283 réponses à ce sujet

[RangerSG]

JKJedi,



I get not wanting to spend the money because you're concerned about cost/entertainment ratio. I've expressed my opinion on why I have a strong feeling the expansion was rushed out the door as well. This has EA suit stink all over it to me. The clowns didn't think DA:O would sell in the first place. Then it turned out to be their only serious hit last year. So now they're scrambling to force DA stuff out the door while their marketing people think it will sell...never mind Bioware said that they had a 2 year cycle in mind for DA:O previously. EA does this with all their games.



That said, there's no reason for people (and you're not the only one who's done this) to try to make THEIR experience in terms of game hours the norm. There's not a one-size fits all. Other people say they've come out low in comparison. But for me, I've come in on the high side. Like I have every single Bioware game I've played.



Also, people saying that 20hrs is too short for an RPG are forgetting that 15-20 hours is the standard rating for a CRPG *expansion*. And has been for the last 5 years at least. In this Awakenings sounds pretty standard length.



Now I get wanting to wait until the price comes down. I'll probably *have* to, because RL stinks. But cost/entertainment ratio is going to be at a slightly different place for everyone. There is no universal margin in economics.

[DiatribeEQ]

Not sure how long it'll take me. I put in over 40 hours so far in DA:O, but I play things slowly (looking for codex, hidden goodies, ect). So I can see a 20+ hour romp for me with this expansion.

[Dick Delaware]

RangerSG wrote...

I get not wanting to spend the money because you're concerned about cost/entertainment ratio. I've expressed my opinion on why I have a strong feeling the expansion was rushed out the door as well. This has EA suit stink all over it to me. The clowns didn't think DA:O would sell in the first place. Then it turned out to be their only serious hit last year. So now they're scrambling to force DA stuff out the door while their marketing people think it will sell...never mind Bioware said that they had a 2 year cycle in mind for DA:O previously. EA does this with all their games.

I might be out of the loop on this, but what makes you think it's being rushed? Is it that whole DLC / Ultimate Sacrifice debacle? Or is there something more as well?

Even if it might be rushed, I am leaning towards getting it early. I am really interested in The Architect as a character and always felt that DA:O lacked a solid villain. Sure, there were characters like Loghain and Branka, but they were peripheral to the real threat, which was the Archdemon.

[Feraele]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

Feraele wrote...


You're expecting another full game at 80 hours playthrough?   I don't think so.

 

well it was advertised to be an expansion pack but the price is ****ing unjustifiable.

$40 USD for a game that's effectively half the length of the original, yet the same price?

the fck?

Hmm I paid somewhere around $75 ish..Canadian for the Digital Deluxe, might depend where you buy it.   Seems like some areas/countries have retailers charging less for the expansion,  but not in Canada..LOL

$39.95 is what I am being charged for the expac, but..knowing me it will take longer than the first estimated 23 hours or so, that some journalist guestimated it to be, after he played through.

Modifié par Feraele, 01 mars 2010 - 02:45 .

[Feraele]

Finnegone wrote...

Why do so many people on this forum assume that a game's length has anything to do with price? If that were indeed true, then video game prices for newly released games would be highly variable... and they're not.

Furthermore, when did we begin to measure enjoyment in units of time? If you want a game that you can sink unlimited hours into, and is also highly replayable, then buy Tetris. Otherwise, be prepared for disappointment.

Well since at least October when I signed up to this site..and people were arguing about dlc prices, comparing them to hamburger or latte prices.

There are many out there, that think because they zip through a game, don't do side stuff, don't look for clues etc, that they've been somehow cheated out of TIME..when in fact its themselves, in a big ol' rush to BEAT THE GAME..that cheat themselves..thats how I look at it.

25 hours on your very first run-through....(a poster stated this earlier in the thread)   ...either you had your hand held by some walk-through online, or you didn't explore and or read codex or any of the other stuff. 

My first run ..and I consider myself an average gamer, was 110 hours.   There is a learning curve to this game as well...so this person is also stating they didn't have to learn anything..they just buzzed right through it?   rofl!

[RangerSG]

Dick Delaware wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

I get not wanting to spend the money because you're concerned about cost/entertainment ratio. I've expressed my opinion on why I have a strong feeling the expansion was rushed out the door as well. This has EA suit stink all over it to me. The clowns didn't think DA:O would sell in the first place. Then it turned out to be their only serious hit last year. So now they're scrambling to force DA stuff out the door while their marketing people think it will sell...never mind Bioware said that they had a 2 year cycle in mind for DA:O previously. EA does this with all their games.

I might be out of the loop on this, but what makes you think it's being rushed? Is it that whole DLC / Ultimate Sacrifice debacle? Or is there something more as well?

Even if it might be rushed, I am leaning towards getting it early. I am really interested in The Architect as a character and always felt that DA:O lacked a solid villain. Sure, there were characters like Loghain and Branka, but they were peripheral to the real threat, which was the Archdemon.

Five months for an expansion is short-cycle in the first place for an RPG. Then yes, the whole DLC/US/end all the character arc thing. Also this fits EA's typical MO, to be honest. Leap on the back of a hit and milk it for what its worth while shortening time-table of production. Add in the fact that last year EA's CEO was busy poo-pooing DA as a product to the shareholders. Then the returns come in, and the games EA banked on did poor and DA was their hit. So in come the suits to "Sim" Dragon Age.

I don't go in for conspiracy theories. But it fits EA's MO too well...

[RangerSG]

Maviarab wrote...

Would agree 100% with that statement Ranger, other than the fact that DA was finished and done last April, and it was only due to the consoles that we got delayed until November..

So really....the expansion is almost a year after what would have been the normal release date...so about right really.

but again, other than that, your spot on in your asessment.

True, but no expansion is going to be Green-lighted until the game is confirmed a hit (or at least having potential to make money). The fact that the US issue was necessitated by a tech-glitch indicates that although story and such may have been ready, the tech side was not seriously in place for an expansion before green-lighting.

[Feraele]

RangerSG wrote...

Dick Delaware wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

I get not wanting to spend the money because you're concerned about cost/entertainment ratio. I've expressed my opinion on why I have a strong feeling the expansion was rushed out the door as well. This has EA suit stink all over it to me. The clowns didn't think DA:O would sell in the first place. Then it turned out to be their only serious hit last year. So now they're scrambling to force DA stuff out the door while their marketing people think it will sell...never mind Bioware said that they had a 2 year cycle in mind for DA:O previously. EA does this with all their games.

I might be out of the loop on this, but what makes you think it's being rushed? Is it that whole DLC / Ultimate Sacrifice debacle? Or is there something more as well?

Even if it might be rushed, I am leaning towards getting it early. I am really interested in The Architect as a character and always felt that DA:O lacked a solid villain. Sure, there were characters like Loghain and Branka, but they were peripheral to the real threat, which was the Archdemon.

Five months for an expansion is short-cycle in the first place for an RPG. Then yes, the whole DLC/US/end all the character arc thing. Also this fits EA's typical MO, to be honest. Leap on the back of a hit and milk it for what its worth while shortening time-table of production. Add in the fact that last year EA's CEO was busy poo-pooing DA as a product to the shareholders. Then the returns come in, and the games EA banked on did poor and DA was their hit. So in come the suits to "Sim" Dragon Age.

I don't go in for conspiracy theories. But it fits EA's MO too well...

Humm never realized that EA didn't consider DA a hit from the get-go...wonder what he was smoking?  hehe

[RangerSG]

Feraele wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

Dick Delaware wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

I get not wanting to spend the money because you're concerned about cost/entertainment ratio. I've expressed my opinion on why I have a strong feeling the expansion was rushed out the door as well. This has EA suit stink all over it to me. The clowns didn't think DA:O would sell in the first place. Then it turned out to be their only serious hit last year. So now they're scrambling to force DA stuff out the door while their marketing people think it will sell...never mind Bioware said that they had a 2 year cycle in mind for DA:O previously. EA does this with all their games.

I might be out of the loop on this, but what makes you think it's being rushed? Is it that whole DLC / Ultimate Sacrifice debacle? Or is there something more as well?

Even if it might be rushed, I am leaning towards getting it early. I am really interested in The Architect as a character and always felt that DA:O lacked a solid villain. Sure, there were characters like Loghain and Branka, but they were peripheral to the real threat, which was the Archdemon.

Five months for an expansion is short-cycle in the first place for an RPG. Then yes, the whole DLC/US/end all the character arc thing. Also this fits EA's typical MO, to be honest. Leap on the back of a hit and milk it for what its worth while shortening time-table of production. Add in the fact that last year EA's CEO was busy poo-pooing DA as a product to the shareholders. Then the returns come in, and the games EA banked on did poor and DA was their hit. So in come the suits to "Sim" Dragon Age.

I don't go in for conspiracy theories. But it fits EA's MO too well...

Humm never realized that EA didn't consider DA a hit from the get-go...wonder what he was smoking?  hehe

Sorry about that, I'll clarify some...yeah they considered it a hit from when the sale returns started coming in. But (and this was on a thread in the old forums), last year the EA CEO essentially called DA:O a "niche game" to the shareholders and that they had little commercial expectation for it. That since Bioware was almost finished with production, it would be green-lit, but they looked to other products from the "Bioware Division" to make profit (specifically, the Star Wars MMO, I would guess).

There was no real expectation of serious profit from the EA marketing side for an old-school single player fantasy RPG. It was more or less written off as saying, "Look, this is their passion. It's what they do. Let them finish it."

Then it becomes a hit, and here comes the suits.

[spirosz]

Some of you guys are putting this expansion in a perspective of which it would be seen as a "full game", which it is not. It's an expansion, not a full fledged game. 15 to 20 hours for an expansion sounds about right, at least for my taste. Bioware is giving opportunity to open up new areas, meet new people, and experience something new, which they'll be able to go in depth with because it's Bioware, that's what they do. I would be happier if the expansion was about 10 dollars cheaper, so about 30 dollars here, just because of it being an "expansion", so about half the price of a full retail game. Sounds more reasonable.

[RangerSG]

spiros9110 wrote...

Some of you guys are putting this expansion in a perspective of which it would be seen as a "full game", which it is not. It's an expansion, not a full fledged game. 15 to 20 hours for an expansion sounds about right, at least for my taste. Bioware is giving opportunity to open up new areas, meet new people, and experience something new, which they'll be able to go in depth with because it's Bioware, that's what they do. I would be happier if the expansion was about 10 dollars cheaper, so about 30 dollars here, just because of it being an "expansion", so about half the price of a full retail game. Sounds more reasonable.

I agree. My concern has little to do with length. I've noted my concerns elsewhere. I'm still going to buy it. Though I may have to be forced by RL to wait a while. We shall see.

[JKJEDIKNIGHT]

I can't say there was much of a learning curve to DA:O. The combat controls were almost identical to KOTOR. At least on 360. The pause/play was even a part of KOTOR, only to get it, you had to switch enemies, where as in DA:O you can actually just pause it and go about your business.

[RangerSG]

JKJEDIKNIGHT wrote...

I can't say there was much of a learning curve to DA:O. The combat controls were almost identical to KOTOR. At least on 360. The pause/play was even a part of KOTOR, only to get it, you had to switch enemies, where as in DA:O you can actually just pause it and go about your business.

What does learning curve have to do with anything? I don't see where anyone mentioned that. Unless this is back to, "Only people who have short hour counts know how to play the game."

[JPL1138]

JKJEDIKNIGHT wrote...

I can't say there was much of a learning curve to DA:O. The combat controls were almost identical to KOTOR. At least on 360. The pause/play was even a part of KOTOR, only to get it, you had to switch enemies, where as in DA:O you can actually just pause it and go about your business.

I'm going to have to agree with you on this one here. If you've played any party-based RPG or MMO in the last 10 years, then chances are you're really not going to have a hard time picking up DAO. The game's basic mechanics are really quite simple compared to anything based on the D&D systems.

My issue here is more with people claiming they can somehow play this game for 100 hours when, realistically even if you do every single quest and read every single codex entry, etc, etc, it still shouldn't take you more than 60 hours unless you really are just counting every single rock on the ground or having a lot of trouble with the encounters. Personally, I didn't find any of the battles in the game to be all that hard compared to anything from the old Infinity Engine games (The Kangaxx reference encounter in DAO was a far cry from that Demi-Lich you fought in BG2), but neither do I expect people to have had the same mileage as me with DAO. However, I just find it ludicrous that people can claim they've spent over 120 hours on a single play-through!

What I'm afraid of is that the 15-20 hour estimate is based on the "100+ hours" than on what anyone who is reasonably familiar with CRPGs can realistically spend on a game like this.

Modifié par JPL1138, 01 mars 2010 - 06:47 .

[Trefalen]

Harelda wrote...

$40?! Seriously? Amazon.co.uk has it for £15 preorder on the PC, which I guess is about $25...

That seems like a massive variation in price...Ooh, I can get free shipping too

Edit: Fine, content. I'm still replaying the original game. I can't imagine I'll not be playing Origins occasionally a few months after release.

Agreed, DA:O is the first game I don't mind playing over and over.. The what if factor is wonderful. I purposely do not read spoilers, or use cheats. If I do figure out I could have done things differently, or should have, I just chuckle and say "Cool I'll do that next go thru". That coupled with lots of save points that let me go back and do things over just for the hell of it.
 

[edeheusch]

As some peoples have said, the length of the game highly depends of the player.

Personally my first playthrough take me about 60 hours and I have only missed 1 or 2 little quest. Now that I now the game, a complete playthrough take me about 55 hours so I consider that a complete first playthrough should have take me about 65-70 hours. See like this, a 15 hours expansion seems like a quarter (or less) of the length of the OC (which seems really short).

What I would really want to know is the length of the expansion in comparison to the OC.
If it is about a quarter (or less) of the OC it is really short! The length is not the most important but I can hardly imagine a so short story being dept and entertaining.
If it is about a third of the length of the OC it is short but I am fine with it. The story can be dept if made correctly.
If the story is about the half of the OC (or more) I will be really happy (unless the story is not entertaining, what I can hardly imagine from BW). I understand that an add-on cannot be as long as an original game as it will always sell less (except if the add-on is a stand alone).

Currently it is “wait and see” but I would really like to now the length of this add-on expressed in term of fraction of the OC.   

[Noilly Prat]

Regarding EA's low expectations for DA's marketability-- I don't doubt that the game ended up being a bigger success than they had expected, but I'm having some trouble with the idea that they really thought it would be all that niche. I assume they were supporting BioWare and the console port people on the decision to make it multiplatform, and in the last couple-few weeks before the game released, I saw a ridiculous quantity of advertisements on gaming sites. We're talking ads the likes of which I had never before seen for a BioWare game, not even Mass Effect 1.



So, right there, we're talking some not insignificant funds being put toward the marketing shove, well before the game was on shelves. Still, I have no idea whether the expansion was already in the works or not. Though I tend to suspect it was at the very least under discussion.

[JKJEDIKNIGHT]

RangerSG wrote...

JKJEDIKNIGHT wrote...

I can't say there was much of a learning curve to DA:O. The combat controls were almost identical to KOTOR. At least on 360. The pause/play was even a part of KOTOR, only to get it, you had to switch enemies, where as in DA:O you can actually just pause it and go about your business.

What does learning curve have to do with anything? I don't see where anyone mentioned that. Unless this is back to, "Only people who have short hour counts know how to play the game."

Try to read all the posts before you make comments then is my only advice for you.  Fer clearly stated that DA:O has a learning curve which she had to adapt to which caused her play time to possibly be as high as it was.  Where as I have stated, I clearly did not.

[JKJEDIKNIGHT]

JPL1138 wrote...

I'm going to have to agree with you on this one here. If you've played any party-based RPG or MMO in the last 10 years, then chances are you're really not going to have a hard time picking up DAO. The game's basic mechanics are really quite simple compared to anything based on the D&D systems.

My issue here is more with people claiming they can somehow play this game for 100 hours when, realistically even if you do every single quest and read every single codex entry, etc, etc, it still shouldn't take you more than 60 hours unless you really are just counting every single rock on the ground or having a lot of trouble with the encounters. Personally, I didn't find any of the battles in the game to be all that hard compared to anything from the old Infinity Engine games (The Kangaxx reference encounter in DAO was a far cry from that Demi-Lich you fought in BG2), but neither do I expect people to have had the same mileage as me with DAO. However, I just find it ludicrous that people can claim they've spent over 120 hours on a single play-through!

What I'm afraid of is that the 15-20 hour estimate is based on the "100+ hours" than on what anyone who is reasonably familiar with CRPGs can realistically spend on a game like this.

Finally!  Someone else who magically beat this game in under 5 million hours.

[le_cygne]

RangerSG wrote...

Sorry about that, I'll clarify some...yeah they considered it a hit from when the sale returns started coming in. But (and this was on a thread in the old forums), last year the EA CEO essentially called DA:O a "niche game" to the shareholders and that they had little commercial expectation for it. That since Bioware was almost finished with production, it would be green-lit, but they looked to other products from the "Bioware Division" to make profit (specifically, the Star Wars MMO, I would guess).

There was no real expectation of serious profit from the EA marketing side for an old-school single player fantasy RPG. It was more or less written off as saying, "Look, this is their passion. It's what they do. Let them finish it."

Then it becomes a hit, and here comes the suits.

Just out of curiosity, can you (or anyone) point me in the direction of this conference call/transcript/source? I'd be interested to hear it, out of pure curiosity.

And, as an aside, count me as another very experienced CRPG player who spent over 100 hours on my first play through without any particular difficulties moving forward in combat or elsewhere. Some of us just enjoy speaking to all of the NPCs in extreme depth, reading all the codices, exploring every niche of every map, and so forth.

[Yrkoon]

My issue here is more with people claiming they can somehow play this game for 100 hours when, realistically even if you do every single quest and read every single codex entry, etc, etc, it still shouldn't take you more than 60 hours unless you really are just counting every single rock on the ground or having a lot of trouble with the encounters.

This is simply untrue.

First off, since I asked this question  earlier  and got no response, I'll ask it again:   When determining how long their playthrough was, are people guessing?  or are they actually looking at the recorded timestamp that appears on the "heroic accomplishments" screen?  Because if they're doing the former, then they're probably way off.

Second, who said anything about tough fights?  Tough fights don't account for an extra 40+ hours of game play.  Neither does admiring the scenery or the so-called "learning curve". (I had none.  the game's controls are ridiculously easy  and intuitive)    Instead, Scouring the game for clickable things does.  Traversing every inch of every avaliable map does.     Doing everything there is to do on every map does. Sitting through whole  cutscenes and dialogues without hitting the escape button does.  Visiting every merchant in the game and studying his inventory, meticulously comparing  the items he's selling to what your party is equipped with does.

Going back and forth on the world map so as to trigger every random encounter does.  Asking Lelianna to tell you her stories does.  Exhausting Shale's dialogue trees does.  Doing all your party member's  personal quests does.  Going back to camp and switching out your weapon runes, and your party members' weapon runes  does.  Deliberately and willfully disarming every trap and unlocking every chest does.

I challenge ANYONE who claims they did all the subquests and managed  to  beat this game in  just 25 hours to PROVE it.  Show us a screenshot of  the timestamp after you defeat the archdemon.

Here.  Let me show you how its done: 



^this is from my First playthough.  (click on it to get it full screen so you can read it)  As you can see,  the very last line is the time it took me to complete the game:  92 hours.  You'll also notice my character's level, and the fact that he defeated the archdemon, and that he explored 94% of the world.

Again, lets see a screenshot from  someone who claims they  "did everything" and still beat this game in 25-30 hours.  My guess is, they're all full of BS.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 02 mars 2010 - 12:40 .

[Trefalen]

As for me, I still have many many aspects to play through in DA:O. That coupled with 40.00 seems like a lot now, (I dread paying 8.99 for netflix, but I love the movies etc) I'm just that strapped for cash that 15-20 hours of play, no romance, I'm basically not interested in it enough to pay 35+.

I guess that sounds silly to some but they don't have my bills

[BanksHector]

I really enjoyed DAO so i will take the chance on Awakening. If it is as good as DAO and 20 hours I feel it will be well worth the money. I am sure it will have really good replay value like DAO did. I have faith in Bioware.