Dictator93
Member
Those games emphasize choice and branching dialogue, correct? I am not seeing the connection beyond the fact that a story is being told.
Ready at Dawn responds to "concern" over The Order: 1886 campaign length
- Thread starter DarkLordMalik
- Start date
Those games emphasize choice and branching dialogue, correct? I am not seeing the connection beyond the fact that a story is being told.
Freeman
Banned
According to Howlongtobeat:
So all that matter is whether the game is good or not.
Code:
Acording to How Long to Beat:
Game Average Rushed
Super Mario World 5h38m 2h51m
Super Metroid 8h05m 4h22m
Resident Evil 6h30m 4h47m
Half-Life 12h04m 7h58m
BioShock 12h21m 8h40m
Silent Hill 2 8h08m 5h20m
God of War 9h05m 6h
ShadowoftheColossus9h33m 6h48m
Metal Gear Solid 11h13m 8h24m
Perfect Dark 10h37m 5h56m
More recent games:
Uncharted 8h54m 5h33m
Vanquish 6h13m 4h23m
Metal Gear Rising 6h37m 4h33m
Bayonneta 2 9h24m 7h35m
Infamous SS 10h24m 7h32m
Portal 2 8h45m 4h07mSo all that matter is whether the game is good or not.
I don't know if the analogy works for you, but I will try :
For 50 euros I can go to a grocery store an buy myself quality food that will last me for the week. Nothing frivolous but something that will be tasty and healthy and generate satisfaction and sometimes even better time than going at the restaurant.
For the same price I can get a gastronomic menu at a fine restaurant. What I pay there, is the specific work and mastery that they put in the plate and it's presentation, the atmosphere as well. I don't pay them to last me the week, I pay them to delight me for a short evening.
It does not mean that I want only the gastronomic experience, just that I enjoy it from time to time because it offers me something else than the usual food and that they could not propose it at a lower price while remaining financially stable.
In the end, I will consume much more from the grocery store and enjoy it...but the little experiences at the restaurant are a "plus" in my life. I'm better with both type of feeding in my life than just one of them.
And sometimes the restaurant disappoint me, then I choose another, or I return to the same one if it was only "one odd failed attempt to do something new".
I see games like The Order in that way.
For 50 euros I can go to a grocery store an buy myself quality food that will last me for the week. Nothing frivolous but something that will be tasty and healthy and generate satisfaction and sometimes even better time than going at the restaurant.
For the same price I can get a gastronomic menu at a fine restaurant. What I pay there, is the specific work and mastery that they put in the plate and it's presentation, the atmosphere as well. I don't pay them to last me the week, I pay them to delight me for a short evening.
It does not mean that I want only the gastronomic experience, just that I enjoy it from time to time because it offers me something else than the usual food and that they could not propose it at a lower price while remaining financially stable.
In the end, I will consume much more from the grocery store and enjoy it...but the little experiences at the restaurant are a "plus" in my life. I'm better with both type of feeding in my life than just one of them.
And sometimes the restaurant disappoint me, then I choose another, or I return to the same one if it was only "one odd failed attempt to do something new".
I see games like The Order in that way.
So...its not innovative...you just contradicted it.
Vincent Grayson
Member
It has one: Gamefly.
At least for me, it changed nothing. When I had it, I'd rent the games like The Order, things I knew I could rent, play, and finish in short form, and I'd still buy the GTAs and Skyrims and other open world games, because those offer fare more value for my money.
I mean...I guess? Not unique enough for me to take the plunge.
its nice to read some common sense amidst all the children.
GatticusFinch
Member
Developers are also free to go broke trying to sell a product that their audience feels is a bad value.
There obviously is a subjective standard of value. The fact that it differs for different individuals is immaterial, because RAD is not trying to appeal to that one special person that would pay full price for the game. They are trying to appeal to as broad an audience as possible to move as many units as possible at as high a price as possible. There is some mixture of amount of content, quality of content, and price point that will result in the highest return.
From the reaction we have seen, it appears they overshot the price for the amount of content. The fact that other games sell for $60 is really beside the point. That would be like me charging $50 for a cheeseburger because there is a $50 steak down the street and both of them are food, so therefore people should buy my cheeseburger. The price point has to be justified on some ground other than "it is what it is."
RAD can say the quality of the content is worth that, however short it is, and maybe for some people that is the case. However, there are going to be people, and apparently a majority of people, who feel the the other two factors outweigh that. The fact RAD is already doing damage control over the length of the game is very telling on that point.
those emphasize choice and branching story lines . uc has lots of tps combat. This has a bit of this (story) a bit of that (combat, graphics). as i said it borrows from both.
your opinion
i can agree with this. I was just pointing out that they are definitely trying something newish. I mean ive seen teh walkthrought not played the game from what I can make out they try out a bunch of ideas from many games i think one of the impressions got it right when he said its a hodge podge of many ideas which doesnt quite come together as a great game.
now they are trying to have this all these aspects (aaa graphics polish, some combat, some exploration, qtes , story cutscenes) all in a seamless experience. thats why given how this game has turned out I think rad did their interviews perfectly they were saying what the game is all along we just kept confusing it thinking they arent showing enough gameplay or they are using cinematic too much ... because thats essentially what the game is a tps but with a focus on the cinematic aspects with the lore/presentation etc taking top priority.
While it would be bad business to do so... I could talk at least half of my store's preorders for The Order out of their preorder just by telling them that people were finishing the game on their first run in six hours.
The value/time perception is real and its not going away. Developers make these games with that in mind and just have to deal with what happens.
The value/time perception is real and its not going away. Developers make these games with that in mind and just have to deal with what happens.
Bill Rizer
Member
And that's appear to be the problem with TO1886. There's barely any game here from what I've seen. Happy to be proven wrong, btw.
Lord of Castamere
Member
Who said it wasn't?
I'll never understand this concept of time=worth. If it was a twenty or thirty hour game, it could ruin the whole thing by being overlong and overstaying its welcome, weighing down the game as a whole. Worth=quality, I get. No one wants to spend $60-70 (or $78 here where I am with taxes) on a dud, This is coming from an excellent team and has good impressions up until now. I rather spend the $78 on this, personally, than on a mediocre game that is artificially lengthened.
GatticusFinch
Member
They didn't have to just deal with it, though. They could have planned to insert elements to improve the perception, many of which are trivial in the grand scheme (leveling up, collectibles, NG+, etc.) and some which are more involved (multiplayer, branching dialogue/paths, etc.). They chose not to, for whatever reason, and it looks like it is biting them.
Freeman
Banned
Fine, if you don't like the game you wouldn't like a longer version of it, the problem if there is one is not necessarily the length.
Yes, and this is my biggest beef with how this has been handled. They're deliberately withholding information about something that has a huge impact on the buying decision. On top of this, they're marketing it to the Gears of War TPS crowd when in reality it's a 5 hour QTE/cinematic experience. It's dishonest and disrespectful.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Welcome to almost all marketing ever.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Holy shit. What the hell am I reading?
John Bender
Banned
Simply ignore it. Maybe it will go away.
It's turning into a witch hunt for the sake of a witch hunt, apparently.
This is a fair point. Games used to take 4-6 hours to beat in the 8 and 16 bit days. In fact, it wasn't until the PSX that game-length really started to balloon, and by the time Xbox/PS2/NGC were out it was the norm.
Games used to survive as single-player only games (or couch multi) by being phenomenally hard to beat and/or requiring they be beat in a single sitting. So, yeah you can beat Contra in less than an hour... but good luck actually doing it.
Now days there are games that cheat their way to 12 hours with back-tracking or an open world that takes 20 minutes to move between missions. Or, like a lot of open world games has 5 minutes of gameplay followed by 10 minutes of driving to the next spot for 5 minutes of more gameplay to complete a mission. Games have found ways to pad out their game time... sometimes for gamers benefits, but a lot of time not really.
To your point, the market answer seems to be to remove borrowing or used game sales and move to a digital distribution platform for these sorts of titles. Then it's a question of will people be willing to spend 40 dollars for a 3 hour game?
Oops. The bunch of used copies are already floating around on used market.
This ain't good.
Wat?
What matters is that those games are around 5 hours long because they're being rushed, and TO:1886 is around 5 hours long because it's lengthened by unskippable cutscenes. What I'm wondering is why RAD decided to make a game instead of a movie, I'm not sure who thought it would be a good idea to have entire chapters of a game be 100% cutscenes.
Freeman
Banned
Why does every chapter has to have gameplay? There are many ways to make a game, they don't have to all be the same way. Its not like they were hiding the game is focused on its cinematic narrative, they also mentioned many times they were trying something new with how the game is paced.
I think it can potentially be refreshing to not have combat shoved in every situation, I for once would love if Uncharted or Bioshock Inifnite had less combat sections.
Why didn't they make a movie? Easy, they wanted to make a game.
UncleCross
Member
You must be seeing different marketing than everyone else. All the marketing/media I've seen has been a very accurate representation of what the game actually is.
FeiRR
Banned
This has nothing to do with publishers. We have a real demand driven retail market here and games cost as much as people are willing to pay, price drops happening after weeks from release. I could wait and pay 75% next month if I wanted. Guess why? We don't have GameStop or Game or any other single chain which dictates prices.
Is this for real? You want them to put that is short on their website? And that it has "QTEs", which does not even have any meaning in the general public?
Desist.
Why does it bother you so that a cutscene is called a chapter? What's wrong with an arbitrary delineation of chapters? Who cares about the length of a chapter? It makes literally 0 difference if they reduce the number of chapters and add on the cutscenes to the previous "gameplay" chapters.
But seriously, who cares?
It really is getting quite hilarious.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
People are so transparent it's not even funny. This is the first thread I bookmarked ever. Lot's of names and opinions are greatly noted.
only that we who haven't played the game yet don't know if it's actually gourmet food or just polished junk food.
if those 5-8 hours are just brilliant in every way, I'm ok with the length, but if they are not....well...
-tetsuo-
Unlimited Capacity
Can we confirm this?
davivascaino
Banned
so much butt hurt here. Most people complaining here are people that would not buy the game at launch ANYWAY. Jes
People are transparent both ways. Feel like exclusives make this happen tbh.
We should all want all games to be great.
This is interesting.
Edit:
From what I can make out via Google Translate I'm not seeing a great deal of testimonials.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Is it though?
Nameless
Member
But if Netflix raised your monthly sub. to $60 a month you would bitch, a lot, and so would I. So lets stop conflating completely unrelated things.
FonkyByNature
Member
Agree with you, reason why i don't participate in this gigantic full-time debate about how long the game is or some other stuff. It's getting crazy here, one of the craziest threads in a long time.
In my case, i already pre-ordered the game and will play it this Friday. For those who don't like, just don't buy. I'm a fan of action cinematic games, this looks like my kind of shit.
It did seem so, on the surface...
Yes, everyone would complain that a service you presently pay 10 dollars a month for increased to 60 dollars.
That said, this is a new value proposition that everyone has to come to terms with individually.
Every time you make a purchase the decision is:
Item costs X
Can I afford X?
Do I need Item?
Do I want item?
Does X seem a reasonable price for Item?
If not, do I care that it is a bad value proposition, or do I want Item A so bad I don't care?
For some people the playtime is going to be the determining factor. For others, it won't be.
No one here is right or wrong, everyone simply has their own opinion for what they are willing to pay for this game.
Now, if it turns out to be financially unviable then that's a separate item. If enough people don't see the value proposition, then you won't see this sort of a game again.
But gourmet food can also disappoint... I am ok with that.
FonkyByNature
Member
First review from France... 15/20.
Gameplay : 4/5
Graphics : 5/5
Sounds : 4/5
Campaign length (7h) : 2/5
ps. I can't create topic
I speak french. The negatives are mostly about long cinematics which they say take half the game length and some QTE but graphics and gun impact seems to be top notch.
I realize that they would never do that. It's a shame that they can't stand behind what they've created: a tight, focused & innovative experience that tries to blur the line between interactive and passive entertainment. Instead that have to dance around gameplay length, the amount of cutscenes and QTEs. But that's the way the world works... people want blue & orange posters with guns.
JackLongRod
Banned
Thank you
I have spent $75+ on a steak before because I know it was gonna be good and it only lasted 10-15 minutes.
Maybe I should get a refund ?