Length of the Game

[Sabretooth]

Bioware said sometime ago that Mass Effect is going to offer a whooping 80+ hours of gameplay. While this number is ridiculously large for any game that is not a wicked mod for Civilization, it is still intriguing.

 

One of the admirable features of KotOR was that it packed a solid 40 hour storyline, while most other games are quitting at a meagre 10 hours and blaming it on their "incredible" multiplayer. So just how long would you like your KotOR III?

 

I'd say a little longer than 1 and 2... maybe 50 or 60 hours. But the storyline should be structured so that the game never feels long or drawn-out.

[Trex]

I'd love to play a KOTOR which could last over eighty hours, but it might be too much for the main plot. Ideally I'd go with around fifty hours, but with enough optional sub-plots and side missions to make it last eighty if you wanted it to.

[legend222]

The longer the better, if the story is well done than I would want it to be 70-80 hours.

[Prime]

I like the length it is at. I think any longer may make the pace of the story suffer...

[GarfieldJL]

Depending on how well the story is, it could last 80 hours, it all depends.

[Jediphile]

The trouble with a poll like this is that how long a game lasts depends entirely on how you play. I like to explore the virtual world and try things out endlessly, so for me TSL was already well over 70 hours, if not 90. Not sure I'd like KotOR III much longer than that. You can very quickly get to a point where the game drags on horribly.

[GTK + JA = fun]

The Longer the better!

 

As long as the storyline is good and keeps me engaged I would play it. I mean heck how many times have all of us re-played KOTOR and KOTOR 2?? I know I have more than 2 times a piece so and 80+ hour game would be great!

[Titanius Anglesmith]

I would love it if it was about 80 hours, so long as the story never gets old or boring. So really, it depends on how well the devs make the story. A long, detailed story deserves more time to complete. A blunt, straight to the point story probably wouldn't need as much time, and I would hate spending 80+ hours playing a story that I figured out 60 hours ago.

[SilentScope001]

I like the length it is at. I think any longer may make the pace of the story suffer...

 

Agreed.

[GarfieldJL]

It depends on the complexity of the story, that would determine the length, plot twists and stuff could keep the story interesting. False leads, dead ends, red herrings, all of that.

[Prime]

It depends on the complexity of the story, that would determine the length, plot twists and stuff could keep the story interesting. False leads, dead ends, red herrings, all of that.

You have to be careful with dead ends though. Too many of them or too long with only frustrate the player if they invest a lot of time in them...

[GarfieldJL]

You have to be careful with dead ends though. Too many of them or too long with only frustrate the player if they invest a lot of time in them...

 

 

True, it's really a balancing act.

[CSI]

Original plz. thank you.

[Emperor Devon]

As long as they maintain a quality story through those 80 hours I'd be all for it. Long stories really add a lot of replay value.

[Jae Onasi]

The longer, the better, as long as it's well done.

[Fish.Stapler]

I think you could manageably add an additional ten hours to the current length and not force it to drag on.

[DARTH_DANZIG]

Ok, so I think it's pretty obvious what the jig is here.

I am all for more content. Yes it makes the game more valueable in replayability, yes it keeps an entertaining drive, and yes it can obviously be done. What that story amounts to, and how it is brought about should be the real drive behind the games conception I think.

 

What strange and puzzling things could happen, the different turns it could take, not necessarily trailing dead ends, yet determination ends. Kind of like silouhetting how to navitgate through dialogue. The difference between quick and dirty, or full and flavorful would be intuitively obvious, and each conjecture point of the plot, main and side alike, can all interplay inside of the story.

And what I'm hoping, is plenty of time and context to be a jedi, as such, to train various student jedi. That would appease me mightily.

 

EDIT: And though I realize the two games in comparison I am about to mention, are varied in sotryline and gameplay executions, they are both in the same in that they can compliment eachother in cross characteristic tapping.

Kotor, could do well to have as much playability as manageable. I believe this as I am a huge fan of epic games, and that is why Elder Scrolls 3, and four(second to three) are games I love, sponsoring as much as, get ready;

500+ hours of gameplay. Despite being subject to gameplay styles and methods.

[adamqd]

The Longer the Better, but of course the story should remain fast paced and exiting, I don't wanna spend the first 10 hours somewhere like Peragus

[azzakabaz]

iw ouodl go with 70 -- 80 of story but hte game should never end much like oblivion in the way that u can play on after the main quest cause that would own and open up a lot of room for quest mods stuff

[Robb Stark]

I would go for KotOR-length, with a little more variability for side-quests/exploration. Unless you really "try everything" I'd say 60-65 hours max. Higher than that gets into Final Fantasy level-crunching territory. Sure, there are games that can fill 80+ hours with a truly epic level of content (the Baldur's Gate games maybe), but I would hate for them to change the nature of the series to add length to the game--for me, KotOR is 8-10 planets/levels broken into 4 or 5 maps.

 

The worst thing possible would be just to just add maps in an effort to increase "playlength"--for example, the first 2/3 of Deus Ex would make the greatest game ever, only they had to add 40 hours of wandering military bases and science facilities shooting mutants and killer robots with absolutely no story to speak of. The player should have a reasonable goal of completing the game before losing interest--not just on the first playthrough, but on every playthrough.

[Canderous_ordo1]

70 to 80 hours or even 1000 hours of play

but the game shou8ld be different every time its loaded like some games Ive played you can be working anything up to three years to pass but battles and harder puzzles then first and second

[Sabretooth]

70 to 80 hours or even 1000 hours of play

but the game shou8ld be different every time its loaded like some games Ive played you can be working anything up to three years to pass but battles and harder puzzles then first and second

 

If that were to happen, I'd find it maddeningly painful if, after 2 years' worth progress, my hard drive were formatted and all my saved data lost.

[Henz]

As long as a good story needs.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

The longer the better...

 

The Longer the Better[...]

 

The longer, the better

 

The Longer the better!

 

 

Ah, guess I haven't seen a phrase being repeated so many times in any forum. And I agree with them: THE LONGER THE BETTER!

 

And no, I don't think the story can get hurt. Hell, that's what Side-quests are about, more depht, more play time, more fun. All that with no relation whatsoever with the main plot. But I really think the secret is on the side-quests, I mean, that's the only way of a long adventure inspire players to replay the game, even if it's huge.

[Ambrose]

If they wind up making the game longer, I'd also want the amount of planets proportionally increased. I don't know about anyone else, but running through the same planet doing a bunch more quests wouldn't add to the gameplay for me. But, on the other hand, with more locations for exploration and different eye-candy, I'd be more than happy for them to crank up the gameplay time.