Because I do not give the slightest of a **** how long a game is? Especially for a story, the story should end when its logical, not go on forever and become a bloated mess: which is most video game stories. I rather have a tightly paced game, where the mechanics have some layers to them and the game is enjoyable on replays than like say a shit load of would be "classic" that are just bloated and offer gameplay per square inch bitch work. It's like we're forgetting an entire era of genuine classics like Resident Evil, Metal gear Solid, Silent Hill, Devil May Cry, etc.
The Order's problems aren't just that it's short, the Order's problems is that it doesn't have a whole lot of ideas for a 5 hour game. It recycles boss fights that are mindless quick time events, the moment to moment cover shooting is some of the most banal action in a game post Gears of War, the story is poorly presented and waits till the very very end to even hint at something more interesting, it's got no sense of pace or design ingenuity when it comes to its encounter designs. 5 hours of that game was banal, 10 would have been atrocious.
I get the whole "I don't want to pay 60 bucks for 10 hours" or whatever, but that stuff to me has always been just wait then, more than enough sales nowadays to get a game later. Especially sales for digital stuff.
@kratosyoloswag said:
Quantum Break is probably a much better game but I can see the similarities. They're both games that are using design philosophies of games from like 2010 and haven't really evolved with the times, which makes sense since that's around the time both games started development.
Both games would've been much better received 6 years ago.
Maybe in the sense that game critics were shittier back then, such a thing might be possibru, but it shouldn't have been better received in 2010, that year had way the **** better games that still shit on most ..**** that all of this gen.
Log in to comment