233 réponses à ce sujet

[Purple People Eater]

Time of full play throughs of DAO for me



1st - 65 hours



2nd - 50



3rd - 45



Naturally the more you play a game, the more you know, and remember. So, your subsequent play throughs will always be shorter than your initial one. Im the kind of player who takes their time the first time through, because im paranoid about missing things, and I want the full experience. It took me about 48 hours to beat Mass Effect 2, which is alot longer than im assuming most people took on it. I do every side quest, and look in every nook and cranny before I move on in a game. That tends to ramp up the time significantly.

[Ryzaki]

I want a maze.A straight up maze in DA2.



And none of this "go back to the beginning." I want it timed and if you make a wrong turn you end up getting slaughtered.

[MagneticDawn]

NO! Its 100 hours or nothing! T_T I LOVED the drama build up in Origins.. to cut backk eh...

I paid FULL PRICE for this game and its sig edittion! I ussually get it off half.com 3 months later.. and I also paid for its TAXES and its shipping!

It better be 100 hours for my $70!!

[falconlord5]

Purple People Eater wrote...

Time of full play throughs of DAO for me

1st - 65 hours

2nd - 50

3rd - 45

Naturally the more you play a game, the more you know, and remember. So, your subsequent play throughs will always be shorter than your initial one. Im the kind of player who takes their time the first time through, because im paranoid about missing things, and I want the full experience. It took me about 48 hours to beat Mass Effect 2, which is alot longer than im assuming most people took on it. I do every side quest, and look in every nook and cranny before I move on in a game. That tends to ramp up the time significantly.

It's funny; I tend to do more on my subsequent playthroughs, and it takes less time.

[Carn Dum]

Amounts of hours as a measure of game length are extremely subjective. So I'll just say I hope DA2 will be at least 75% of the length of DA:O ...

[oldgodbioware]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

oldgodbioware wrote...


Em sorry but ive been playing video games for 20 year since like pacman came out.
And English is not my native language so sorry if my Grammar offended.

Yes and I just came back from war, just after finishing my third university grade, after saving 2 towns from total destruction all on my own.

English ain't my native language either and to get the first paragraph's message clear: I don't believe you. At all.

Well thats good for you.But in i am telling the thruth i am 36 the first game i ever played was pacman at a local arcade,btw i am a Gardai/police in dublin ireland.Which army did you serve in?

Modifié par oldgodbioware, 10 février 2011 - 10:31 .

[Rhjh20]

If it has good replayability even 20 hours is oke by me

Modifié par Rhjh20, 10 février 2011 - 10:31 .

[PsychoBlonde]

Nerevar-as wrote...

As long as it feels 40 hours long. ME2 didn´t with so much filler, while in Risen I was surprised it had been less than 40 hours. DA:O was perfect for me in that regard. Was long and felt long in a good way.

OMG SOMEBODY ELSE PLAYED RISEN!!!!

I was so sick of fighting those damn lizardmen by the end of that game, so it really did feel longer than Origins.  I enjoyed it, but I don't think I'll be playing it again any time soon.  

I don't mind if DA2 is "shorter" than Origins provided there's plenty of interesting stuff to look at and mess around with, and I think there will be.

[Cariborne]

I fail to see how people were building up 100+ Hours in a Playtime of Origins, I think my longest was like 35 hours and that was my first play time. Now I can beat the game start to finish in a sitting skipping cut scenes; it's actually not that long.



If the game is 30-40 hours, awesome. If it's only 20? Still gonna be a good game. One of my favourite games is Xenosaga, and it was incredibly short. Look at Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2; I can beat BOTH games in a day (combined). (Yes; I have very nerdy days on weekends) Including Side Quests and sorts... they're both short games, and both amazing games. People need to stop saying things like "If it's not 100+ hours the game will suck!" No, it wont.

[thegoldfinch]

keginkc wrote...

pixieface wrote...


My issue with the Fade section is not necessarily the length, but the design. It became boring because it was very drab.

That was actually my problem with the deep roads.  The whole thing is monotonous, from the atmosphere to the enemies.  There really wasn't much to see or to do in any of the thaigs, and it just kept going and going and going.  It seemed less like an adventure than a chore.

I was playing the game simultaneously with my brother and some friends, and they all had the exact same sentiments about the Deep Roads. So, yeah, I understand where you're coming from. But Caridin, Hespith, Branka, and the Brood Mother really colored the level for me and their brooding presences (lol brood mother, get it) aided the already crushing atmosphere significantly for me. What can I say, I'm a fatalistic kind of gal. Although, I wouldn't mind if it was even more crushing.

I am just cranky that there were no Kafka-roaches or Dali-phants strutting around in the Fade.

Modifié par pixieface, 10 février 2011 - 10:34 .

[DARBanks]

Carn Dum wrote...

Amounts of hours as a measure of game length are extremely subjective. So I'll just say I hope DA2 will be at least 75% of the length of DA:O ...

I agree with this.

[JrayM16]

How many hours I want from a game is directly related to the quality of the individual pieces. Usually, I tend to lean towards quality over quanitity. I'd rather have 10 really good side-quests than 100 pretty good ones. From what I've seen of DA2 and the quality of the individual pieces, 30-40 hours sounds great.

[Chris Priestly]

Time is, as they say, relative. What it takes YOU to play DA2 may be longer than what it takes HIM to play DA2 and shorter than what it takes HER to do. Different people play at different speeds.

No matter the length of the game, SOMEONE will speed rush through it and say that "it only took me X to finish". Baldur's Gate 2 is probably our longest game, but we have someone here who can finish it(with boots of haste, but no other cheats) in under 6 hours. Would that make BG2 a 6 hour game?

In the end, for me anyways, it comes down to "did I get good value for the money I paid". The DA2 team has tried to fill the game with heaps of excellent content. I think that by the time people play DA2 they'll have gotten great value for their money. And, if they choose to replay the game as a different class, as nasty instead of nice, with different NPCs, taking different paths, etc then they will get even greater value.

[wildannie]

JrayM16 wrote...

How many hours I want from a game is directly related to the quality of the individual pieces. Usually, I tend to lean towards quality over quanitity. I'd rather have 10 really good side-quests than 100 pretty good ones. From what I've seen of DA2 and the quality of the individual pieces, 30-40 hours sounds great.

this ^

[Threeparts]

If they fully told the story they want to tell, then the hours it takes for me to devour it don't mean so much. I'd much prefer tight, shorter storytelling than an extra ten hours of filler.

[Mr.House]

Most likely the game will take me 50+ to beat the game, It took my 85 hours to beat Origins.

[MortalEngines]

Chris Priestly wrote...
Baldur's Gate 2 is probably our longest game, but we have someone here who can finish it(with boots of haste, but no other cheats) in under 6 hours. Would that make BG2 a 6 hour game?

I know they meaning of the post was to say that enjoyment and gametime is relative to the person, but holy cow! 6 hours? That guy is a demi-god! Even playing through BG2 for the 15th time I couldn't get that sorta time.

[Zeldias]

Origins is tiresomely long to me at some points, as others mentioned. For me, it runs around 50 or 60 hours, which is fine. The only games that have ever taken me longer than that are SMT games, the Etrian Odyssey series, Persona 3 and 4, FF:T, and Tactics Ogre (which really should say more about how much I care about combat mechanics vs. piles of story). Mass Effect took me about 50 hours at first, but now when I play, I skip almost all of the sidequests (I loathe driving around empty spaces in the Mako) so I'd say maybe 30 hours now? Or a little less. I'd be good if DA2 hit on 40+ hours, but not really more than 50. I just don't think I'm gonna have as much fun with the combat and character-building as I would with SMT: Nocturne or something. I'm sure it'll be enjoyable, just not something I can sink 60 or more hours into without becoming bored with the gameplay.

[SandyWB]

I finished Origins in 50 hours, so 40 hours for Dragon Age 2 would be ideal. 30 might be a bit on the short side, but then again it always comes down to quality over quantity. I've played great games that are only like 9 hours, and they were still excellent and worth every penny.



It's human nature to always want more of something good, so I'm not surprised people are yelling for more Dragon Age. Would I be happy if the game was longer than 30 hours? Absolutely. But I sure as hell won't judge a game soley on how long it takes me to complete it. 40-50 hours would be ideal for me, but I think 30 would be alright too. Not worried at all.

[keginkc]

pixieface wrote...

I was playing the game simultaneously with my brother and some friends, and they all had the exact same sentiments about the Deep Roads. So, yeah, I understand where you're coming from. But Caridin, Hespith, Branka, and the Brood Mother really colored the level for me and their brooding presences (lol brood mother, get it) aided the already crushing atmosphere significantly for me. What can I say, I'm a fatalistic kind of gal. Although, I wouldn't mind if it was even more crushing.

I am just cranky that there were no Kafka-roaches or Dali-phants strutting around in the Fade.

Something that may or may not color my perception of the area is the fact that on my first play through the game, that was the last main area that I explored.  And by that point I was beginning to feel the whole "how is this story going to end?" itch/excitement.  I thought I was getting close to the finish line.  And then there was another thaig.  And then there was another thaig.

Another facet is the fact that I'm a long time Lord of the Rings Online player, and at the time that Origins came out, I'd been slogging through the Mines of Moria for about a year.  And by that point, the last thing I wanted to do was explore yet another underground dwarven kingdom.

(Which is probably still an issue for me - I'm not all that hot on the idea of going back into the Deep Roads in DA2)

Modifié par keginkc, 10 février 2011 - 10:46 .

[The Night Haunter]

What was the average play time of BG2? 100h? I know it was huge, which is awesome even if I havent playing it.... yet.

[keginkc]

Chris Priestly wrote...

What it takes YOU to play DA2 may be longer than what it takes HIM to play DA2 and shorter than what it takes HER to do. Different people play at different speeds.

 Evil Chris just implied that girls are slower!

[Giltspur]

oldgodbioware wrote...

I have to say i am really excited about dragon age 2,but a bit dissapointed it will be shorter after spending 80 plus hours in Origins i am a bit worried it will be just like awakenings...what is your opinion?

now on the other hand if it is as long as 45 hours i will be pleased..

(1) Depends on how replayable DA2 is.  If done well, that can multiply the time you can usefully spend on the game and make a shorter playthrough less of an issue.

(2) Depends on the release cycle for DA games.  If they release a DA game every five years, 30-40 hours is too short.  If they release one every 12-18 months, then 30-40 hours is pretty impressive.

I think that behind these concerns is an expectation that RPG's are different and more significant than other games and that a longer time to completion is expected.

I kind of feel that way too.  I've always liked RPG's more than other games.

But I think the 80-hour RPG with the scope of Baldur's Gate II is pretty much dead, that keeping the RPG flame alive is a challenge in the first place and that we as consumers that value RPG's should be willing to pay for shorter RPG's if they still provide compelling experiences.

There are a few challenges for RPG developers.

Challenge 1: RPG games need to be "epic and great" and be universally acclaimed and get like 90 on Metacritic to have legs in terms of sales, it seems. 

Challenge 2: Expectations with regards to production values have risen.  In the past, you could have a little cartoon dude running around on a map and write all you  want without having to worry about voice acting.  Now people want the production value of movies almost.   And the longer a game is, the more production costs will rise.

So combine the high expectations with regards RPG quality and length with the general cost of making a polished product in 2011, and you have a design challenge.

So I'm just glad Bioware is devoted to the Dragon Age franchise in the first place and hope they continue to deliver compelling experiences in a manner that's profitable enough that they can continue to get RPG's approved for production.

None of this is saying that Bioware can't screw this up by deviating too far from core values.  But to me, they've done a good job with the balancing act that releasing entertainment products is, and, hopefully, Dragon Age II will be the next example.

But given how many games are 15 hours, I think Dragon Age II's length will probably prove to be more than reasonable.

[Beerfish]

Many people don't agree with my way of looking at games but I still look at them as total hour value rather than just total length of time to complete once. If I have a game that is 30 hours long that I plya through four times due to class and companion combos I'm very happy with that game value. Much like I am happy with a very long detailed game that I play thought once.



BioWare recently has been in the 1st category, not as long as some sandbox type games but still full value due to replay value.

[Lilunebrium]

Are you kidding me?

I think the longest playthrough I've had was about 37 hours, which included several times when I left the good ol' xbox running thinking I was gonna get something real quick, which turned into... well. Hours.

So yes. For me, 30-40 hours equals the amount of time played on Dragon Age Origins during a single playthrough, so I'll be perfectly happy.



On another note. I'd rather choose a 2-hour game with amazing content, mindblowing plot and wonderful characters, than a 60-hour one made simply to reach 60 hours.

Modifié par Lilunebrium, 10 février 2011 - 10:58 .