Normchacho said:
http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=20067 Just pay attention to this page in the coming days. |
No thanks, I trust my eyes. I saw the erased video.
Normchacho said:
http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=20067 Just pay attention to this page in the coming days. |
No thanks, I trust my eyes. I saw the erased video.
Normchacho said:
http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=20067 Just pay attention to this page in the coming days. |
Why didn't you use this site for Wolfenstein's playthrough time? There's like 300 players recorded.
Normchacho said:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/8/4313632/wolfenstein-the-new-order-is-a-single-player-only-game |
Stood? Stand? Corrected carry on with that comparison lol
This is going beyond the point of ridiculous. Length is one of may concerns relating to the Order 1886 and was the straw that broke the camels back regarding whether the Order 1886 was going to be a somewhat decent game.
Comparing another games length, while simultaneously ignoring what the title also offers, in an attempt to justify one shortcoming of the Orders 1886 while simultaneously ignoring the other shortcomings is somewhat... I'd rather not say, in fear of getting banned.
jlmurph2 said:
Why didn't you use this site for Wolfenstein's playthrough time? There's like 300 players recorded. |
What? I did earlier...The average time is about 13 hours. I was making the point that LP are usually a good deal shorter than the average play through time. I tested this theory against a couple of other games aswell, but it just so happens that somebody on Gaf used TNO and it works out to almost the same gameplay/cutscene ratio.
If you meant in this post than I didn't because that will be the source for the average play time for The Order. Which, I suspect will end up being a good bit longer than 5 or 6 hours, based on the reports we've been hearing.
Bet with Adamblaziken:
I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.
HollyGamer said:
The fact is The order have both Quality and Quantity, depending on who play the game. |
We don't know if it's quality or not. We do know it had generic gameplay though. But if the game has solid characters and story it can still be a good game, even without top level gameplay.
However it does not have quantity. A game that can be 100 percented in 7-12 hours is not quantity. U keep bringing up the fact that gears has a 6 hour campaign(ya maybe on easy) but it also has mp. You would be much better off comparing it to Alan wake which if I recall was a 12-15 hour game.
Halo MCC will sell 5+ million copies(including digital)
halo 5 will sell 10 million copies(including digital)
x1 will pass ps4 in USA, and UK.
It's about the same as gears but as tiffac says it's a high profile exclusive. That's the main reason.
I remember a time when we hated tacked on multiplayer and now it's a thing. I've ignored "multiplayer" in a lot shooters starting as far back as Crysis and Far Cry 2.
onionberry said: GOW is pure gameplay plus cool multiplayer, we'll have to see if the order can be a GOOD short experience. |
Only GoW Ascension had multiplayer though and the SP campaign was good enough to justify the purchase just like all the others
i like how your comparing a game youve played already to a game you havnt played yet. going by your example you will finish the order pretty quickly then