[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;47154725]This thread is really not factoring in Story nuts who go into games for story, not caring about gameplay length, or cutscene length, just good story and world building.
[sp]I'm one of those people.[/sp][/QUOTE]
I'll be getting O:1886 because i'm interested in the new physically based graphics tech (which Ass creed Unity tried and failed to use and run well) and the setting. 30 FPS does grate me a little but it's expected due to it being on console, and the game length and replay value does have me a little worried, but it's true that there's different ways to find value in a game - how is the overall experience going to play out?
Edit: I have actually played the game, it was at EGX. The weapons were novel and fun to use, and the graphics were definitely top notch. The world seemed very fleshed out even in such a short gameplay segment.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47154710]i'd rather everyone talk about how boring actually playing that game looks like[/QUOTE]
I don't know the gunplay looks satisfying however little there is of it and I like the setting so it'd probably be fun
There are games that don't translate well at all into videos, if you look at Max Payne 1 or 2 they look like absolute shit but if you get to actually play them they offer some of the best gunplay in any game, ever. Hitman looks horrendously stupid on video but it's a really fun series to play. Tons of games are like that.
[QUOTE=Wii60;47154545]People play their own way
whether they are playing it wrong or not is subjective, not objective.[/QUOTE]
No not really, it can be quite objective. Its like saying you are playing tic tac toe except instead of yourself playing right and using X and Os and getting 3 in a row, you instead take a big shit on the paper, roll around in it, and say you won.
Apply that to any board game, then realize video games follow rules as well. If all someone did was cut down trees in Dota 2 with a quelling blade all game then they would be playing it wrong.
[editline]16th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;47154547]Maybe there's a reason for multiple playthroughs?[/QUOTE]
Nope, their isnt, no new game+ or anything.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;47154777]No not really, it can be quite objective. Its like saying you are playing tic tac toe except instead of yourself playing right and using X and Os and getting 3 in a row, you instead take a big shit on the paper, roll around in it, and say you won.
Apply that to any board game, then realize video games follow rules as well. If all someone did was cut down trees in Dota 2 with a quelling blade all game then they would be playing it wrong.
[/QUOTE]
those are MP games
SP Games (like the order 1886) are different. The Developers give you a world and say "Beat it at your own pace with whatever you can do with the tools we gave you"
Someone speedrunning a game or Someone who gets stuck at a part because of <reasons> is not playing it wrong.
All this discussion about speedrunning and skipping shit and "playing the game wrong" is irrelevant because if you watch the playthrough he goes through it at a pretty normal speed.
[editline]16th February 2015[/editline]
Honestly I think the game looks pretty cool but it is definitely short on gameplay when you combine the overall short length with the amount of cutscenes and quicktime events.
[QUOTE=Wii60;47154739]spoilers
[url]http://i.imgur.com/L3gUxuW.png[/url]
[url]http://i.imgur.com/HAfinJ4.png[/url][/QUOTE]
I was so looking forward to this game... this almost made me cry.
[QUOTE=Wii60;47154739]spoilers
[url]http://i.imgur.com/L3gUxuW.png[/url]
[url]http://i.imgur.com/HAfinJ4.png[/url][/QUOTE]
reminds me of this from cod
[video=youtube;vrzLg2M1KP0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrzLg2M1KP0[/video]
maybe that's why that dev used cod as a comparison for the length :v:
I for one will still keep my pre-order and play it for myself. Either way, I'll be selling it once I complete it.
[QUOTE=Wii60;47154739]spoilers
[url]http://i.imgur.com/L3gUxuW.png[/url]
[url]http://i.imgur.com/HAfinJ4.png[/url][/QUOTE]
This is beyond lazy. This isn't worth the full asking price.
$60 for 10 hours alone feels kind of week $30 for a 5 hour add on is okay though.
[QUOTE=Mr. Agree;47155264]I for one will still keep my pre-order and play it for myself. Either way, I'll be selling it once I complete it.[/QUOTE]
why not just buy a copy someone is selling for a cheaper price then resell it?
Sounds like a perfect game to rent out, knock it over in a night before it overstays it's welcome, and keep going with other stuff.
this game is going to suck
[QUOTE=Sunday_Roast;47154601]Do you know what pacing is?
Do you know how important it is for narrative driven games (or any non-arcade styled games for that matter) to have down-time?
Take a look at Call of Duty.
CoD campaigns are non-stop action, with no down-time. And they are exhausting to play.[/QUOTE]
My ass. I play Half Life 2 and I find myself constantly thinking ugh, I have to drive this stupid boat for god damn ever, or ugh, I have to trek through Ravenholm for god damn ever, or ugh, I have to drive this stupid fucking car forever. It's so fucking chock full of 'that one part' moments.
If that's pacing, it's awful pacing.
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;47154613]"why play any of david cage's games"[/QUOTE]
good question :v:
[QUOTE=Dracon;47151572]it took me about the same amount of time to beat Metal Gear Rising and it was well worth it.[/QUOTE]
Difference is MGR was 5.5 hours of gameplay, this will be 2 hours of gameplay and 3.5 of QTEs.
MGR was 5.5 hours of outstanding gameplay and a huge replayability potential.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;47156942]My ass. I play Half Life 2 and I find myself constantly thinking ugh, I have to drive this stupid boat for god damn ever, or ugh, I have to trek through Ravenholm for god damn ever, or ugh, I have to drive this stupid fucking car forever. It's so fucking chock full of 'that one part' moments.
If that's pacing, it's awful pacing.
good question :v:[/QUOTE]
Well, that's like, your opinion, man. (And so it is in its purest form)
Mind you that many people like slower games and movies.
You clearly don't. And I can respect that.
But just because a game gives time to smell the ashes; don't judge its down-time as being objectively shit.
want more examples than just hl2?
portal 2, how about some non-valve games
braid, how about non pc games
halo 1/2/3
how about some ps4 games
killzone shadowfall
[QUOTE=Map in a box;47157438]want more examples than just hl2?
portal 2, how about some non-valve games
braid, how about non pc games
halo 1/2/3
how about some ps4 games
killzone shadowfall[/QUOTE]
You're forgetting these games are about gameplay with relatively little cinematics. The only game close to this idea I can think of is MGS4 but that one had 8 hours of cinematics alone. Then it also had gameplay.
What about transistor or bastion? Story heavy and beautiful, and great gameplay
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;47154705]People who complain about this game seem to mostly be people who expected another title entirely.
Don't play story heavy games if you don't like to see QTEs, loads of cutscenes and short titles.
Not every game has to be a massive RPG with immense replay value that takes at least 60 hours to complete once. Moreover, QTEs are not necessarily a bad thing and are in fact pretty damn necessary for some cutscenes to work well - if you complain about the final boss of a game being a giant QTE then chances are you're not the kind of people who should play that sort of game to begin with.[/QUOTE]
Have people actually forgotten about all the games with great writing that came before QTEs and movie-sized cinematics?
Just because someone really likes the narrative aspect of a game doesn't mean he has to put up with QTE "gameplay" or endless cutscenes. In fact, if he likes video game narratives he'll probably not be looking for a movie's approach instead since video game can deliver narratives in many more ways than just cutscene, and often they'll be make the experience more immersive and personal for it.
The characteristic element of games compared to other media is interactivity. It is talking to every random dude on the Citadel to puzzle together a mystery, it's /actually/ sticking with the Prod to make your brother proud, it's hastily building a shelter from Creepers in the rain, it's using White Phosphorus because you don't think you have any other option, it's stabbing your quest giver and looting a trinket that sends you down a different quest line.
That's the kinda stuff I expect someone to liked if they're into video game narratives. Not movies broken up by obligatory dry gameplay or QTEs that feel like having to press "Play" five times on a remote every now and then to keep the TV running.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;47157438]want more examples than just hl2?
portal 2, how about some non-valve games
braid, how about non pc games
halo 1/2/3
how about some ps4 games
killzone shadowfall[/QUOTE]
braid wasn't sold at full price and wasn't cinematic-heavy
halo series has difficulty settings, skulls, large areas where you can use different vehicles and weapons to get a different experience each time, co-op and multiplayer
shadowfall was shit
[QUOTE=Map in a box;47157438]want more examples than just hl2?
portal 2, how about some non-valve games
braid, how about non pc games
halo 1/2/3
how about some ps4 games
killzone shadowfall[/QUOTE]
All of those have multiplayer minus Braid, which isn't $60.
Now, I don't want to seem like I'm white-knighting this game because frankly I have no interest in it... BUT to play Devil's Advocate...
Shouldn't you all be waiting for the game to come out and hear what people have to say instead of relying on unsubstantiated rumors?
[QUOTE=Skyward;47157671]Now, I don't want to seem like I'm white-knighting this game because frankly I have no interest in it... BUT to play Devil's Advocate...
Shouldn't you all be waiting for the game to come out and hear what people have to say instead of relying on unsubstantiated rumors?[/QUOTE]
I completely agree. I'm not trying to defend the game by any means, but it's hard to judge a game's length when you have a sample size of only a few people.
[QUOTE=Greetings;47151920]Exactly. Outside of RPGs, games were usually never long anyway outside of a few special cases like Deus Ex.
That said, the value all comes down to if it's fun enough to replay or not.[/QUOTE]
According to [URL="http://howlongtobeat.com/"]howlongtobeat.com[/URL], looking at some of the best action games throughout the ages and some personal favorites (main story only):
Wolfenstein 3D - 7 hours
Doom - 4 hours
Duke Nukem 3D - 9 hours
Half Life - 12 hours
Blood - 10 hours
Oni - 12 hours
Halo - 9 hours
NOLF - 13 hours
Operation Flashpoint - 24 hours
FEAR - 9 hours
Far Cry - 13 hours
Crysis - 10 hours
Doom 3 - 11 hours
Quake 4 - 8 hours
Dead Space - 11 hours
Shadow Warrior (2013) - 12 hours of pure awesome
So in average most games are around 9 hours for the main plot only, usually over 12 hours at the very least if you go for some of the extras.
Less than 9 hours for everything in the games seems a little thin.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;47157777]According to [URL="http://howlongtobeat.com/"]howlongtobeat.com[/URL], looking at some of the best action games throughout the ages and some personal favorites (main story only):
Wolfenstein 3D - 7 hours
Doom - 4 hours
Duke Nukem 3D - 9 hours
Half Life - 12 hours
Blood - 10 hours
Oni - 12 hours
Halo - 9 hours
NOLF - 13 hours
Operation Flashpoint - 24 hours
FEAR - 9 hours
Far Cry - 13 hours
Crysis - 10 hours
Doom 3 - 11 hours
Quake 4 - 8 hours
Dead Space - 11 hours
Shadow Warrior (2013) - 12 hours of pure awesome
So in average most games are around 9 hours for the main plot only, usually over 12 hours at the very least if you go for some of the extras.
Less than 9 hours for everything in the games seems a little thin.[/QUOTE]
That's a terrible assumption. For starters, you're getting games from different time periods. And then, your sample size is also too small.
[QUOTE=Covalent;47156030]why not just buy a copy someone is selling for a cheaper price then resell it?[/QUOTE]
Because I'm already getting it for £37 on pre-order which is fine for me
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47157876]That's a terrible assumption. For starters, you're getting games from different time periods. And then, your sample size is also too small.[/QUOTE]
How does time period matter in this case? All the games in that list play pretty much the same. It's not like NES era where they had to artificially lengthen the time by upping difficulty. Sample size also doesn't mean much. If you spend a long time on 1886, you will spend an even longer time on these games and vice versa. 1886 is a short game, most of it being cinematic. That's the truth.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.