Top
320°

Trophy Hunter Gets The Order 1886 Platinum Within 24 Hours, Details His Playtime For Platinum

GearNuke: "The Order 1886 street date was broken by stores worldwide and many users were able to play through the entire game the past few days. Out of all these lucky users, some were able to achieve platinum trophy as well, and one of the users who recently got done with his platinum detailed his playtime of the game."

Read Full Story >>
gearnuke.com
The story is too old to be commented.
PsBoxGamer1036d ago

Making me wonder if I should just rent it.

G20WLY1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

"someone can finish it in 7-8 hours on their first playthrough if they don’t go after trophies/collectables"

It's a little on the short side, but I'm a completionist, I'll want that platinum, so if that means 11+ hours of good gaming I'll take that!

I just want the story to be interesting and well told. I already know enough about everything else to know I'll enjoy other aspects. There are too many conflicting statements as to how long the game is, so I'll find out for myself - but I'm no 'speed runner'!

Septic1036d ago

This is a rental for sure unless you're gonna keep going back to the game over and over again. SP games like this are better off rented unless you like to take your time with them.

Unarmed_Civilian1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

This is a Trophy Hunter so i guess he plays really good, and can finish games quickly.

Is a game like Metal Gear Solid a bad game just for being short.

SoapShoes1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

^ @Septic, sooooo you only rented Metal Gear Solid, BioShock, Resident Evil 2, Silent Hill 2, God of War, etc? All of which can be beat in 1-2 hours. Sounds like you have lousy taste in games.

LifeInNZ1036d ago

I agree about the conflicting statements however, surely that is even more reason to rent? the game in these parts is close to $100, which is not cheap!

I don't buy any game at new release price if I'm not assured of its value in terms of longevity.

Jaqen_Hghar1036d ago

This is the type of game a man will replay at least annually though. So even after platinum it will have unlimited hours just like all SP games worth their salt. A great SP is like a great film you can revisit over and over and love it all the more. A MP focused game is like daytime TV with plenty of content that's always a little different but it's just not the same quality and all pretty much the same after awhile.

LOGICWINS1036d ago

@SoapShoes- I would say anyone who wants to PLAY those games you mentioned has good taste in games. I don't see what owning them has to do with anything. For example, the last movie I've seen in theaters was the Equalizer. I enjoyed it, but I don't see the purpose of buying it. I accept it for what it was, an enjoyable experience.

I don't see the need to repeat EVERY single enjoyable experience...because there are so many NEW enjoyable experiences out there to have.

marlinfan101036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

@soap

as logic wins said, you don't need to buy the game to enjoy it. if a game offers no replay value and not a very long story or much gameplay, i don't feel its worth $60 IMO.

also, you don't find it a little weird that you're here bringing up ps2 games to compare it too? i mean those are some pretty old games your talking about. sure they're good games, but you don't think we should have longer, more in depth experiences 10+ years later? i find myself getting a little nervous seeing a lot of people in here doing this same thing. RE2 was released in 98 (17 years ago!!!!) Silent hill 2 was 2001, 14 yrs ago. bioshock was about 8 years, same with the last MGS game. i mean i personally feel there should be no way were still comparing the content of 2015 to games that old to try and justify our purchase.

. someone posted a reddit link in here where the guy said he finished it in a little over 5 hrs and only had 1.5-2 hrs of gameplay. i think thats pretty bad if you ask me. ill still buy it for sure, but i don't plan on keeping it for long if that turns out to be true.

UltraNova1036d ago

Even though 7-8hrs might be considered short, I can tell you that I had more fun playing Vanquish and Azuras Wrath both of which I beat in around 5 hrs than all other similar titles combined!

Quality > Content for the sake of content.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1036d ago
Killa781036d ago

Depends how good the game is Tbh.

I didn't play Uncharted 3 online but don't regret the purchase at all because it was a brilliant Experienc. Same with TLOU and even GTA.

If the order is as immersIve as that I'll be very pleased.

I've got it pre-ordered :D

UKmilitia1036d ago

i spend £10-15 on a bluray film which will give me 2hours a few times.
i got the order for £35 so if it gives me 8 hours i think thats good enough for me,then the fact i sell the games on that are single player only so it will end up costing me about £10 to play it after resale

Volkama1036d ago

Hard to guess how good or bad the inevitable DLC will be though. If the game is amazing then the DLC could be worth the time at a later date too. I suppose you could re-rent it, depending on how many additional content packs they release :)

PudgeyBurrito1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

I don't buy games for trophy's. I buy games to play the game. Trophy's are secondary. Good on him for the plat though.

GokuSolosAll1036d ago

Sounds like a rental. This is why games need multiplayer. Short AAA single player games are awesome but we need to justify the $60 price tag.

freshslicepizza1036d ago

strange isn't it? we can validate a single player game that is less than 10 hours in length for $60 but we can't do the same for a game that is online multiplayer only that could be enjoyed for hundreds of hours for the same $60.

Dyldog691036d ago

Multiplayer is repetitive a.d.d. garbage

marlinfan101036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

Good point. I remember a lot of ppl that are in these order articles defending it, saying that TF should've been $30-40 because of its content and being MP only. I personally got over 50 hrs out of TF (not even a lot compared to most people I know) which, going off all the things we've heard so far, is more than just about anyone will get out of the order.

BTW before ppl freak out I'm not saying anything about the content of either game, just that there's a lot of double standards and hypocrites on this site.

freshslicepizza1036d ago

@Dyldog69

so what do you do with that single player game once you are finished? it too is repetitive but only this time you know what to do. in multiplayer matches are not the same because you have different people to play with and unlike a.i. they are not as predictable.

@marlinfan10

titanfall what somewhat limited with maps and player count size but yeah, many thought it should have an added campaign mode yet here we are and people are defending the order for not having multiplayer.

it all boils down to how much you enjoy the game but i think people are going to trade in the order very quickly once they finish. maybe not buy the game digitally or just rent it.

MasterCornholio1036d ago

Not all games need multiplayer though.

I can't imagine Alien Isolation with a multiplayer mode in it.

mixelon1036d ago

.. I can! One alien, humans given random tasks. Alien can only use bursts of energy and has to rest rather than sprint everywhere forcing him to play tactically. Some sort of alien-vision that shows heat and movement but doesn't let you see very clearly.

Maybe the option for a player to control a synthetic or survivor from a competing group (like TLOU MP which works surprisingly well)

Maybe in the sequel? :D

I don't think it would have made the game better necessarily, but it could be fun and I'd like to see creative assembly try something along those lines.

Dirtnapstor1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

@mixelon

Evolve?

@MasterCorn
I agree, MP in AI wouldn't be that great. It would take away from the original intent of the game. Maybe a co-op escape-from-point A to B type thingy....

Jumper091036d ago

Can we stop with this bullshit comment "Not all games need multiplayer"?

Yes MP is needed to justify 60 bucks IMO.

60 bucks for a 5-6 hours long game is a waste of money.

MasterCornholio1036d ago

@Jumper

That's what people told me about Alien Isolation when someone beat it in under 5 hours.

I beat it in 14.

Let the reviews come out first and then I'll decide for myself how long the game lasts. If its around 10 hours and its a good experience then I dont see why it isn't worth 60$.

moegooner881036d ago

Only idiots think all games need online multiplayer.

Moldiver1036d ago

I guess it depend on what you accept as value at the retail price of a new game. A game like skyrim, or a bloodborne, mass effect (even before that game had an MP mode it had tonnes of replay value) etc. is worth the full price for me because its going to last me months. It took me a year to complete skyrim plus its DLC. between playing other shorter games that I bought a reduced/second hand prices. I will happily pay full price on day one for any single player game that offers depth and variety to its gameplay and lots of content. Thats a what a full price AAA game is, to me.

I can deal with BF, halo and gears short campaign because they offer great replay value in the form of great multiplayer modes. And that never gets old. Because no two matches are ever the same. How many times would you have to play the order to justify it as a full price game if its a 5 and a half hour experience that you have to actually make effort to extract longevity from it?

You can never go online on GTA and STILL find a tonne of things to do. even the order: 1866's closest peer, Gears of war, offers a multitude of gameplay options at the mechanical level in its single player. They didnt even lock the hardest difficulty setting on first play through (and even that would be a dubious means of extracting a longer gameplay experience.)

So the REAL question is are you getting your moneys worth? Thats up to you guys individually. But for me, I would want more game for that money. So bloodborne is my must have PS4 game this month.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1036d ago
destroyerz11036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

You are not required to buy this game. And games with focus on the storyline doesn't necessarily need multiplayer, unless it makes sense. BioShock is an example. BioShock 1 (no multiplayer), BioShock 2 (with -bad- multiplayer), BioShock Infinite (no multiplayer). All of them are amazing. These claims of "short game", "no multiplayer", "blablabla" has no base to be supported. All BioShocks costs the same price on release date.

Letthewookiewin1036d ago (Edited 1036d ago )

I beat Bioshock in 7 hours and didn't run to the Internet to bash it. I also didn't feel cheated. Skyrim can be beat in under 3 hours yet I have over 180 in it. This campaign to downplay The Order is redundant. Enjoy the game or don't. Quick tip, buy a PS4 and you won't hate The Order any more, it's truly a relief to not hate something with a crackheads passion. (Not aimed at Destroyerz)

Forn1036d ago

Well said, and I can't wait for The Order. It's going to be incredible imo.

Farmassy1036d ago

@letthewookiewin

you can't be serious when you compare skyrim to this game for the purposes of game length. The reason you have over 180 hours of playtime on Skyrim is because there are hundreds of hours of content in it... you could spend a whole day just doing sidequests alone. The Order has much more limited content compared to Skyrim. I'm not saying the Order is going to be a bad game, just that your logic almost negates itself. You are saying, "hey... just look at skyrim. Its a good game and can be beaten quickly." This makes me compare the amount of content in both games and makes the Order fall very short.

I hope everyone enjoys the Order. I watched the gameplay for a couple hours and from what I saw it wasn't for me. Not that it really matters since I don't own a PS4. But people should just accept that it is a short game. As long as its a good short game it doesn't really matter. People shouldn't get so defensive. Who cares if it takes 6 hours or 12 hours. If the quality is there it shouldn't matter too much.

Jumper091036d ago

lol at all the butthurt Sony kids downvoting your comment.

But you are right.

WildArmed1036d ago

Not really, you just make good games.

Batman, Mordor, Wolfenstein are all games that did not need multiplayer to make them worth buying and keeping.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1036d ago
vongruetz1036d ago

It always makes me laugh because when someone says it only takes them 10 hours to get through the game, that usually translates into 15 for me. I'm guessing someone who plays a 10 hour game straight through in one day is a little more hard-core than I am. I don't even think I could sit and play 10 hours straight even if I had the time.

UKmilitia1036d ago

yeah last of us was 12/13 hours everywhere i read and yet it took me just over 17 hours.
i spend ages just gawping at scenery lol.

Sokol1036d ago

23.5 hours first playthrough on normal difficulty. Enjoyed every minute of it. :)

ReelBigMike1036d ago

It always amazes me how much weight people give the length of a game when judging it. Length is literally the last thing I consider when buying a game. I'd MUCH rather purchase a great 5 hour game than an average 50 hour game. People virtually never use length as a criteria for judging movies, music, theater, or TV negatively, so why games? It's about the quality of the experience, not how quickly you can finish it.

achmetha1036d ago

yup. i believe heavenly sword is on the shorter side, but great game

WildArmed1036d ago

And had amazing replay value.. regardless of how much NT kept downplaying the game/franchise.

Show all comments (71)
The story is too old to be commented.