XI
you are not logged in
News

YouTube Walkthrough Suggests The Order: 1886 Can Be Finished In Under Six Hours

But how long is it really?

Sony’s latest exclusive, The Order: 1886, is reportedly around five and a half hours long, with a full YouTube playthrough of the game clocking in at this time. Obviously, since the game has no multiplayer and is very story-focused, this has many people concerned.

Bear in mind that, if you watch a section of the video such as the first half of the shooting-heavy video above at the bridge section, you’ll notice that the difficulty is most certainly on quite a low setting, and that the player appears to be running and gunning. On the flipside, though, there’s cutscene sections which can’t be skipped and the player also spends a good couple of minutes looking for an objective just after the five minute mark.

Obviously, it’s hard to comment on how reflective this will be of any one playthrough, and we haven’t watched the entire playlist of videos to confirm the length, but Ready At Dawn’s CEO, Ru Weerasuriya, does have some things to say about these allegations, speaking to Eurogamer:

“I know there are numbers out there,” he said. “I know why the question comes up. I know numbers have been put out there that are actually not right. It’s impossible to finish the game in that time, so we know the numbers are wrong.”

It’s likely he’s referring to the “under five hours” length that was rumoured last week, rather than this five hour playthrough which has only just surfaced.

“Game length is important,” continued Weerasuriya. “Every game has to take its own time to tell its story. Some games can be short. Some games can be long. I still remember the first time I picked up Modern Warfare, I finished the campaign in about three-and-a-half or four hours. And it was fun because they made that campaign work for that because they had something else.

“You go back 10 years, there were a lot of games that were just single-player, one time play. There were some games that were single-player and you could jump back in and get more. That’s what we did in our game. You can jump back and get other things out of it.”

Weerasuriya continued to defend shorter length games, which suggests that The Order: 1886 might fit alongside those too: “I’ve played games that lasted two hours that were better than games that I played for 16 hours. That’s the reality of it,”

“I’ve had many more experiences of very short games that have floored me, that have left me dreaming of the things I could do after, more than the games that have lasted 15, 16, 20 or 30 hours, where I’ve just been like, okay, I played it through and I got what I wanted, but I didn’t get more than what I was expecting. Sometimes I want to be floored, even if it’s for a short amount of time.”

I must say that I agree with his next statement: “Gameplay length for me is so relative to quality. It’s just like a movie. Just because a movie is three hours long, it doesn’t make it better.” This is very true, and I’ve completed games such as Portal 2 and Journey in a matter of hours, yet they still remain some of my favourite gaming experiences of the generation. For The Order, we’ll just have to wait and see how it is, and if quality is better than quantity.

Keep an eye out for our own interview with Ru Weerasuriya later this afternoon, and we’ll have a review of the game before release.

Source: Eurogamer, via Videogamer

Read more: #
35 Comments
  1. Tony Cawley
    Pint! Pint!
    Since: Feb 2009

    It’s definitely an interesting debate, I think the key point is as he said, there have been some really good short games but also some really bad short games. There have also been some really good long games but also some really bad long games. So what’s the point? Well game length is irrelevant to game quality, as long as there’s replay value you can still get money’s worth from a short game. But please, collectibles do not mean replay value, that’s artificial and shit, give repayability through alternative story lines or endings or whatever, not through drab collectibles.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 13:46.
  2. JustTaylorNow
    Member
    Since: Oct 2011

    That’s not good, considering it has no online what so ever it’s no excuse as to why it couldn’t be 10/12 hours long. There is no excuse as to why RAD couldn’t make this longer. From the looks of the game, it doesn’t look like it has replayability & this is disgusting from Sony/Rad.

    My pre order cancelled

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 13:52.
    • bunimomike
      Member
      Since: Jul 2009

      Whilst I respect anyone’s decision to cancel a pre-order, saying that Ready At Dawn had no excuse is unfounded nonsense. If they fleshed out the Arthurian story and realised that it was a relatively lean six hours or so, for example, then that’s to be respected. If there’s little-to-no filler then that’s wonderful. The thing to (potentially) disrespect is the price.

      Journey took 90-120 minutes to play but was staggeringly wonderful in many, many ways. However, the price also reflected that so it felt like good value for money too.

      Describing Sony and Ready At Dawn being part of some sort of “disgusting” behaviour is very bizarre. It’s just game length. Nothing more, nothing less.

      If the reviews are good I’ll pick it up, enjoy it and then sell it on. Job done.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:06.
      • JustTaylorNow
        Member
        Since: Oct 2011

        For the price they charging for a triple A title, the rumoured length of the game, it’s disgusting & standard firm by it. I’m basically paying £40 for graphics & 5 hour patch download day one. RAD & Sony messed up there is no justifying it. 5/6 hours, might aswell call it an indie game.

        Life is strange, walking dead, game of thrones. All episodes put together are longer than this & you only pay at least £15

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:12.
      • bunimomike
        Member
        Since: Jul 2009

        … and the production values of the games you mention are not even in the same league as 1886.

        It’s like comparing a large meal at McDonald’s compared to a medium-sized meal at a Michelin rated restaurant. However, just like those two food-based examples, it’s up to you whether you think they’re good value or not.

        Saying “£40 for graphics” is frankly pathetic. There’s audio (FX and soundtrack), acting, story, (hopefully) progression in said story, some sort of conclusion, decent quality game-play, etc. Just because you’re not happy with what’s been revealed doesn’t mean you have to strip everything else out for some popcorn statement about it just being for graphics. :-\

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:21.
      • JustTaylorNow
        Member
        Since: Oct 2011

        And the games I mentioned don’t have fx/sound, story, everything else that the order has? The McDonald’s meal will fill me up compared to the Michelin meal. My point being sometimes quality means nothing, I rayher mcdonalds than Marco pierre.

        At the end of the day, my opinion & I respect your opinion.

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:32.
      • CrawFail
        Member
        Since: Apr 2010

        Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes COULD be finished in less than 30 minutes..just because it can be it doesn’t mean it will be by everyone.
        If the guy in youtube was rinsing through the game and it took him 6 hours, I’d inagine it’ll clock in somewhere around 10 hours, which is pretty reasonable in my opinion. That and the fact you can play it again later or on a higher difficulty setting.
        You’ll get more out of it. This youtuber more than likely wanted to be the first person on YT to finish it as a way to get financial rewards from people looking for a walk through guide.

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:37.
      • Kennykazey
        Member
        Since: Mar 2010

        I agree. If a game doesn’t have multiplayer, co-op or something else on the side, then I’d want it to be at least a dozen hours to feel like it’s worth the full price. If it’s less than that, then I think it should be priced accordingly.

        Look at what Nintendo is doing with Captain Toad Treasure Tracker and Kirby & The Rainbow Curse for the right pricing.

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 18:37.
    • Tony Cawley
      Pint! Pint!
      Since: Feb 2009

      You’re fully entitled to your opinion but I just don’t really understand it. You’re unwilling to buy what could be an outstanding game because it’s 4 hours shorter than you’d like? 4 hours?

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:12.
      • JustTaylorNow
        Member
        Since: Oct 2011

        badically yes, the reason being that, I don’t play online at all unless I’m chasing a platinum. If a game has no online play, I expect a SP oriented game to be longer than 5 hours at least for my money

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:15.
    • double-o-dave
      Member
      Since: Nov 2008

      I haven’t watched the video but I’m guessing it’s on ‘Easy’ and despite the searching a couple of minutes for an objective, I bet the player has rushed through it.

      From what i’ve read from other people who have the game, they are about 8-9 hours in and haven’t completed it yet.

      I’m pretty sure I could complete a game that originally took me about 10 hours to complete in about 5 or 6 if I put it on Easy & powered my way through. In fact I’m pretty sure I have done similar things in the past for certain trophies.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:19.
      • JustTaylorNow
        Member
        Since: Oct 2011

        Good point, about iy bring played on easy.

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:26.
  3. Youles
    Member
    Since: Feb 2011

    Game length doesn’t bother me. Some games are bulked out with a ridiculous number of side missions pointlessly – Watch_Dogs!! But you could even argue that something like Far Cry 4 is X amount of hours long, but some of those hours are filled with side missions that are just repetitive and pointless after you’ve done a few. So long as the game is of good quality the length really doesn’t bother me – I would rather the campaign was made how it was intended, and not stretched out by adding in some silly story just to make it longer. I actually welcome some shorter games, as it means I’ll have more time for other games.

    The only problem is that for some people it will not represent good value – particularly if they’re making a decision between The Order and another game (that perhaps has multiplayer etc). I guess it depends on how much you think you’ll enjoy it.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:08.
    • Youles
      Member
      Since: Feb 2011

      Just to add – whilst I tend not to trade-in, I believe the trade in value of new titles stays high close to release. Therefore, surely people who are not going to get it just because of the game length (but like the look of it etc), should buy it, complete it over a weeks or so (since it’s short), then trade it in. Even if you lose £10 on it, you’ve been able to playthrough (and hopefully enjoyed) a console Exclusive game that you had considered spending £30-£40 on.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:15.
    • bunimomike
      Member
      Since: Jul 2009

      I’m glad length doesn’t bother you as I’ll be seeing you later this evening. *whores self out*

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 16:48.
      • Youles
        Member
        Since: Feb 2011

        Haha! ;)

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 17:04.
  4. Carrot381
    Member
    Since: Dec 2013

    I’ve been looking forward to The Order but that length of game would certainly stop me buying it. If it is that short I would imagine that cheap used copies would be available quite quickly anyway.

    I’m interested in what the reviews say when they’re published.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:08.
  5. Starman
    Member
    Since: Jul 2011

    Sounds like there will be a lot of pro-owned copies on shelves within a couple of weeks.

    He has a fair point that a long game isn’t necessarily better than a short one, however if you’d paid full price you may feel short changed.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:23.
  6. Crazy_Del
    Member
    Since: Jul 2009

    I completed Resident Evil HD on Easy first time and it took me 8hrs. Played again but this time on Normal I completed it just under 5hrs. Played 3rd playthrough and completed it under 3hrs…. I believe this youtube video is probably his second playthrough seeing he knows what to do or where the object is? (This is an assumption as I do not want to watch the video!)
    I am looking forward to play this on launch day and in my opinion it is worth it as it looks absolutely stunning. I will be taking my time, explore all sections, take some screenshots or capture the video…. it’ll be 10hrs of gaming for me. Then replay it again could be 6hrs who knows as long as it’s enjoyable and has a replay value as I enjoyed Resident Evil HD which I completed 9 times and that’s probably around 30hrs maybe 40hrs in total!

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 14:52.
    • double-o-dave
      Member
      Since: Nov 2008

      Exactly. I’ll take my time, admire the graphics and do a little bit of exploring. There’s no way on this planet I’m likely to complete it first time round in 5-6 hrs.

      If it looks as good as people say, then this will probably always remain in the PS4 collection as one of the eye candy games you get out every now and then to show off the PS4.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 15:01.
  7. JR.
    Member
    Since: Apr 2013

    Some people complained that Alien Isolation was too long and said it would have been a better ‘tighter’ experience with a shorter runtime. Now people are saying The Order is too short because someone rushed their way through it and beat the game in 5-6 hours… Make your minds up folks.

    Personally, I’m here for the best looking ‘next gen (erm, current gen)’ game across all platforms and hoping it has a great story to match. I’m not one of these ‘finish it once and if it doesn’t have MP, trade it in’ types.

    Beat the game on the hardest difficulty (if you didn’t on your original playthrough). Find all the hidden journals/collectibles. Alien Isolation had challenges such as ‘finishing the game without dying (impossible btw)’ or ‘don’t kill any humans’ etc. It’s not all about the runtime. You get out of it what you choose to.

    Plus, most single payer games can be rushed and completed within a few hours. You can speed run MGS4 in 1 and a half hours (obviously not including cut scenes..). The first Dead Space in under 3 hours. You can speed run The Last of Us in 3 and a half hours if you want to, and that game is a masterpiece. I realise The Last of Us had MP but personally, as someone who dislikes MP in these types of games, I wouldn’t object if it didn’t.

    This video isn’t a ‘speed run’ as such but they aren’t playing the game like your average player would. There’s some definite rushing going on.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 15:06.
  8. ll Eldave0 ll
    Member
    Since: Oct 2013

    Normally I’d say it looks like a rental but with Blockbusters gone and Boomerang deciding to give away your bank details these days, coughing up the full £45 or waiting for a speedy price drop are probably the only options.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 15:18.
  9. stonyk
    Member
    Since: Dec 2009

    Didn’t skyrim take just over 2 hours to run through?

    http://www.geek.com/games/skyrim-completed-in-2-hours-16-minutes-by-determined-game-testers-1430075/

    So this is a decent time then :-)

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 16:33.
  10. TSBonyman
    Member
    Since: Dec 2009

    Games are too expensive this gen – i’ve already skipped several AAA titles simply because i can’t afford to buy all the games i want to play brand new. But The Order 1886 looks like one of those games i will be picking up day one, regardless of game length.

    Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 16:37.
    • Carrot381
      Member
      Since: Dec 2013

      I’m in agreement there. Only bought 1 full price game in the 12 months i’ve had my ps4 (t’was Dragon Age and totally worth it). It’s all price drop and used copies for me unfortunately.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 16:50.
    • MrYd
      Member
      Since: Mar 2011

      Actually, prices are about what they should be or less. Think what we were paying 20 years ago for PS1 games and work out what that should be now due to inflation. (A quick Googling will find tools to help you there).

      Those prices everyone moans about for the games on the PS store? About what they should be. Prices might not be dropping quite as quickly for physical copies as they did for the PS3 generation, but that’s probably to be expected. New systems, less choice of games, no need to drop the prices because they’ll be selling anyway. And a year later, that’s starting to change.

      And with development costs presumably still increasing, prices aren’t really that unreasonable.

      Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 18:10.
      • TSBonyman
        Member
        Since: Dec 2009

        Games are too expensive this gen * around where i live – i should have said.

        Example Gamestop UK sell The Order for 43.97 GBP, Gamestop Ireland sell the same game for 74.99 Euro.

        According to online currency converter: 43.97 GBP = 59.76 EUR.

        That’s where i’m coming from, but i tend to agree with most of the points you made.

        Comment posted on 16/02/2015 at 23:07.