and an arena battle mode that's god damn fantastic. It has replay value. Every single game comparison I've seen brought up is a false equivalence.

Portal - The game was a free bundled game or 20 dollars.
Vanquish - See above.
MGS4 - Was twice as long as this, packed with extra content and did have a multiplayer mode
COD (Made by the devs no less) - Multiplayer mode, depending on what game, it also has co-op.

 

[Ivan]

I agree with them. Stay true to your vision.

Length has nothing to do with quality (and I prefer shorter games anyway, but that's my own thing)

 

[ICPEE]

Could part of the problem also be that PS4 owners were expecting this to be a GOTY contender, and thought that it would be a major selling point for the system? Now that the hype has been slowed, maybe people are refusing to accept that is may be "just another game"? This may seem like a drive by post but I assure you it is not. I find these Order threads to be fascinating from a sociological perspective. People are defending or trashing his game like their lives depend on it being the greatest thing ever or the worst.

Its not about PS4 owners. This game has been dogged since its annoucment. From black bars, to qte's, through 3rd person gameplay elements, cutscenes and game modes. Basically this game has been dogged on every single aspect apart from the graphics and even then we had a few crying "downgrade" in recent times. What warrants the criticism of this game on all the above mentioned points so long before we have had any chance to play it. I can't speak for PS4 owners but I certainly won't expect an upcoming AAA exclusive to be GOTY without having played it myself and reading up on what game critics have said of final build playthroughs and/or general opinion from gamers. Its not foolish to be optimistic about a game, movie or book you are expecting to release soon. However it is foolish to dimiss something before you have had a chance to sample it. Its like there would be an electric car launching soon and I would be excited because hey its something new and in the same vein go "but its probably shit". How would I know? I haven't even driven it yet.

 

[Ninjimbo]

The right thing to say is that the length doesn't matter, that it shouldn't be the deciding factor in determing a game's quality. I get it and I mostly agree, but if I paid $60 dollars and beat the game in 4 hours, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't holding back some kind of regret. I bought Vanquish day one knowing how short it was. I beat that game in 4 hours and while I loved it, I couldn't help but feel like a jackass for spending 60 dollars when I knew I could have gotten the game for 20 if I were willing to wait a couple of months. I guess that makes me a cheapskate. It's a real feeling though.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

Well, I kinda said that in a post of mine as well. The Gaffers probably took their time (finding all the collectibles etc.) vs the youtuber. However, at least the youtube video gives you an idea of how long it vs people on GAF just throwing around numbers without evidence. Looking at various evidences from across the net, I think I will spend around 8 hours on this one, which isn't bad at all, but the lack of a new game+ is disappointing.

Fuck me, am I reading this right.
After repeadedly (ad nauseam) hinting the GAF posters were unreliable because they could be just making their times up, because, well YouTube, you are now saying you are going to play the game for the same sort of time span you think could possibly just be fictitious????!!!??

You couldn't make it up.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

Such a shame. When first announced I was so looking forward to the game. You can tell from their damage control it's a short game without a doubt. Hell they're defending it by referencing other short games and how amazing they were. That's not a good strategy.

If I ever pick it up it's going to be sub 20 bucks.

 

[WGMBY]

I agree with them. Stay true to your vision.

Length has nothing to do with quality (and I prefer shorter games anyway, but that's my own thing)

I'm finding myself liking shorter games now that I'm out of college and have a full time job. I've been playing through Kingdom Hearts HD the past week, and even though I know everywhere to go and everything to do, I still only got maybe 2/3rds of the way through at the 11 hour mark.

 

[016]

Alright I made a decision to buy this game when it's on sale or something. Did the same for Asura's Wrath and I love everything about.

 

[Afrodium]

I agree that length has nothing to do with quality, but I also think that not wanting to pay $60 for something that will only last a short amount of time is valid. Even if this game is a great five hours, I can probably wait a few months and buy it at a more palatable $30. Hell, I could even Redbox it over the weekend and play it for a few bucks. Basically, length isn't a quality metric, but it can be a value metric.

 

[Snapshot King]

I don't understand the people saying they prefer shorter games. Can't you play the same game for, I dunno, longer? If a game takes you 12 and costs 60, could you play it for 2 weeks instead of one? Or if you do prefer short games, wouldn't you be happier if a game that was 4-5 hours long cost, I dunno, 40 bucks instead of 60? Or is part of your experience contingent on spending the 60 bucks for it?

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I wonder how many people who were concerned about the length have been put off buying it.

Up to #8 on the Amazon top 100 so probably not many.

 

[DrZeus]

Perceived value of this game just continues to drop sadly. That's where co op or mp add to a game like this. I just hope it does as well as they need it to. Really like RAD and I wish them the best.

 

[prwxv3]

for Christs sake if you don't think the game is worth 60 dollars (because of length ect) dont buy it for 60 dollars. Wait for a price drop or rent it. Its not that fucking hard.

 

[Dreamgazer]

Which thread do I go to if I want a count of 5 hour completion vs. 7-10 hour completions?

 

[SirMossyBloke]

for Christs sake if you don't think the game is worth 60 dollars (because of length ect) dont buy it for 60 dollars. Wait for a price drop or rent it. Its not that fucking hard.

Oh my god. Why didn't anyone else think of this?

OK guys, stop posting your opinion on this, no more discussion to be had.

 

[EightBitNate]

Which thread do I go to if I want a count of 5 hour completion vs. 7-10 hour completions?

There's an impressions thread posted somewhere.

for Christs sake if you don't think the game is worth 60 dollars (because of length ect) dont buy it for 60 dollars. Wait for a price drop or rent it. Its not that fucking hard.

It's a discussion board..

 

[gelf]

I don't understand the people saying they prefer shorter games. Can't you play the same game for, I dunno, longer? If a game takes you 12 and costs 60, could you play it for 2 weeks instead of one? Or if you do prefer short games, wouldn't you be happier if a game that was 4-5 hours long cost, I dunno, 40 bucks instead of 60? Or is part of your experience contingent on spending the 60 bucks for it?

Maybe that short game has the same development cost as the other long one, its just resources were put in different areas. Of course I'd always pay less if given the option but if I love a game I'd be happy to pay that price to encourage more big budget tightly designed experiences in future.

 

[Talon]

We desperately need diverse price points on console games.

To the point where Captain Toad becomes less of an exception.

 

[kaching]

Those games get a pass for not having cutscenes longer than 5 seconds.

"Those games"? Which games are you thinking of, specifically? The lack of cutscenes didn't change the fact that Strider was a game you could easily beat in 1-2 hrs on the first playthrough, selling for $60. I don't believe it got a "free pass" at all - plenty of complaints at the time about the value proposition of such a title. This type of discussion about a game being too short for the asking price certainly didn't start with Lair last generation, that's for sure. Shorter games that try to focus on a tour de force single-player experience have always run up against this particular point of contention among some gamers. But it's really only a concern for people mired in the need to experience games on day 1 who can't seem to realize that the initial asking price is just an opening bid.

 

[Snapshot King]

Maybe that short game has the same development cost as the other long one, its just resources were put in different areas. Of course I'd always pay less if given the option but if I love a game I'd be happy to pay that price to encourage more big budget tightly designed experiences in future.

So where's the line? 3 hour campaign for 100 dollars? 1 hour campaign for 200? Your line of thinking always breaks down somewhere.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Which thread do I go to if I want a count of 5 hour completion vs. 7-10 hour completions?

There is not actual thread dedicating to the discussion of both, the impressions thread is only for gaf impressions so it's encouraged to not include the two completed five hour youtube playthroughs, (one is german) in the discussion. Your best bet would be the spoiler thread but...well..spoilers.

 

[EightBitNate]

We desperately need diverse price points on console games.

To the point where Captain Toad becomes less of an exception.

I think we're seeing that more this gen than last gen. Captain Toad, Garden Warfare, and Ground Zeroes were all priced closer to their actual worth.

 

[Fury451]

We desperately need diverse price points on console games.

To the point where Captain Toad becomes less of an exception.

Not a bad idea. But the production values on this are likely pretty huge, meaning that full price is ideal for recouping some costs.

And we have more diversity now with digital only games being more accurately priced for content.

 

[spekkeh]

I don't understand the people saying they prefer shorter games. Can't you play the same game for, I dunno, longer? If a game takes you 12 and costs 60, could you play it for 2 weeks instead of one? Or if you do prefer short games, wouldn't you be happier if a game that was 4-5 hours long cost, I dunno, 40 bucks instead of 60? Or is part of your experience contingent on spending the 60 bucks for it?

You mean two months instead of one? Nah, even taking out that's it's probably padded to hell and back, the beginning will have been partly forgotten by the time you reach the end. Besides, by that time you really want to play other games too. Of course cheaper is always better, that's why it's a good idea to shop around or buy it two months later. But cheaper also means lower production values, and it seems like The Order is all production values anyway.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

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.

All this is personal opinion. There is nothing absolute about it.
Don't they teach people the difference between opinion and fact anymore?
Is subjectivity really that hard to understand?

And, no, I'm not saying you aren't allowed to think a 5 hour campaign is too short. But it's your opinion.
There's nothing ridiculous about people not agreeing with you. People who don't agree aren't 'justifying' anything - they just disagree. Is it so hard to understand?

 

[Fbh]

A short game isn't necesarily bad, and I think the last few years have shown that lenght has little to do with quality. I can list a ton of games with less than 10 hours of gameplay for a single playthrough that I consider to be amazing, and I can fully agree with the core idea of preffering to play an amazing 8 hours long game than a mediocre 40 hours long game.


But I think value is also important in a game and personally I'm just not seeing much value in The Order.
Bayonetta 2 is also less than 10 hours long, but offers so much replay value in the form of great difficulty settings, extra challenges, unlockables and bonus content that in the end I spend over 30 hours on this game (and that's not even considering that it also had a fairly fun multiplayer mode and came with an enchanced port of the first one). To me it felt well worth the $60.

The Order 1886, from what I've read ever since all the early impressions have started to come out, sounds like a game I'd beat once in less than 10 hours and then I would move on to something else. It seems to have little in terms of replay value other than collectables which I don't care about, and unless a videogame offers different dialog paths and choices (like mass effect) unskippable cutscenes are a real replay value killer for me.
That doesn't make The Order a bad game or aything, it just makes it a game I will feel more confortable buying for $30 or less. It's an ideal rental game but, sadly, I don't have videogame rental places in my area

 

[Hellshy.]

That answered nothing.

Damage control?

Also, the Modern Warfare comparison doesn't count as it had multiplayer.

Spoiler

still gonna love the shit out of this game

Did u read what he said bc he states it worked bc it had other thinGs anf their game is not 3 to 4 hrs

 

[Snapshot King]

You mean two months instead of one? Nah, even taking out that's it's probably padded to hell and back, the beginning will have been partly forgotten by the time you reach the end. Besides, by that time you really want to play other games too. Of course cheaper is always better, that's why it's a good idea to shop around or buy it two months later. But cheaper also means lower production values, and it seems like The Order is all production values anyway.

I don't mean to judge but are you seriously telling me you only have 6 hours of playtime for a game within a single month. How do you even get to a checkpoint before having to put it down.

 

[Xander Crews]

We had this exact controversy over Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes. People said you could beat the campaign in 1 hour. I got 19 hours out of that game.

I think I will pre-order The Order today in protest of these shenanigans

 

[His Majesty]

Early impressions indicate that there are a lot of cutscenes and QTE. Probably not a game for me.

 

[Korten]

Our game is really focused on narrative, and story telling, and character development!

OK, cool. What is the story about?

Special operatives fighting werewolves!

...

RAD thinks they are being treated unfairly for focusing on storytelling. But RAD is wrong. They focused on telling a bad story about dumb stuff. The Order has a storyline and characters that could fill in a few pages of manual in the SNES era, but RAD expects people to watch these goons argue in olde english about monsters and councils for 3 hours. The premise is far too stupid to be taken seriously. Earnest pap can be fun in short doses. Resident Evil 4 is the best single player action game and it's full of the stuff. But it gets doled out in 30 second bursts every half hour of game. If RE4 had 10 minute cutscenes every other chapter it would be a bad game.

What... I don't even...

 

[-tetsuo-]

Personally I can only enjoy a game if it is at least 8 hours long. Pretty lazy of them to not make it at least that long. Should have added multiplayer. Thanks Sony.

 

[CarbonByGravity]

My experience with Dragon Age Inquisition was that it was far too long and fragmented to be worth playing through to completion. I spent 8 hrs with it and gave up. I don't have time for sprawling open-world games that take 100 hours to complete. I'll leave that kind of game for people with better time management than I. Personally I'm okay with a short well crafted game. Hence, the reason I pre-ordered The Order. Yes, I do make exceptions to this rule, Bloodborne being that exception. But, From doesn't fill their games with arbitrary filler just to increase play time and they don't make open-world games just because it's the "in" thing to do. Their games, specifically Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, are well composed and coherent in their delivery of content despite their length. Plus I find the game play far more compelling than most RPG.

 

[Talon]

My experience with Dragon Age Inquisition was that it was far too long and fragmented to be worth playing through to completion. I spent 8 hrs with it and gave up. I don't have time for sprawling open-world games that take 100 hours to complete. I'll leave that kind of game to children and adults without responsibility. I'm okay with a short well crafted game. Hence, the reason I pre-ordered The Order. Yes, I do make exceptions to this rule, Bloodborne being that exception. But, From doesn't fill their games with arbitrary filler just to increase play time and they don't make open-world games just because it's the "in" thing to do. Their games, specifically Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, are well composed and coherent in their delivery of content despite their length. Plus I find the game play far more compelling than most RPG.

I'm sorry you live in a binary world where your only choice is between either a 100% explored 100 hour open world game or a quick run through a 6-7 hour game.

 

[Crossing Eden]

We had this exact controversy over Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes. People said you could beat the campaign in 1 hour. I got 19 hours out of that game.

I think I will pre-order The Order today in protest of these shenanigans

MGS GZ is short, it's very short, however, the game is designed first and foremost with a "play it your way" style in mind and is set in a mini sandbox with lots of different routes and passage ways, which encourages replayability heavily as the gameplay takes priority over the story during general play, i.e.detection doesn't=instant fail try again. Also things like challenges to complete and hidden levels. We should really stop using short games designed with a ton of gameplay replayability in mind as comparisons.

 

[Snapshot King]

My experience with Dragon Age Inquisition was that it was far too long and fragmented to be worth playing through to completion. I spent 8 hrs with it and gave up. I don't have time for sprawling open-world games that take 100 hours to complete. I'll leave that kind of game to children and adults without responsibility. I'm okay with a short well crafted game. Hence, the reason I pre-ordered The Order. Yes, I do make exceptions to this rule, Bloodborne being that exception. But, From doesn't fill their games with arbitrary filler just to increase play time and they don't make open-world games just because it's the "in" thing to do. Their games, specifically Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, are well composed and coherent in their delivery of content despite their length. Plus I find the game play far more compelling than most RPG.

Are you implying that if RAD made a long game that it'd be rife with filler? Doesn't that say something about them as devs?

 

[bud]

it's a single player story/cut scene driven game. this doesn't surprise me at all.

will rent.

 

[codhand]

My experience with Dragon Age Inquisition was that it was far too long and fragmented to be worth playing through to completion. I spent 8 hrs with it and gave up. I don't have time for sprawling open-world games that take 100 hours to complete. I'll leave that kind of game to children and adults without responsibility. I'm okay with a short well crafted game. Hence, the reason I pre-ordered The Order. Yes, I do make exceptions to this rule, Bloodborne being that exception. But, From doesn't fill their games with arbitrary filler just to increase play time and they don't make open-world games just because it's the "in" thing to do. Their games, specifically Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, are well composed and coherent in their delivery of content despite their length. Plus I find the game play far more compelling than most RPG.

this is an obnoxious, judgmental, and most of all shitty, post.

 

[kmag]

I don't think length is actually the issue here rather the full package, ultimately if it's a short linear narratively driven SP game, sans multiplayer, co-op or optional playmodes then that's a bit disappointing given it's a full price 1st party exclusive.

A short game can be fun, but most short games value-add with factors to improve replayability, it's a bit weak that that doesn't seem to be the case here.

 

[cripterion]

My experience with Dragon Age Inquisition was that it was far too long and fragmented to be worth playing through to completion. I spent 8 hrs with it and gave up. I don't have time for sprawling open-world games that take 100 hours to complete. I'll leave that kind of game to children and adults without responsibility. I'm okay with a short well crafted game. Hence, the reason I pre-ordered The Order. Yes, I do make exceptions to this rule, Bloodborne being that exception. But, From doesn't fill their games with arbitrary filler just to increase play time and they don't make open-world games just because it's the "in" thing to do. Their games, specifically Demon's Souls and Dark Souls, are well composed and coherent in their delivery of content despite their length. Plus I find the game play far more compelling than most RPG.

So only adults without responsabilities, and children play MMO's then? The fuck? Maybe, just maybe people spread out their playing time. Kinda like how you can watch 10 season long tv shows but you just don't do it in one sitting.

 

[OléGunner]

Only a sliver of Gaf will finish The Order in 5 hours.

The majority of us who are interested in this game will savour every moment and drink in the atmosphere, world and story created by RAD. That's a guaranteed 8 hour playthrough minimum.

Can't wait for this as I've been dying for a solid single player experience, need to get the nasty open world taste of AC Unity from my mouth.

 

[kaching]

We desperately need diverse price points on console games.

Things are pretty diverse already. We get lots of $5-20 games on the digital front and the Day 1 pricing for premium games doesn't take long to drop from $60 to $50, to $40 or even $30 within weeks or months. Sales and discounts are abundant - the opening price should hardly be treated like the hard and fast rule for the determination of a game's value. In all likelihood, most games will likely spend more time on the market selling for significantly less than their Day 1 pricing.

If we "desperately" need anything, it's a little patience and self-control. Stop marching to the drumbeat that the only time a game is worthwhile is on Day 1.

 

[rob305]

Wow people are defending these practices?? I thought i had seen everything. Really hope this game doesn't sell, the gameplay seems mediocre. I will probably rent it for a day to rush through it and return it the same afternoon

 

[CosmicQueso]

If The Order is anywhere near as good as Heavenly Sword I'll be real happy.

This. Will happily pay $60 if I can get another game I liked as much as I liked Heavenly Sword.

 

[codhand]

Only a sliver of Gaf will finish The Order in 5 hours.

The majority of us who are interested in this game will savour every moment and drink in the atmosphere, world and story created by RAD. That's a guaranteed 8 hour playthrough minimum.

Can't wait for this as I've been dying for a solid single player experience, need to get the nasty open world taste of AC Unity from my mouth.

reads like you already played it to completion, don't make up your mind now or anything.

also cool how you can predict a minority will complete in five hours, but will "guarantee" eight hours, for your own.

 

[Frillen]

Fuck me, am I reading this right.
After repeadedly (ad nauseam) hinting the GAF posters were unreliable because they could be just making their times up, because, well YouTube, you are now saying you are going to play the game for the same sort of time span you think could possibly just be fictitious????!!!??

You couldn't make it up.

Nope, not at all. I'm basically adding all the information known to us now, and finding the average from that, which I think is around 8 hours, give or take. We know the youtuber didn't hunt the collectibles, which I'm going to.