235 réponses à ce sujet

[ArkkAngel007]

wolfennights wrote...

Baldur's Gate 2 had multiplayer, and it was as much of an RPG as they get.

Shh...they aren't supposed to know that...

[Iakus]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

But the previous two were less than 30...

Okay, you know what?  You're being ridiculous.  It does NOT take 50+ hours to tell an epic story, and if you're that stuck up about gameplay length, you're nuts.

30 hours is a long-ass game, man.  Most western, (semi)linear games are between 10 and 20.

My current ME run is at about 28 hours and I haven't even been to Feros or Virmire yet,and still have a bunch of assignments to complete.

All my DAO runs have been 50+ hours pre-Awakening.

I'm reasonably certain that all my ME2 runs where I bothered to recruit everyone come out to around 40 hours or so without DLC.

I'm sorry if I sound stuck-up or elitist or whatever term you want to use, but 10-20 hour rpgs are simply not my experience  Heck that's my big complaint about ME2, the main storyline's maybe 10 hours long and 30 of side missions..

 If I want an epic rpg experience, a 30 hour game is not going to cut it.  Thus I'm going to be very suspicious of anything that appears to take content away from ME3's single player game to make room for multiplayer.

[IllusiveMike]

G3rman wrote...

Bad King wrote...

G3rman wrote...

They are making more money by putting MP into the game, they could care less about losing a small fraction of customers like you.

They 'could care less' implies that they do care about losing a small fraction of customers.

I hope you aren't American or fluent at english because otherwise you should know what that expression means.  I'll forgive you for your ignorance.

The expression is "X COULD NOT care less."  That means X has the absolute minimum of caring possible. 

To say "X could care less" means that X cares something above the minimum amount of caring possible because X could care even less than it currently does.

No offense intended.

Modifié par IllusiveMike, 06 février 2012 - 01:29 .

[someguy1231]

iakus wrote...

I said I'll eat my words if it's 50+ hours.  Because if it's that long, and a good story, it will be a truly epic experience.  I know that it will more likely top out at around 40 or so hours.  Which will be...adequate...but always leave doubts about what might have been cut.

If it's 30 hours Bioware will never hear from me (or my wallet) again.  If it's that short I'll know they've completely sold out, as I can break that in either of the first two games without breaking a sweat.

You do know that ME1 and 2 were roughly 30 hours each at a leisurely pace, right? It seems to me you're using a double-standard against multiplayer by expecting more from it solely because it has multiplayer. I predicted when MP was first announced that people who dislike MP would use it as a scapegoat for any problems they perceive in the single-player. Thank you for fulfilling my prophecy. <_<

Seriously, though, expecting a 50 hour campaign when the previous two could be beaten in 30-35 hours tops, and then pre-emptively declaring that if it isn't then MP is to blame is just incredibly arrogant and biased.

[didymos1120]

iakus wrote...
 Heck that's my big complaint about ME2, the main storyline's maybe 10 hours long and 30 of side missions..

That's your big complaint about ME2?  ME1's main story is about that long too, unless you're seriously dawdling.

[TheKillerAngel]

 This thread is going to get locked so fast.

[ediskrad327]

iakus wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

But the previous two were less than 30...

Okay, you know what?  You're being ridiculous.  It does NOT take 50+ hours to tell an epic story, and if you're that stuck up about gameplay length, you're nuts.

30 hours is a long-ass game, man.  Most western, (semi)linear games are between 10 and 20.

My current ME run is at about 28 hours and I haven't even been to Feros or Virmire yet,and still have a bunch of assignments to complete.

All my DAO runs have been 50+ hours pre-Awakening.

I'm reasonably certain that all my ME2 runs where I bothered to recruit everyone come out to around 40 hours or so without DLC.

I'm sorry if I sound stuck-up or elitist or whatever term you want to use, but 10-20 hour rpgs are simply not my experience  Heck that's my big complaint about ME2, the main storyline's maybe 10 hours long and 30 of side missions..

 If I want an epic rpg experience, a 30 hour game is not going to cut it.  Thus I'm going to be very suspicious of anything that appears to take content away from ME3's single player game to make room for multiplayer.

they did say it would long as ME2 so that would ba round 40

[didymos1120]

ediskrad327 wrote...

they did say it would long as ME2 so that would ba round 40

Apparently,  because it has a co-op mode it has to last longer in order to pass muster.

Modifié par didymos1120, 06 février 2012 - 01:35 .

[Dewart]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

iakus wrote...

I said I'll eat my words if it's 50+ hours.  Because if it's that long, and a good story, it will be a truly epic experience.  I know that it will more likely top out at around 40 or so hours.  Which will be...adequate...but always leave doubts about what might have been cut.

If it's 30 hours Bioware will never hear from me (or my wallet) again.  If it's that short I'll know they've completely sold out, as I can break that in either of the first two games without breaking a sweat.

But the previous two were less than 30...

Okay, you know what?  You're being ridiculous.  It does NOT take 50+ hours to tell an epic story, and if you're that stuck up about gameplay length, you're nuts.

30 hours is a long-ass game, man.  Most western, (semi)linear games are between 10 and 20.

I am an extreme completionist and I have searched every inch of the ME1 to the extreme. I have fallen asleep at points while riding around in the Mako to then wake up and save my game. My longest single playthrough was around the 40 mark with maybe 8 hours of that was some nap time. Cheez is completely right if you are expecting 50 hours and 40 is only adequate you are completely nuts. I mean my friends say I'm nuts while playing rpgs but dude 50 hours really? you've got me beat.

[ArkkAngel007]

iakus wrote...


My current ME run is at about 28 hours and I haven't even been to Feros or Virmire yet,and still have a bunch of assignments to complete.

All my DAO runs have been 50+ hours pre-Awakening.

I'm reasonably certain that all my ME2 runs where I bothered to recruit everyone come out to around 40 hours or so without DLC.

I'm sorry if I sound stuck-up or elitist or whatever term you want to use, but 10-20 hour rpgs are simply not my experience  Heck that's my big complaint about ME2, the main storyline's maybe 10 hours long and 30 of side missions..

 If I want an epic rpg experience, a 30 hour game is not going to cut it.  Thus I'm going to be very suspicious of anything that appears to take content away from ME3's single player game to make room for multiplayer.

Many people really don't have the time to play 100+ hour RPGs like Dragon Age and The Elder Scrolls.  I'm on several campuses for classes and research, as well as a lot of out-of-town contract jobs.  I don't have the luxury of time to spend on videogames when I have responsibilities that I either am required to do to provide for myself and others or have a greater impact on the world.

Hours of play does not equal quality.  Yes, $60 for a 6 hour game is a bit ridiculous, but a 40-60 hour game with a multiplayer component and DLC support is a lot better than about 90% or more of what is being churned out in this industry.

[Iakus]

didymos1120 wrote...

ediskrad327 wrote...

they did say it would long as ME2 so that would ba round 40

Apparently,  because it has a co-op mode it has to last longer in order to pass muster.

If only to avoid suspicion.

[AdmiralCheez]

iakus wrote...

I'm reasonably certain that all my ME2 runs where I bothered to recruit everyone come out to around 40 hours or so without DLC.

Dude, 40 hou--

WTF R U DOIN BRO

My completionist insanity run took me about 35 hours.  COMPLETIONIST.  With ALL the DLC!  And that's on insanity, where I crawled through levels on my hands and knees (because I suck at videogames guys lol)!

Do you leave the damn thing running when you're not in the room or what?

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 06 février 2012 - 01:41 .

[NOD-INFORMER37]

The Executioner wrote...

BioWare i don't know why you did this but the game better be great or your going to lose me as a customer. Multiplayer is just a waste of time better spent on the ACTUAL GAME.

I sorta agree, but is it a waste of time if ppl enjoy it? It was worked on by a seperate team too so the SP portion remained untouched.(plus dont forget about the SP DLC that'll come later)  

Besides multi certainly isnt as bad as some thought it would be. 
We'll find out when the demo comes I suppose, but so far this is my gamespot-type preview.  

The Good: 
- Its Co-Op, not Competative 
- You CAN play it solo

The Bad:
- No allied AI bots, which means playing solo will be really hard.  
- It WILL have a "sunset date", meaning they will shut down the online part of the game sometime in the future. This is why I think offline capabilities are so important.  

Modifié par NOD-INFORMER37, 06 février 2012 - 01:48 .

[Dewart]

IllusiveMike wrote...

G3rman wrote...

Bad King wrote...

G3rman wrote...

They are making more money by putting MP into the game, they could care less about losing a small fraction of customers like you.

They 'could care less' implies that they do care about losing a small fraction of customers.

I hope you aren't American or fluent at english because otherwise you should know what that expression means.  I'll forgive you for your ignorance.

The expression is "X COULD NOT care less."  That means X has the absolute minimum of caring possible. 

To say "X could care less" means that X cares something above the minimum amount of caring possible because X could care even less than it currently does.

No offense intended.

No you are in fact wrong.

I COULD NOT care less.
I COULD care less.
Say those two out loud. The first may be proper way of writing but the second is the actual expression. The reason the expression exists is because that particular phrase (I could not care less) sounds very awkward when said aloud.

[Iakus]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Many people really don't have the time to play 100+ hour RPGs like Dragon Age and The Elder Scrolls.  I'm on several campuses for classes and research, as well as a lot of out-of-town contract jobs.  I don't have the luxury of time to spend on videogames when I have responsibilities that I either am required to do to provide for myself and others or have a greater impact on the world.

Hours of play does not equal quality.  Yes, $60 for a 6 hour game is a bit ridiculous, but a 40-60 hour game with a multiplayer component and DLC support is a lot better than about 90% or more of what is being churned out in this industry.

Kinda funny how everyone's latching onto that 50  hour number I gave out.  I did say that a game of that length would remove any doubt that stuff got cut, right?

Granted time doesn't equal quality.  But a good 40 hour game is still better than a good 20 hour game.  And a quality 50 hour game is better than a quality 40 hour game.  And so on.  

[HTTP 404]

oh noz, biowarez mit luz a fan

[Iakus]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Dude, 40 hou--

WTF R U DOIN BRO

My completionist insanity run took me about 35 hours.  COMPLETIONIST.  With ALL the DLC!  And that's on insanity, where I crawled through levels on my hands and knees (because I suck at videogames guys lol)!

Do you leave the damn thing running when you're not in the room or what?

My one ME2 run where I did every N7 mission, recruited everyone, did all DLC, came out to about 52 hours and change.

Does it matter that I don't skip dialogue?  :innocent:

[Cainne Chapel]

I'm gonna have to agree with Cheez. Now I'm a Mass Effect Nut (38 ME2 completions and counting dammit! All different permutations too! ALL DLC and nearly ALL missions done on each one) and I top out at MAYBE 34hrs average. Longest playthrough was 38 hours and that was on my very first playthrough and I did that in 2 days just about (i have a sickness what can I say).

Even ME1 which I have about 16 playthroughs on the longest topped out at about 66hrs and that was into my 3rd playthrough to hit level 60.

So if the game is 30hrs I'll be more than happy. After all how can you expect the 3rd game to be twice as long as either the first or the second? Heck if I do speed runs, you can beat ME1 in under 7 hours just by doing the main missions.

So I do think 50+ hours is VERY unreasonable. Heck even DA:O didn't take me that long to beat.

[General User]

Multiplayer doesn't seem like a very good idea to me either. But I'm willing to see how things actually work in the game before passing final judgement.

[Pee Jae]

Once again, I'm just going to nod my head and agree with AdmiralCheez.

[Cainne Chapel]

While I agree the more game the better, there are times when stuff is artificially padded, and personally I dont like padded games just like I dont like movies that are artificially padded to increase length. Useless scenes are useless to me.

If everything is clear and concise and can be wrapped up suitably in 30 or so hours of playing, I can be happy with that.

[Cainne Chapel]

I Will admit however Iakus... i DO skip dialogue a bit now... after playing through as much as I have I tend to know it all at this point Like listening to a song you've played until you know it by heart everytime is comes on the radio

[HTTP 404]

General User wrote...

Multiplayer doesn't seem like a very good idea to me either. But I'm willing to see how things actually work in the game before passing final judgement.

pretty much; I'm not broken up that its in there.  the way I figure is if I don't like it, it looks like I don't need to play it.  And if its fun to play, all the better. 

[didymos1120]

iakus wrote...

My one ME2 run where I did every N7 mission, recruited everyone, did all DLC, came out to about 52 hours and change.
Does it matter that I don't skip dialogue?  :innocent:

No.  Seriously: what are you doing? Well, whatever it is, if that's the case ME3 probably will last you 50 hours.

[Dewart]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

iakus wrote...

I'm reasonably certain that all my ME2 runs where I bothered to recruit everyone come out to around 40 hours or so without DLC.

Dude, 40 hou--

WTF R U DOIN BRO

My completionist insanity run took me about 35 hours.  COMPLETIONIST.  With ALL the DLC!  And that's on insanity, where I crawled through levels on my hands and knees (because I suck at videogames guys lol)!

Do you leave the damn thing running when you're not in the room or what?

lol thats exactly what I was thinking. I had to fall asleep with the game on to reach 40 hours. I do the completionist thing every time and I've never gone over 40. like I even literally go through every diolog important or not. I've even only been able to hit 70 hours on 2 completionist playthroughs. (combat is always a bit faster on new game plus)