+1 to this. Hour count vary from player to player.
Original Dmc3 took me 25 hours to beat the first time but it was no where near that long of a game. Likewise I beat Diablo 3 first time in 10 hours when it took most people 20 hours.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Darksiders II |OT| What starts with War, ends with Death.
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
Original Dmc3 took me 25 hours to beat the first time but it was no where near that long of a game. Likewise I beat Diablo 3 first time in 10 hours when it took most people 20 hours.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
This is the same shit those idiots who think every game should be non-linear say
Tell me you're not one of those idiots, Derrick01.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
I've never completed a game anywhere near is supposed hour count. Part of it is I never play more than 3 hours at a time and tend to redo things a lot and part of it is that I like to play about in the game world, without going straight to my objective.
having alot of content is more important than how long it takes from beginning to end.
I know I'll spend close to 100 hours in the crucible alone.
having alot of content is more important than how long it takes from beginning to end.
I know I'll spend close to 100 hours in the crucible alone.
I'm not sure you should be calling people who want longer and smarter games idiots. That doesn't make much sense.
A game should only be as long as it needs to be, having regard to pacing, it's story, and mechanics. There is no prescribed length for any sort of game, and anyone who says otherwise lacks basic intelligence. More is not necessarily better, and it's sad that some still don't realise this.
!!!!
This game being twice as long as Ds1 would make it one of the longest non-Rpgs of this generation.
This is like being disappointed because some guy said this is a 100 hour game. It could very well be for him but there is no context to that number.
And I agree there is no time limit games should follow just to make up their costs. Padded games are some of the worst offenders in gaming there are.
This is like being disappointed because some guy said this is a 100 hour game. It could very well be for him but there is no context to that number.
And I agree there is no time limit games should follow just to make up their costs. Padded games are some of the worst offenders in gaming there are.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Depends if those people apply that logic to arcade type titles.
short games can be just as vital for the industry as long as they have addictive gameplay and encourage replayabilty.
not everything has to be huge.
iNvid02
Member
cod 6 hour campaign is spot on, the barrage of shit thrown at you every second of the game is brutal and tiring, anything longer than that would amount to torture
Twice as long as DS1 would make it quite a bit longer than 20 hours so that would be better.
iNvid02 said:
COD wouldn't exist as it is in the perfect gaming world. It would be forced to be more open and smarter, thus almost guaranteeing it being much longer than 10 hours let alone the usual 5 it is.
Seriously why do people complain??
LOL, yeah. I'm not worried about it being too short.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I think if you cut out all the filler and crap from Skyward Sword, you'd have a more solid video game. In fact, I think I can say that about a lot of video games. Quality > Quantity, every single time.
R
Retro_
Unconfirmed Member
I always thought the opposite was the problem.
Because of the recent attention to hour counts this generation you see so many games padded with filler content in order to meet what you call "standards"
All the while shorter more focused (and imo more enjoyable) games seem to get penalized for not doing this.
It just completely ignores the actual quality of the content and game design for the sake of some meaningless reductive quantity that's more easily comparable.
It's nuts to me.
Oh come now, you're just being silly now. Game developers shouldn't be 'forced' to do anything. Your premise is that short, linear games somehow do not have a place in the industry. You're quite clearly just trying to impose your personal preference on the debate, and purposefully ignoring the millions of people who might enjoy short, punchy arcade experiences. There is no one size fits all for games or game length.
Filler is subjective. Some people bitch about long parts of Lords of Shadow but I thought the whole game was solid from start to finish with parts that were great. I wouldn't shed 30 minutes from that 20+ hour game.
Sidzed2 said:
5 hour arcade experiences are fine. Just charge the $10-$15 they're worth on xbla/PSN and not $60.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I'm getting the feeling Derrick is one of those people, with this "perfect gaming world" of non-linear everything
edit: oh man, Lords of SHadow. The filler of all filler games. Proof positive that just because you can, doesn't mean you should. It's like they had 6 hours of content and streeeeeeetched it out to 20 to fulfill some obligation from people who just NEED to have as much game as possible, even if it's kinda shitty and repetitive.
edit: oh man, Lords of SHadow. The filler of all filler games. Proof positive that just because you can, doesn't mean you should. It's like they had 6 hours of content and streeeeeeetched it out to 20 to fulfill some obligation from people who just NEED to have as much game as possible, even if it's kinda shitty and repetitive.
keltickennedy
Member
What did you think was filler in Lords of Shadow?
R
Retro_
Unconfirmed Member
So is the value of a game. So is the time spent with a game.
but that doesn't stop you from speaking in absolute about how much a game is inherently worth based on nothing but the (hypothetical)length of a single playthrough.
With only a few exceptions. Shortening the length of certain games didn't fix this whole "filler" issue people talk about. There are still sewer levels, there are still terrible turret sequences, the only thing different is that the game is over sooner and you spent more money on less content.
Critics love this because it makes their jobs way easier.
Critics love this because it makes their jobs way easier.
Haunted
Member
ugh, talking about DLC already.
Shut up and let me enjoy my hype building up without trying to make me go limp with that kind of talk. When I have the game and don't follow the marketing anymore, then you can talk about the DLC shit.
Facism
Member
can anyone help me with this? i got confirmation page after completing the paypal process but there's no record of purchase either at thq or paypal. i don't want to try and put another order in until i know what happened here @(
Daydream Sequence
Banned
25 hour main story is quite good for me and justifies my 60 bucks. 10 or less and I'll gladly wait a month or two for the price to drop on Amazon to 30 bucks.
I could really go for some Häagen-Dazs® ice cream right about now
Digic made 20 times better CGI animations for DS1.
http://www.digicpictures.com/#works/game_cinematics?sub=darksiders
http://www.digicpictures.com/#works/game_cinematics?sub=darksiders
Uno Venova
Banned
Over 20 hours is a little much, games start to loose steam at that length, still going to get this eventually.
Reluctant-Hero
Member
I want to say yes to both.
neoism
Member
Seriously why do people complain??
awesome... most gamers now fucking run through shit.. and gaf being mostly pro gamers... they probably will beat it in like 25 or less. I'm a sllllooow ass gamer, especially with RPGs.... I'm looking at 75 hours or so before I'm done with this.. 45 bones well spent.
Reassuring as hell. 40-50 hour single-player campaign in a non-RPG or Open World game is insane. There's bound to be repetitiveness in there if that was the case.
28 hours is still amazingly long for a single player experience of this kind. Im pleased and less worried now.
edit: oh, already been discussed
edit2: derrick is crazier than I thought, lol
oddworld18
Member
hey! that's by my office!
i hope the advertising works. i'd love it if darksiders 2 is a sleeper hit... the first one was a huge, delightful surprise when i picked it up a few years back, and everything for this one just looks incredible.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
I hope Darksiders II sells well enough for a sequel. This game could potentially kill THQ.
Kickass667
Banned
Hey everyone who preordered Darksiders 2 off the THQ store!
When you look up your preorder, do you see the message "Order Search Results
No orders were found"? or is there a problem with my preorder.
When you look up your preorder, do you see the message "Order Search Results
No orders were found"? or is there a problem with my preorder.
Kickass667
Banned
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Hope you don't mind, but I made that my avatar.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
Which platform? I think GOG or GMG has it for sale at $37.50.
Kickass667
Banned
keltickennedy
Member
The armor does look badass.
Oh wow I hope that was intentional.
I just finished it as well on PC for the first time- but it's bugged! I can't seem to start a new game with the Abyssal Armor acquired. Finished it on console first, but playing on PC was a real joy. Any ideas on a work around? Also, half the achievements didn't unlock either :/
In any case, DEATH COMETH.
keltickennedy
Member
Yes, an epic action adventure game should be epically long. More developers should take note if they are asking $60. I cannot fucking wait.