Locked: Why I think The Order: 1886 won't be only 5 hours.

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why I think The Order: 1886 won't be only 5 hours.

Now let me start off by saying I'm playing with fire having the balls to smash right into the Sony discussion, and I'm sure looking at my sig its obvious I'm an XBOX fanboy. But moving away from that, let me speak. For starters, its single player only. Thus the developers wouldn't be idiotic enough to put just 5 hours of content into the game (reviewers would be all over this, and this would sway buyers away from the game). So let start with that. Another reason is because of simply because its well not like COD. Its a new franchise, and the developers would want as MUCH content in the game as possible. If its 5 hours, people buy the game, and get pissed off. They never come back to the franchise, and that ends with a huge lose for the developers. Well only time can tell (lol I can't even say that with a straight face, its out in a couple of days so if you don't have the patience well thats to bad).


P.S. My b-day was yesterday, don't know why I didn't post it on vgchartz. Anyway its 12:30 am, so before I start posting about rage XBOX fanboy stuff, I'm heading off to bed...

Around the Network

Did we really need another one of these threads? Can't we just, you know, wait for the game to release so we can formulate our own opinions?

I think it's longer too, but not by much. Maybe 2 to 3 hours longer ...

Add me on Xbox: DWTKarma 

What confuses me is that there isn't a bet involved here.

“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix


I think it wont be 5 hours before we get another fluffing thread about this.

Around the Network


Uhmmm... No?
It might not sell well for a number of reasons, but it might also be lacking in content for many of those reasons as well.

- New IP
- Inexperienced Dev
- Small(er) Budget than other AAA titles

The central purpose of this game SHOULD be to set up brand awareness, generate enough profit to break even, score well enough to prove Ready At Dawn deserves a bigger budget, and also to give them more responsibility as a Development studio. This game doesn't need to sell 3 million units to be considered a success. Given Sony's financial situation and doubling down on risk in the form of financing a completely new title by a relatively unheard of team, on top of these reports bubbling up about lack of content and no multiplayer, I'd say it's safe to assume there was not that big of a budget behind this game. I think they built this game so that it can't really fail and if the public perception is bad enough, they can walk away without any further obligation. With that being said what I actually foresee happening is it doing 2 million + copies sold, being financially successful, critically mediocre or better but MOST IMPORTANTLY paving the way for what will become a juggernaut IP. Tell me who remembers this - "greatness from small beginnings". Looking at the technical aspects of this game its clear that RAD are technically gifted. Worst case scenario they need to allot more funds to a better story, best case scenario they just add in a multiplayer component and call it good (I'm talking about the sequel here). Point being that they're actually in a really good position with Sony and they have nothing but room to expand in all meaningful ways (this is a good thing!). How you feel about playtime or replay ability is irrelevent. I could play through all the titanfall maps in less than five hours and then literally do the same maps over, and over and over again. If people can enjoy that then there's no reason the general market can't enjoy a story driven experience set in a unique period of alternate history.

I understand your reasoning but the video was there, although it wasn't just 5 hours.
We already know how much of the walkthrough was QTE and cutscene which has to be taken off by any playtime we get to know from here.
But let's not forget that the actual time you get to play the game is only one factor of the value of the game and there are a lot of other (of course subjective) factors to consider. By how much and whether they are to consider will most probably be the subject of many discussions to come.

Who cares if it's longer than 5 hours? Your eyes can't see past 5 hours, anyways.

We already know that the game is ~12 hours for an average playthrough. c:

Plus, the length trolling in general has been an asinine internet event. The quality on display is pretty incredible, and we should be talking about that.