Grifman
3176
Yeah, I don’t understand why people keep bringing the length of the main quest up. You can finish up many games pretty quickly if you just do main quest missions and ignore side quests. FO3/FO4/NV had a ton of side quests that could be skipped. Same with the Tomb Raider reboot trilogy - a lot of people said those three could be completed in 15-20 hours but they were easily double that length if you did the side quests and tombs.
Yeah, Eurogamer felt like they hadn’t seen enough of a game to do a review…at 40 hours. And Easy Allies on youtube is calling their 35-hour look at the game a first impression…so…
The full version of the launch trailer cover of Never Fade Away.
I think I like this better than the rock version.
It’s just another data point. Also for some, shorter may be perceived as a strength.
It is clear that there is a lot of optional side content here so people can kind of set their own length. After that story that circled a few weeks back about the developer that has played the game for 200+ hours and hasn’t finished or whatever, it is nice to see many reviewers say the main story is 15-25 hours. That gives me a more reasonable metric to measure against. I don’t want a 200+ hour slog.
It’s been a while since we’ve seen Tom_McNamara — their last post was 4 years ago.
Welcome back. Guess you work in The White House :)
I’m very happy to hear the main story only takes 20 or so hours. The Witcher 3 took me years to finish! I’d rather do a good paly through once per quarter and discover new side quests each time - hopefully they have a way of tracking what quests you’ve completed in different playthroughs.
Somebody with too much time on their hands has beaten Witcher 3 in 2 hours and some change, so it doesn’t HAVE to take years :)
Seriously? Patch notes like that when you have so many game breaking bugs?
Precisely, they have so many it was better to not put the entire list, for PR purposes.
Put on download!! Can’t wait.
So jus popping in to join the length-of-game-discussion.
Can someone please explain to me WHY they want a game to end quickly? If it’s a great and immersive game with a wonderful world and interesting characters… why would you want it to end as quickly as possible? What’s the joy in that?
The most disheartening thing about the reviews and commentary so far has been that it seems the writing/sidequest design is nowhere near as good/interesting as in TW3. That was the one thing I thought was pretty much guaranteed, and it’s also basically impossible to fix, outside of DLC.
mtkafka
3188
I thought it wasnt a big deal until i saw a movie on Netflix with it and without it… really big difference. Queens Gambit was so good looking on xbox one x, compared to everything else non dolby vision. Thing is you will need a good oled to see it. so if you don’t have one yet, dont worry about it.
AFAIK, dolbyvision is the future… it will be more standard because it supposedly has better colors while not bloating bandwidth. This is all from reading about it… i might be wrong! Just got an oled tv and been experimenting it with every game movie i could… i just need new console since they are better tailored to it than even computers (unless you have a new 3000 nvidia for hdmi2.1).
I wonder if the setting is part of the reason some reactions to the narrative are lukewarm. There is plenty of bad fantasy, for sure, but it seems that there are more people who like fantasy literature than like cyberpunk or its sub-genres. And while there are amazingly good writers in the cyberpunk genre, the genre seems disposed towards all or nothing; it’s either great or terrible. Fantasy lit seems to have a lot more of a middle ground. It certainly seems that there are far more fantasy-themed games than cyberpunk-themed games.
I think some folks don’t want to have a 100+ hour story beat hanging over their heads. No matter how good the game is, unless it is truly a transcendent experience, many people start to burn out after 50-60 hours, if not sooner. If that happens, and you are nowhere near to closing out the narrative, it can be frustrating contemplating having to play (now, slog) through a ton more content just to find out what happens. Assassin’s Creed’s last couple of offerings fall into this category for me.
I understand this, but I’m thinking more of the 5-10 hour players, or worse: speedrunners. I see no pride in having completed a game in the least amount of hours because you skipped the history of it, just so you could “finish” it. If a game is designed to have history and narrative and at least does some effort in trying to build the story, I’ve never seen the point or pride in managing to skip it.
I agree with a few of the AC-games just having filled a void to make it longer, which of course is not interesting for anyone, but if you think about The Witcher, that kept up some great stories and side quests throughout the game, I don’t see the value of rushing through it, or complaining about the length. At least for me, Witcher was filled with interesting side quests, none like the other, and after having put in a lot over 100 hours (including the DLC’s), I was still extremely saddened to have ended it. I have a few friends that still hold on to it, not playing a couple of hours here and there, and just refusing to play the end game because it would mean … it’s over.
Of course we’re all different, but if CD Project Red managed to make another immersive world that keeps me entertained for anoterh great 100 hours, I’d just be happy about it =)
For me.ots about time investment. I think having a main story in the 20 hour range with tons of optional sidequests is perfect. If I don’t have time I can zip through. If I do I can take my time and play anywhere between 20 and 180 hours however it ever suits me.
Soma
3193
I was about to jump on the hype train and play this on day 1. Then I read about all the game breaking bugs. Yeah nah not gonna be a public beta tester.
Are you sure you’re not just comparing HDR to non-HDR? You can already do HDR on most current gen and last gen consoles apart from Switch and OG Xbones. The main difference between Dolby Vision and HDR10, the main non DV standard, is just that the tone-mapping can change from scene to scene, whereas in HDR10 it’s fixed throughout. I don’t see why that would be as meaningful for games, which already have much finer control over their lighting, as it is for movies (and even there, I struggle to tell the difference between HDR 10 and DV versions).
Oh my CE just arrived, so gorgeous…you can see CDP really love their work and are proud of it…right down to the packaging. Statue looks great, artbook is meaty, steelbook is different (and nicer) than I expected.
