253 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerevar-as]

ME lenght is not a good lenght for an RPG. It is about half as Origins, TW, or Drakensang. Better graphics and VO don´t make up for duration to me. At least I hope it is mostly about Hawke´s story and not most as Sidequest as in ME1 and 2 (Squadiesidequest but still only tangent to the main mission).
Although it can be that the story simply doesn´t allow for a longer game. Filler main missions are not a good thing either. (ME2 again).

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 25 août 2010 - 02:00 .

[SelphieSK]

Will there be DLC for Dragon Age 2? Absolutely, they’re already talking about two years of DLC content for the game.

Getting the main game out as soon as possible, then expanding it with DLC.
Seems like that's the plan...

[wowpwnslol]

valleyman88 wrote...

DA:O was unusually long for a game. 'Mass Effect length' , which was about 40 hours for me, is more than enough for a quality game.

I'm more concerned about replayability and quality than length of one playthrough.

The shorter the game, the less replayability it has. Go replay Bioshock 2, for example. Can't do that? Because the game is 10 hours long, there's less to do.

[Suicider_11]

If it has a good re playability, I'm for it.

i think it doesn't have to be too long since general information about the DA universe such as different races, magical concepts, etc. have been discussed in DAO. Although there are still a lot lore to be explored but maybe not that much compared to DAO. I'm saying this because I'm assuming reading the codex is part of the game length.

[kaimanaMM]

My first DA:O playthrough was about 80-ish hours, but since they're usually about 50-60ish. I'm pretty positive about DA2 and looking forward to what's new / what's to come, but I'm wondering how they can fit 10 years meaningfully into 20-30 hours of game play. DA:O was supposed to be what 2-4 years? Awakening was 15-20 hours and it was a year or so in the timeline? (I'm not exact on the timeline numbers, so if I'm off, I apologize.)

[Beerfish]

wowpwnslol wrote...

valleyman88 wrote...

DA:O was unusually long for a game. 'Mass Effect length' , which was about 40 hours for me, is more than enough for a quality game.

I'm more concerned about replayability and quality than length of one playthrough.

The shorter the game, the less replayability it has. Go replay Bioshock 2, for example. Can't do that? Because the game is 10 hours long, there's less to do.

Nonsense regarding length vs replayability.  If they make enough engaging chracters/companions and give you some very good relevant choices it will be very replayable.  I've played long long games that had very little replay value to me.  Almost all of the BioWare games I've played from the long ones like BG2 to shorter ones like the Mass Effects have had very good replayability.

From that note sof that article I'm a bit more concerned with the word on the skill trees.  I've always like certain skills tied to certain classes it sounds like they are being more lax on what skills you can take and when.

[Tennyochan]

hmmm 20-30hrs is a bit short for the DA franchise. (for me anyway) perhaps its just because of the faster pace battle system. :/

concerned but optimistic.

[Stompi]

The Witcher 2 is taking the same path. Seems games lasting 50+ hours are officially dead.

[Shah_Hell]

Dragon Age Origins took me a solid 70-80 hours of play.

Mass Effect 2 , on the other hand , took around 30-35 hours at most .

All I could wish for was that DA2 would be more epic than DA:O.

This is indeed rather disappointing ...

[Dynamomark]

kaimanaMM wrote...

My first DA:O playthrough was about 80-ish hours, but since they're usually about 50-60ish. I'm pretty positive about DA2 and looking forward to what's new / what's to come, but I'm wondering how they can fit 10 years meaningfully into 20-30 hours of game play. DA:O was supposed to be what 2-4 years? Awakening was 15-20 hours and it was a year or so in the timeline? (I'm not exact on the timeline numbers, so if I'm off, I apologize.)

I was under an impression that DAO continued over 1-2 year period, and the Awakening didn't last for more than a year after that.

[scootermcgaffin]

40 hours is a lot of hours, guys. And that's about how long the first one took me, anyway.

And at least five of those hours were probably spent wandering through the Deep Roads getting more and more annoyed with each Deep Stalker I had to fight, so really I like everything I read there.

[In Exile]

When we heard previous of the original dragon age, we saw numbers like 30-40 hours reported. I would be hesitant of what reviews say (particularly since no one played a full version) unless they have a developer quote on hand in the article.

[wowpwnslol]

scootermcgaffin wrote...

40 hours is a lot of hours, guys. And that's about how long the first one took me, anyway.
And at least five of those hours were probably spent wandering through the Deep Roads getting more and more annoyed with each Deep Stalker I had to fight, so really I like everything I read there.

If you honestly done DA in 40 hours, then DA2 will last you 20 at most. Dragon Age is 60+ hour game even if you don't do all the quests. 40 hours is what I get when skipping ~80% of dialogue.

[wowpwnslol]

In Exile wrote...

When we heard previous of the original dragon age, we saw numbers like 30-40 hours reported. I would be hesitant of what reviews say (particularly since no one played a full version) unless they have a developer quote on hand in the article.

Original DA was reported at 80+ hours - it was actually said so by developer on the old boards.

[scootermcgaffin]

I am taking 21 credits next semester (when this game will be out), on top of working part time and tutoring. Twenty hours is plenty of hours for me. :-P

[Suicider_11]

A confirmation/clarification regarding the game-play length from the devs would be appreciated in this thread.

[scootermcgaffin]

As a clarification because I know how these things work, I'm not telling anyone here to not be unhappy with the ~40 hour estimate. I'm just offering my own opinion that that is a perfectly fine length.

[Dynamomark]

scootermcgaffin wrote...

I am taking 21 credits next semester (when this game will be out), on top of working part time and tutoring. Twenty hours is plenty of hours for me. :-P

Will it be enough when the semester is over?

[scootermcgaffin]

I would have to assume I'll be done with it by then, so...yes?

[maxernst]

I think replayability has more to do with the number of meaningful choices ways there are and the number of ways of completing the main quest than length of the main quest. A very long linear game has less replayability than a game that can be completed in a lot of different ways. Actually, I would say a short game is potentially more replayable because it doesn't take as much time to replay. I have other things to do in my life than grind through fifty hours of fighting the same enemies using the same tactics over and over again...and I'd guess you could cut the length of DA:O by more than half if you dropped every non-memorable, non-unique combat.

[Taritu]

As with others, don't like what I'm hearing about the length.

[Wyndham711]

I'm a little saddened. A sequel that is shorter than it's predecessor - dumb. Then again, much of that could be explained by the faster battle system, cutting some of the filler fights and improving the pacing of the "dungeon-content" overall etc.

ME2 lasted me a bit over 40hours, and if DA2 manages that with a good replay value, I think I'll be sated. Another way of thinkin this is that Origins had to fill for several years lack of great story driven RPGs, DA2 only has a bit over year of emptyness to cover. Not to mention we may get a DA3 surprisingly quickly also - I'll gladly take three of four 40 hour games within a decade than only one 100 hour game within that same timeframe (if they are all of similar quality).

[scootermcgaffin]

maxernst wrote...

I think replayability has more to do with the number of meaningful choices ways there are and the number of ways of completing the main quest than length of the main quest. A very long linear game has less replayability than a game that can be completed in a lot of different ways. Actually, I would say a short game is potentially more replayable because it doesn't take as much time to replay. I have other things to do in my life than grind through fifty hours of fighting the same enemies using the same tactics over and over again...and I'd guess you could cut the length of DA:O by more than half if you dropped every non-memorable, non-unique combat.

You really could. I'm replaying now, actually, to finalize my dude for importing purposes, and the entire middle of the game is a huge bore. I'm not choosing which of the treaty quests I like the most, or which are the most fun, I'm choosing which I hate the least, or which is the least tedious. 

I remember reading that they were focusing mostly on the middle of the game this time, so that it was much tighter and with more choice, like the Origins in DA:O and that is basically the greatest thing they could have said. So, yeah, I'll take 20 to thirty hours with the main 10-15 of it being tightly plotted over 30-40 with only the first and last 5 being tight.

Modifié par scootermcgaffin, 25 août 2010 - 02:27 .

[Suicider_11]

maxernst wrote...

I think replayability has more to do with the number of meaningful choices ways there are and the number of ways of completing the main quest than length of the main quest. A very long linear game has less replayability than a game that can be completed in a lot of different ways. Actually, I would say a short game is potentially more replayable because it doesn't take as much time to replay. I have other things to do in my life than grind through fifty hours of fighting the same enemies using the same tactics over and over again...and I'd guess you could cut the length of DA:O by more than half if you dropped every non-memorable, non-unique combat.

I'm also hoping for the same. Maybe combat encounters /number of enemies in each quest in this game will be lesser than DAO ( the DEEP ROADS which took a lot of time) and since there is no blight in the Free Marches there will be lesser number of enemies/darkspawn thus lesser combat encounters.

DEVs?

[-Semper-]

they talk about the tactical cam 2.0 as an improvement. that alone is an epic fail...