Support NeoGAF

[Incognito]

true, sorry. i just can't wrap my head around a game that big.

 

[SteveMeister]

Well the other thing about long games is that if you can save often enough, and if the game gives you a good means of keeping track of your progress and objectives, you CAN play a lengthy game in short bursts.

 

[ge-man]

Well the other thing about long games is that if you can save often enough, and if the game gives you a good means of keeping track of your progress and objectives, you CAN play a lengthy game in short bursts.

That's a good point. I think a more pressing problem is sustaining interest over a long period. This is something that can't be easily solved. Length seems to be the toughest design element IMO.

 

[seismologist]

I wonder how long Morrowind is with all the sidequests. Must be in the 100's of hours.

 

[SteveMeister]

I wonder how long Morrowind is with all the sidequests. Must be in the 100's of hours.

Including the expansions, I think the estimate is well over 300 hours.

 

[siamesedreamer]

Hil, you made me come out and comment now.

For a start, Fable keeps me busy for a long time, it's still keeping me busy, and it took me around 26 hours to complete the game, doing some side quests but not everything. Not talking to too many people either in the game.

With that said, seeing the sort of game Fable is, it will keep you busy for over a 100 hours. Just like the very lineair Diablo 2 kept me busy (and still does), or Secret of Mana kept me busy for over a 100 hours.

My dad would probably need his whole life to complete Fable, mainly because he's not a very good gamer. I know friends who played it (Fable) for five days and only just got 2/3s far. As I say - it really depends on different factors. Hil and Rob are probably very experienced gamers (I surely hope so!) and it's likely for them to complete the game quicker then someone else. Then again, I know of other journalists who reviewed the game and after spending 20 hours only got halfway trough.

The core quest completed in nine hours? Twenty two hours? Hell, I'm sure someone will beat the game in eight hours and thirty minutes, record it and put it online. Just to show of their skills and to set a record. Just like was done with Mario, and Diablo, and Zelda, and ...

If you feel like spending 50$ on a game and rush trough it as quickly as possible that's your call and that's a great thing to do. Fable does allow for some serious play, some serious long play if that's your fancy.

I respect Hil, and Rob, and anyone else who has a mature opinion - be it positive or negative - about Fable. I'm sure there's going to be lots of talking to come, I'm sure people will disagree, agree, call eachother names, and so on. It's my opinion that an opinion should be based on self experience, not on rumors and what else. I love you all.

- From Sam something (a BBB VP) on the IGN Xbox board

 

[ferricide]

it's nice to see hilary arguing with the lionhead dude. if you spend 100 hours of fable you're probably just putting the controller down and walking away while the timer counts up.

+ respect

 

[shantyman]

I haven't bothered to read most of the responses, but I can't wait until the people complaining it is too short hit age 28 or so. They'll want shorter games because of real life and agree with me: shorter is better.

 

[dark10x]

And holy shit, if you were to put 1 hour into a game every third day, you're still playing for more than 100 hours!

Maybe you can't, but I'm 21, work, go to school, and I can still fit some gaming in along with a social life. Does this have to turn into a measuring contest?
What the hell is your point? Some people have or make time to do what they enjoy?

Soooo...why are you complaining about length again? You have already made it clear that a shorter RPG is acceptable. I honestly don't understand your issues...

 

[Pimpbaa]

I don't get this short games are better for people with lives argument. Longer games doesn't mean you have to have longer gaming sessions. You can still play the longer game at your usual pace, it will just take you longer (which isn't a bad thing, you get more for money).

 

[SteveMeister]

I haven't bothered to read most of the responses, but I can't wait until the people complaining it is too short hit age 28 or so. They'll want shorter games because of real life and agree with me: shorter is better.

I'm 39. And if I really get in to a game, I tend to hate to see it end. Like I said before, as long as I can save whenever I want and the game makes it easy for me to keep track of my progress and objectives, I can play it in small chunks of time over the course of a couple months if need be.

 

[djtiesto]

One thing that I've seen before in a few games, that would really help with longer games is... why not have a "diary", where you can review what has happened in the story up to that point. TOS and the MGS games feature something like this. I know plenty of people who'll be playing a long, long game... give up halfway through (to play another game, real life priorities, just got bored of the game, etc), then a few months later, go back and play the game, totally confused as to what they're doing. I wish more games would add something like this.

 

[RevenantKioku]

Soooo...why are you complaining about length again? You have already made it clear that a shorter RPG is acceptable. I honestly don't understand your issues...

I forget myself.

 

[Prine]

Fable features something like that. ^^

I think i read that in a interview a few months ago

 

[NotMSRP]

I remember Might and Magic games have a log/diary. A very nice feature for nonlinear/open/long games.

 

[dark10x]

I forget myself.

Very strange...

 

[Duckhuntdog]

Wait. You mean to tell me that Pete Molynuexlkdsadf hyped a game to high heaven and it fails to deliever on the promises he made???

C'mon, I don't believe any of you for one second. *pats copy of Black & White*

 

[Saint Cornelius]

Is Darien trying to get a spot on EGM's writing staff? I haven't seen so much defending since back when swarmers & mutants were the enemies du jour

 

[DarienA]

Is Darien trying to get a spot on EGM's writing staff? I haven't seen so much defending since back when swarmers & mutants were the enemies du jour

I've done my tour of writing reviews for a print rag already thank you very much.

 

[chespace]

hell, i'm still playing doom 3 and i'm a pretty experienced gamer.

 

[Saint Cornelius]

I've done my tour of writing reviews for a print rag already thank you very much.

I'm not doubting your writing prowess, I'm just wondering why you feel the need to defend the editors of EGM so ravenously.

 

[chespace]

sorry, i don't have the stomach or time to read this entire thread, but which EGM editor is under fire? and why?

 

[shantyman]

I'm 39. And if I really get in to a game, I tend to hate to see it end. Like I said before, as long as I can save whenever I want and the game makes it easy for me to keep track of my progress and objectives, I can play it in small chunks of time over the course of a couple months if need be.

I see your point, but for me too many games acrrue and I could not possibly finish them all if they were 40 hours, or even 30. The last game I forced myself through was Kingdom Hearts, and I still don't know why, Even when i was in college I become bored with FF7, although that mya be because I did not love the game, not because of its length.

 

[DarienA]

I'm not doubting your writing prowess, I'm just wondering why you feel the need to defend the editors of EGM so ravenously.

Who knows what whim I'll follow each day? ...and you apparently missed one of my posts.

 

[Saint Cornelius]

 

[Kiriku]

Is it really reasonable to compare Fable to Morrowind? I mean, does Fable have that kind of crazy amount of (sometimes rather pointless) customization and interactivity? A world of somewhat similar size? With a close enough number when it comes to side-quests?

I can't really imagine it being possible to beat Morrowind in 20 hours. Even if you DO manage to reach the last boss, you'll stand no chance in hell anyway. And in practice, it's far too easy to get side-tracked in Morrowind to even MAKE it to the last boss within 20 hours.

 

[LAMBO]

With all the user created stuff i didn't even get very far in the real storyline, and i logged in 70 hours and had a near invincible character.

 

[Nameless]

LOL..I've logged about 50-60+ Hours in Morrowind and I literally havn't done a SINGLE main-quest mission. I have that blasted Note to Cassius still collecting dust in my inventory.

 

[Phoenix]

I'm 39. And if I really get in to a game, I tend to hate to see it end. Like I said before, as long as I can save whenever I want and the game makes it easy for me to keep track of my progress and objectives, I can play it in small chunks of time over the course of a couple months if need be.

I am the anti-Steve (which is funny because we've known each other for years). All good things must come to an end - especially becasue other good things are just around the corner. A game that takes 100 hours to complete will either never be finished or will be your ONLY game for a long long time (especially at the free time rate that I have for games.... hell I haven't even finished DOOM3 yet). There are MANY games that I just don't even consider buying because I know that there is no way I would ever have a chance to finish them. I think a good statistic would be 'out of all of these absurdly long games, what percentage of people actually FINISH them'. About 5 years ago I throttled back on game purchases because I literally had stacks of games that I'd purchased that I'd grown tired of, didn't have a chance to play, or simply didn't get into enough before something more appealing hit the shelves.

A game has to be beyond incredible to sustain my interest for really long periods of time - which is why I can't pick up any of the new FInal Fantasy games anymore.... they just go on and on and on forever to the point where you're just pleading with the game to end so you can do something else I played a Front Mission game (believe it was 3) that was the same way.... just when it looked like the game was over, it just pulled you back in for more madness.

These are the types of things that lead gamers 'with lives' to cease to become gamers anymore. There aren't many games that are really designed with 10-20 hour gameplay in mind these days. Its fine to be able to save a game whenever, but when a project creeps up at work and I come back to the game 2 months later the game needs to have the ability to 'bring me back up to speed' so I can get back into it. This is one of the reasons I believe retro gaming is very popular in this particular demographic. THe games are short and disposable... you can play it, finish it, and move on to something else.

Its really funny to read these responses because Steve and I discuss this at least once a month. Good to see a relatively large number of people in my camp...

 

[Fixed2BeBroken]

Soooo...why are you complaining about length again? You have already made it clear that a shorter RPG is acceptable. I honestly don't understand your issues...

<EDIT...im tired>
his point is western rpgs = crap

and eastern rpgs = Much > than western rpgs.

we've been over this many times.

peace

 

[RevenantKioku]

his point is western rpgs = crap

and eastern rpgs = Much > than eastern games.

Haha, I do say that.

I think my beef is my impression was Fable was the life of a hero. And that life I expected to take more than 20 hours and they're like "You completed the main goal of the game!" That I find a little disheartening.
Didn't they remove gradual aging too? I mean that kind of shit.

 

[dark10x]

Haha, I do say that.

I think my beef is my impression was Fable was the life of a hero. And that life I expected to take more than 20 hours and they're like "You completed the main goal of the game!" That I find a little disheartening.
Didn't they remove gradual aging too? I mean that kind of shit.

That's a pretty sad viewpoint...

"Oh, that game didn't really deliver on all of the promises...so no matter how enjoyable it might still be, I'm going to insult the hell out of it just 'cuz I want to". I've been there, and it's not a good place to be.

Honestly, if you shop this attitude around a lot, you are REALLY only cheating yourself...perhaps without even realizing it. I'm not a Fable advocate, but I really think you are acting very foolish here. As hinted at above, perhaps I have simply learned my lesson? Shenmue disappointed me in a similar way (ie - it failed to match what I originally had expected) and taught me the value of judging the final experience on its own merits. It took time, but I grew to appreciate Shenmue and no longer allow myself to become disappointed when a game winds up missing touted features AS LONG AS THE GAME IS STILL GOOD.

So, while I understand what you are doing...I think you are making a mistake and should step back and consider your reasons for acting this way. Do you want to ruin gaming for yourself? You laugh, but if you continue to view entertainment products with such scorn...its something that could very well happen.

 

[Optimistic]

If they didn't remove the gradual aging then what you'd end up with is a Shenmue-esque scenario where you have to wait around aimlessley in the game world until you're old enough/the correct time to progress the story. It's a completely logical removal as it's just not practical from a gameplay standpoint. You still age, only the aging works through "chapters" - complete one part of the story and you'll age accordingly for the next stage. Sure, it's not as cool but it's clear that real time aging simply couldn't work. Also, the environment still affects what you look like - you still get a tan if you stay in the sun etc etc. And as for this -

I think my beef is my impression was Fable was the life of a hero. And that life I expected to take more than 20 hours and they're like "You completed the main goal of the game!"

One, you, I, and everyone else that buys this game are not on a fucking deadline to finish it. We won't have to rush, we will be able to fully exploit the game world, and meander around it at our own pace. It will almost definitely take a lot longer than 20 hours IMO. And even so, your point is a really fucking weak one, and clearly just an attempt at subtle trolling (you failed miserably btw).

 

[RevenantKioku]

One, you, I, and everyone else that buys this game are not on a fucking deadline to finish it. We won't have to rush, we will be able to fully exploit the game world, and meander around it at our own pace. It will almost definitely take a lot longer than 20 hours IMO. And even so, your point is a really fucking weak one, and clearly just an attempt at subtle trolling (you failed miserably btw).

I'm sorry, but that's not the point at all.
They've said the main quest is short. That I find weak.
Consider it what you want, that's my viewpoint.

 

[Optimistic]

You do realise that the only reason the FF games take so long to complete are because of the 4748759595 random battles you have to fight, yeah? Of course you do, but you're just trolling so you'll push that fact under the carpet, right? Hahaha.

P.S that you ignored my other points, and those of dark 10 really does show beyond a shadow of a doubt that all you are is a worthless troll.

 

[dark10x]

I'm sorry, but that's not the point at all.
They've said the main quest is short. That I find weak.
Consider it what you want, that's my viewpoint.

Did you realize that this forum offers word wrap?

 

[RevenantKioku]

You do realise that the only reason the FF games take so long to complete are because of the 4748759595 random battles you have to fight, yeah? Of course you do, but you're just trolling so you'll push that fact under the carpet, right? Hahaha.

What? I'm not denying anything. Frankly I enjoy that part about the games.

P.S that you ignored my other points, and those of dark 10 really does show beyond a shadow of a doubt that all you are is a worthless troll.

I won't deny my initial interest back when it was Project Ego.
Why can't I be disappointed in it from what information I'm given?

Did you realize that this forum offers word wrap?

Oh come on now, you're just being petty. Sometimes I think things need to be separated to be noticed, what does that even matter?

 

[dark10x]

Oh come on now, you're just being petty. Sometimes I think things need to be separated to be noticed, what does that even matter?

Heh, considering that you ignored my post previous to that...it would seem that things DO need to be separated in order to be noticed.

Really, though, I'm just f*cking with you. ;P

 

[RevenantKioku]

Heh, considering that you ignored my post previous to that...it would seem that things DO need to be separated in order to be noticed.

Really, though, I'm just f*cking with you. ;P

Yeah yeah yeah, we'll get to that later. I got caught up talking with optimistic.

Anyway, those premises were the few little things that had me attracted to Fable in the first place. The other stuff is just extra bunk I can get pretty much anywhere else.
Also I got beef with Molyneux (I'm not going to bother to get that right) for the disappointments with Black and White.
Trust me, I have plenty of RPGs to play, and a slew coming out. Why should I bother with it? I'm just sick of the hype its getting and my instinct is to try to combat it, even though its not going very well.

 

[ferricide]

You do realise that the only reason the FF games take so long to complete are because of the 4748759595 random battles you have to fight, yeah?

whereas fable has no enemies, thus no fighting to slow you down.

OH WAIT

seriously, these arguments get so retarded.

WE ALL LOSE

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

Really ferricide, ever since you became the "worst reviewar evar", you've become quite bitchy.

His point may have been fanboyish in presentation, but it is true - many turn based RPG's drag on due to frequent enemy encounters. Real time combat seems much less sluggish. Unless there's a paragraph from your famed review complaining about sluggish and repetitive combat in Fable?

 

[RevenantKioku]

Really ferricide, ever since you became the "worst reviewar evar", you've become quite bitchy.

His point may have been fanboyish in presentation, but it is true - many turn based RPG's drag on due to frequent enemy encounters. Real time combat seems much less sluggish. Unless there's a paragraph from your famed review complaining about sluggish and repetitive combat in Fable?

Drag on or give you juicy pleasure. Its all perspective.

 

[Optimistic]

It's not all perspective, though. If Fable had random battles you could probably add on another 10 hours to the game's length.

whereas fable has no enemies, thus no fighting to slow you down.

OH WAIT

seriously, these arguments get so retarded.

WE ALL LOSE

Oh please. Real time battles are much quicker, and occur less often. Any tool can use sarcasm to make another's point seem less valid, but the fact of the matter is, I am right.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

"Drag on or give you juicy pleasure. Its all perspective."

Sure man, a good RPG battle system can be really addictive, no doubt. I was merely agreeing with optimistic that random turn based battles pad an RPG's length. I swear, more than half the 70 hours I spent on Xenosaga was messing around in combat and developing character skills.

 

[RevenantKioku]

It's not all perspective, though. If Fable had random battles you could probably add on another 10 hours to the game's length.

It IS perspective first, because if you're enjoying it its not going to drag on for you.
Second, even if you spend ten extra hours in random battles that's not going to increase the length of the meat of what you're doing. I can't pull the right words out of my head at the moment, but what I've been trying to address is that if you took the main "meat" of what the Fable main quest is, it seems like its rather skimpy in comparison to what I was led to believe, and what was part of what put some interest in the game for me.
Don't get me wrong I wasn't going to buy or play Fable before I heard about this, but this is just more reason not to in my book.

Oh please. Real time battles are much quicker, and occur less often. Any tool can use sarcasm to make another's point seem less valid, but the fact of the matter is, I am right.

Right about what exactly? That random battles take time? You want a medal for that one? Just if Fable's battle went slower that wouldn't increase the meat or time of Fable's quest.

Edit: I realize that Fable is supposed to have a bunch of sidequests, but sidequests generally don't appeal to me. I like a game that gets me wrapped up in the main story.

 

[Phoenix]

It IS perspective first, because if you're enjoying it its not going to drag on for you.

Sorry dude I have to disagree. I used to love FF3's combat until I got to the tower of kefka.... it was like it would never end and that DID drag on... and on.... I think one party member at a time was fighting in most of those battles. Random battle can be a good thing in doses, but ANYTHING that goes on forever (like this thread) will wear on you after a while. ESPECIALLY the longer the game gets.

 

[RevenantKioku]

Sorry dude I have to disagree. I used to love FF3's combat until I got to the tower of kefka.... it was like it would never end and that DID drag on... and on.... I think one party member at a time was fighting in most of those battles. Random battle can be a good thing in doses, but ANYTHING that goes on forever (like this thread) will wear on you after a while. ESPECIALLY the longer the game gets.

And I disagree with you, because it didn't happen to me. Again, its all about your view.

I'm not saying its isn't possible to get sick of it, but I'm also trying to make it clear that its not impossible to keep on enjoying it.

Shut up. My head hurts

 

[Phoenix]

I'm not saying its impossible to get sick of it, but I'm also trying to make it clear that its not impossible to keep on enjoying it.

So long as you realize that the above statment contradicts with itself I'm cool

 

[ferricide]

It's not all perspective, though. If Fable had random battles you could probably add on another 10 hours to the game's length.

possibly. the enemies do respawn in fable, so there's a fair bit of fighting in getting from point A to point B till you unlock warp points. then again, if they had badly wanted to pad the game they'd've killed the warp points, so i suppose it's commendable that they did not. some games that desperately need them don't have them (cough, star ocean 3. talk about padding, jesus.)

obviously randoms take longer, and i am not a huge fan of them (being random, i mean -- i love RPG battle systems when they come off well.) it's been successfully illustrated that you can do a game without them now just fine at this point.

most of the best-made RPGs (and even the meh ones) this generation get by just fine without them. TOS put the nail in that coffin as far as i'm concerned, because it worked beautifully at preserving the traditional RPG feel and throwing away the randoms.

FFX is still a bigger game than fable, though, and suggesting it's only the randoms that make it longer is ... ignorant. as just about anyone who's trying to make points about fable is, still.

BOO

 

[Optimistic]

Second, even if you spend ten extra hours in random battles that's not going to increase the length of the meat of what you're doing.

Yes it is. That's exactly what it's going to do. Cut out the random battles and what you're left with is a plot that spans around 20 to 30 hours in length (see Chrono Cross for an example of how much shorter a Japanese rpg can get without random battles).

I can't pull the right words out of my head at the moment, but what I've been trying to address is that if you took the main "meat" of what the Fable main quest is, it seems like its rather skimpy in comparison to what I was led to believe, and what was part of what put some interest in the game for me.

Huh? Fable was never pushed as some huge, giant rpg that took hundreds of hours to finish. You deluded yourself. Why blame the game?

Don't get me wrong I wasn't going to buy or play Fable before I heard about this,

Then why do you feel the need to have a whinge? If that's the case you shouldn't even be in this thread.

Right about what exactly? That random battles take time? You want a medal for that one? Just if Fable's battle went slower that wouldn't increase the meat or time of Fable's quest.

We really fucking need a rolleyes smiley in this forum.

Look, I'm not claiming there's anything wrong with random battles, Final Fantasy 7 is one of my favourite games of all time, I'm just stating that they bloat the length of what would otherwise be a shorter game. RPGs that real time battles will always be shorter than those with random battles (see Zelda, even KOTOR). If you don't like this then avoid playing action rpgs for god's sake.

FFX is still a bigger game than fable, though, and suggesting it's only the randoms that make it longer is ... ignorant. as just about anyone who's trying to make points about fable is, still.

Oh look, for sure, even when taking the random battles into account, many turn based random battle RPGs would still be longer than what Fable is reported to be, but not significantly so. Things need to be kept into persective - YES, Fable is a bit shorter some other RPGs, but not to the extent people are making out, nowhere near.

What I'm annoyed with is that many of the Fable haters probably happily play other action rpgs which are just as short, give or take a few hours. The only reason they feel the need to criticise Fable for this is because it's on xbox and it's SUPERVISED by a guy who made ONE broken game (of course they happily ignore all of the other games he's made that have been AAA). The fact is, action rpgs will always be shorter than turn based random battle rpgs, and if people don't like this fact they shouldn't play or look forward to games of the genre.