233 réponses à ce sujet

[Hellosanta]

Playtime varies depending on each player. My first playthrough of DAO was about 40 hours or so without completing all side quests, and it took me about 60-70 hours to complete all the side quests. now I think of, DAO was just too long for me, so i'm happy with the length of DA2.

[Nonoru]

If it's half long as origins(it's an example) i will play twice more playthrough then .



And so on.

[Fishy]

30-40 hours .. geez .. i need to workout .. after 5 minutes i'm tired.

[Wehrmacht007]

More game time the better don't want to buy a game I can beat in the first day.



Will say though playing through DAO again I am think "jeez still not half way through" haha but thats the beauty of it. Content.

[RussianSpy27]

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

Chris,

Why are you using extreme examples? Maybe there is a guiness book of records' kind of a player out there? I get your point, but it's a cheap trick not to use averages here. I think
most people you ask (certainly as seen by what critics are saying),
mean an AVERAGE number of hours a person when they inquire about length.


I'm talking abot a player who neither rushes like a maniac through the main quest nor
waits for 10 minutes,  pondering the philocophical impact of every
conversation with a minor NPC. You can respond by being techy techy with me and saying that "average to you is not average to Joe Shmoe who uses a different statistical analysis" but I think I'm making a tiny bit of a commonsensical example here that doesn't require nitpicking.

I think it'd be fair to say that an approximate number of hours DAO provided for its fans who took some reasonable time to explore the world and side-quests is 45-50 hours.

As for value...yes, I think being immersed in a huge world and a game of such length that managed to stay interesting all the time a very good investment.

[White_Buffalo94]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Matt 2108 wrote...

How can you possibly get 80 hours out of Origins?

30 hours is plenty.

By not skipping the dialogues? Though I only get 60.

Idk how that is possible. I did EVERYTHING you can do in Origins and my canon and longest playthrough is only 56 hours. With WK, RtO, and SP dlc

[Nashiktal]

Actually I think it won't be that different. You see the length in the original DA was mostly artificial. Sure you can take your time doing quests, crafting, and the like. That, however, isn't probably what added to your long playtimes.

Most of the length in DA came from the dungeon "crawling." Remember how long the fade took on your first run? The deep roads? The Brec forest? Remember that long trek through the gang hideout in dust town? The mountains while searching for the urn? The wilds around ostagar?

Really I expect no less story content at all. The way I see it so far is less running around the artificially long dungeons, and instead have a more focused narrative as evidenced by the new storytelling device. (the 10 years thing)

In other words because of the new setting we are far less likely to have another "the fade" fiasco, and more like saving redcliffe. Of course I havnt touched the game so take what I say with a bit of salt, but that just seems to be where it is all leading according to the previews.

Modifié par Nashiktal, 11 février 2011 - 06:55 .

[sepir]

I see it like this, a 40 hour game at AU$80 is $2 an hour. Most of Bioware's games have mulitple play through's with different outcomes that practically make for a different story. Discounting that though, it's still a lot cheaper than a new release DVD here, which is usually an hour and a half for AU$25 for (8 times more expensive for less interactivity).



Personal example if buying from local shops, other's experiences will definitely differ.

[dlow-]

I hope the game play time is longer than DAO, I enjoyed the long length of the game.
By far it is one of my favirote games.

[koshiee]

It really depends. If it's a quality 30-40 hours than I'm all for it. If it's like origins and large chunks of that is fetch quests and low quality slogs than hell to the no.

[Jorina Leto]

No.

[daverian]

I LOVE long games. If possible, I would love to have a 30,000 hour game. The only problem is each one of those 30,000 hours would have to be amazing. If you gave me the choice of 30,000 hours, where some were amazing, or 50 hours where ALL were amazing, I would take the 50 even though it's MUCH less.



That said, I felt Dragon Age: Origins would have been a great 25 - 30 hour game. It seems like the designers had a game of that length, then decided to make each area twice the size and double the amount of enemies to make the game 60 hours. Many a time, like the Deep Roads or the Fade stuff, I just felt was thrown in there to rack up the game's length. I would have rather had it 30 solid hours.



Continuing though, there is a certain amount of hours per cost that also has to be factored in. If a game costs $60, but was only 3 hours long, even if those 3 hours were some of the best of any video game, I would not buy it.

[Collider]

Do you think 30 to 40 Hours is long enough?

Yes.

[mr_nameless]

"40 hours" is more like 20 hours of solid gameplay and story content. Which is what? One day of gaming for over $50. what a rip off...Thats why I read and play board-games nowadays. ROFL.

[mr_nameless]

I want my 200+hours games back. "sniff".

[Nashiktal]

Then go make one mr nameless. No one is stopping you.

[GodWood]

DA:O took me 44 hours to complete and I:

~ talked/listened to all the companions

~ did most of the quests available.

~ looted every area of the game.

~ dawdled around picking weapons, armours etc.



30-40 hours is fine.

[slimgrin]

I smell exaggeration in this thread.

[ViSeiRa]

My first Origins playthrough took me exactly 79 hours, I completed all side quests, initiated all conversations and so on, all consecutive playthroughs took me between 40-50 hours to complete, again by doing everything.

In the case of DA2, I think it'd take me a full 60 hours to complete my first playthrough, why? because I'll read all codex entries when they're made available, I'll keep staring at that scene I like and so on, so I'm happy for the length of DA2.

[kreite]

long length would be nice, but I won't really mind.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Veex wrote...

That doesn't really seem to be an accurate statement. You can prefer DA:O's dialogue system of course, but simply having a different system doesn't automatically make it of lesser quality. It can be an extremely high quality of paraphrased, voice over work and you can still dislike it.

If a wheel+paraphrase system can be of equal quality to a full-text unvoiced dialogue system, I haven't seen it yet.

When I see a voiced PC that allows me as much roleplaying freedom as an unvoiced PC, I will accept it.  Until then, it's a poorly implemented idea.  That's the very definition of low quality.

Now, if it were the worst narrative BioWare has ever told, and we find that the cause of that is the dialogue system then you'd of course be right.

Like the ME games.  Exactly.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 11 février 2011 - 08:02 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

RussianSpy27 wrote...
Chris,

Why are you using extreme examples? Maybe there is a guiness book of records' kind of a player out there? I get your point, but it's a cheap trick not to use averages here.

Since BoWare did collect game data from players, they actually do have the averages handy.

I'd be interested to know what the average playtime for a full game was (that would, of course, ignore time lost to reloads).

[Mordechaisiz]

If they would just start making free roam(even after u beat the game) RPGs again...Ahhh...Hours Of Gameplay:Unlimited.. Beautiful.

[ViSeiRa]

Blasto the jelly wrote...

If the 30 to 40 hrs to complete DA2 are engaging and enjoyable then yes that's long enough.

Allow me to say that your avatar is just plain awesome good ser, SpongeBob SquarePants is epic