A question if I may? Can I subscribe monthly to Origin Premium? Or is it only an annual deal?
Yes. You can sub monthly and immediately cancel so it won't auto-renew if you forget.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Cons - Woefully short: See you in a year or two when it is on more than a 50% discount. I won't pay for a trailer that is masquerading as a full pricedWell, in my opinion "a lot of things."
But action games tend not to be that long. There are some that are. Also, Quake 5 hours/Quake 2? A whole 8 1/2 hours. And these are good games. Of course more of something good could be very good. But at some point it can also wear its welcome. I'd rather a game be a little short making me want more (and possibly replaying it) than me slogging through and thinking "ok, when does this end?
For the sake of discussion, Quake and Quake2 didnt cost $60 on release and had broad mod capabilities.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
A question if I may? Can I subscribe monthly to Origin Premium? Or is it only an annual deal?
Yes. You can sub monthly and immediately cancel so it won't auto-renew if you forget.
Oh good. Guess I'll play Order for 15$ then. Ought to be worth that much. Guess I could try Anthem in the meantime too.
Also, is EA account different from SWTOR account?
(the way I'm going with this cheapskating, I'll end up in Orzhov lol)
Anthem is actually part of Origin Basic now (and so is Vampyr which is pretty damn good) which is an even cheaper sub option and has a hundred + games (I sub to Basic and get way more than my moneys' worth for that.)
SWTOR is a different sub altogether.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Cons - Woefully short: See you in a year or two when it is on more than a 50% discount. I won't pay for a trailer that is masquerading as a full pricedWell, in my opinion "a lot of things."
But action games tend not to be that long. There are some that are. Also, Quake 5 hours/Quake 2? A whole 8 1/2 hours. And these are good games. Of course more of something good could be very good. But at some point it can also wear its welcome. I'd rather a game be a little short making me want more (and possibly replaying it) than me slogging through and thinking "ok, when does this end?
For the sake of discussion, Quake and Quake2 didnt cost $60 on release and had broad mod capabilities.
well, $60 dollars in 1996 was 38 dollars less? So how much was quake in 1996? And Moddable wasn't like me modding skyrim using their toolset. You had to know a bit more. Granted, there was a program I tried to use to mod quake back in the day but it was a bit clunky,
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I'm confused. This review puts the campaign at 15 hours. I've seen other reviews putting it as low as 10. But the chosen number from the "it's not too short" crowd seems to be 25-30 (I'm surprised it's not up to 30-35 now that we're on page 4 of this thread )
Now someone's got to be exaggerating. Who to believe? The reviewers or the peanut gallery?
Some reviews I've seen put it at 25.
This site indicates "24 1/2" if you are a completionist. Or 13 just for the main story.
The reviewer also talked about a 2nd run through at a higher difficulty level.
Pretty clear from the posts on lowest difficulty it - sort of - "watching" a film with some combat stuff needed; a good move imo since it makes the game accessible to "everyone" and DS combat is not for all etc.
As the difficulty is notched up though every fight will take longer, there will be more deaths etc. So the question then is how long is the movie vs. how long is the game vs. how long is the torture session. And which is the right answer.
This was a great review, very thorough! In fact, considering it is a single-player game that isn't open-world, and the end isn't anything special, I feel like reading the review has given me all the experience of the game I'm interested in!
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
I'm too intense? Lol. You're the one going around challenging posts by anyone who says 15-25 is too short for them. It's as if it's really important to you to impose a definitive number on short games and this one is not it.
What is that number for you, BTW? 2? 6? Are there even any games that short?
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
I'm too intense? Lol. You're the one going around challenging posts by anyone who says 15-25 is too short for them. It's as if it's really important to you to impose a definitive number on short games and this one is not it.
What is that number for you, BTW? 2? 6? Are there even any games that short?
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
I think the disconnect comes from the fact that every other game in this genre is just as short/long as this one. This isn’t a short game by the standards set by other games of the same type.
A thing that surprises me are that some people here equal length with quality which I think is a grave mistake. I had more amazing moments in 4 hours of Doki Doki Literature Club then in 200 of Skyrim for instance, but I understand that is personal. Another thing is that I have never seen this outcry with other games, adventure games, Devil May Cry, Sekiro etc.
Ahh well, length has never been a deciding factor for me, I am all about the experience.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Its ok guys we understand. Your hate for EA is just oozing from your post. Love how your trying to hide it as real concern over the games length. That just so cute. If this was done by anyone else and you'd be shooting a load for this game. HAHA just pathetic....
--------------- Tested over a 115+ games since 1997.
Its ok guys we understand. Your hate for EA is just oozing from your post. Love how your trying to hide it as real concern over the games length. That just so cute. If this was done by anyone else and you'd be shooting a load for this game. HAHA just pathetic....
Its ok guys we understand. Your hate for EA is just oozing from your post. Love how your trying to hide it as real concern over the games length. That just so cute. If this was done by anyone else and you'd be shooting a load for this game. HAHA just pathetic....
Well they want to be upset about something but EA published a really good star wars game with no MTX. You could post an article about cancer being cured and people here would still post negative things.
Was in it about 2 minutes and got a refund from EA. This is a Xbox controller game and if u want to play it on a PC keyboard, it's almost unplayable. 1st screen is a "recommendation" to use that controller. Can not lock the screen behind the character, limited keybinds. Large thread on the EA forums about all this.
Was looking forward to a new Star Wars game but after that 2 minutes, I'll stick with SWG.
Wasn't aware 30 hours of gameplay was short, maybe you guys should try getting off your couch occasionally instead of burning through games start to finish in a single sitting?
This.
Mass Effect, Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls games can be finished under 30 hours too, if you just focus on the main mission/quest only and blast through to the end.
A question if I may? Can I subscribe monthly to Origin Premium? Or is it only an annual deal?
Yes. You can sub monthly and immediately cancel so it won't auto-renew if you forget.
Oh good. Guess I'll play Order for 15$ then. Ought to be worth that much. Guess I could try Anthem in the meantime too.
Also, is EA account different from SWTOR account?
(the way I'm going with this cheapskating, I'll end up in Orzhov lol)
Anthem is actually part of Origin Basic now (and so is Vampyr which is pretty damn good) which is an even cheaper sub option and has a hundred + games (I sub to Basic and get way more than my moneys' worth for that.)
SWTOR is a different sub altogether.
So, different accounts?
My gripe with Basic is the 10 hour trial period(if I understood it correctly, you can play a game for only 10 hours on Basic). A lot of games can't be finished even halfway in that time. That's where the Premium comes in.
If a game is in the basic "vault," you get to play it indefinitely.
If a game is in the premier "vault," you get to play it indefinitely.
Was in it about 2 minutes and got a refund from EA. This is a Xbox controller game and if u want to play it on a PC keyboard, it's almost unplayable. 1st screen is a "recommendation" to use that controller. Can not lock the screen behind the character, limited keybinds. Large thread on the EA forums about all this.
Was looking forward to a new Star Wars game but after that 2 minutes, I'll stick with SWG.
One of the reasons I never buy at launch is PC gaming interface issues, even if you only wait a week you will be able to work out how bad they are. This is the sort of issue that down the line usually gets sorted out, though sometimes it takes months.
A question if I may? Can I subscribe monthly to Origin Premium? Or is it only an annual deal?
Yes. You can sub monthly and immediately cancel so it won't auto-renew if you forget.
Oh good. Guess I'll play Order for 15$ then. Ought to be worth that much. Guess I could try Anthem in the meantime too.
Also, is EA account different from SWTOR account?
(the way I'm going with this cheapskating, I'll end up in Orzhov lol)
Anthem is actually part of Origin Basic now (and so is Vampyr which is pretty damn good) which is an even cheaper sub option and has a hundred + games (I sub to Basic and get way more than my moneys' worth for that.)
SWTOR is a different sub altogether.
So, different accounts?
My gripe with Basic is the 10 hour trial period(if I understood it correctly, you can play a game for only 10 hours on Basic). A lot of games can't be finished even halfway in that time. That's where the Premium comes in.
If a game is in the basic "vault," you get to play it indefinitely.
If a game is in the premier "vault," you get to play it indefinitely.
Wtf? What is that 10 hour mention then? Maybe for Premier vault games that you can "demo" via Basic? Yes, that seems to be it.
Look, I missed a word, woops! Functionally it's the same to me to me - FO and all. Premier will have to be it and later...later we'll see.
Thanks!
10 hour trials are only for games that are not in the vault.
For example, when Anthem first released it was only in the premier vault but basic members got a 10 hour free trial for it. It is now in the basic vault so you can play as long as you want.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
<snip>
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
I wasn't directly but - in actuality - films are relevant.
When a company comes to set a price for its game it wants to recover its costs and go on to make a profit of course.
There are various factors that go into pricing. One is expected lifetime sales: initial sales at a higher price + long tail sales at a lower price + residual value from game bundles or - these days - as part of an access pass (Origin Basic, Premium etc.).
Another is price comparison partly to direct competitors - so other games - but also to near neighbour competitors; other non-game entertainment products like films. A post above actually made a comparison to a years worth of Apple+ TV. There is some other stuff as well but such comparisons will have been done.
Is the approach "valid"? Well marketing research has consistently said that this is what "we" do. The "we" being influenced by the "target market" (strictly target markets at different price points.) So yes but ... its not a "science" and other factors are at play. So the studies and the sensitivity analysis carried out can only be a guide.
There will - will - also be other goals at play. To promote Origin membership as "good value" for example. Consider: if you believe you have access to "lots" of "high price" games you are more likely to see the membership cost as "good value". If they sold their games at a "low price" then you will consider the cost of Origin membership as "less good" value.
Make no mistake though the cost of movies, Netflix, Hulu etc. are in the mix.
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
<snip>
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
I wasn't directly but - in actuality - films are relevant.
When a company comes to set a price for its game it wants to recover its costs and go on to make a profit of course.
There are various factors that go into pricing. One is expected lifetime sales: initial sales at a higher price + long tail sales at a lower price + residual value from game bundles or - these days - as part of an access pass (Origin Basic, Premium etc.).
Another is price comparison partly to direct competitors - so other games - but also to near neighbour competitors; other non-game entertainment products like films. A post above actually made a comparison to a years worth of Apple+ TV. There is some other stuff as well but such comparisons will have been done.
Is the approach "valid"? Well marketing research has consistently said that this is what "we" do. The "we" being influenced by the "target market" (strictly target markets at different price points.) So yes but ... its not a "science" and other factors are at play. So the studies and the sensitivity analysis carried out can only be a guide.
There will - will - also be other goals at play. To promote Origin membership as "good value" for example. Consider: if you believe you have access to "lots" of "high price" games you are more likely to see the membership cost as "good value". If they sold their games at a "low price" then you will consider the cost of Origin membership as "less good" value.
Make no mistake though the cost of movies, Netflix, Hulu etc. are in the mix.
All very nice and everything but just WTF does the length of a movie have to do with the length of a game? Or were you not implying that there is a connection with your LOTR sarcastic post.
Still waiting for the Lord of the Rings film. Watched the c. 11 hour 25 minute trailer but still no film.
FFS the fact that Origin Basic does not have their usual 10 hour preview for a newly released game that is free on Premier, as is their habit, is a big hint that they well know it's very short and that some people could well finish the whole damn thing in 10 hours free preview.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Never seen a more overrated game en masse. This entry into the action-adventure genre offers nothing new. Characters are boring and lackluster (Cal especially, and what is with Cere's skull-like, toad-eyed face?) the story is predictable and the gameplay is ultra-linear, uninspired, and just a constant array of "jump here, use force here" in perfectly positioned places that make no logical sense whatsoever. The whole world is created for Cal and Cal only with no regard for any other character or person moving through the settings.
I play this ... I grow tired of doing everything, from climbing, to fighting, to retreading the same areas.
Then I play something like Assassin's Creed Odyssey and go, "Better graphics, better vistas, open-ended, superior climbing, superior combat, longer game, better story (sadly)...." and wonder, how can two games that give you the same predominant things (climbing and combat) differ so wildly, where one feels like something smooth and seamless from the year 2019 (Odyssey) while another feels like an antiquated entry from 2007 (Fallen Order)?
I couldn't bring myself to even finish this game after being asked to go back and retread the same boring planet for the 3rd time merely because I unlocked a new force power ... and for what? To collect another pointless skin or item I will never see or use? The placement of objects is just a weak-attempt to placate the player's mind into thinking they've accomplished something. Had all those boxes or echo points been removed, nothing changes. Everything about this game is dated, from the conception to the delivery.
A 9/10 should push a genre forward to new heights. Fallen Orders doesn't push a single gaming concept forward. At all. It's the same game we've seen a hundreds of time before yet with a Star Wars skin. Even the new Tomb Raiders took more leaps forward than this lackluster snorefest.
And I can't get how people like Cal. He is bland, boring, uncharasmatic, ugly, idiotic, gullible, and everything that summarizes a character who is solely there a hollow plot device and nothing other. He's a large red button to be pressed by the villain to induce stereotypical and predictable reactions in an effort to steer the plot forward. No one in their right mind would ever put this game down and go, "Boy, I really want to see more of Cal in another Star Wars setting." At least guys like Kyle Katarn had some depth and personality to them. Cal sounds like Vaan from FF12; like he's in an underground cavern when he speaks while savoring over two large Wookie balls he keeps stuffed in the pockets of his cheeks. Worst of all, he's even less likable than Vaan. And that's a pretty bad place to be.
OK, I'm having a hard time again understanding some of you.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
Way to be way too intense.
It's too short? Great. But it still falls in line with other games that are also "too short for you."
Is the argument really that we don't understand your preferences or is the argument "great, you like longer games but this isn't part of a class of longer games?"
Because that's what I'm seeing.
I'm too intense? Lol. You're the one going around challenging posts by anyone who says 15-25 is too short for them. It's as if it's really important to you to impose a definitive number on short games and this one is not it.
What is that number for you, BTW? 2? 6? Are there even any games that short?
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
Well, again, this is a game forum and we are discussing games. Someone says it's too short but it very well could fall in line with what is considered par for the course for a game like this. Which then means it's "too short" because people want longer games 'cause.
It's as if people are complaining because they didn't make the game that players had in their heads.
You might want a longer game but if a certain genre has games that clock in at x hours then by it's very existence in that genre it (or category, whatever) it is as long as it should be.
So yeah, you think it's too short and don't want to play it. Fine. But it seems to me that they made a game that falls right where these games should fall. I mean, I've used examples that were close to what this game seems to be. Do you think those games are too short as well? Does every game have to be 40 hours or whatever?
I think Torval said it better in that the game doesn't invite replayability. That at least has, in my opinion, more merit. Otherwise, again, in my opinion, a game should be adequately cover the subject and not outstay its welcome.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Never seen a more overrated game en masse. This entry into the action-adventure genre offers nothing new. Characters are boring and lackluster (Cal especially, and what is with Cere's skull-like, toad-eyed face?) the story is predictable and the gameplay is ultra-linear, uninspired, and just a constant array of "jump here, use force here" in perfectly positioned places that make no logical sense whatsoever. The whole world is created for Cal and Cal only with no regard for any other character or person moving through the settings.
I play this ... I grow tired of doing everything, from climbing, to fighting, to retreading the same areas.
Then I play something like Assassin's Creed Odyssey and go, "Better graphics, better vistas, open-ended, superior climbing, superior combat, longer game, better story (sadly)...." and wonder, how can two games that give you the same predominant things (climbing and combat) differ so wildly, where one feels like something smooth and seamless from the year 2019 (Odyssey) while another feels like an antiquated entry from 2007 (Fallen Order)?
I couldn't bring myself to even finish this game after being asked to go back and retread the same boring planet for the 3rd time merely because I unlocked a new force power ... and for what? To collect another pointless skin or item I will never see or use? The placement of objects is just a weak-attempt to placate the player's mind into thinking they've accomplished something. Had all those boxes or echo points been removed, nothing changes. Everything about this game is dated, from the conception to the delivery.
A 9/10 should push a genre forward to new heights. Fallen Orders doesn't push a single gaming concept forward. At all. It's the same game we've seen a hundreds of time before yet with a Star Wars skin. Even the new Tomb Raiders took more leaps forward than this lackluster snorefest.
And I can't get how people like Cal. He is bland, boring, uncharasmatic, ugly, idiotic, gullible, and everything that summarizes a character who is solely there a hollow plot device and nothing other. He's a large red button to be pressed by the villain to induce stereotypical and predictable reactions in an effort to steer the plot forward. No one in their right mind would ever put this game down and go, "Boy, I really want to see more of Cal in another Star Wars setting." At least guys like Kyle Katarn had some depth and personality to them. Cal sounds like Vaan from FF12; like he's in an underground cavern when he speaks while savoring over two large Wookie balls he keeps stuffed in the pockets of his cheeks. Worst of all, he's even less likable than Vaan. And that's a pretty bad place to be.
So you don't like a game that other people like. That's perfectly okay. If you prefer Odyssey, go play that, it's still there. The rating scales are for people to give their own reviews, which a 9/10 could be just something someone really enjoyed as opposed to pushing the genre forward like your 9/10 would be. Entertainment is subjective. I thought the game was really great, I had a blast exploring and I enjoyed a lot of the story / characters, way more than I did with Odyssey. But like I said, you could give the game a 3/10 and I could give it a 9, that's the beauty of having your own opinion.
Cons - Woefully short: See you in a year or two when it is on more than a 50% discount. I won't pay for a trailer that is masquerading as a full priced game.
Well, if it really is 25/30 hours, it's not really short.
I'm fine with 25 hrs actually. Most adults nowadays don't have 60+ hours to spend on a single game, especially gamers who play or like a lot of games.
im about 12 hours in and still not halfway done. of course im looking for all the chests and secrets so im taking my time enjoying the game. im an adult with a family so i dont have 8 hr play sessions. love the game and totally worth the money.
Comments
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
SWTOR is a different sub altogether.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Pretty clear from the posts on lowest difficulty it - sort of - "watching" a film with some combat stuff needed; a good move imo since it makes the game accessible to "everyone" and DS combat is not for all etc.
As the difficulty is notched up though every fight will take longer, there will be more deaths etc. So the question then is how long is the movie vs. how long is the game vs. how long is the torture session. And which is the right answer.
Watched the c. 11 hour 25 minute trailer but still no film.
Do you not understand that for some people this game is just too short to interest them much or do you just not approve of anyone thinking that way?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
What is that number for you, BTW? 2? 6? Are there even any games that short?
I mean @gervaise1 up there seems to be equating them to film length as if that were a relevant number for games.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
A thing that surprises me are that some people here equal length with quality which I think is a grave mistake. I had more amazing moments in 4 hours of Doki Doki Literature Club then in 200 of Skyrim for instance, but I understand that is personal. Another thing is that I have never seen this outcry with other games, adventure games, Devil May Cry, Sekiro etc.
Ahh well, length has never been a deciding factor for me, I am all about the experience.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
---------------
Tested over a 115+ games since 1997.
Currently Playing:
Played(Retired): AOL NWN(91-95), UO, EQ1/2, DAoC, CoX, Lineage1/2, SWG(Pre CU/NGE), Planetside, Anarchy Online, FFXI, AC, Vanguard, D&D, AoC, DCUO, Rift, Eve, others
Was looking forward to a new Star Wars game but after that 2 minutes, I'll stick with SWG.
Mass Effect, Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls games can be finished under 30 hours too, if you just focus on the main mission/quest only and blast through to the end.
If a game is in the premier "vault," you get to play it indefinitely.
For example, when Anthem first released it was only in the premier vault but basic members got a 10 hour free trial for it. It is now in the basic vault so you can play as long as you want.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
When a company comes to set a price for its game it wants to recover its costs and go on to make a profit of course.
There are various factors that go into pricing. One is expected lifetime sales: initial sales at a higher price + long tail sales at a lower price + residual value from game bundles or - these days - as part of an access pass (Origin Basic, Premium etc.).
Another is price comparison partly to direct competitors - so other games - but also to near neighbour competitors; other non-game entertainment products like films. A post above actually made a comparison to a years worth of Apple+ TV. There is some other stuff as well but such comparisons will have been done.
Is the approach "valid"? Well marketing research has consistently said that this is what "we" do. The "we" being influenced by the "target market" (strictly target markets at different price points.) So yes but ... its not a "science" and other factors are at play. So the studies and the sensitivity analysis carried out can only be a guide.
There will - will - also be other goals at play. To promote Origin membership as "good value" for example. Consider: if you believe you have access to "lots" of "high price" games you are more likely to see the membership cost as "good value". If they sold their games at a "low price" then you will consider the cost of Origin membership as "less good" value.
Make no mistake though the cost of movies, Netflix, Hulu etc. are in the mix.
Still waiting for the Lord of the Rings film.
Watched the c. 11 hour 25 minute trailer but still no film.
FFS the fact that Origin Basic does not have their usual 10 hour preview for a newly released game that is free on Premier, as is their habit, is a big hint that they well know it's very short and that some people could well finish the whole damn thing in 10 hours free preview.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I play this ... I grow tired of doing everything, from climbing, to fighting, to retreading the same areas.
Then I play something like Assassin's Creed Odyssey and go, "Better graphics, better vistas, open-ended, superior climbing, superior combat, longer game, better story (sadly)...." and wonder, how can two games that give you the same predominant things (climbing and combat) differ so wildly, where one feels like something smooth and seamless from the year 2019 (Odyssey) while another feels like an antiquated entry from 2007 (Fallen Order)?
I couldn't bring myself to even finish this game after being asked to go back and retread the same boring planet for the 3rd time merely because I unlocked a new force power ... and for what? To collect another pointless skin or item I will never see or use? The placement of objects is just a weak-attempt to placate the player's mind into thinking they've accomplished something. Had all those boxes or echo points been removed, nothing changes. Everything about this game is dated, from the conception to the delivery.
A 9/10 should push a genre forward to new heights. Fallen Orders doesn't push a single gaming concept forward. At all. It's the same game we've seen a hundreds of time before yet with a Star Wars skin. Even the new Tomb Raiders took more leaps forward than this lackluster snorefest.
And I can't get how people like Cal. He is bland, boring, uncharasmatic, ugly, idiotic, gullible, and everything that summarizes a character who is solely there a hollow plot device and nothing other. He's a large red button to be pressed by the villain to induce stereotypical and predictable reactions in an effort to steer the plot forward. No one in their right mind would ever put this game down and go, "Boy, I really want to see more of Cal in another Star Wars setting." At least guys like Kyle Katarn had some depth and personality to them. Cal sounds like Vaan from FF12; like he's in an underground cavern when he speaks while savoring over two large Wookie balls he keeps stuffed in the pockets of his cheeks. Worst of all, he's even less likable than Vaan. And that's a pretty bad place to be.
It's as if people are complaining because they didn't make the game that players had in their heads.
You might want a longer game but if a certain genre has games that clock in at x hours then by it's very existence in that genre it (or category, whatever) it is as long as it should be.
So yeah, you think it's too short and don't want to play it. Fine. But it seems to me that they made a game that falls right where these games should fall. I mean, I've used examples that were close to what this game seems to be. Do you think those games are too short as well? Does every game have to be 40 hours or whatever?
I think Torval said it better in that the game doesn't invite replayability. That at least has, in my opinion, more merit. Otherwise, again, in my opinion, a game should be adequately cover the subject and not outstay its welcome.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo