Support NeoGAF

[cripterion]

After this thread, it sounds like you're in the norm. But personally if I only play a game once it means it's a bad game. I don't think developers continue to make these games thinking they'll be played once either.

Well I should have been more explicit : there are several games I do replay but that's because they have a mode that keeps me going back to it or due to their nature. I still play BF4 or I do a game of FIFA or NBA2K once in a while.

SP games like The Order, I would just clear it once and never go back to it. My other example is Binary Domain, which is one of my favorite games but I've ever only played once and even that has even higher replay value than The Order since I think you can have a different ending.

Due to the game being cutscene heavy, sounds like co-op wouldn't have been possible anyway but to me, just that mode would definitely increase the replay value, just like it did for the Gears of War games in its time.

 

[yoplay]

I've had a long-standing argument that games should either be single player or multi-player focuses affairs, and free the teams up to focus on what they are actually doing. There are rare occasions where a games focus seems evenly divided (Halo), but generally just make what you want.

That's why I was fine with Titanfall being exactly what it was, and don't generally have an issue with what the Order is doing.

I also tend to think single player linear games that have one solid idea tend to go too long and have tons of filler. By the end of Gears 3 I wanted it to be over pretty badly even though I had really enjoyed my time in the game. Same with most of the Halo Single Player stuff.

Conceptually I actually like the idea of high production value games that are 3 or 4 hours long and are more like a movie experience.. fun set pieces and then it ends before over-staying it's welcome, with a 30 or 40 dollar price attached. It seems that the Order is probably roughly double that length. I don't own a PS4, but this would be a game I would get simply because it seems like a world that would be fun to run around in.

That said, given the way this thread has gone and the way Titanfall was received for lack of content, I may be the only person with this opinion.

No. I second that opinion homie.

 

[MMaRsu]

Of all the stuff I've heard the inability to pause cutscene's is the worst for me.

Just press the Playstation pr Share button, it will pause ur games.

 

[sploatee]

I've had a long-standing argument that games should either be single player or multi-player focuses affairs, and free the teams up to focus on what they are actually doing. There are rare occasions where a games focus seems evenly divided (Halo), but generally just make what you want.

That's why I was fine with Titanfall being exactly what it was, and don't generally have an issue with what the Order is doing.

I also tend to think single player linear games that have one solid idea tend to go too long and have tons of filler. By the end of Gears 3 I wanted it to be over pretty badly even though I had really enjoyed my time in the game. Same with most of the Halo Single Player stuff.

Conceptually I actually like the idea of high production value games that are 3 or 4 hours long and are more like a movie experience.. fun set pieces and then it ends before over-staying it's welcome, with a 30 or 40 dollar price attached. It seems that the Order is probably roughly double that length. I don't own a PS4, but this would be a game I would get simply because it seems like a world that would be fun to run around in.

That said, given the way this thread has gone and the way Titanfall was received for lack of content, I may be the only person with this opinion.

No, I agree. My main concern is only replayability. I'm quite goal-focused so if there's nothing to achieve after a hard playthrough and a collectible round-up I'm afraid I'll feel swizzled.

I still think it looks like my kind of thing, though. Just not something to buy until it goes down in price a bit.

 

[Ricky_R]

I've had a long-standing argument that games should either be single player or multi-player focuses affairs, and free the teams up to focus on what they are actually doing. There are rare occasions where a games focus seems evenly divided (Halo), but generally just make what you want.

That's why I was fine with Titanfall being exactly what it was, and don't generally have an issue with what the Order is doing.

I also tend to think single player linear games that have one solid idea tend to go too long and have tons of filler. By the end of Gears 3 I wanted it to be over pretty badly even though I had really enjoyed my time in the game. Same with most of the Halo Single Player stuff.

Conceptually I actually like the idea of high production value games that are 3 or 4 hours long. It seems that the Order is probably roughly double that length.

That said, given the way this thread has gone and the way Titanfall was received for lack of content, I may be the only person with this opinion.

You obviously aren't... Even Uncharted 2, which is among my favorites games ever, I was kinda hoping it ended right before the last shooting segment. I wanted to it end already. Uncharted 2 seems to be longer though.

That's not to say that I wouldn't want more playtime from The Order, but I don't stress about the fact either. I enjoy the experience for what it is, I always have.

 

[Welfare]

You have slain me, sir.

 

[Honome]

As for why am I picking up 2 other games, when I still haven't finished Dying Light...well, that's a whole other backlog issue

I think the time you spent reading this whole thread would be enough to finish Dying Light already!

 

[Interfectum]

After this thread, it sounds like you're in the norm. But personally if I only play a game once it means it's a bad game. I don't think developers continue to make these games thinking they'll be played once either.

Heavy Rain was only ment to be played once. I doubt Telltale cares if you go through their games again.

I think devs making story driven titles can totally assume gamers are doing a 'one and done' playthrough. If they cared about replayability I would think they would get more into multiplayer experiences (coop, vs, esports, etc).

 

[codhand]

But I've put hundreds of hours into destiny.

sorry to hear that

 

[MMaRsu]

Destiny was 25 hours long, with three hours worth of actual, original content, and that wasn't worth $60 either. not about simply disliking short games, it's about disliking games short on content.

But Dedtiny has no coherent content at all. Id rather replay a 5 hour great game 3 times then play through Destiny's "campaign" one more time.

 

[codhand]

But Dedtiny has no coherent content at all. Id rather replay a 5 hour great game 3 times then play through Destiny's "campaign" one more time.

i generally agree with this, but that breakdown is brutal, i would probably rather play Order at a price drop than play more Destiny though.

 

[mrklaw]

It was £36 last week on Rakuten, currently you could order it for £38.95 using the code FEBGIFT10. You could use that code on FF:T0 if you can bump the total basket up to £40 for £10 off.

code doesn't seem to work?

 

[DarkLordMalik]

sorry to hear that

:lol

I just realized how much I hated TEW filler chapters. The highlights of the game were great but the bad stuff was ughhh... I loved the game at the end of the day but it took me 15 hours to get through it and they could have easily shortened. Short and well paced is the way to go.

 

[nib95]

I think this notion of sticking to a $60 launch RRP is the problem. Not particularly for The Order, or Titanfall, but in terms of allowing developer flexibility to that degree. There seems to be this notion that if you're on a disc you must ask your customer for $60/£40 day one, and I really hope we get to a point where games feel comfortable occupying lower (or heck, even higher, to the effect of reducing DLC/microtransaction muddying of content) price-points. A more fluid pricing system, I think, would alleviate a lot of this.

I absolutely agree with the fluid pricing system, though in reality we do sort of already have this system in place, but generally post release. Prices will drop accounting for demand and supply.

I do however think that The Order would still be a $60 game even if such a pricing system as you've described was in place. Game length or content quantity does not tell you the full account of development budget. For all we know The Order 1886 could have been just as expensive if not more expensive to make as something like Gears of War or Last of Us, despite having less overall content. It's clear a lot of time, money and resources were put in to developing the engine, overall visuals, mo cap, assets etc, the quality of which are currently among some of the best in the industry.

 

[MMaRsu]

i generally agree with this, but that breakdown is brutal, i would probably rather play Order at a price drop than play more Destiny though.

Buy game at 60

play through in a day or two

sell for 40 second hand

Only 20 bucks "lost".

 

[JacksUsername]

I've had a long-standing argument that games should either be single player or multi-player focuses affairs, and free the teams up to focus on what they are actually doing. There are rare occasions where a games focus seems evenly divided (Halo), but generally just make what you want.

That's why I was fine with Titanfall being exactly what it was, and don't generally have an issue with what the Order is doing.

I also tend to think single player linear games that have one solid idea tend to go too long and have tons of filler. By the end of Gears 3 I wanted it to be over pretty badly even though I had really enjoyed my time in the game. Same with most of the Halo Single Player stuff.

Conceptually I actually like the idea of high production value games that are 3 or 4 hours long. It seems that the Order is probably roughly double that length.

That said, given the way this thread has gone and the way Titanfall was received for lack of content, I may be the only person with this opinion.

Agree with most of what you've said, especially in regards to allowing teams to focus more and that filler is abundant in games.

Most importantly, developers need to be be transparent and straightforward. A lot of the frustration and anger over Titanfall's content could have been mitigated if they addressed it earlier. Instead, people were told in very vague terms that Titanfall wold have a single-player campaign or component, but it wasn't until a week or two before release that we realized what it actually was.

In the case of The Order, I think the developers have been pretty straightforward in regards to their aims and vision for the game. Never expected it to be an extremely long affair due to their focus on storytelling, and I'm okay with that.

I think the time you spent reading this whole thread would be enough to finish Dying Light already!

Haha, GAF is the biggest obstacle for completing games.

 

[codhand]

id be curious to see Ryse's breakdown, that game was worth about $20 imo.

Most importantly, developers need to be be transparent and straightforward. A lot of the frustration and anger over Titanfall's content could have been mitigated if they addressed it earlier. Instead, people were told in very vague terms that Titanfall wold have a single-player campaign or component, but it wasn't until a week or two before release that we realized what it actually was.

truth, more transparency would be nice. no one really knew Destiny was a mile wide and an inch deep until launch week. but i'd say The Order PR hasnt been upfront, this Eurogamer interview about game length discusses philosophy more than it does Order game length. also when the QTE stuff popped up, they downplayed it. then the forced walking werewolf section was downplayed too.

 

[LAA]

But I've put hundreds of hours into destiny. Maybe it's about not liking games that don't interest you

In fairness I do like to come back to it from time to time just to level up my character and try and tackle more raid trophies and for dlc, but I wouldnt have paid for the LE looking at it now. I was hoping for it to be this massive game with several planets to go to and an epic campaign, which the game seemed to present itself as and seemingly many also seemed to believe. That and Bungies name also pushed people to think they won't let us down, again it's down to subjective. I still enjoy Destiny at times, but not nearly as much as I thought I would, perhaps for some they liked it more than they thought they would.

I'm just confused why someone would want a shorter campaign vs a longer one. Like I said above, why does making a game longer automatically mean that its quality will be worse?

Think a better point is more instead of making a game unnecessarily longer, maybe just compact it so it's a more solid experience, compared to a longer experience which maybe has good stuff in it, but lots of filler in between lessening the experience?
I think if people generally want short games and developers acknowledge that and make a game with those expectations, they shouldn't be expecting the same price other games made based on expectations for high content have.

 

[Izcarielo]

Then don't buy it. Some people value things differently. Buy games at the price you want with the features you want.

Im just gonna rent it for a weekend and beat it.
Seeing the clearing times of some guys it wont take me more than 7 hours while exploring every scenario. Im not even going to need to rush it.

 

[ANDS]

How are you gauging if someone completes a game? Surely not by trophies?

Pretty sure every game of this type has a "Beat on X Difficulty or Higher. . ." Not too difficult to see what percentage that is on PS4. I've yet to see a game that has 100% next to that. It's usally 30-50%.

 

[yoplay]

Buy game at 60

play through in a day or two

sell for 40 second hand

Only 20 bucks "lost".

It really is just that easy.

 

[StoOgE]

I think the better way to measure a game is relatively simple.

How much fun did I have relative to the price?

I think a lot of gamers tend to divide time played by price paid to get the notional value of a game.

i.e. I played Destiny for 150 hours / 60 dollars = .40 cents an hour for entertainment!!!

But not everything is created equally.

If you gave me a false choice of buying Destiny for 30 dollars or Sunset Overdrive for 100 dollars right now, I would buy Sunset Overdrive. And that's a 10-15 hour game with decent but not great replay ability.

That answer is going to be different for everyone though. Someone who can only afford 1 game every 3 months and has 40+ hours of gaming time a week would likely look at the choice and gladly pay more for Destiny because they want something that they can play for a long time. Or they like Destiny more.

Or any number of things.

I think this construct that designers must have a 12+ hour main game and multiplayer to get a 60 dollar value is bad for our industry.

 

[Kem0sabe]

Heavy Rain was only ment to be played once. I doubt Telltale cares if you go through their games again.

I think devs making story driven titles can totally assume gamers are doing a 'one and done' playthrough. If they cared about replayability I would think they would get more into multiplayer experiences (coop, vs, esports, etc).

Telltale does care about replayability, they go as far as showing the percentage of players who made different choices than yours after you finish.

Walking dead, game of thrones, Wolf among us, all of them highly repayable because of the number of choices and outcomes that the player never gets to see in the first or even second playthrough.

 

[ANDS]

Just press the Playstation pr Share button, it will pause ur games.

Massive thread derail, but I wish this actually worked for all games. I'm pretty sure doing this doesn't pause DA:I (though you can force manual conversation progression there). Game will keep running at the dashboard.

 

[Officerrob]

With the relatively short length, impressions saying there is zero replayability, and no multiplayer, I'm expecting the likes of Gamestop to be flooded with used copies of The Order within a week of release

 

[Knuf]

The concern in this thread is almost palpable.
If you fear The Order will be short on content, then don't buy it on release but wait some days for some more reviews/impressions. Yeah, simple as that.

 

[MADGAME]

Pretty sure every game of this type has a "Beat on X Difficulty or Higher. . ." Not too difficult to see what percentage that is on PS4. I've yet to see a game that has 100% next to that. It's usally 30-50%.

Hmmm I think there may be a disconnect. The post I replied to seemed to infer that on PSN you are able to see if a person finished a game. Your reply infers games "of this type" by looking for a trophy. Not sure they are one and the same. I just checked the PS app and glanced at some lists, it appears you can beat games with a low trophy percentage so at this juncture I'm not convinced the original statement was accurate. Unless of course there is actually an indicator which displays if you've finished the game or not, and if so I would like to know how to view this.

 

[thebloo]

i generally agree with this, but that breakdown is brutal, i would probably rather play Order at a price drop than play more Destiny though.

I would honestly like to see such a breakdown for more games. I mean, the breakdown of TLoU on easy would pretty much look the same, I think - percentage wise.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

I think the better way to measure a game is relatively simple.

How much fun did I have relative to the price?

I think a lot of gamers tend to divide time played by price paid to get the notional value of a game.

i.e. I played Destiny for 150 hours / 60 dollars = .40 cents an hour for entertainment!!!


I think this construct that designers must have a 12+ hour main game and multiplayer to get a 60 dollar value is bad for our industry.

I agree, although I prefer a strictly financial equation. A publisher should charge no more than necessary to recoup a marginal profit of 30% at most per game disc sold. Let their actual marginal costs be the market determinate, and then the consumer can decide if they spent their budget foolishly or laudable.

 

[Sendou]

I think the better way to measure a game is relatively simple.

How much fun did I have relative to the price?

I think a lot of gamers tend to divide time played by price paid to get the notional value of a game.

i.e. I played Destiny for 150 hours / 60 dollars = .40 cents an hour for entertainment!!!

But not everything is created equally.

If you gave me a false choice of buying Destiny for 30 dollars or Sunset Overdrive for 100 dollars right now, I would buy Sunset Overdrive. And that's a 10-15 hour game with decent but not great replay ability.

That answer is going to be different for everyone though. Someone who can only afford 1 game every 3 months and has 40+ hours of gaming time a week would likely look at the choice and gladly pay more for Destiny because they want something that they can play for a long time. Or they like Destiny more.

Or any number of things.

I think this construct that designers must have a 12+ hour main game and multiplayer to get a 60 dollar value is bad for our industry.

This is the best way to go about it for sure.

Yet for The Order 1886 to be worth 65€ in exchange for what's the current estimate? 3 hours of gameplay? I really hope they're bringing on the table something extraordinary. Modern classic, no less.

 

[Interfectum]

Telltale does care about replayability, they go as far as showing the percentage of players who made different choices than yours after you finish.

Walking dead, game of thrones, Wolf among us, all of them highly repayable because of the number of choices and outcomes that the player never gets to see in the first or even second playthrough.

Huh, I've never played through one of their games again. I always felt like that would muddy the story too much.

 

[Radec]

I think the better way to measure a game is relatively simple.

How much fun did I have relative to the price?

I think a lot of gamers tend to divide time played by price paid to get the notional value of a game.

i.e. I played Destiny for 150 hours / 60 dollars = .40 cents an hour for entertainment!!!

But not everything is created equally.

If you gave me a false choice of buying Destiny for 30 dollars or Sunset Overdrive for 100 dollars right now, I would buy Sunset Overdrive. And that's a 10-15 hour game with decent but not great replay ability.

That answer is going to be different for everyone though. Someone who can only afford 1 game every 3 months and has 40+ hours of gaming time a week would likely look at the choice and gladly pay more for Destiny because they want something that they can play for a long time. Or they like Destiny more.

Or any number of things.

I think this construct that designers must have a 12+ hour main game and multiplayer to get a 60 dollar value is bad for our industry.

SSDs have dollar per GB.

Games have dollar per fun confirmed.

 

[cripterion]

id be curious to see Ryse's breakdown, that game was worth about $20 imo.



truth, more transparency would be nice. no one really knew Destiny was a mile wide and an inch deep until launch week. but i'd say The Order PR hasnt been upfront, this Eurogamer interview about game length discusses philosophy more than it does Order game length. also when the QTE stuff popped up, they downplayed it. then the forced walking werewolf section was downplayed too.

In the end wasn't Ryse free with GWG?
I could see The Order 1886 be a perfect candidate for PS+ monthly games down the line.

 

[Semper88]

I got this pre ordered and paid but I'm having doubts about it now.

And its not because of what people saying and its probably totally worth the money (come on people, its just money...) but because I'm really bad at having patients for long cutscenes or press "x'' to do this while watching a scene. I want to shoot shit, blow stuff up and cut things to shreds.

I'll be like

 

[kuroneco]

It is kind ridiculous to see something be judged this much

I guess it just we do not have much to talk about in this generation of gaming... in the old days, there were games come out everyday with many varieties. People talking about values, I don't know about the average gamer age here now, but back then, with so many games out, and not enough coverage for every single of them, many times I run into games that no one cares about. Some of them were really awful but some were my personal favorite of all time.

Maybe my point is a little bit off, but it is all depends on the game producer who visionary a game and the person who play the game to decide how perfect or how likeable that game is. There should not be a universal standard for gaming. It is not and never should be $1 = 1 hour contents or 1 play through = $10 or so on. Unfortunately, the company needs money to run and they seeking profits. That has nothing to do with game itself.

 

[ValfarHL]

When does the reviews hit?

 

[nib95]

I think the better way to measure a game is relatively simple.

How much fun did I have relative to the price?

I think a lot of gamers tend to divide time played by price paid to get the notional value of a game.

i.e. I played Destiny for 150 hours / 60 dollars = .40 cents an hour for entertainment!!!

But not everything is created equally.

If you gave me a false choice of buying Destiny for 30 dollars or Sunset Overdrive for 100 dollars right now, I would buy Sunset Overdrive. And that's a 10-15 hour game with decent but not great replay ability.

That answer is going to be different for everyone though. Someone who can only afford 1 game every 3 months and has 40+ hours of gaming time a week would likely look at the choice and gladly pay more for Destiny because they want something that they can play for a long time. Or they like Destiny more.

Or any number of things.

I think this construct that designers must have a 12+ hour main game and multiplayer to get a 60 dollar value is bad for our industry.

This. Very much this.

Though by the same token, I do think developers who can make games like this of a longer length, remain fun and engaging throughout, are especially talented. But the only linear TPS games of a longer length I've played (eg 13+ hours like RE4 and LoU), that don't overstay their welcome, happen to be one's that have had some sort of upgrade system or material gathering in place. Presumably these elements being part of the reason play time is extended.

 

[Kacho]

When does the reviews hit?

Thursday morning. 8 AM EST I believe.

 

[codhand]

I would honestly like to see such a breakdown for more games. I mean, the breakdown of TLoU on easy would pretty much look the same, I think - percentage wise.

i think that for me, TLoU nails "light exploration"

In the end wasn't Ryse free with GWG?
I could see The Order 1886 be a perfect candidate for PS+ monthly games down the line.

yeah i agree, im sure it will be but not anytime soon

 

[TomShoe]

In the end wasn't Ryse free with GWG?
I could see The Order 1886 be a perfect candidate for PS+ monthly games down the line.

We've got to reach critical mass at some point. From "Day One" to "I'll wait for reviews" to "I'll buy it and resell it" to "I'll rent it when it comes to Redbox." Now we're finally talking about The Order being a PS+ title. The roller coaster just won't stop, I just hope it ends on a high note.

 

[KungFucius]

One less game for me to buy. 5 hours for a $60 cinematic game is ridiculous.

 

[codhand]

One less game for me to buy. 5 hours for a $60 cinematic game is ridiculous.

to be fair, i dont know of many 20 hour cinematic games.

 

[thebloo]

i think that for me, TLoU nails "light exploration"

I'm not dismissing TLoU, heaven forbid. I'm just saying that this breakdown was made specifically for this game, to make it look bad. And it's the truth (

Spoiler

truth is variable

) so you can't dismiss it. But what if a similar breakdown could be made for something universally acclaimed?

 

[MMaRsu]

I got this pre ordered and paid but I'm having doubts about it now.

And its not because of what people saying and its probably totally worth the money (come on people, its just money...) but because I'm really bad at having patients for long cutscenes or press "x'' to do this while watching a scene. I want to shoot shit, blow stuff up and cut things to shreds.

I'll be like

So you are that guy that skips all story stuff? Not the type of game to buy then

 

[MMaRsu]

One less game for me to buy. 5 hours for a $60 cinematic game is ridiculous.

Yeah way to take a number and run with it.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

Thursday morning. 8 AM EST I believe.

Y'all better strap in. It's going to be World War III.

 

[-MD-]

Haven't finished it yet, but Ive used more than 5 hours, that's for sure.

You posted this a little under 3 hours ago

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152421335&postcount=8752 and then followed it up with this http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=152429936&postcount=8820

Were you already a couple hours into the game before you made that initial post? Just curious cause you said you weren't actually counting your playtime.

When does the reviews hit?

Thursday morning iirc.

 

[cripterion]

We've got to reach critical mass at some point. From "Day One" to "I'll wait for reviews" to "I'll buy it and resell it" to "I'll rent it when it comes to Redbox." Now we're finally talking about The Order being a PS+ title. The roller coaster just won't stop, I just hope it ends on a high note.

What? Does it offend you if I think the game might end up on PS+ later on? Doesn't mean it's a bad game. Yakuza 4 is PS+ monthly game now and that game is godly.

 

[Alucrid]

Yeah way to take a number and run with it.

It's weird how all for the order you are when you were so down on destiny for having so little content. Unless you're getting a refund for this too after beating it

 

[Semper88]

So you are that guy that skips all story stuff? Not the type of game to buy then

No only if its slow or to much of that crap in a row.