all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 12 points 2 months ago

"We have around 15-20 hours of mainline quest gameplay, we have around 15-20 of side and open-world exploration content gameplay," associate game director Will Kennedy told Polygon. "And then, of course, the life systems are limitless, so you can play them for as long as you want."

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    This is actually fills me with confidence in the game. I hate games that are 80 hours long, and just empty game or convoluted and grindfest to get to these playtimes (Ubisoft I look at you).

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    ~20h is a great length for a video game. Enough to feel like a substantial experience but doesn't wear out its welcome. Apparently there is another 15-20h of aide content, which puts it in the 30-40h Goldilocks zone of not too long and not too short for me.

    We should normalize appropriately long games. The prospect of starting a 100h+ juggernaut game doesn't feel exciting these days, only exhausting.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Completely disagree. I want to get wrapped into a world and fully absorbed. I'm hyped that GTA 6 is longer than red dead 2. I wrap myself in that world for months.

    I will say as a caveat where I agree is that the world has to deserve it. There has to be enough there to warrant me being in there that long. Assassins creed also takes that long, but it's constant chests and fetch quests.

    I'd also say that I'll gladly pay 80 or even 100 for a red dead two level of immersion with that much content warrants it. 40 hours is not worth that much. 60 max, but I'd probably say 40.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I have learned that I don't think like that, or at least don't anymore. Maybe I used to. These days I only think I do. I still get that tingle of wanting a huge world to disappear in that you described, at times. But every time I've played a 100+ hour game over the past few years hasn't played out the way I visualise before starting to play. Instead I've only become completely worn out, bored and exhausted by them far before the credits roll.

    That 20-40h zone of a focused, concise but still meaty experience is definitely my sweet spot. But maybe it's just my ADHD getting worse with time, who knows.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    If open world I agree that the main plot should be 15-20h long, to give even casual players a chance at closure. But for side content sky's the limit. If I actually vibe with your game I will likely spend months in it so stuff it all in. Witcher3 and Cyberpunk did this approach right (albeit more repetitive in cyberpunk). Besides, there's people spending thousands of hours in roguelikes, so 100h+ of non-roguelike non procedural content isn't that much in the great scheme.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    speedruns the whole game in 4 hours using glitches that skip 60% of the game

    "They lied to me!"

  • source
  • 19 comments in c/pcmasterrace@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 20 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    15of those is getting the login to work. Authenticator

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    20 to mainline the story, double that if you do all the side content. Sounds good to me

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    After seeing the combat physics in the gameplay trailer where the brute guy doesn’t react at all to hits except for the 5th or 6th in a row I’m gonna have to pass on this game. It looked promising, at first, but hopping around a boss and landing multiple hits without any reaction just seems lazy from the devs. Microsoft and Sony are both churning out some bullshit to try to appeal to millennial gamers and it’s not working.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    There were games I couldn't play because of games for Windows live login requirement and their backend remained broken. I don't trust them for the long run.

    The only way I would buy this is if it didn't require Xbox login, and that ain't happening anytime soon.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    "Yeah, it took me a good 20 hours to beat this game. It is crazy hard, so be prepared, Gamers!"

    ~Interview with an IGN Game Journalist after completing the Fable demo.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    oof, so it'll be 5 hours long and sold at 89.99€$

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Here's hoping they keep to the original and don't do anything too crazy. The sequels were good but the first was a masterpiece. I still remember my loadout: 1 handed weapon with force push, assassin rush, and fireball on page 1. Eventually swap to 2 hander (solus greatsword obvs) with berserk and slow time. Tear those summoners a new ass.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    I always thought it would be better if they made the game Molyneux promised and hyped up originally. I wanna carve my name into a tree and see the scarring remain over time. I want to actually have to worry about other heroes taking my quests. I want to fight a fuckin' dragon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    There are two kinds of people who played the original Fable.

    The first, after years of hearing Molyneux's lies hyping up "Project Ego", finally got their hands on the game and thought "Is this it... What the fuck?" as they collectively experienced one of the first true examples of an over hyped game failing to live up to the promises. A now time honored trend in the gaming industry with games like CyberPunk 2077 and heavy weight champion Star Citizen carrying on the tradition.

    The second, having been living blissfully unaware of Peter Molyneux, rented it on a whim and though "wow, an RPG with choice and consequence and a passable combat system on a console!? Amazing!".

    Oh what I would give to have been part of the second group...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Choice: Be good or be evil.

    Consequence: Get a halo or be stinky.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    As a person that was not cursed with previous hype info, there was certainly more than just the halo and the horns. The npc reactions when u strolled into town, their comments based on ur outfits. It was cool AF. Never understood the hate. Then I bought No Man's Sky at launch and understood.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments