283 réponses à ce sujet

[Fraevar]

Let's see. 20 hours for an expansion pack? Oh stop the presses, it's a scam! Oh wait, most other publishers want $60 for a boomfest that's done in 5 hours. Please. Complain about actual issues, please. The aforementioned boomfests would be a good place to start!

[Vuokseniska]

i think 15-20 hours is very rushed.... reviewers generally don't take the proppertime to review games nowadays

[Fycan]

Vuokseniska wrote...
i think 15-20 hours is very rushed.... reviewers generally don't take the proppertime to review games nowadays

Link Please?

[Finiffa]

Querne wrote...
The main game is at 42,90 EUR in Germany, Awakening at 37,90..

I pre-ordered it for 25.99 EUR over here in The Netherlands...maybe you should get it here  

[hojo101101]

Well since a Dragon Age runthrough was optimistically described as having a potential length of 100 hours, a figure you could surely only reach by standing for days on end picking your nose in Orzammar, I am at least glad they're being more realistic with the estimation this time. Took me personally around 30 hours to finish DA each time on two playthroughs, so the price seems entirely reasonable to me.

Modifié par hojo101101, 27 février 2010 - 12:44 .

[VampireCommando]

i've got it pre-ordered from GAME for £25, so i think that it is just about right, daying that though i would of still paid £40 for it though

[Eudaemonium]

hojo101101 wrote...

Well since a Dragon Age runthrough was optimistically described as having a potential length of 100 hours, a figure you could surely only reach by standing for days on end picking your nose in Orzammar, I am at least glad they're being more realistic with the estimation this time. Took me personally around 30 hours to finish DA each time on two playthroughs, so the price seems entirely reasonable to me.

See, I really don't get how this is possible, particularly on your first go through the game. Not that I'm saying you didn't or using that 'you must not have appreciated it at all!' logic which gets thrown around, but even in my subsequent playthroughs I usually end up at 50-60 hours, and my first was over 80. I'm just somewhat bewildered that people can finish it in such a short time.

[kansadoom]

You can get it on amazon.co.uk for £15

[Phonantiphon]

Eudaemonium wrote...

hojo101101 wrote...

Well since a Dragon Age runthrough was optimistically described as having a potential length of 100 hours, a figure you could surely only reach by standing for days on end picking your nose in Orzammar, I am at least glad they're being more realistic with the estimation this time. Took me personally around 30 hours to finish DA each time on two playthroughs, so the price seems entirely reasonable to me.

See, I really don't get how this is possible, particularly on your first go through the game. Not that I'm saying you didn't or using that 'you must not have appreciated it at all!' logic which gets thrown around, but even in my subsequent playthroughs I usually end up at 50-60 hours, and my first was over 80. I'm just somewhat bewildered that people can finish it in such a short time.

Agreed, I am nowhere close to finishing the game and i have done way over 80 hours at the moment and no that's not picking my nose either.
I'm gonna buy the expansion pack regardless anyway coz I want it and realistically you have to accept that decent games are expensive.
There was an almighty hoo haa about PS2 games costing £40 when they came out originally, but you know - if you want it you'll buy.
As has been said in numerous other threads and posts in these forums, if you 're not will to pay the money, don't spend the money.

[GreenSoda]

The length is alright.

I still think paying ~80% of DA:O's price for ~30%-40% of DA:O's content seems rather expensive, though.

Modifié par GreenSoda, 27 février 2010 - 01:17 .

[Dragon Age1103]

15 hours isn't too bad. I honestly expected 20-25 for that very high price but then again this is Bioware/EA now. lol. I hope they lose money on it so we don't have to waste any more money on expansions. I rather just wait for a sequel for $50 with another 80+ hours of play time than an over priced expansion. Oh well it will be fun & it is part of my tax return paying for it so it doesn't feel like such a rip off.

[supersims796]

I think we can all agree...
At least this expansion is twice as long as Fable 2

[SamboScoots]

RangerSG wrote...

Noilly Prat wrote...

I don't care what anyone says. I will be surprised if I take fewer than thirty hours to finish it. I'm a completionist, and a slow player besides. I took around 120 hours getting through DA:O. Hell, I took over 60 on my first ME2 playthrough.

I have learned over the years how to read a playthrough time estimate for a game and convert it to "me hours." It usually comes to much more than the estimate.

Me too. I finished DA:O at 123 hours. And I don't get how anyone could've played it first time in under 70 like some claim. At least not on the PC. *shrugs* It sounds like the standard hours estimate for an expansion, which I have always come in at least 50% higher than.

I remember someone on a forum somewhere complaining about the length of DA:O being way too short. It was later revealed the person played on casual, went through the main questline only and may have skipped most of the dialogue.

It's just an example of how play-time estimates for openworld RPGs are difficult. With an estimate of 12-15 hours (if that is infact accurate), I can see how many players would scoff at it combined with the price.

For a player like myself (reads most of the codex entries, explores all side quests and takes in all NPC dialogue possile) I know that 12-15 hours will be more like 40-50 hours on my first play through. That makes $40 well worth it. For the fellow who complained that DA:O was too short, I'm sure 12-15 hours could mean 4-8 hours.

[Fycan]

SamboScoots wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

Noilly Prat wrote...
I don't care what anyone says. I will be surprised if I take fewer than thirty hours to finish it. I'm a completionist, and a slow player besides. I took around 120 hours getting through DA:O. Hell, I took over 60 on my first ME2 playthrough.
I have learned over the years how to read a playthrough time estimate for a game and convert it to "me hours." It usually comes to much more than the estimate.

Me too. I finished DA:O at 123 hours. And I don't get how anyone could've played it first time in under 70 like some claim. At least not on the PC. *shrugs* It sounds like the standard hours estimate for an expansion, which I have always come in at least 50% higher than.

I remember someone on a forum somewhere complaining about the length of DA:O being way too short. It was later revealed the person played on casual, went through the main questline only and may have skipped most of the dialogue.
It's just an example of how play-time estimates for openworld RPGs are difficult. With an estimate of 12-15 hours (if that is infact accurate), I can see how many players would scoff at it combined with the price.
For a player like myself (reads most of the codex entries, explores all side quests and takes in all NPC dialogue possile) I know that 12-15 hours will be more like 40-50 hours on my first play through. That makes $40 well worth it. For the fellow who complained that DA:O was too short, I'm sure 12-15 hours could mean 4-8 hours.

and how do you know for sure that it's 12-15 hours?

[Gabey5]

hmmm

[Dragon Age1103]

12-15 if true isn't bad for an expansion but I must admit it is bad for a dragon age expansion. 15 hours isn't much for $40. They'll still get my money though!! probably just not right at launch.

[hojo101101]

Eudaemonium wrote...

hojo101101 wrote...

Well since a Dragon Age runthrough was optimistically described as having a potential length of 100 hours, a figure you could surely only reach by standing for days on end picking your nose in Orzammar, I am at least glad they're being more realistic with the estimation this time. Took me personally around 30 hours to finish DA each time on two playthroughs, so the price seems entirely reasonable to me.

See, I really don't get how this is possible, particularly on your first go through the game. Not that I'm saying you didn't or using that 'you must not have appreciated it at all!' logic which gets thrown around, but even in my subsequent playthroughs I usually end up at 50-60 hours, and my first was over 80. I'm just somewhat bewildered that people can finish it in such a short time.

I don't consider myself a powergamer or someone who rushes through, either. Maybe I didn't spend the time exploring that others did. Or maybe my degree made me rush when I had the free time to play. I'm sure there is plenty left I haven't seen. I'm not complaining by the way, I enjoyed the game a lot.

Modifié par hojo101101, 27 février 2010 - 06:27 .

[Ponce de Leon]

If that's true, I'll be very happy. Heck, I could buy Modern Warfare 2 for twice or trice as much money and get one sixth of Awakening's length.

[Vicious]

dark-lauron wrote...

If that's true, I'll be very happy. Heck, I could buy Modern Warfare 2 for twice or trice as much money and get one sixth of Awakening's length.

qft

[Musa25]

Dear gamers, excuse me, for my English is probably not the one spoken by a native speaker. Therefore, I'll ask you to be indulgent regarding the form of my comment.

Anyway, like many of my fellow-gamers, I don't like this new gaming policy which consists in having the player pay lots of money for constant DLCs. In time, I hope editors will realize they're making a big mistake...

But as far as DAO:Awakening is concernerd, I can't really see the problem. Many of us are willing to pay 60/70 bucks for games such as Heavy Rain (excellent game, btw...) even though it lasts no more than 10 hours. Of course, you have the possibility to go through it a second time, even a third time, and engage a new experience (although there's no more surprise), and you're complaining about 15-20 hours for a game which "only" costs 30/40$?

It might be an extension, it's still a game which proposes 15 to 20 hours... which isn't the case for many games that aren't add-ons but don't last more than 10 to 12 hours (Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, Prince of Persia, Bioshock, should I continue?). These are real games that can be done in 10 to (in the most extraordinary cases) 20 hours... so what's the problem with Awakening, knowing that you can go through it three times in a different way (two characters imported with different moral choices, and the new warden)?

Serisouly... It's okay to criticize this new money-making policy, but I'm not sure we can condemn BioWare in this particular case just because an add-on (as it is called) lasts 15-20 hours, which in the case of a casual game, is more than enough in terms of length.

That being said, I would have liked it to be longer, of course...
Good night, people!

Modifié par Musa25, 27 février 2010 - 08:56 .

[Vuokseniska]

i just preordered it for 30 euro's in holland

[RangerSG]

hojo101101 wrote...

Well since a Dragon Age runthrough was optimistically described as having a potential length of 100 hours, a figure you could surely only reach by standing for days on end picking your nose in Orzammar, I am at least glad they're being more realistic with the estimation this time. Took me personally around 30 hours to finish DA each time on two playthroughs, so the price seems entirely reasonable to me.

Bzzt...as I said, I clocked in at 123 hours and didn't even get the "Easily sidetracked" achievement my first time. 

Part of the issue is platform. Another part is how a person plays. I couldn't play DA in 30 hours on my FIFTH playthrough now if I wanted to.

[JKJEDIKNIGHT]

My first play through was on Normal, and I did not skip the dialogue, I did not read every Codex entry since most of them have no real purpose to the quest of the game. That said, I did not do EVERY side quest, I did however complete most of them since I know what they all are, and my character finished at level 23 and I did this in 31 hours. So how some of you get over 100 hours, I just don't see possible. Even putting it on Nightmare only added around 2 hours more to my next game play. My "completionist" character which I used on my 4th or 5th game I used the PRIMA Guide to do all possible side quests and that game only topped out at about 44ish. So someone please tell me how you're getting 100 hours out of this. Are you people just really slow readers when you read the Codex? I can't imagine that the 360 version (which I have) and the PC is that drastically different play through wise.

[worksa8]

20 hours for an RPG. Doesn't seem to be nearly enough for the price (Considering how much other things were cut, and how few are being added)

[Finnegone]

JKJEDIKNIGHT wrote...

My first play through was on Normal, and I did not skip the dialogue, I did not read every Codex entry since most of them have no real purpose to the quest of the game. That said, I did not do EVERY side quest, I did however complete most of them since I know what they all are, and my character finished at level 23 and I did this in 31 hours. So how some of you get over 100 hours, I just don't see possible. Even putting it on Nightmare only added around 2 hours more to my next game play. My "completionist" character which I used on my 4th or 5th game I used the PRIMA Guide to do all possible side quests and that game only topped out at about 44ish. So someone please tell me how you're getting 100 hours out of this. Are you people just really slow readers when you read the Codex? I can't imagine that the 360 version (which I have) and the PC is that drastically different play through wise.

I can't tell - are you asking if they're liars, or just stupid?