Support NeoGAF

[pilonv1]

Since when is a 22 hour long "8/10" game a bad thing? God you people pick the most retarded things to complain about. Where's that massive rolleyes gif when you need it?

 

[TekunoRobby]

People want this game to fail, that's the only reason. Either that or they want to rile up the fanatics.

 

[JayFro]

Bottom line.........people want to see this game fail miserably because it has the potential to be a great seller and great RPG. Down with MS! Bleh.....

How 20 hours is viewed as bad is beyond me, the last two non sports titles I put 20+ hours into were Ninja Gaiden (25) and Splinter Cell 2 (not sure exactly).


Get over it already people, this game will be great and sell great.

 

[Teddman]

Here's an example for you: I started playing Xenogears this year.

20-HOUR FABLE SOUNDS GREAT!

 

[ferricide]

i'm actually surprised he spun it out to 22. honestly. not shocked, but surprised.

can i say whatever i want now that hilary is doing a fable play diary or whatever? man.

 

[MC Safety]

I have a question:

Why are you so concerned about how long it took some other guy to finish a game?

Also, for the record: 15 hours, 50 minutes.

 

[Rhage]

i'm actually surprised he spun it out to 22. honestly. not shocked, but surprised.

Does that mean 22 is high or low?

 

[TekunoRobby]

Uh oh.

 

[john2kx]

dang... 22 hours is a fuckload more than I have to spend on one game.

i'm actually kinda glad it isn't gonna turn out to be 80+ hours..

"but it took them this long to develop a 22 hour game?" is my only question.

 

[xsarien]

"but it took them this long to develop a 22 hour game?" is my only question.

My gut's telling me that at some point, they just took a hatchet to a lot of stuff to actually get the game out. No sense in pulling a DNF.

 

[shuri]

It's a morrowind type of game. So you can spent weeks just doing fucking nothing at all, running around killing random stuff or stealing

 

[RevenantKioku]

Bottom line.........people want to see this game fail miserably because it has the potential to be a great seller and great RPG. Down with MS! Bleh.....


Get over it already people, this game will be great and sell great.

Yes, because its such a bizarre idea that people enjoy long RPGs.
Get this, I just played through and LOVED Xenosaga.
I'm playing ToS right now, and while I like it, I've played Tales games before and I think of it as an average but fun RPG.
Look, I don't know shit about Fable. All I remember is Moley-I-can't-spell-his-dumb-ass-name talking about the "epic, greatest RPG" he was making. That gives you this idea of this freedom, and that you can put some hours into the game each day, maybe racking up hours upon hours of game-play. Initially, I was excited because it felt like it might be a GTA with good RPG elements. Three years of hearing shit over and over again, I got sick of it, and didn't care anymore.
Sure, it may "just be the main quest" but it seems very disappointing that this "epic" RPG, okay ARPG, whatever, can tell you after a measly 22 hours that your main quest is over is dissapointing for me. Sure, I can replay it, but the initial thrill will be gone. I've played some of my favorite RPGs through many times. Hell I've probably played Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy Legend 2 through maybe 10, 15 times. Still, the replays are never as good to me as my original play-through.
If this seems fine for you, fine, go nuts for it. Some of us actually have different views that doesn't make us haters and so on despite that we may think some of your beloved games are trash.
I can get past that most of you don't like Xenosaga. So why can't you get past the fact I have no interest in Fable?

 

[dark10x]

Get this, I just played through and LOVED Xenosaga.

I liked it.

However, since this thread is about playtime, it should be noted that early reports on Xenosaga suggested that the game was very short. Many of the people who finished the Japanese release were able to do so in around 25-30 hours (which disappointed those who were expecting another 70 hour game). Xenosaga 2 is much shorter than that, with people finishing it in under 20 hours in some cases. Grandia II was another big RPG (for the DC) and I completed that in like 23 hours or so. Not every RPG is some sprawling 60 hour opus...

I honestly DO prefer the shorter games, as they typically pack more content into those hours and the result is a more exciting experience. The point here is that you just named XS, which many people were able to finish in a similar amount of time as is being cited for Fable. We can't judge length by one report...as it varies per person. It certainly suggests a shorter game, though...

 

[TekunoRobby]

Peter Molyneux!

Link to a quick Bio on Moby

 

[JayFro]

Yes, because its such a bizarre idea that people enjoy long RPGs.
Get this, I just played through and LOVED Xenosaga.
I'm playing ToS right now, and while I like it, I've played Tales games before and I think of it as an average but fun RPG.
Look, I don't know shit about Fable. All I remember is Moley-I-can't-spell-his-dumb-ass-name talking about the "epic, greatest RPG" he was making. That gives you this idea of this freedom, and that you can put some hours into the game each day, maybe racking up hours upon hours of game-play. Initially, I was excited because it felt like it might be a GTA with good RPG elements. Three years of hearing shit over and over again, I got sick of it, and didn't care anymore.
Sure, it may "just be the main quest" but it seems very disappointing that this "epic" RPG, okay ARPG, whatever, can tell you after a measly 22 hours that your main quest is over is dissapointing for me. Sure, I can replay it, but the initial thrill will be gone. I've played some of my favorite RPGs through many times. Hell I've probably played Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy Legend 2 through maybe 10, 15 times. Still, the replays are never as good to me as my original play-through.
If this seems fine for you, fine, go nuts for it. Some of us actually have different views that doesn't make us haters and so on despite that we may think some of your beloved games are trash.
I can get past that most of you don't like Xenosaga. So why can't you get past the fact I have no interest in Fable?

You love RPG's yet have no interest in Fable and call it trash? Glad to see you don't have a slanted view on the game.....wow

Since you already played Fable, why was it trash? You would have to have played it to have an opinion of it........it's all about gameplay right?

 

[firex]

The point is that you can supposedly replay Fable in a totally different way from start to finish, something you can't do with the games you listed as replaying several times. Chrono Trigger may have different endings, but they're all gotten by beating the last boss at various points in the exact same main storyline you went through the first time.

I've stayed out of most Fable threads before because all I could say about the game was "I hope they don't pull another Black and White," and while I'm still not going to praise the game endlessly (given I haven't even played it and probably won't get to play it until way after its release), I don't think the game should be criticized for being 20+ hours long. That's still plenty of time for a game that feels "epic" -- hell, Deus Ex felt pretty epic to me, and that game can be completed in 12 or 15 hours. A lot of 16-bit RPGs have felt more epic to me than most console RPGs on generations beyond, and plenty of those are games that can be completed in 25 hours or less. I guess the point I'm making is, epic doesn't have to mean it's 50+ hours long. Epic can just mean that the main quest makes the player feel like he/she has done something incredible in the scope of the game.

 

[JayFro]

The point is that you can supposedly replay Fable in a totally different way from start to finish, something you can't do with the games you listed as replaying several times. Chrono Trigger may have different endings, but they're all gotten by beating the last boss at various points in the exact same main storyline you went through the first time.

I've stayed out of most Fable threads before because all I could say about the game was "I hope they don't pull another Black and White," and while I'm still not going to praise the game endlessly (given I haven't even played it and probably won't get to play it until way after its release), I don't think the game should be criticized for being 20+ hours long. That's still plenty of time for a game that feels "epic" -- hell, Deus Ex felt pretty epic to me, and that game can be completed in 12 or 15 hours. A lot of 16-bit RPGs have felt more epic to me than most console RPGs on generations beyond, and plenty of those are games that can be completed in 25 hours or less. I guess the point I'm making is, epic doesn't have to mean it's 50+ hours long. Epic can just mean that the main quest makes the player feel like he/she has done something incredible in the scope of the game.

Well said.

 

[ScientificNinja]

The point is that you can supposedly replay Fable in a totally different way from start to finish, something you can't do with the games you listed as replaying several times. Chrono Trigger may have different endings, but they're all gotten by beating the last boss at various points in the exact same main storyline you went through the first time.

Err... I'd take that with a grain of salt, to be honest.

 

[Meier]

Also, for the record: 15 hours, 50 minutes.

What. the. fuck? :|

 

[firex]

I take everything Molyneux says with a grain of salt. If it doesn't allow for that level of replayability, it's a major failure of the game to deliver on its promises. But even if it's as simple as KOTOR's light side/dark side stuff, that's more replayability than pretty much any Japanese RPG I've played so far.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

Damn, I just want the game to be here so I can make up my own mind about it now. The next few reviews are going to be battle stations for GAF where nebulous views are formed and kept by those who won't even play the damn game. Ah, well. Nice banstick action, couldn't have happened to better people.

If Burnout 3 and KUF are godly, it will help me look past Fable's shortcomings, haha.

 

[Ambience]

22hours is fine, its better than throwing in long boring quests just for the sake of extending the gameplay *coughTriforceQuestcough*

 

[CrimsonSkies]

Fable just seems like it would be a completely different experience if you played it again as Evil compared to Good. More so than most RPG's where when you play them again you're just another class / race. Can any of those that have played through the game comment on this?

 

[RevenantKioku]

You love RPG's yet have no interest in Fable and call it trash? Glad to see you don't have a slanted view on the game.....wow

Since you already played Fable, why was it trash? You would have to have played it to have an opinion of it........it's all about gameplay right?

First I never called Fable trash. I have no interest in it, but I never said its trash, unless of course Fable is already beloved by you, but unless you've played it, your opinion is just as baseless.
Slanted? I took all the data I could get on the game and made my judgment. Do I harbor slight resentment based on Black and White? Sure, because it was played up the same way Fable has been and it was a big disappointment to me. You call it whatever you want, I call it live and learn. There's enough RPGs coming out this year to keep me satisfied, I don't need Fable, and I'm sick of seeing it being played up to be some sort of Savior.
Actually, its not all about game-play. Game-play is a large factor of any game but not everything. People can get turned off from many different aspects of it. Scenario, graphics, music, story or lack of. You have to play a game to have an opinion of it? I've never played Madden, but since I don't like football, my opinion is Madden's a waste of time! Holy shit, I am a sinner!
We can have epic opinions all night long, and yeah, some short games can feel epic, sure, it's happened. But to me, the whole build up of Fable, it feels if everything they talked up is put into a 22 hour game, I'm already more disappointed than a non-interested person can be.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Aren't you an old man by the end of the game?

Or am I thinking of Harvest Moon?

 

[Stryder]

I'm happy with 22 hours, this means I'm going to be able to play this whilst keeping on top of the other stuff going on my life (work and uni), if it was any longer I'd be saving it till the holidays.

 

[seismologist]

22hours is fine, its better than throwing in long boring quests just for the sake of extending the gameplay *coughTriforceQuestcough*

But 22 hours is including the sidequests which it makes it sound like a 9 hour RPG padded with sidequests.

 

[AniHawk]

Alright. After beating my head against a brick repeatedly for the last 3 1/2 hours, I feel I am now of the ideal mental capacity to join the trainwreck of a thread. And before the bloodloss/massive neurological trauma goes straight to the bleeding mass that has become my head, let me say this: It takes 22 hours to complete FABLE on ONE ALIGNMENT

I'm pretty sure that was established in the early posts of this thread.

 

[JayFro]

I'm pretty sure that was established in the early posts of this thread.

Yeah, but some people want to break out the hatorade anyway. Can't we all just get along?

 

[fennec fox]

As far as I'm concerned, 15 hours is not only the optimum playtime for any story-driven console game, it's also quickly becoming my maximum unless I'm playing the game for work.

Bring on the "short" games! And screw all of you guys for this eye-twitching thread!

 

[RevenantKioku]

Yeah, but some people want to break out the hatorade anyway. Can't we all just get along?

Not until all AAA titles get 8/10s and justly fail in the market.

As far as I'm concerned, 15 hours is not only the optimum playtime for any story-driven console game, it's also quickly becoming my maximum unless I'm playing the game for work.

Bring on the "short" games! And screw all of you guys for this eye-twitching thread!

I know you're a more reasonable man than most here, so surely you can see the room for both long and short games!

 

[JayFro]

Not until all AAA titles get 8/10s and justly fail in the market.

Yes, down with all AAA titles! Where is the Pikmin 2 thread........I can't wait

 

[RevenantKioku]

Yes, down with all AAA titles! Where is the Pikmin 2 thread........I can't wait

Nah, Pikmin 2 is fun. Fable is just shit.

 

[JayFro]

Nah, Pikmin 2 is fun. Fable is just shit.

Wow.......

 

[kiryogi]

Spot on

I clocked up around 35 hrs on ToS. Spent alot of time running/flying around the overworld or getting into random battles.

Not fun

Random battles you say? Did you really play ToS?

 

[RevenantKioku]

Wow.......

The thread was getting to lovey-dovey.

Random battles you say? Did you really play ToS?

They're still random battles, you just have a little more control...kinda.
Not that seeing your enemies on the map is necessarily more fun. I'll bet my fanboy status that I'll enjoy the Tales battles more than Fable's battles.

 

[AniHawk]

As far as I'm concerned, 15 hours is not only the optimum playtime for any story-driven console game, it's also quickly becoming my maximum unless I'm playing the game for work.

Bring on the "short" games! And screw all of you guys for this eye-twitching thread!

I know long games don't ALWAYS mean better, but I'd like to get my money's worth at least.

Short games like Beyond Good & Evil, Viewtiful Joe, Eternal Darkness, and Prince of Persia don't mesh well with me at full price (which is why I got all except ED at less than full price).

Plus, I think, like KotOR, Fable would be more character driven than story driven.

 

[RevenantKioku]

I know long games don't ALWAYS mean better, but I'd like to get my money's worth at least.

Short games like Beyond Good & Evil, Viewtiful Joe, Eternal Darkness, and Prince of Persia don't mesh well with me at full price (which is why I got all except ED at full price).

Plus, I think, like KotOR, Fable would be more character driven than story driven.

And even if Fable has this "replay", really a short play through is a short play through. Personally, I've rarely had as much fun on a replay, even when I had massive choices in games like Fallout or Baldur's Gate.

 

[fennec fox]

I know you're a more reasonable man than most here, so surely you can see the room for both long and short games!

Well, sure I can. But, on a personal level, I can't anymore, because I'm 26, work most of the day, and don't have the time nor the perseverence for 50-hour games any longer -- and with the average gamer age increasing I don't think I'm alone.

This is beginning to diverge a bit from the topic at hand, but would you agree with me that the great majority of gamers do not play the games they buy to completion? I hope so, 'cos I'm pretty sure the ESA said such in their most recent white paper. Usually they get bored, or frustrated, or distracted by something else, before reaching the climax. I know I'm that way fairly often.

With that in mind, I totally welcome the trend for shorter console games as of late, and I don't see what the problem is with a short Fable. The power behind any story-driven game is dulled greatly if you never get to the end of the story, after all.

I think it was Game Developer that printed a quote from Cliff Bleszinski where he said that he wished someone would take the no-doubt-enormous risk and make a series of AAA-class, story-driven games that only last 2 or 3 hours and sell them for budget prices. As far as I'm concerned that is about the smartest thing he's ever said.

 

[sc0la]

Does anybody have the Fable screen with the pale guy in corn rows?

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

22 hours seems fine to me. In fact, its only increased my interest in the title. One of the main reasons I didnt purchase ToS was because I had no intention of playing a 50 hour game.

Im not too big a fan of huge, long games.


this fenekku guy is dead on. Most games nowadays tend to drag, and who really has 50 free hours for a video game?

 

[AniHawk]

With that in mind, I totally welcome the trend for shorter console games as of late, and I don't see what the problem is with a short Fable. The power behind any story-driven game is dulled greatly if you never get to the end of the story, after all.

The problem comes from the game being in development so long and so many features have supposedly been cut (I can only name the gradual aging thing).

 

[RevenantKioku]

A lot of logical shit.

Hell, I'm 21, I put 20 hours of class a week and 30 hours of part time work, not to mention homework and sleep. I still play long games, just in short chunks.

I know, I know, trends and all. Its just like when RPGs moved from the people like me who were always clinging to them, and then they became popular. Then the trends meshed their ways in, and we died a little inside. Its the same. Its not bad, but I'd hate to see it be the norm.

 

[AniHawk]

22 hours seems fine to me. In fact, its only increased my interest in the title. One of the main reasons I didnt purchase ToS was because I had no intention of playing a 50 hour game.

Im not too big a fan of huge, long games.


this fenekku guy is dead on. Most games nowadays tend to drag, and who really has 50 free hours for a video game?

Some people here beat ToS in a rental. I think Wario64 beat it in 30 hours or so. People like me who played it for the sidequests and optional bosses/costumes/titles managed to push it to over 50.

 

[Dave Long]

I think it was Game Developer that printed a quote from Cliff Bleszinski where he said that he wished someone would take the no-doubt-enormous risk and make a series of AAA-class, story-driven games that only last 2 or 3 hours and sell them for budget prices. As far as I'm concerned that is about the smartest thing he's ever said.

The problem with this is even AAA-class story-driven games sometimes fail to find any kind of audience. So if your first 2-3 hour masterpiece sells like bunk, you just blew years of development on two more entries in that series that will also sell like bunk. There's just too much risk inolved in something like that failing with the first release.

 

[RevenantKioku]

this fenekku guy is dead on. Most games nowadays tend to drag, and who really has 50 free hours for a video game?

I paid $50 for a game on release because I was looking forward to it. I'd hope I get about 50 hours out of it. They're not gonna be consecutive by any means, but I'd hope to get them.

 

[IJoel]

Well, sure I can. But, on a personal level, I can't anymore, because I'm 26, work most of the day, and don't have the time nor the perseverence for 50-hour games any longer -- and with the average gamer age increasing I don't think I'm alone.

This is beginning to diverge a bit from the topic at hand, but would you agree with me that the great majority of gamers do not play the games they buy to completion? I hope so, 'cos I'm pretty sure the ESA said such in their most recent white paper. Usually they get bored, or frustrated, or distracted by something else, before reaching the climax. I know I'm that way fairly often.

With that in mind, I totally welcome the trend for shorter console games as of late, and I don't see what the problem is with a short Fable. The power behind any story-driven game is dulled greatly if you never get to the end of the story, after all.

I think it was Game Developer that printed a quote from Cliff Blezinski where he said that he wished someone would take the no-doubt-enormous risk and make a series of AAA-class, story-driven games that only last 2 or 3 hours and sell them for budget prices. As far as I'm concerned that about the smartest thing he's ever said.

I'm not sure I completely agree, in my personal case, but I certainly understand this.

I guess my point is that a great game is a great game regardless of length. This is, for me to consider a game great, it doesn't have to be long, it has to be of good enough length for the specific game. To make it clearer, let's put a couple of examples:

1. Prince of Persia - I really loved the game but thought it was too short. By the end of the game, I was left wanting more and there just wasn't anything else to accomplish. The game was completely the same experience regardless of how many times you played it.

2. Chronicles of Riddick - Same as above.

3. Tales of Symphonia - This is the opposite case. I haven't beaten the game. I'm at hour 32 and the storyline is simply being stretched too thin. I would've preferred the game to be shorter (I expect it to last for 10-15 hours more) with a tighter storyline.

4. Ninja Gaiden - This is the best case I can imagine. A big part of the game is the learning curve. By the time you're 30% through it, you've most likely mastered the combat engine and are just whooping all sorts of ass. After that, you have many more hours of fun, and it never seems like it's dragging along. The variety of enemies and locales help a lot in doing this. I've gotten more than 50 hours out of this game. It's just fantastic.

5. Max Payne Games - These games never feel either too long or too short. They are admittedly short, but they don't seem to extend the game at the cost of quality. They are short, effective games.

I wasn't expecting Fable to be too long, but I did expect it to be about 30 hours long and possibly 35-40 hours including all the quests. From what I've read, it seems that 20-25 will be the average completion time including all the quests. I'll be certainly pleased with it if the game has good pace and doesn't seem rushed during any parts, but nowadays, that's the exception and not the norm.

 

[JayFro]

22 hours seems fine to me. In fact, its only increased my interest in the title. One of the main reasons I didnt purchase ToS was because I had no intention of playing a 50 hour game.

Im not too big a fan of huge, long games.


this fenekku guy is dead on. Most games nowadays tend to drag, and who really has 50 free hours for a video game?

I share the same point of view. I'm 27 and have a job where I work 6 days a week and have a live in girlfriend. I couldn't finish a 50+ hour game if I wanted to, and that doesn't even include going out and doing other things. I just don't have that kind of time.

 

[Optimistic]

Check it: Fable, from all reports, is not some linear, on rails eastern style rpg. As such, although it may take only around 10 to 20 hours to complete the main story and some of the quests, there is so much to do in the world (even excluding the replay value gained from playing through it as both a good and evil character) that a number such as that is deceptive. It sounds to me like Fable could occupy one's time anywhere from 10 to 40 hours, depending on how you play, and whetehr or not you fully exploit things like the economic system etc...

I don't see what the fuss is about. And how many of you whingers buy survival horr games that take like 8 hours to complete, anyway? Hypocrites.

 

[deadhorse32]

It sounds to me like Fable could occupy one's time anywhere from 10 to 40 hours, depending on how you play, and whetehr or not you fully exploit things like the economic system etc...

posted by Optimistic