126 réponses à ce sujet

[Aradace]

My first playthrough I had well over 46 hours....So no, if you go everywhere, do everything, DONT SKIP ANY DIALOG, and get every upgrade and weapon then no, it's not too short. Unless you think 46 hours is too short...If thats the case, what the hell were you expecting, 100+ hours of gameplay?! ME1 wasnt even that long and you expect ME2 to be that long? Negative. Even now, on my at least 10th run through (possibly more Ive lost count lol) I average around 33-35hrs per playthrough.



Mind you, Im one of those that unless Ive died extensively on a part, I NEVER skip dialog of any kind so I never have those 17-20hr playthroughs lol

[Aisynia]

My first playthrough was about 39 hours. My average is around 20-25.

[Lintire]

If co-op was integrated into Me2 - that would pretty much triple the replay value. Unfortunately, you simply can't have everything.

working another character through ME now, although my Infiltrator (he's black - somehow fitting for the voice) has racked up a total of about 75+ hours now. Both games, mind you.

[Dracotamer]

I felt it was too short. I'm on my third playthrough now, probably my final one and a pain to finish.

Modifié par Dracotamer, 14 février 2010 - 11:43 .

[deimosmasque]

And why do you think it's too short?

[Looy]

...ME2 is twice as long as ME1.

[Ninja Ataris]

My last playthrough on ME2 was 43 hours. Didn't manage to do all the sidequests.



My last playthrough on ME1 was 22 hours, all sidequests included, with BDTS included.



ME2 is WAY longer than ME1.

[R34P3RR3D33M3R]

ME2 seemed a lot bigger to me than ME1.

[deimosmasque]

R34P3RR3D33M3R wrote...

ME2 seemed a lot bigger to me than ME1.

Actually this is a good point.  ME2 feels bigger to me.  ME1 was alot of empty space that spread out the playtime.  People complain about the size of the Citadel and the other hubs but in reality alot of those in ME1 was empty space that took time to get across.
Instead in ME2, I feel like I'm actually doing something even when I'm just walking to my next mission.

[i7206]

First playthrough was 55 hours. Wasn't, but felt shorter than ME1 cus there wasn't as much main quest story.

[scrappydoo555]

I think ME2 has more content than ME1 but there is something about the way the missions are fragmented with the recruiting and loyalty missions having no connection to the main mission it makes the game feel shorter.

[kaotician]

I think it feels smaller because of a combination of factors including : there's less 'fresh air' in the game as you do missions, the Mako questing takes longer (though is arguably less boring than mining), the story is less expansive and more personal and there's a lot less invisible wasted time doing things like sorting out your ammo and upgrades etc, leaving your ship and backtracking to return.



I'm of the view that there's actually more game in there than in 1, it's just quicker to access, is all.

[Johnzor]

33hrs for me. I feel is short side quest wise.

[tsd16]

yoomazir wrote...

tsd16 wrote...

Queenie4000 wrote...

I apologize now, if there is already a post - only went back a handful of pages and didn't see a topic like this one.

I know there have been some critiqueing threads, but this is more of a "How the hell did I complete this one so fast?"

If felt like it took weeks to complete ME1 - maybe my excitement wouldn't let me put down the controller, but I'm sure I didn't "rush" through the game.  I gained every squadmate - did loyalty missions and did several "anomally detected" missions (not all mind you - did that later after completing the suicide mission) and I still feel sort of cheated.

Don't get me wrong, ME2 still gets high scores from me but I miss the large exploring areas like the original Citadel....

After waiting all this time for ME2 I guess I'm just a bit bummed.  I figured all that time was being dedicated to making all those deep missions and huge areas of exploration.

And am I the only one who prefers the elevator to the loading screens?  Seems like there was a real hate among people, but honestly I enjoyed looking at my femshep and characters over the loading screens.

Will ME3 be longer/better???  Thoughts????

"ME2 still gets high scores from me but I miss the large exploring areas like the original Citadel...."

Have to take into account here were actually more "cities" in ME2 than ME1.  While the citadel in ME1 was larger than any one place Omega, Illium, Tachaunka(Krogan homeworld im not gonna bother spelling it), and the new citadel were larger combined than the original citadel.  Feros and Noveria hardly count as a "city" to revist, in ME1 as after you do the MQ part there is really no reason to revisit them and they are very small.


there was alot of ME1 that was just filler.

alot of the side quests were essentially the same exact mission (rotating one of 3 prefabbed interiors, so technically the area they took place was the same) all that changed was the text description.

Time in the elevator = time played.

Every world you could land on was exactly the same save for being a different color.   And searching for anomolies/resources for UNC : missions, were exactly the same for each mission.

So essentially what I am saying alot of ME1's side quests were doing the same thing over and over again, with the mission description telling you its different.   Whereas ME2 never repackaged the same exact mission calling it something else.

I just did a full playthrough of ME1 recently all side missions 40hrs, my first playthrough of ME2 was 42hrs second playthrough was 32.  Arguably ME2 is "shorter" but if eliminate all of the "repetative" missions from ME1, ME1 would be considerably shorter.

its simply a matter of quality vs quantity.  ME1 offers more missions but they are by no means unique from eachother. 

So in the end you say ME2 is shorter.

And about the "fillers", you could also say that between the start and the end in a game everything else is a "filler" , for that, I have a solution, you go on youtube and watch the beginning of a game and then you go back and watch the ending of the same game. Like that you avoid the "filler'...

my point is there are numerous quests that are exactly the same, and if you simply kept the 2-3 "original" missions all the others were clones of ME1 would be shorter than ME2.

So My point is, if you could watch a 4 hour action film where the guy assaults the same building fighting the same bad guys for the same objective 50 times while still having unique points to progress the story OR watch a 2 hour film  where the star fights 10 battles but they are all different while having unique points to advance the story.   Which one will you want to watch? (I am sure you will say the 4hr one just to be an ass).

When you play the same mission over and over again, but they call it something different THAT is filler.

Modifié par tsd16, 14 février 2010 - 12:13 .

[kaotician]

In terms of side quests, there are 42 in ME2 compared to 49 in ME1. However, this feels allright overall to me, since in terms of the storyline I quite like the idea that dlc will bring extra side-missions, since it makes more sense 'in-game' that you would do other things whilst waiting for the Reapers to arrive a coupe of years from now, rather than doing them all before tackling them.

[Awesome Helmet]

ME2 seems longer, but only because you have to go out and recruit 11 people. thats all you do in ME2. go recruit 11 people. no advancement in story except in the last 2 hours. so it might seems shorter in that regard. because all you do is recruit 11 people. both games worked fine in terms of gametime. but in ME2 you just go recruit 11 people and the games over with.



thats all you do! sheaprd dies. shepard gets revived. shepard finds 11 random idiots. 2 hours of story gameplay. game over.

[gggrunt]

It took me 15hrs including loyalty missions and some random missions like on omega etc and scanning.
I don't know why but this game just feels short compared to mass effect 1.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Unless you really really really loved driving around on the barren planets in the Mako, ME1 was much shorter than ME2. You can speed run ME1 in about 6 hours if you really want to. I don't see how it is possible to do this same in ME2 at all... and that's cutting out all the loyalty missions (which are easily half the game).

[Rejoy Skinler]

The length felt right to me, although I wouldn't mind an extra 10 hours but I was expecting Babylon 5 and I got 24 instead (which I'm not complaining about, both are great). The story was good but there wasn't enough of it and for once I would have prefered less PCs and extra focus on a couple of extra arc based missions and some political intrigue. I know there may be a couple of novels to tie us in with ME3, but I wish we'd get an expansion pack that deals with getting earth, council. rachni, geith, flotilla and krogans on board because if they want to do all of this in ME3 and defeat the reapers it may feel a bit rushed.

[InvaderErl]

ME 2 is a longer game, ME 1 was artificially longer. How much time is spent driving around in the Mako or plodding around huge areas like the Presidium that are really mostly empty with lots of dead space between its hot points, or playing around in the inventory system?

[acello007]

This game was great with mix of rpg/shooter style and had a great story. I have played through 4 times already and will start a 5th soon, yet I feel there should be more in this game. I only say this with a positive attitude because I want to play 60+ hours. Dragon age was awesome and had more content, but I like the Mass Effect world and story better.

Still a great game.

[aeetos21]

Heh, hopefully ME3 will be epic in length. I know Bioware is trying to market to a crowd of people who play mainly for action but come on. Have ME3 go back to its roots, make it epic and complex - the main storyline. If people played ME1 or ME2 then they're going to play ME3. In other words...



Market it to the fanbase you have now BW!

[Geralt of Relays]

I wouldn't say it was short as in terms of time. More like short as in a large chunk of the game being bulid a team, make them loyal to you, them bam through the relay do your stuff there and the end.



I think it was correct that there was less (but more vaired) sidemissions this time. Doing the collecting quests in ME1 for all those tags, Prothian discs, Asari studies etc don't even get a mention in your private terminal, let alone affect your story. So I think that shows ME1 was a bit bloated for some rinse & repeat sidequests that merely had different text to make them all seem different.



Remember as well ME1 probably feels longer because we were all out there discovering everything we could about the universe create, since it was all brand new, we looked everywhere, read every codex, walked/drove around everywhere incase we missed something. ME2 comes along and you already know the rules of the universe and whats in there so you don't need to do it again.



Still though, ME2 would have really benefitted from more non-romance talk for all the characters, and a longer final act. I would have done it KOTOR2 style where you have to control mutiple squads and do specific things in order for you to reach the final boss. This is where also doing (or not doing) the loyalty quests should have their consequences.



E.g. things are looking bad and an unloyal Tail thinks Legion sold them out so tries to kill him, a loyal Legion kills her in self-defence, if both are unloyal then its random who dies, if both are loyal it takes interference from another character to dertmine the outcome and that should also depend if that character is loyal or not. (See where am going here?)



Wouldn't it been epic on the way back to the ship if an unloyal Jack tries to have out the fight she promised Miranda? There could have been a lot of possiblities like that. All would have made a game that little bit longer, and better I think.

[stillnotking]

How should I know whether you're too short?