I don't mind the length of the game if i'm hooked all the way. Witcher 3 did that well for me because I never felt bored in that game.
On one hand, I have noticed a pattern for a few years now where some devs listen too much to reviewers. And the same reviewers always complain that they don't have enough time to play games because their work forces them to only play a game at launch then they never touch it again. I do not want video games being design with reviewers in mind.
On the other hand, i've also seen players who mostly play repetitive live service games demanding that single player games should last hundreds of hours or they wont pay for them. These same people forgot many AAA games used to last 4-5 hours back in the day and still were great games.
I'm 80 hours in on Assassins Creed Odyssey and haven't seen half the map. While I'm loving the gameplay and story, i get very bored when i decide to explore the map and not do the main story because it feels like a cheap mmo. I do not want every single player game to feel like that.
And considering how long Witcher 3 is, if Cyberpunk is shorter than that then i am still not worried.
As long as the story is good it's length shouldn't matter.
Once upon a time.
I assume that's too short? It is a concern because we have no idea how much shorter it is and it must be significantly shorter or they would not be mentioning it.
Yall argue for nothing. You can't have both. And both short and long has it's positives and negatives. A trilogy can win an oscar also a single movie can win an oscar in the same category. It's just a different.
For Cyberpunk I would prefer shorter main story + more expansions. rather then one big game.
For myself I am not saying a short main story can't be excellent or that it cannot be supplemented by side quests......however as an old time RPG player I prefer long quality main quests, I love a good engaging and interesting main story line.
I also like having plenty of side stories to expand the game beyond the 60hour mark but these IMO should be supplemental to the main story, to help enhance the main story and not to make up for the mains story line's shortcomings so to speak.
For example I really enjoyed the Tron Evolution story line on the PS3 however that was way too damned short... I finished it in one evening......it's a good thing I got it for like 5 bucks or so used....
Now I am not saying Cyberpunk will be a one evening game however it illustrates my point.
I look at cyberpunk as a RPG game in which a good engaging lengthy story line is and should be a staple.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I am all for shortening the story if metrics actually show that barely anyone beat the game, but CDPR didn't provide those metrics, so I can't in good conscious accept that excuse. I went ahead and did the research and found that an average of 41% of the people who played Witcher 3 on all platforms (At least those with public profiles) have beaten Witcher 3. About 42% on PC, 41% on Xbox, 44% on PS4, and 56% on GOG. That is a good chunk of people that have beaten the game. The people who didn't beat the game, that is on them. Now, that raises the question, what percentage of the people who didn't beat the game -actually- complained about the game being too long or felt it was too long and wasn't some other reason for not completing the game?
I'll be honest, I love CDPR and the work they do; but this honestly feels like a huge excuse.
Yep, from inside knowledge from someone who works with CDPR I heard they have decided to cut off the story, because the game is too huge already. But no worries, it's going to be great.
I've always felt quality over quantity is most important.
Speaking out of thin air as i know nothing about the game, i focus and play with what's in front of me, then when something comes out of interest i dig in, deep, and revel in the surprises because i didn't follow, everything is new and fresh.
It's a rare xmas morning for us gamers, why sneak a peak at your present to the point you know it inside out before you can even start to play with it?
So... anyway, are there tons of side missions which can be played along the way or even after the story is complete? Then the fact it's shorter is sometimes a good thing.
Not saying 2077 story sucks but, as an example Oblivion for me i could not stand the main story of closing all the gates, i believe if memory serves i stopped playing it for a bit, picked it back up and hammered the main story out, finished it fairly fast.
If i was asked well now that you're done the main story story what are you going to do now?
Now i can play the game!
I mean what a difference once that story was done i had an entire world to explore, tons of side quests, i put in probably a good hundred hours or more once the story was out of the way.
My faith is my shield! - Turalyon 2022
Your legend ends here and now! - (Battles Won Long Ago)
I am all for shortening the story if metrics actually show that barely anyone beat the game, but CDPR didn't provide those metrics, so I can't in good conscious accept that excuse. I went ahead and did the research and found that an average of 41% of the people who played Witcher 3 on all platforms (At least those with public profiles) have beaten Witcher 3. About 42% on PC, 41% on Xbox, 44% on PS4, and 56% on GOG. That is a good chunk of people that have beaten the game. The people who didn't beat the game, that is on them. Now, that raises the question, what percentage of the people who didn't beat the game -actually- complained about the game being too long or felt it was too long and wasn't some other reason for not completing the game?
I'll be honest, I love CDPR and the work they do; but this honestly feels like a huge excuse.
Yep, from inside knowledge from someone who works with CDPR I heard they have decided to cut off the story, because the game is too huge already. But no worries, it's going to be great.
See this here seems fare more plausible to me than the whole...weeeell metrics say witcher 3 was too long so we made the story in this shorter...reason.
Now could this perchance be them cutting down the main story line to have some dlc or expansion in the future..or perhaps to have something to shove into the MP portion coming later or on someshit?
I hope not I would really be unhappy if they shoved or hid some main storyline behind a multiplayer wall......
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I like how people jump to a massive conclusion about the storyline and attention spans and all this other nonsense.
When I was in college, and a bit of a different person than I am now, my then girlfriend had said that she was never able to finish Wuthering Heights as we were commenting on another classmate reading it.
I looked at the book and it's thin size and I scoffed at that. "Are you kidding? I could finish that in no time!" She then said it was just difficult to read. "Bah" said I, I'll read it and do it quicker than you can say "Heathcliff has issues."
So I borrowed the book and proceeded to read it. At one point I felt like it was such a slog "surely I must be close to the end?"
I think I was on page 100.
I gave the book back and admitted I was a moron.
what a horrible book.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
If a resturant cut downs on portions because "not all our customers finish the whole meal", what do you think will happen on tripadvisor the next day?
Not all restaurants have to be "All you Can Eat" grease fests though. Who do you think serve bigger portions, five star Michelin restaurants or your local pub round the corner?
Besides, this entire discussion isn't about amount of content or length, it is about pacing. Rushing things is bad in a game, drawing stuff out is bad too. Funny fact, the longer a game/book/movie etc. the more difficult it becomes to keep quality pacing and keep the players attention, I know W3 couldn't keep mine.
/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
I like how people jump to a massive conclusion about the storyline and attention spans and all this other nonsense.
When I was in college, and a bit of a different person than I am now, my then girlfriend had said that she was never able to finish Wuthering Heights as we were commenting on another classmate reading it.
I looked at the book and it's thin size and I scoffed at that. "Are you kidding? I could finish that in no time!" She then said it was just difficult to read. "Bah" said I, I'll read it and do it quicker than you can say "Heathcliff has issues."
So I borrowed the book and proceeded to read it. At one point I felt like it was such a slog "surely I must be close to the end?"
I think I was on page 100.
I gave the book back and admitted I was a moron.
what a horrible book.
I finished it, it was mandatory at University..... Horrible.
I also dare people to rush through something like the collected poems of T.S. Elliot, its only 240 pages, no biggie right?
/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
If something sucks it's going to be a slogfest no matter if it's short or long. Doesn't matter if a book is 300 pages or 1000 pages if it sucks you're gonna be bored and not get through it most likely....however if it's a good story and you are able to "lose yourself in it" then that 300 page book is going to feel far too short compared to the 1000 page book that you were equally able to lose yourself into.
It's not about "quality over quantity" but rather about "time flies when you're having fun" over time slows to a crawl when you're not.
Take beer or whisky for example sometimes you're sitting at home and just want one but want a really good one to savour so you get the really expensive stuff but sometimes you want to have something for the whole evening, day, party etc so you bring out the less expensive stuff that is still very good but maybe better suited for mixing and the like.
There is no reason not to have a nice lengthy main story line that will keep you engaged throughout and be very high quality. IMO this allows the game or devs to tell a really good involved story without having to half ass it, skimp out or neuter it into complete stupidity.
IMO if you enjoy the side quests more than the main story then the devs got it wrong.....side quests should enhance the main quests not replace the main story...
Post edited by Asm0deus on
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Persona 5's campaign was 90 hours and I loved every minute; shouldn't matter how long the game is if the gameplay and writing are quality enough.
I agree with you however, I feel like we are a dying minority. From what I have seen/read the majority of people don't want to play RPG games, they want to finish games. Obviously I have not polled all gamers on this one, but it is the impression I get talking to people and reading forums.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
I like how people jump to a massive conclusion about the storyline and attention spans and all this other nonsense.
When I was in college, and a bit of a different person than I am now, my then girlfriend had said that she was never able to finish Wuthering Heights as we were commenting on another classmate reading it.
I looked at the book and it's thin size and I scoffed at that. "Are you kidding? I could finish that in no time!" She then said it was just difficult to read. "Bah" said I, I'll read it and do it quicker than you can say "Heathcliff has issues."
So I borrowed the book and proceeded to read it. At one point I felt like it was such a slog "surely I must be close to the end?"
I think I was on page 100.
I gave the book back and admitted I was a moron.
what a horrible book.
I finished it, it was mandatory at University..... Horrible.
I also dare people to rush through something like the collected poems of T.S. Elliot, its only 240 pages, no biggie right?
/Cheers, Lahnmir
You do know Bowie was Kate Bush's Heathcliff? There is even that awful theatre production about the time they spent together. Not sure as a Bowie fan you would want to watch that though, cringe worthy.
A good story is never too long. Problem is, a good story isn't the same for everyone. I think the issue with Witcher 3 is that there are so many well written, time consuming side quests that it can make the main story bog down and feel to long for some people. Others wish it would never end.
I like how people jump to a massive conclusion about the storyline and attention spans and all this other nonsense.
When I was in college, and a bit of a different person than I am now, my then girlfriend had said that she was never able to finish Wuthering Heights as we were commenting on another classmate reading it.
I looked at the book and it's thin size and I scoffed at that. "Are you kidding? I could finish that in no time!" She then said it was just difficult to read. "Bah" said I, I'll read it and do it quicker than you can say "Heathcliff has issues."
So I borrowed the book and proceeded to read it. At one point I felt like it was such a slog "surely I must be close to the end?"
I think I was on page 100.
I gave the book back and admitted I was a moron.
what a horrible book.
I have watched several dramatizations but never finished the book and I dare say a few of the dramatizations either. Catherine Earnshow you shall not rest in peace!
Honestly, its not as bas as people think. Witcher is 51 for the main story according to how long to beat. I am guessing Cyberpunk 2077 is 35-40. However, they have also said before that they are putting a ton of side quests and content into the game. More than ever before and that was the bread and butter of Witcher 3 so I think people will still get a lot out of it
imagine paying for 10/10 quality game and complaining it's only 35-40 hours lol. I was also one of those people who didn't really enjoyed how streched main story was of witcher 3, i beat all dlcs+main game, have it at 96% completed but i honestly feel like making it shorter, but give it more story choices that actually determines your life in game, as they're advertising how vivid the game and character will feel etc. is waaay better option than going with strict and sometimes tedious with little replayability(not saying Withcer 3 isn't, but you don't really have game changing choices there so w.e.) gameplay. Hopefully launch will be great with no problems for everyone
They have said on numerous occasions that their approach to game design starts with the story, the gameplay comes later and is only there to support the story. So, if a lot of players are saying that they aren't reaching the end of the story, and as Torval showed above, their metrics support that, then it's totally a good move to make the story shorter so that more people can finish it.
Personally, I don't play RPGs for the story. Story is not roleplaying, story is not gameplay, so I prefer as little story as possible in my games. (i also don't rate stories in games, they all seem really basic to me. if i want story, i read a book or watch a film; usually a book)
CDPR are the exact opposite to me, so completing the story seems like it would be a mark of success for them: if more people complete the story, then they've achieved what they set out to do in telling an engaging story.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Its not going to flop. But Its sounds very unlike CDPR to talk about shortening the game. I would expect them to say "People so much liked our games we decided to make even longer one"
I would rather expect EA or similar to go out with statements "People anyway do not finish our games, so we are making even shorter ones now ( for same price )"
Comments
On one hand, I have noticed a pattern for a few years now where some devs listen too much to reviewers. And the same reviewers always complain that they don't have enough time to play games because their work forces them to only play a game at launch then they never touch it again. I do not want video games being design with reviewers in mind.
On the other hand, i've also seen players who mostly play repetitive live service games demanding that single player games should last hundreds of hours or they wont pay for them. These same people forgot many AAA games used to last 4-5 hours back in the day and still were great games.
I assume that's too short? It is a concern because we have no idea how much shorter it is and it must be significantly shorter or they would not be mentioning it.
For Cyberpunk I would prefer shorter main story + more expansions. rather then one big game.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Yep, from inside knowledge from someone who works with CDPR I heard they have decided to cut off the story, because the game is too huge already. But no worries, it's going to be great.
Speaking out of thin air as i know nothing about the game, i focus and play with what's in front of me, then when something comes out of interest i dig in, deep, and revel in the surprises because i didn't follow, everything is new and fresh.
It's a rare xmas morning for us gamers, why sneak a peak at your present to the point you know it inside out before you can even start to play with it?
So... anyway, are there tons of side missions which can be played along the way or even after the story is complete? Then the fact it's shorter is sometimes a good thing.
Not saying 2077 story sucks but, as an example Oblivion for me i could not stand the main story of closing all the gates, i believe if memory serves i stopped playing it for a bit, picked it back up and hammered the main story out, finished it fairly fast.
If i was asked well now that you're done the main story story what are you going to do now?
Now i can play the game!
I mean what a difference once that story was done i had an entire world to explore, tons of side quests, i put in probably a good hundred hours or more once the story was out of the way.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I looked at the book and it's thin size and I scoffed at that. "Are you kidding? I could finish that in no time!" She then said it was just difficult to read. "Bah" said I, I'll read it and do it quicker than you can say "Heathcliff has issues."
So I borrowed the book and proceeded to read it. At one point I felt like it was such a slog "surely I must be close to the end?"
I think I was on page 100.
I gave the book back and admitted I was a moron.
what a horrible book.
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
Besides, this entire discussion isn't about amount of content or length, it is about pacing. Rushing things is bad in a game, drawing stuff out is bad too. Funny fact, the longer a game/book/movie etc. the more difficult it becomes to keep quality pacing and keep the players attention, I know W3 couldn't keep mine.
/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
I also dare people to rush through something like the collected poems of T.S. Elliot, its only 240 pages, no biggie right?
/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
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I agree with you however, I feel like we are a dying minority. From what I have seen/read the majority of people don't want to play RPG games, they want to finish games. Obviously I have not polled all gamers on this one, but it is the impression I get talking to people and reading forums.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Imho
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
imagine paying for 10/10 quality game and complaining it's only 35-40 hours lol. I was also one of those people who didn't really enjoyed how streched main story was of witcher 3, i beat all dlcs+main game, have it at 96% completed but i honestly feel like making it shorter, but give it more story choices that actually determines your life in game, as they're advertising how vivid the game and character will feel etc. is waaay better option than going with strict and sometimes tedious with little replayability(not saying Withcer 3 isn't, but you don't really have game changing choices there so w.e.) gameplay. Hopefully launch will be great with no problems for everyone
I would rather expect EA or similar to go out with statements "People anyway do not finish our games, so we are making even shorter ones now ( for same price )"
So for a single playthrough might be 40hrs, but to get all playthroughs might be 80 -120 hours of main quest.
Someone inform me, that's what I thought.