The book analogy doesn't work at all. DLC would be more compared to selling seperate chapters set after the book has ended, or to be slotted in somewhere random in the middle of the book. I would feel a bit cheesed off if i found out I had to buy a short story seperately because it had been cut from the book in case people got bored of reading it. Book sequels are no different to movie and game sequels, they're not to be compared DLC.
In my opinion, if people aren't getting to the end of a game then the story isn't captivating them. It's got nothing to do with it's length. Again, the same applies to books.
There are plenty of short games out there that take 5-10 hours to complete. Each genre has it's different standards. But i don't mind a shorter game as long as the quality is good. ME2 was perfect for example.
Did people really say to be shorter and have more dlc?
Débuté par
LoK-y-Yo
, févr. 25 2011 08:54
Retour en haut
#77
Posté 25 février 2011 - 02:45
Efienutyalorh
-
- Members
- 20 messages
This is probably going to be very dry, but, to answer the Original Post and thread topic, it's a highly likely yes. If you do find my musings too terrible, just skip to the point where it says "My elaboration of my answer to the OP"
This will probably not be the first time it has been said, but in this article by IGN it quoted Bioware that only 50% people completed Commander Shepard's mission to stop the Collectors. From the posts before me in this thread, I get the general sentiment that some find ME2 to already be a shorter game. The inference, while may seem to be wild, highlights the fact that there is a huge change in gaming patterns.
The article by IGN highlights the thoughts and opinions of the author, who offers some pretty refreshing insight and explanations for the shifts in gaming attitude and behavior. For those of you who are older, you can and may remember older game titles that required you to devote hundreds of hours to fully experience the game.
Unfortunately, that was a time where it was (arguably) viewed that playing and interacting with a virtual scenario on a computer was a terrible dark secret that was happily linked to violence, death and destruction. I'm probably making a sweeping statement here, but for those of you who have played games almost religiously in the 80's to late 90's, you cannot forget the scorn that is generally directed towards people who dedicated hours to explore a rich virtual world that was the product of a development team's imagination.
From here on, it's mostly my personal opinion, but I feel the shift really started with the advent of Infocomm Technology, especially the Internet. Taking the world by storm, free-to-play MMOs were suddenly the rage. Following many milestones later, all of a sudden gaming was suddenly divided into 'casual', and 'hardcore'. The penny arcade has had a descendant; those who used to pass time at the arcades just for fun have suddenly taken up the keyboard, mouse and controller to play a game. For some, they play it just for the story. Others, just because it seems fun ('arcade' genres where there is no clear start or end). Both of this groups however, exhibit the same traits: they'll share their war stories, laugh a little over an obvious easter egg or major major glitch and/or bug here or there, but never really saw the need to explore the game or to take it up a notch and go online and pit their pride and skills against other players. Unfortunately, the former happened to cross back into a very very delicate genre: RPGs.
I'm going back a little, to a game I remember dedicating time to master the mechanics of it: Neverwinter Nights. This was a game that I revisited every now and then, and when the urge strike, even completed it from head to tail inclusive of 2 of it's expansions. The hours I dedicated to would probably have been better well spent on books according to everyone else but me, but I sure as hell enjoyed myself terrifically, immersing myself in Neverwinter lore and it's world.
(Un)Fortunately, casual gamers came along. They don't want to have to think to how to build a character so that it can contribute to killing something. They just need to know that pushing A means attacking the monster and pushing B means quaffing a potion. It's probably not that extreme for most cases, but the fact still remains that there is now That end of the spectrum. They are the ones who would probably complete a game, and just go, oh good story, and keep it in the collections drawer. They wouldn't be the ones who go, alright, time to up the difficulty another notch for round 2.
That is, if they ever wrapped their head around the idea that you sometimes Must pause the combat to strategise, and not only to quaff potions. ('fess up, how many of you did just that and only that on normal difficulty of DAO and DAOA?) The adventure in the Fade at the Mage Tower to me was nothing more than something terrrifically fun part of the game. In fact, on all my playthroughs, that was the part I looked forward most to. To me, the complexity was nothing more than just needing to go through paths we once took, but only after we've gained more powers to confront old challenges. (hur hur hur at the stab at life.) Unfortunately, and I probably can somewhat empathis with this notion, it was just too damned annoying to need to do such things, especially when the bonus rewards were "only a couple more stat points" for fully exploring every nook and cranny in the Fade.
My elaboration of my answer to the OP
I myself completed the game a few times through, and if I found it too long, I'll say no, but they could have scaled back a bit on the main storyline length so that it'll be 'long' and not 'too long', but only if they included more sideline goodies to keep gameplay hours about the same. However, I am probably one of the few minorities who feel that way. The reality remains that there are many players who had given up because the game was too damned long, or completed the game just for the storyline and still found it too damned long; it's the Bell Curve at work on the spectrum. (though on the forums, I think we are the majority. DAO has supposedly millions of sales. Do we see millions of forum users being active?)
To quote, "Game companies like Bioware may be tracking whether or not you complete a game for internal use, but you can be sure the accounting department couldn't care less if you saw the ending credits." - Levi Buchanan in "Why Don't We Finish More Video Games?"
This will probably not be the first time it has been said, but in this article by IGN it quoted Bioware that only 50% people completed Commander Shepard's mission to stop the Collectors. From the posts before me in this thread, I get the general sentiment that some find ME2 to already be a shorter game. The inference, while may seem to be wild, highlights the fact that there is a huge change in gaming patterns.
The article by IGN highlights the thoughts and opinions of the author, who offers some pretty refreshing insight and explanations for the shifts in gaming attitude and behavior. For those of you who are older, you can and may remember older game titles that required you to devote hundreds of hours to fully experience the game.
Unfortunately, that was a time where it was (arguably) viewed that playing and interacting with a virtual scenario on a computer was a terrible dark secret that was happily linked to violence, death and destruction. I'm probably making a sweeping statement here, but for those of you who have played games almost religiously in the 80's to late 90's, you cannot forget the scorn that is generally directed towards people who dedicated hours to explore a rich virtual world that was the product of a development team's imagination.
From here on, it's mostly my personal opinion, but I feel the shift really started with the advent of Infocomm Technology, especially the Internet. Taking the world by storm, free-to-play MMOs were suddenly the rage. Following many milestones later, all of a sudden gaming was suddenly divided into 'casual', and 'hardcore'. The penny arcade has had a descendant; those who used to pass time at the arcades just for fun have suddenly taken up the keyboard, mouse and controller to play a game. For some, they play it just for the story. Others, just because it seems fun ('arcade' genres where there is no clear start or end). Both of this groups however, exhibit the same traits: they'll share their war stories, laugh a little over an obvious easter egg or major major glitch and/or bug here or there, but never really saw the need to explore the game or to take it up a notch and go online and pit their pride and skills against other players. Unfortunately, the former happened to cross back into a very very delicate genre: RPGs.
I'm going back a little, to a game I remember dedicating time to master the mechanics of it: Neverwinter Nights. This was a game that I revisited every now and then, and when the urge strike, even completed it from head to tail inclusive of 2 of it's expansions. The hours I dedicated to would probably have been better well spent on books according to everyone else but me, but I sure as hell enjoyed myself terrifically, immersing myself in Neverwinter lore and it's world.
(Un)Fortunately, casual gamers came along. They don't want to have to think to how to build a character so that it can contribute to killing something. They just need to know that pushing A means attacking the monster and pushing B means quaffing a potion. It's probably not that extreme for most cases, but the fact still remains that there is now That end of the spectrum. They are the ones who would probably complete a game, and just go, oh good story, and keep it in the collections drawer. They wouldn't be the ones who go, alright, time to up the difficulty another notch for round 2.
That is, if they ever wrapped their head around the idea that you sometimes Must pause the combat to strategise, and not only to quaff potions. ('fess up, how many of you did just that and only that on normal difficulty of DAO and DAOA?) The adventure in the Fade at the Mage Tower to me was nothing more than something terrrifically fun part of the game. In fact, on all my playthroughs, that was the part I looked forward most to. To me, the complexity was nothing more than just needing to go through paths we once took, but only after we've gained more powers to confront old challenges. (hur hur hur at the stab at life.) Unfortunately, and I probably can somewhat empathis with this notion, it was just too damned annoying to need to do such things, especially when the bonus rewards were "only a couple more stat points" for fully exploring every nook and cranny in the Fade.
My elaboration of my answer to the OP
I myself completed the game a few times through, and if I found it too long, I'll say no, but they could have scaled back a bit on the main storyline length so that it'll be 'long' and not 'too long', but only if they included more sideline goodies to keep gameplay hours about the same. However, I am probably one of the few minorities who feel that way. The reality remains that there are many players who had given up because the game was too damned long, or completed the game just for the storyline and still found it too damned long; it's the Bell Curve at work on the spectrum. (though on the forums, I think we are the majority. DAO has supposedly millions of sales. Do we see millions of forum users being active?)
To quote, "Game companies like Bioware may be tracking whether or not you complete a game for internal use, but you can be sure the accounting department couldn't care less if you saw the ending credits." - Levi Buchanan in "Why Don't We Finish More Video Games?"
Modifié par Efienutyalorh, 25 février 2011 - 02:47 .
#78
Posté 25 février 2011 - 02:54
Naitaka
-
- Members
- 1 670 messages
Efienutyalorh wrote...
*snip
Very well thought out post and a fair assessment. The only problem I have with it is how Bioware is coming up with that figure of 50%. Because quite frankly, after I activated the game, I never let Mass Effect 2 connect to the internet ever again just so I don't have to deal with the ridiculous DLC ads and how, and what I do with my game is entirely my business.
#79
Posté 25 février 2011 - 02:56
GunClubGirl
-
- Members
- 265 messages
I don't understand anyone who says games are too long. If I'm paying $60 for a game you'd better believe I expect to get a lot of entertainment hours out of it. I don't understand people who don't want their money's worth - or is it because they are renting? I HATE short games - feel like I wasted my money.
#80
Posté 25 février 2011 - 02:57
Taleroth
-
- Members
- 9 136 messages
I'm okay with shorter games. I might say I prefer shorter games. So long as the time is used well.
#82
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:02
Taleroth
-
- Members
- 9 136 messages
Many people distinguise time and value. They are not the same thing. It's a quality vs. quantity recognition.GunClubGirl wrote...
I don't understand anyone who says games are too long. If I'm paying $60 for a game you'd better believe I expect to get a lot of entertainment hours out of it. I don't understand people who don't want their money's worth - or is it because they are renting? I HATE short games - feel like I wasted my money.
#83
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:06
brownybrown
-
- Members
- 130 messages
15 -20!? thats way too short for $50
I would like to see it follow a Fallout3 style - main mission 40% side missions 60% formula myself, that way you shorties could be accommodated and us longies could be too.
My cousin did buy it start it and then give up a few hours in, he thought it would be a Diablo like game.
I would like to see it follow a Fallout3 style - main mission 40% side missions 60% formula myself, that way you shorties could be accommodated and us longies could be too.
My cousin did buy it start it and then give up a few hours in, he thought it would be a Diablo like game.
#84
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:12
Efienutyalorh
-
- Members
- 20 messages
Naitaka wrote...
Efienutyalorh wrote...
*snip
Very well thought out post and a fair assessment. The only problem I have with it is how Bioware is coming up with that figure of 50%. Because quite frankly, after I activated the game, I never let Mass Effect 2 connect to the internet ever again just so I don't have to deal with the ridiculous DLC ads and how, and what I do with my game is entirely my business.
Well... If I were a company, I'll say I'll employ a couple of statistics analysts or company to perform some statistical study on the results I gathered to try and make it as reliable as possible. (yes that clown in class who was the sole survivor of all those statistics tests and went on to get a degree in it probably was engaged by them to do so.) The reality does exist that there is always some areas that they cannot gather data from. I myself do not have an xbox live account, and hence played Mass Effect 2 disconnected from the internet permenantly. (meaning I never plugged the LAN cable into the Xbox unit, if you conspiracy theories are inclined so)
While they cannot gurantee 100% accuracy with the estimates, I'll say that 50% figure was probably already heavily generalised, especially have numerous statistical tests and continuity corrections they performed to ensure the rigor of the results. So yes, we can't take that figure to be the biblical truth, but we do have to consider it with a pinch of salt.
#85
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:12
KezzieZ
-
- Members
- 79 messages
Pretty much this.Gibb_Shepard wrote...
People want it shorter? No, they just don't want to have to go through the flawed fade and deep roads. It's funny how he conveniently interpreted it like that so they can sell more DLC.
On Topic: Just about every game seems to be jumping on the DLC bandwagon these days, so I'm honestly not all that suprised even though I do find it to be immensely annoying.
There's also that annoying policy on free DLC for games bought new (otherwise you have to buy the DLC individually) and, though I understand that EA (and probably other companies) are only trying to potentially get some money to compensate for not getting a cut of the used sale itself, there has to be a better system.
That's getting a bit off topic, though. I'm not sure if being shorter is something I would neccessarily call good either, even though I did despise the Fade and Deep Roads parts of the game. Maybe if they meant shorter as in no over-long crawls and unneccessary padding, that would be great, but I get the feeling that that isn't what's being said.
Modifié par KezzieZ, 25 février 2011 - 03:13 .
#86
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:14
Aesieru
-
- Members
- 4 201 messages
Dude if this is true, and BioWare would listen to such inane advice (where's those people touting the fact that BioWare listens INTELLIGENTLY?) then it might be enough to make me screw this game because I played through 9 times, many different ways, and I kept saying it wasn't LONG ENOUGH and there weren't enough choices to really merit the story outside of one's which all ended the same regardless of what you did in the long run.
I hope this is just idiocy.
I hope this is just idiocy.
#87
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:17
Aesieru
-
- Members
- 4 201 messages
brownybrown wrote...
15 -20!? thats way too short for $50
I would like to see it follow a Fallout3 style - main mission 40% side missions 60% formula myself, that way you shorties could be accommodated and us longies could be too.
My cousin did buy it start it and then give up a few hours in, he thought it would be a Diablo like game.
The Fallout 3 story was 8 hours if you did it right...
That game was a failure because you really had no impact on anything even though it touted that you did... also the story and issues and bugs... and freezes...
Anyway, it was an abomination compared to the series that was Fallout 1 and Fallout 2, which were 40-60 hour games if I recall right.
---
I payed 60 for this signature edition, I better get more than 15 hours.
#88
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:18
Maconbar
-
- Members
- 1 821 messages
fwiw I can appreciate the concern that BW has about players not completing the game. Although I have spent tons of hours on DA:O, I actually have fewer complete playthroughs compared to ME2. I think that DA:O is a much better game but I find ME2 easier to complete.
Right now in DA:O I have two playthroughs that are stalled near the final battle. I find several elements of the final battle to be too drawn out and not worth my time to complete. I also have a playthrough stuck in the Deep Roads. I am dreading going to Ostagar for the 15th or so time and when I get to the fade I just set the difficulty down to easy so that I can zip through it. I still kind of enjoy the fade though so I haven't modded it away.
And yes on the whole I would like long and incredibly interesting but I have yet to see an rpg that doesn't have some filler that gets boring on the 2nd or 3rd playthrough. The stuff in ME2 that bores me is generally shorter than the stuff in DA:O that now bores me.
Brownies suggestion of 40%60% split would probably work for me because on later playthroughs I could more easily skiup past the things I don't enjoy.
Right now in DA:O I have two playthroughs that are stalled near the final battle. I find several elements of the final battle to be too drawn out and not worth my time to complete. I also have a playthrough stuck in the Deep Roads. I am dreading going to Ostagar for the 15th or so time and when I get to the fade I just set the difficulty down to easy so that I can zip through it. I still kind of enjoy the fade though so I haven't modded it away.
And yes on the whole I would like long and incredibly interesting but I have yet to see an rpg that doesn't have some filler that gets boring on the 2nd or 3rd playthrough. The stuff in ME2 that bores me is generally shorter than the stuff in DA:O that now bores me.
Brownies suggestion of 40%60% split would probably work for me because on later playthroughs I could more easily skiup past the things I don't enjoy.
#89
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:20
Stevie 402
-
- Members
- 193 messages
I have played it about 7 or 8 times. Going through all origins stories. Getting all possible endings romances etc. The game was not too long for me. At the end of my first playthrough ( about 90 hrs) I wanted more and immediatly started a new character. My only complaint was with the circle tower/fade. Not that it was too long or boring, just that I discovered how much I hate the color brown and sepia tones.
#90
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:20
Efienutyalorh
-
- Members
- 20 messages
Taleroth wrote...
Many people distinguise time and value. They are not the same thing. It's a quality vs. quantity recognition.GunClubGirl wrote...
I don't understand anyone who says games are too long. If I'm paying $60 for a game you'd better believe I expect to get a lot of entertainment hours out of it. I don't understand people who don't want their money's worth - or is it because they are renting? I HATE short games - feel like I wasted my money.
I couldn't agree more. Bulletstorm released for about $49 in my country, and right now as of latest price check from the same store, DA2 would be released and priced at about $57. The amount of game hours that one will get from each playing the main storyline on normal difficulty would definitely be quite apparent in difference, but you can't really quantify or justify a game's worth just like that. I for one love to do stupid stuff with friends, and the multiplayer features of Bulletstorm blend so well with the main kill combo feature of Bulletstorm that I would definitely rate it to have given me just as much quality satisfcation from killing virtual enemies in the dumbest way possible to outdo each other among friends as I will (or might) get from playing DA2.
#91
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:24
Aesieru
-
- Members
- 4 201 messages
Krytheos wrote...
Just for clarification purposes, here are two direct quotes from the interview he is talking about, though I don't see why one couldn't have posted in that thread:TGL: How long will the main game take to complete by comparison to Origins?
FM: It’s a little bit less, I would say. Focus is the biggest thing. With Origins we had some feedback that suggested that it was probably a bit too long; a lot of people didn’t actually finish it. And that’s not a great place to be in. It’s a good thing to have lots to do but maybe we went a bit too far. So it’s probably comparable to say Mass Effect 2, maybe a little bit bigger than that. But again it’s very hard to pin it down because you can just do the core quests and advance through in X amount of time. If you’re a completion-ist, where you want to complete everything in an area before you advance forward, it’ll probably be double that time. Most players usually end up somewhere in the middle. It’s actually very hard to pin that down but if you think of it as a little bit bigger than Mass Effect 2 then you’re probably in the right direction.TGL: What about Hawke: The College Years DLC?
FM: Not quite! I think that’s actually one of the nice things that we learned a lot from Origins, was the feedback in terms of DLC and what people liked and what they didn’t. Two key things are we definitely need more content. Regardless of what they liked or didn’t like, everyone thought there wasn’t enough stuff so that’s something that we’re working on. The other one is that our overwhelmingly most successful DLC’s were the ones that continued the story of the Warden. So all the DLC that we are thinking about right now are pretty much a continuation of the story of Hawke and also the followers. That was a big thing that I think we missed on a couple of the Origin DLCs. We did a lot of experimentation on purpose with Origins because we hadn’t done anything to that scope. Mass Effect 1 was the only other title that we’d done for consoles and the DLC there was quite limited. So we wanted to understand what people wanted so we tried lots of different things. Now I think we have a much better understanding of what kinds of content people really want and the direction we’re heading in. How many it ends up being is again reactive. Let’s start with making a successful game and then we’ll figure that part out.
In case anyone was interested in the full interview, if you didn't read the original thread this is based on...
Voila
But yes, this is already a thread here. I think so anyways. Correct me if I am wrong.
Edit: Fixed the quotes. Stupid me.
I just read this..
My fears are slightly abated..
Mass Effect 2 was too short and didn't have much actual influence by my character in the long run, outside of that one scene which was just inserting it there to say that it worked that way.
#92
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:28
pezit
-
- Members
- 139 messages
Of course pretty much anyone who visits a forum is gonna have completed the game. But even if a lot of people didn't finish the game it was because some part wasn't fun enough, the solution is not to make the game shorter... it's just money grabbing. Companies nowadays even releases games with already finished DLC to sell once it's released, stuff like that really makes me sympathize with pirating of games, you should release the best game possible and not leave stuff out to sell as extras.
When the DLC is pretty much an expansion i'm fine with it, but when they leave out customization possibilities just to later sell it as DLC it really disgusts me, people need to stop buying that **** for it to stop though and i can't see that happening (i'll never spend money on something like that).
When the DLC is pretty much an expansion i'm fine with it, but when they leave out customization possibilities just to later sell it as DLC it really disgusts me, people need to stop buying that **** for it to stop though and i can't see that happening (i'll never spend money on something like that).
#93
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:29
Andros_Hanarak
-
- Members
- 163 messages
I only played it on PC. I finished the game somewhere between 7 or 8 times. Most of my plays were reruns on Human Noble origin male and female to see the different endings I could get with Alistair and Anora. I played Dwarf Noble once, 1 Mage, 1 city elf and 1 dalish elf. I started dwarf commoner but that one I never finished.
I used the Skip the Fade mode on my 4th or 5th run, can't remember. I found that area tedious. I also dread the Orzammar part, I find it too long compared to the Dalish area and the circle area. If I could find a Skip Orzammar mod I would gladly install it. But this is due to already playing it over and over again. I guess the more you play it, the more you notice how some areas become less interesting than others.
I recently replayed again as a City Elf and plan on doing one more Human Noble just for DA2 World State Import.
I do enjoy DA:O a lot, for an RPG its been a great game. But the replayability tends to be more of a turn off for me at least after the 5 or 6 playthrough. Guess I burned out on it hehe. So I assume that perhaps Bioware thought making the game shorter would make it easier on those players who either lose interest halfway to the game or for those who enjoy replaying it to see the various endings you can get.
I used the Skip the Fade mode on my 4th or 5th run, can't remember. I found that area tedious. I also dread the Orzammar part, I find it too long compared to the Dalish area and the circle area. If I could find a Skip Orzammar mod I would gladly install it. But this is due to already playing it over and over again. I guess the more you play it, the more you notice how some areas become less interesting than others.
I recently replayed again as a City Elf and plan on doing one more Human Noble just for DA2 World State Import.
I do enjoy DA:O a lot, for an RPG its been a great game. But the replayability tends to be more of a turn off for me at least after the 5 or 6 playthrough. Guess I burned out on it hehe. So I assume that perhaps Bioware thought making the game shorter would make it easier on those players who either lose interest halfway to the game or for those who enjoy replaying it to see the various endings you can get.
#94
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:29
Darkeus
-
- Members
- 709 messages
I have said this a couple of times, the game is supposed to be about 50 hours long. That is not short by any means.
I really would not be worried that the game is going to be short.
And where did this opinion that ME2 is short come from? That game took me 40 - 50 hours to complete with my first playthrough.....
I really would not be worried that the game is going to be short.
And where did this opinion that ME2 is short come from? That game took me 40 - 50 hours to complete with my first playthrough.....
Modifié par Darkeus, 25 février 2011 - 03:30 .
#95
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:29
Naitaka
-
- Members
- 1 670 messages
Efienutyalorh wrote...
I couldn't agree more. Bulletstorm released for about $49 in my country, and right now as of latest price check from the same store, DA2 would be released and priced at about $57. The amount of game hours that one will get from each playing the main storyline on normal difficulty would definitely be quite apparent in difference, but you can't really quantify or justify a game's worth just like that. I for one love to do stupid stuff with friends, and the multiplayer features of Bulletstorm blend so well with the main kill combo feature of Bulletstorm that I would definitely rate it to have given me just as much quality satisfcation from killing virtual enemies in the dumbest way possible to outdo each other among friends as I will (or might) get from playing DA2.
It's that much fun eh? My friend been bugging me all week about buying Bulletstorm on xbox360, sounds like there's more to it than just another mindless shooter.
Modifié par Naitaka, 25 février 2011 - 03:37 .
#96
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:34
Derax
-
- Members
- 154 messages
michaelius_pl wrote...
I didn't finish it because of total boredom of mage tower/void quest not because it was too long.
Actually I liked that part but deep roads were really annoying --> felt alittle bit like halo 1B)
#97
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:35
88mphSlayer
-
- Members
- 2 124 messages
see i'd rather complain about a short rpg or an rpg with a bad story than whether the combat had a few minor tweaks... the latter stuff can get modded out eventually if you really care, the former stuff? impossible to fix
#98
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:36
Derax
-
- Members
- 154 messages
Darkeus wrote...
I have said this a couple of times, the game is supposed to be about 50 hours long. That is not short by any means.
I really would not be worried that the game is going to be short.
And where did this opinion that ME2 is short come from? That game took me 40 - 50 hours to complete with my first playthrough.....
For (PC-) RPG it is short (average is 60 hours) for normal games, and if you happen to play console games it is long duration.....
#99
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:37
Xewaka
-
- Members
- 3 739 messages
You mean like the model Telltale games has proved rather successful with their Chaptered games?moilami wrote...
I think if they would had made of each chapter a separate game and charged premium of each, fans would be still cheering. You can't disappoint fans.
#100
Posté 25 février 2011 - 03:38
Wrathra
-
- Members
- 627 messages
I finished DA:O a couple times. I didn't find it long at all. I also found ME1 & ME2 to be very short, but that is the nature of those, I suppose.
I remember spending many, many hours playing Ultima 7 (yes, I'm dating myself here), BG2, etc. I think BG2 was 200+ hours of gameplay? I don't even remember anymore, but it took me a long time to finish it and I was disappointed when it was done.
Threads like this make me feel very, very old.
I remember spending many, many hours playing Ultima 7 (yes, I'm dating myself here), BG2, etc. I think BG2 was 200+ hours of gameplay? I don't even remember anymore, but it took me a long time to finish it and I was disappointed when it was done.
Threads like this make me feel very, very old.
Modifié par Wrathra, 25 février 2011 - 03:38 .
