349 réponses à ce sujet

[MichaelStuart]

I feel any story should only be as long as it needs to be.

[naughty99]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I feel any story should only be as long as it needs to be.

Perhaps so, but if that story "needs to be" 5-10 hours, there is no way I'd pay $60 for it.

Modifié par naughty99, 10 octobre 2012 - 04:21 .

[garrusfan1]

I like longer games as long as it isn't just because of fetch quests. But I have never had a playthrough of DAO of more then 30 and 40 if you count all the dlc like witch hunt and awakening.

[Chromie]

naughty99 wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I feel any story should only be as long as it needs to be.

Perhaps so, but if that story "needs to be" 5-10 hours, there is no way I'd pay $60 for it.

Pretty much this. As much as I want Dishonored I will not play a game that can be done finished in 10-15 hours.

[Sylvius the Mad]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I wish.  In fact, I could probably write a treatise about the phenomenae that encourage me to make 20+ characters but only "finish" 3 of them.  Assuming the game has an "ending" of some kind.

I grant you this behavior is an aspect of my personality, but in the end it comes down to the fact that on 17 of my 20 attempted runs on the game, the game bored or annoyed me into stopping--and these are my best-loved games.  The ones I wind up disliking, I make about the same number of characters but never finish.

So, for me, the way I know a game is quality is not by how much I play it (which largely depends on my free time/interest in other things going on anyway), but how many times I FINISH the thing.

Whereas, how many characters I create is a good indication of quality for me.  If I create 20 different characters, that means the game is open enough to allow me to play 20 different personalities.  They probably won't all get through the game - there will likely come a point on most of the characters after the third one where I'll realise that none of the rest of the game's content will produce new or interesting results, so I'll stop playing that one (this happened with my Aeducan Warden - after he'd killed Bhelen (he did Orzammar first), none of the rest of the game really mattered to him, so I stopped playing him, but he was still a fun character to have created and played).

For some people, finishing is a VERY important measurement, if not an end in itself.

I don't understand that approach.  I don't perceive the games as really having ends.  At some point, you just run out of interesting content.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AmstradHero wrote...

Yes, the journey is important, but imagine every game you've ever played now finishes with "and then they woke up and realised it was all a dream.", and try to tell me the ending is irrelevant.

I don't ever see the "end" of many of the games I play.  I have several complete playthroughs of DAO that didn't make it as far as the Landsmeet.

Also, waking up and realising it was all a dream is a defensible interpretation of several classic Ultima games.  You start in your house, find a mystic portal, and journey to a fantastic land - that could easily be a dream.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I actually find a long game can hurt its replayability because in many cases a lot of stuff is still repeated.

That problem goes away if you just don't replay those parts.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I wish.  In fact, I could probably write a treatise about the phenomenae that encourage me to make 20+ characters but only "finish" 3 of them.  Assuming the game has an "ending" of some kind.

I grant you this behavior is an aspect of my personality, but in the end it comes down to the fact that on 17 of my 20 attempted runs on the game, the game bored or annoyed me into stopping--and these are my best-loved games.  The ones I wind up disliking, I make about the same number of characters but never finish.

So, for me, the way I know a game is quality is not by how much I play it (which largely depends on my free time/interest in other things going on anyway), but how many times I FINISH the thing.

Whereas, how many characters I create is a good indication of quality for me.  If I create 20 different characters, that means the game is open enough to allow me to play 20 different personalities.  They probably won't all get through the game - there will likely come a point on most of the characters after the third one where I'll realise that none of the rest of the game's content will produce new or interesting results, so I'll stop playing that one (this happened with my Aeducan Warden - after he'd killed Bhelen (he did Orzammar first), none of the rest of the game really mattered to him, so I stopped playing him, but he was still a fun character to have created and played).

For some people, finishing is a VERY important measurement, if not an end in itself.

I don't understand that approach.  I don't perceive the games as really having ends.  At some point, you just run out of interesting content.

There is the difference it comes down to perception. You do not perceive an end, but others do. Others may not understand your approach to the game. It is a matter of seeing both sides of the discussion. You choose to end your games based on what you think the character is experiencing in the game. Others want to see the end that the developers have written so to them that is the end or finishing point of the game. It comes down to perception.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

My gameplay time for DAO has never been less than 80 hours and frequently more. I always play to the end. Now, I also play to hear my favorite banter and I have all the DLC. I'm hoping for more of this in DA3.

[Arthur Cousland]

As long as a rpg isn't just full of endless filler, it can't be long enough.  When I'm having fun with a game, I want the adventure to go on forever.

[AmstradHero]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Yes, the journey is important, but imagine every game you've ever played now finishes with "and then they woke up and realised it was all a dream.", and try to tell me the ending is irrelevant.

I don't ever see the "end" of many of the games I play.  I have several complete playthroughs of DAO that didn't make it as far as the Landsmeet.

Also, waking up and realising it was all a dream is a defensible interpretation of several classic Ultima games.  You start in your house, find a mystic portal, and journey to a fantastic land - that could easily be a dream.

Then they're not complete ... ?  An unfinished story is by definition incomplete.

Thus rendering everything you've done in the game a complete fabrication and your actions have had absolutely no effect. What a great waste of time. No. Thanks.

PS You didn't like Portal? It even has a silent protagonist! How can you possibly dislike it?

Modifié par AmstradHero, 10 octobre 2012 - 08:08 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AmstradHero wrote...

Then they're not complete ... ?  An unfinished story is by definition incomplete.

How are they unfinished?  The end comes wherever you decide it does.

Thus rendering everything you've done in the game a complete fabrication and your actions have had absolutely no effect. What a great waste of time. No. Thanks.

Welcome to gaming.  When you get up and leave the room to do something else, nothing you've done in the game matters at all.

[AlanC9]

EntropicAngel wrote...


I feel compelled to mention this every time I see AP mentioned, but in AP your choices didn't matter until the final mission. Within the final mission you could literally have any outcome regardless of what you'd done before--just depends on [SPOILERS] whether you save Scarlet, Ming (that her name?), kill/arrest/join the two baddies.

AP had extremely little choice/consequence.

Sounds like a Bio design. Or, really, almost any other RPG. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't understand that approach.  I don't perceive the games as really having ends.  At some point, you just run out of interesting content.

They view it not so much as a "game" but as an interactive story. The story is the focus.

I agree.  But I'm co-author.  I get some say in where the story goes and when it ends.

Or, alternatively, you're experiencing an interactive story, while I'm living in a world.  From the PC's perspective (which is the only perspective that matters while I'm playing), there is no story.  There's just his life.

[ObserverStatus]

50 Hours? That's way too short, I've clocked in 68 hours on my latest Fallout 3 run, and I've only completed two of the DLCs.

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I agree.  But I'm co-author.  I get some say in where the story goes and when it ends.

Or, alternatively, you're experiencing an interactive story, while I'm living in a world.  From the PC's perspective (which is the only perspective that matters while I'm playing), there is no story.  There's just his life.

That's it exactly. Though one might argue that doing things halfway and abandoning them is "bad" RPing--though I'm not sure there's such a thing as bad RPing.

It would depend what he was doing.  My Aeducan Warden was exacting vengeance on Bhelen.  After that, everything was routine, so I just assumed I'd done it and moved on to the next character (though, his dagger&shield fighting style was pretty fun).

I might describe breaking character as bad RPing, but that's about it.

[Dragoonlordz]

I would take a good game that last 100 hours over a good game that lasts 20 or 40 hours. The best thing a developer can do (imho) is produce a good long game with good replayability as opposed to a good short with replayability. As far as I am concerned it is common sense, if something is good in general people want more of it not less.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 10 octobre 2012 - 09:42 .

[snackrat]

Don't ever measure the quality of a game by its hour count. Thay's how we got DA2 fetch quests and ME3 eavesdrop quests. If it Is too long that also interferes with replay ability.

(also this site is not mobile friendly at all, my keyboard keep closing and underneath is a bunch of links to accidentally click where it used to be. Good thing the browser tempers what I typed so far because it has done it six times just on this post) ._.