|
rabidsquid posted:I would rather play a well paced 8 hour game than a badly paced 13 hour game, and I genuinely can't fathom why you would prefer a longer game for the sake of length. 13 hours sounds like a fine length--not too long, but not insignificant either. The Last of Us maybe has the ideal length for a big cinematic AAA title, how long would you clock that one at, provided it is a first playthrough and one isn't simply rushing through zones?
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
TLOU is a 15 hour game that is also probably too long
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Splendid then, my point stands nicely. A little shorter than or equivalent of TLOU is fine, provided you can fill it with meaningful content. A game should generally be as long as it needs to be, but if you're charging sixty dollars for a two hour distraction and no replay value, that's troublesome as investments go.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
I love tlou and I would agree the pacing suffers in summer. It could cut a hour or two out easily.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I sort of want to check out Doom but an awful lot of my friends who were really enjoying it told me they got bored and never finished it. Do you have a Redbox near you? I was genuinely surprised at how much praise Doom was getting. I rented it from Redbox and it was fun enough that I beat the single player campaign, but there was probably one back and forth too many between Hell and Mars and it was boring me by the end. The game is good, a perfect rental.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Ineffiable posted:I love tlou and I would agree the pacing suffers in summer. It could cut a hour or two out easily. Ehhhh. You could probably make the Bill/High School part shorter, and also shorten dramatically the University bit, but there's nothing I think could actually be "cut" so it's all just level/encounter design stuff. Personally I'd rather cut out some of the beginning, honestly I think the game takes a bit too long to get going. I feel like the bombastic prologue pace should have carried over into the "actual" game and it shouldn't have given you any time to breathe and relax until several hours in. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:
A game being longer is not inherently good. A shorter but well-paced game is probably more fun to play than a longer game that pads that length out with content the core mechanics can't support. A 'sub 8-hour game' isn't inherently a bad thing if that 8 hours is fun or has solid replay value. Also a lot of "13-14 hour' games are padding the poo poo out of that 13-14 hours with cutscenes or pseudo-cutscenes. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:44
|
|
You people asking for 13 hour games to be shorter are hosed.
|
Short well paced games are good, long poorly paced games are bad. Long well paced games are best.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:Short well paced games are good, long poorly paced games are bad. Long well paced games are best. I admit that "long well-paced games' are absurdly rare. I can't think of many plot-focused games that go over the 10 hour mark that really benefit from it. Maybe some RPGs but even then I doubt anyone would really miss Dragon's rear end in a top hat: The Dungeon Full Of Random Zubats or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Long games are fine as long as they don't expect me to remember anything between gaming sessions because I'm old and have a job and a wife and a half dozen projects and it took me like three weeks just to finish Uncharted 4.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
There are some, but they are admittedly rare. Seems like 10 hours is about how long devs go before there ends up being padding. I think TLOU and UC4 are some of the few that pull it off even if some would disagree. RPG's are kind of a whole different beast. I don't even consider pacing in the broader scale with them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
RPG designers should listen to this paraphrased thing from what someone said about making movies once: "Is this the most exciting/important conversation this character could be having right now? If not, why aren't you showing us that?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Loose, fun character interaction is like, most of the reason I play RPGs though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Eh. I sort of agree but I don't have the same expectations with an RPG. I think downtime and less exciting stuff is just part of the package usually. It doesn't excuse how lazy the writing it in most RPGs. Any sort of linear action game I agree 100%
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
MrAristocrates posted:Loose, fun character interaction is like, most of the reason I play RPGs though. Well, yeah, I guess it depends on what the game is trying to do. On the one hand, yeah, the only reason Mass Effect 2 was so good was the fact that the "story missions" comprise at best like 10% of the entire game and clowning around with your space bros was the best. On the other hand, poo poo like Ni No Kuni where there's a totally awesome 10 hour game trying to get out from under the 40 hours of stupid padding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
If an RPG is relatively well-written, I don't mind verbosity, but mainly because I can speed read through that to the point that voice acting seems more trouble than it's worth. If I had to listen to all that dialogue in real time I would probably advocate for tightening things up
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
When I think of a badly paced RPG I think of DAI where roughly 80% of the maps and things I could do I was just thinking "why am I doing any of this"
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
I got 19 hours out of my first tlou playthrough and I was happy as a clam.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:When I think of a badly paced RPG I think of DAI where roughly 80% of the maps and things I could do I was just thinking "why am I doing any of this" Yeah I loved DAO but absolutely hated DAI. Bored the hell out of me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
The Witcher 3 has basically set the high bar for open-world RPGs at this stage, to be honest. Going back to "kill ten wolves" style quests after that is like going colorblind after finally seeing what a garden in full bloom looks like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Crysis 2 was long as a mofo for an FPS, but I felt it lasted just long as it had to, phenomenal all the way, I remember it being like 12 hours when done, no sense of filler or running out of steam, constant interest, like the greatest sci-fi action film to ever take place in Manhattan. Go back and play it if you haven't. Modern Warfare 3, as many hours as its name and I wanted to end it hours before it actually did end. Final map was great for story reasons but the journey there was the most uninspired shooting gallery poo poo. Dark Souls 3 when I first completed it was like 44-45 hours on the savegame and it quickly came to feel short and small and in need of filler afterwards, while Bloodborne feels perfectly tuned, still (forget the DLC tho). Mercenary Kings was a great 35 hours and I pity the haters especially all those incompetent rear end games journalists who couldn't figure the most basic poo poo out so that they could progress past one of the first few stages. But Star Ocean 5 is reportedly 20 hours including battles and cutscenes the first time through with no guides for help, and I am worried. Will I want to NewGame+ and grind and max things out after finishing it? I want an hour per euro-buck spent on a game and it's hard to find a solid fix these days. I cannot remember games feeling like they were stretching it retardedly much besides FF13 which is criminally bad with it. Obscenely bad. They model an airship larger than your mom, you start at the rear end with squads split up and have to hit the cockpit AND YOU ACTUALLY MOVE ALL THE WAY THERE MANUALLY AND ITS AT LEAST TEN MILES (european miles). CharlieFoxtrot posted:Tomorrow everyone's going to get a chance to play a exquisitely characterized storygame that really puts you in the shoes of a protagonist exploring a strange and unfamiliar world, in which you have to be attentive to your surroundings and piece together a family history from context clues. King this man.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
That new Horizon trailer is really good. I hope they show off more gameplay during E3. I want to see what they do with the open world, how things are structured and what kind of things you can create with the resources you collect in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:A game being longer is not inherently good. A shorter but well-paced game is probably more fun to play than a longer game that pads that length out with content the core mechanics can't support. I dunno. For RPGS that require 40-50 hours, absolutely. I don't have time for that anymore. But 13 hours? That's like... the bare minimum to get my money's worth if its a 60 dollar game. Dark Souls I usually end up spending around 40-50 hours on my first time though. As long as the game is also good and not needlessly padded to with poo poo, that's amazing. You guys are acting like games have to be either 6 awesome hours of sweetness or 20 hours of padded poo poo. But the reality is more like, there's some games only 6 hours long, some 8 hours long, some 13 hours long, and a ton that are 20+ hours long. And even then, some of the 20+ ones aren't even padded and have tons of good content, like The Witcher. With that much content, having some optional things so you can "finish" the story and still have more to do later after you've seen the "ending" is good, but its not required for all game types at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
For short games, I just compare them to movie prices. Is Until Dawn worth as much money as going to the movies with someone else twice? gently caress yeah it is. In fact games like that are best played with your s/o or friends around. My wife watched me play Life Is Strange and it was relatively indistinguishable from just watching something except that I got to make choices about the narrative which is like, the future, man. What was I saying?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Until Dawn was a good experience, but lacking replay value, I'd have no reason to do anything but rent it. The game does have more gameplay than I expected though, it's certainly a worthwhile purchase at 20, hell, I'd even say 30 dollars. I just don't think the game is really worth playing again unless you just adamantly want a perfect run. For what it's worth, I basically only had one person die on me (although I had to reset in the final sequence because I didn't fully understand the situation) and was pretty must satisfied with my experience, but had no further desire to replay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
The length of a video game really has no correlation to the quality of the game. Theres good and bad games that skew short or long. The reason it comes up, is because I think people have a certain expectation when it comes to spending $60 on something. If you can finish something in a few sittings and will probably never pick it up again it's hard to want to plop down the money. That's really all that the length=value argument boils down to. For example, Until Dawn was pretty fun (actually not even super short either) but it's something you play in a few sittings and are likely never return to or not play again for years. Stacked up against something like a 40-70 hour RPG or something with a more replayable SP+MP like Uncharted, it makes Until Dawn seem not worth 60 dollars even though it's a perfectly fine game. I'm not even saying that's right, but I think that's how a lot of peoples brains work including my own. It's also probably the reason games are so full of filler these days. Edit: lol multiple people brought up until dawn while I had the window open.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:Until Dawn was a good experience, but lacking replay value, I'd have no reason to do anything but rent it. The game does have more gameplay than I expected though, it's certainly a worthwhile purchase at 20, hell, I'd even say 30 dollars. I just don't think the game is really worth playing again unless you just adamantly want a perfect run. For what it's worth, I basically only had one person die on me (although I had to reset in the final sequence because I didn't fully understand the situation) and was pretty must satisfied with my experience, but had no further desire to replay. I somehow got three people killed in my first run, and two of those were "the hardest characters to get killed" 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
precision posted:I somehow got three people killed in my first run, and two of those were "the hardest characters to get killed" Mine were mostly dumb ones on my part. Jessica ran instead of hiding, Ashley went and opened the trap door. The only one that wasn't my own dumb fault was getting jumped by the wendigo'd sister because I missed some well-hidden clue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:I dunno. For RPGS that require 40-50 hours, absolutely. I don't have time for that anymore. You can play games for longer than a month. That's what I say to people who write that sort of stuff. Amazingly paced 40-50 hour JRPGs exist, even WRPGs. I'd like to keep it that way. Ghosts n Gopniks fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Jun 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:I dunno. For RPGS that require 40-50 hours, absolutely. I don't have time for that anymore.  Zaphod42 posted:Dark Souls I usually end up spending around 40-50 hours on my first time though. As long as the game is also good and not needlessly padded to with poo poo, that's amazing. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
first line should read "for rpg series that require 40-50 hours that i am not personally obsessed with, absolutely. i dont have time for that anymore"
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
and thats fair. 40-50 hours is a long time to dump into a game you dont love
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Awesome! posted:first line should read "WARNING: ZAPHOD POST, PLEASE DISREGARD"
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
lol yeah am i defending zaphod? wtf
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
I like The Witcher 3 a lot but you're kidding yourself if you say it isn't padded. It has some really great quests and also a lot of really boring mindless stuff that pads out the map because otherwise it would be empty but involves killing the same enemies to find a chest full of utterly worthless loot because anything that isn't Witcher Gear isn't worth your time anyway. Witcher 3 has some excellent quests but the world itself is padded to poo poo and back. The fact that it has great quests despite that is a strength but a smaller and more refined Witcher 3 that focused on just those core quests instead of Open World Filler would probably be even more fun of a game and have less time for the combat to wear thin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
I spent over 123 hours with both expansion quests all things considered in Witcher 3. It was a good 123 hours. It didn't feel padded to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Well, Dark Souls is the only RPG series with good combat you should and could spend 40-50 hours on
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Didn't people say good things about Dragon's Dogma combat
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
I really like your avatar. ImpAtom posted:I like The Witcher 3 a lot but you're kidding yourself if you say it isn't padded. It has some really great quests and also a lot of really boring mindless stuff that pads out the map because otherwise it would be empty but involves killing the same enemies to find a chest full of utterly worthless loot because anything that isn't Witcher Gear isn't worth your time anyway. Yeah, the Witcher's open world is quite fantastically built but there's plenty of clutter. Skellige's just got a poo poo ton of smuggler's lot crates in the ocean that seems to just be there to fill in space in the ocean areas. Still, it's not as irritating as collecting 100 flags in Assassins Creed and other such padding. Farcry 4 I felt was really just abysmally full of repetetive poo poo. The spooky serial killer death spots start to lose their edge after the fifteenth one, Ubisoft!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Slightly confusing wording yes, but implying those RPGs have grindy repetitive sections. I should have been clearer. If the RPG is well done from start to finish, awesome. If you end up repeating the entire game a second time before you can properly beat it like Bravely Default, well... not the same. Awesome! posted:lol yeah am i defending zaphod? wtf 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 01:14
|
|