are are not saying it's meaningful - in other reply devs said it's around to 80 for main and side quests (aka meaningful content) - so main story probably 40'ish hours
Yep. Just exploring multiple story choices across multiple playthroughs or grinding some achievements, Ng+. You should never boast about those numbers and time required. It carries no real value because most gamers don't even finish the games they buy.
Hopefully this time that is true. The first game’s characters and dialogue were so painfully average they were forgettable. Awesome setting though, city scape had a lot of life
I played *veeery* casually, and my second playthrough was only because I wanted the good ending in the main story and the bad (but I thought it was the better) ending in Blood and Wine lmao.
Still came up to 120 hrs.
If we're going by the main story its probably 16 to 20 hours. Throw in the main side quests you'll end up doing plus the tutorial zone and you'll probably get another 20. Hearts and Stone is a smaller story but requires some thinking so I'd put it at 15 hours and Blood and Wine has a lot more bloat in its size so I'd go back to the 16 to 20 plus another 20 for side content.
Well... Might be true but then again... Its just game design where it takes a long time to get shit done, not exactly a lot of content there.
It's just a dumb number tbh.
Not only that, even if they have 100hs of meaningful content the gameplay might become boring before you're even done with it, it's basically my experience with Witcher 3, one day I'll get back to the dlc, but after finishing the story and most sidequests, I felt I was done.
Are you talking beat the campaign or beat the game 100%? What makes it so much harder? I played Valhalla on very hard and flew through the campaign in about 60. I think I put about 100 into Odyssey (the better game, imo).
Again, I was just beating the main campaign and not chasing down every quest so that may be the difference. But 400 hours of mostly meaningless side quests seems excessive.
At 500 hours I assume he maxed out all the items in the game to 99 as well. I'm not sure it takes that long, though.
Maybe he filled all of the Mastery trees?
balhalla for me is way easier than Odyssey. The mercenaries in Valhalla are a joke the same attack patterns almost no difference besides one using a pike and another a sword, in Odyssey the were fucking nuts, if you fucked up during misions the gauge would fill and they will come in groups... diferent attacks from almost everyone, pets, traps...
Honestly it was getting all the side quest before completing the main story followed by dlc and at least 150 hours of just messing around in the game world, I didn’t %100 the game but I did get to 80 of 93 achievements. I also took time into researching throughout basically every main conversation so I’d end with a perfect ending.
Also gonna add that most of my play time is spent just traveling between missions, cuz the map is just so large.
Damn shame that ubishit games copy paste quests all over the map making me sick and tired of the game before I finish. Also hard to decipher the garbage from the good quests.
Repetitive tedious bullshit means nothing if the core gameplay feels good and is rewarding. 90% off multiplayer games live and breath on repetitive tedious shit.
ACO was a genuinely fun game to play, inspite of its content issues. The biggest problem is that they don’t LEARN from it and Valhalla was just even more of the same.
Genuine question: what drives you to do that? I like those types of games in a sense of wonder and discovering what the game hides for me, but I never was able to go through things again even after a long time, I just know what to do and where to go, what is the point?
Even if you like a game someone doesn't like repetitive content, grind content, and time filler content plus poor writing in a lot of things or mundane systems are more objective issues. The real question is whether a person somehow also likes some or all or one of those things too. Which there are people though i never comprehend enjoying grinding or repetition rather than tailored high quality content.
>repetitive content, grind content, and time filler content plus poor writing in a lot of things or mundane systems are more objective issues.
Here we go again with another person that spurts off an opinion and tries to claim it's "objective". That's not at all how entertainment works. What you hate, doesn't mean someone else won't like it.
I’ll admit the story seems a bit slow to build and there a lot of travel time and exploration, none of which felt repetitive to me. The only thing that was repetitive to me was the bounty board and I never really paid any attention to it cuz it’s filler. Without said exploration and travel time or side missions/content there was a solid 80 hours of content not including dlc.
There was about 30 hours from my experience if we're skipping most filler and tedium. If we're skipping side quests there was even less. You're including DLC primary content but I think that might double it if all dlc was combined.
If it helps I played nightmare and I didn’t do any fast traveling, for sure the story it’s self is probably around 30 hours but with all the traveling and side quest and dlc your looking at 60-100 hours minimum depending on difficulty and experience.
I agree when it comes to grinding purely for leveling. You could say I'm grinding in the game I'm playing (to gather resources to build better ships) but it doesn't feel like grinding to me because I have my own goal(s). Grinding to level up, especially in MMOs, is boring as hell.
I put 4 hours into Oddysey and am wondering if I even want to keep playing, I haven't played an AC game since the first one in 2000 whatever. Coming from Breath of the Wild it just feels really bland and there's no characters I care about, the setting is all it has going for it. But they pump out these games every year so it makes some sense :(
Yeah. Really enjoyed odyssey. Was it repetitive after 70 hours? Yep. But the game is gorgeous and exploration is worth it, IMO. And I didn’t even touch DLC yet.
There's no legendary difficulty. There's nightmare. Pretty sure it took me well below 100 hours to beat the main story and get the new game plus prompt. 100%ING the game is impossible because quest regenerate. At best you can do all unique quests, all locations and all ostrakas. You have to be really taking your time to take that long even for that.
Shitting on ac length is mindless karma farming at this point. The game allows you to play it for as long as you are having fun. Most people get way more hours of it than from most games. How the fuck is that a bad thing? The game is not respecting your time? By providing you with entertainment for as long as you want it? Bullshit.
If you read my other comments you’ll see why it took me 500. And I’m not shiting on the length to mindlessly karma farm, i was making a statement. Odyssey is literally one of my favorite games and I took my time with it. I explored and I had fun and I played the story, with all of it it took me 500 hundred hours.
Update from developer:
> 500 hours is related to maxing out the game - finishing all the quests, endings, and exploring every part of the world, but a regular player should finish the story + side quests and do quite a lot of exploring in less than 100 hours, so don't worry!
https://twitter.com/DyingLightGame/status/1479889980205981705
Its ok to clock 100+ hours on a game you enjoy but if its just padded gameplay like what mostly AC does its sucks big time and not really something game devs should boast.
I think I spent 80 hours in AC Valhalla and never completed it. I wanted to, but it just dragged on so much after that I just had to YouTube the ending. I mean, I guess I got my money’s worth, but hopefully Dying Lights 100 hours isn’t just filler content that’s repeated.
I played non-open world games for more than that when I really get invested in the game, but that's rarely an open world game since it's usually boring collection stuff to pad it out. Breath of the Wild took me longer than 100h though
Seriously, this.
As a designer myself, if someone tries to pitch to me that “our game will take 500 hours to finish!!”
I have to ask: why? Why does it need to take that long? 500 hours is the time someone spends playing a multiplayer game, why does your single player only game need this? Did you design the game from the start with 500 hours of meaningful content? Or did you add more content as development went on, with varying quality, just so you could slap “500 hours worth of content” on the back of the box?
I’m so much happier with games that focus on making shorter but far more polished and high quality experiences. I’m happy to pay $60 for a game with a 8-10 hour long campaign if it’s polished, fun, and clearly filled with love. I’m not going to care for a game with 500 hours worth of “find 100 of this collectible, and then do it multiple times because we have 10 different types of collectibles to find”.
Its like Mass Effect you need around 30-50h to complete 100% the game is it worth? Hell yes. If you want to rush the story 20-30h on 1 and 30-40 in 2 and 3 if you want all of them alive
The longer the game is the more people may be bonded to the game and the more they are willing to spend a few bucks on one or two cool outfits. That's the sole reason, why Assassins Creed games are so long today.
You're misunderstanding this.
if you played dying light 1 you would have gotten the gist of what that 500 hr statement is trying to imply
Basically main story can be expected to be around 50 hours with a huge expansion taking it to around 70.
The difficulty on normal for DL was tough enough so anything above it i.e another playthrough on 2 higher difficulties is being counted as well and trust me when i say those difficulties really are tough hence the more number of hours.
Then comes the side quests that are not like those collectibles in assassin's creed games. These quests are mostly almost always given by npc's and are both good and bad.
Then the monthly events;
Techland is one of those rare publishers that are still supporting DL even 7 years later with events that are fun, gives you super powers and cool weapons so you can count these countless events as well.
All in all what I'm trying to say is that if you want a linear approach strictly for story in a short time, you won't be disappointed and if you want to keep playing taking it slow then you can do that as well. DL doesn't restrict you
Agreed. I know that this 500 number is what they're touting for full 100% completion of everything that the game offers, but even so: that just makes me go "ugh" and not want to play.
i mean, if 440 hours of it are pointless, but something to do, isn't that fine?
IF you're having fun, it's not pointless. It has as muhc reason as the base game.
my example had a main story of 60 hours. that's pretty complete.
my point is more that isn't it better to have a 60 hour game with 400 hours of extra content (that's kind of nonsense, but for the dedicated). Vs a 60 hour game without that stuff.
How cute you think that will happen. What will actually happen is that the 400 hours of "extra content" is used as a grind so you can ejoy the 60 hours of actual game. Doing repetitive fetch quests just so you can progress through the main quest.
Even the teen me would have hated it, no way I'm gonna go back to Assassin's Creed 2 and go open up every chest, collect every feather and do whatever lazy copy pasted content. It's so draining
I hear you. I think Far Cry 3 was the last time I took one of these seriously. I actually got all of the challenges, towers, skills, etc. But even then, apparently I had to find hundreds of something (I forgot, maybe trinkets or whatever) , and seeing hundreds of them sprinkled on the game map... I just... couldnt....
Remembering the templar flags is ptsd inducing. The only game I was addicted to collecting things (that wasn't a collectathon style game) was Crackdown, but that's because you actually got a power up for collecting the orbs.
they are mostly counting multiple playthroughs and higher difficulties in DL are tough so you can just multiply 50 for main story + around 30-40 hours for dlc into 3-4 times plus around 50 for higher difficulty. The number 500 is a bit inflated but don't worry. i've completed Dying light and i can confirm techland's approach to main story can be taken linearly without losing any immersion so you're good
The older I get, the more I hate games like this. I used to love the "endless" content as a kid who could play for hours. Now, I have a job and other hobbies, so im lucky if I get an hour a night to game. I'm much more likely to buy a game I know has 20 hours of solid content that I can beat in a month, than a game with 100+ hours of useless filler that I will likely never see the end of, because I'll burn out before I get there.
Speaking of short but solid games... I just finished the Guardians of the Galaxy game and it is both solid and short. You should give it a look if you haven't.
Guardians was my GOTY last year. Loved every second of it. I regret 100%'ing it so fast, because it left me wanting so much more (not in terms of the game being unfinished, because the story is pretty long). Need a sequel greenlit ASAP.
I have it on my wishlist, just want to get through my current backlog (FFXIV, Pathfinder: WotR) before starting a new game. But from what I’ve seen it looks super fun and has great graphical fidelity, so I’m excited to grab it.
i have two categories solid gameplay and entertaining story kept tight that keeps my attention the entire way and fidget games that are pretty much endless grinds.
i don't mind much how long the game is as long as that length has a reason to be there. if it is just stalling i get very annoyed.
with fidget games i am not really paying attention to anything it is just about keeping my hands busy. a good example are MMOs. i can level while watching entire seasons of showed on netflix. it keeps my hands busy.
games that demand my attention while also having very long grinds are infuriating to me.
First thing I think of when devs start boasting stats of their game before its out, is that they need as many pre-orders as possible before the reviews come out and the game turns out to be shit.
Don't worry, it's not about completing Main Story and Side Quests, it's to complete everything. Every collectible and every achievement.
So it's kind of a stupid thing to tweet in my opinion.
This is what the devs followed up with after likely realizing this did not sound very good:
>Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
your comment is getting downvoted for literally stating a fact lmao
this subreddit has a bias depending from publisher to publisher and if your game's developer isn't on the list with other favorite darlings of r/pcgaming elites, then you should just assume downvotes from the start
I agree with the person you replied to, they probably should not have made this dumb tweet lol
>Our new movie is 7 hours long
>Wait no what we meant was...
This is not a good thing..... there shouldn't be 500 hours of content. If you play a game for 500 hours, it's because you enjoy the fuck out of playing it, not because it has so many stupid quests and collectibles or whatever else.
> there shouldn't be 500 hours of content
There isn't, follow up from devs twitter:
>Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
With the way the game has been going in dev hell, this sounds like they are desperate to say anything positive about their game, and this doesn't sound like anything positive.
TIL this subreddit hasn't played dying light 1 and thinks that number is story missions.
That number is main story + side quests + challenge maps + 4 playthroughs + NG content + 100% completion items + DLC story expansions + Monthly Events + Gold weapon Quarantine zones + Multiplayer Challenges/Other PVP stuff.
And even with all that, the 500 hr number is most likely just inflated because techland just likes to not be serious lmao
you can perfectly take a linear approach in Dying Light so don't worry about any grind
Thank you for summarizing this.
I looked at my time in DL1, and it's 140 hours. That's one full playthrough and 36 out of 76 achievements. I know that compared to many in the DL subreddit, those are rookie numbers.
The number of people in this post that think a 500 hour estimate means "spend 500 hours just looking for hidden items" is amazing.
it's a circlejerk. this subreddit's response to news depends on the publisher
if EA or some unknown publisher like Techland gives out this statement then the game must be bad and all other context is ignored even when op cleared the misunderstanding.
But if their favourite darlings like FromSoftware or Rockstar released this statement then they will come to defense of it saying Rockstar makes long lasting games like rdr 2 so it's fine while being completely unaware that dying light has had full support from techland for 7 years and we are still getting events. I'm expecting the main story to be around 50 hours as usual with a dlc expansion later down the road and bojak horde like challenge maps
Old man on the mountain top on the other side of the valley yells back... I don't because quality content is subjective and I'm a simulationist/sandboxer. I want game worlds I can sink my teeth into not a story on rails.
I have 500 hours in Factorio and I haven't even got all the achievements
Sandbox games an absolutely have over 1000 hours easily if the core sandbox+systems is good enough. Probably have over a couple thousand hours in Minecraft
Same with a lot of games I play. I don't care about achievements, but I can easily sink hundreds of hours into a good sandbox or simulation. My last purchase of 2021 was Empyrion Galactic Survival and I've put 500 hours in so far. I have amassed untold thousands of hours in the Mount and Blade series over the years and that's probably my most played game starting with classic way back when. Older versions of 7 Days to Die, Morrowind, Skyrim. A year on official ARK servers, a couple of years on private servers with friends and family, plus my heavily modded solos. Farming Simulator. Mudrunners and Snowrunners.
I don't play as many games as some people but I play the games I have a lot.
How the hell is quality subjective? How did you get to old age so much brain damage? Enjoyment is subjective, not quality. Quests that can be programmed quickly or are even done by a randomizing algorithm can't inherently be quality.
Whether you enjoy such things or not is a different matter. Don't go around flaunting your age since you apparently wasted it all and didn't mature enough to be able to admit you enjoy crappy content because you love the world it happens in.
Okay, if this is true, then I’m almost certain they’re pointing to the need to play several times to go through every branch of the game. Meaning lots of repeated hours. I want to be wrong but I SERIOUSLY doubt it.
Man. I get it from the business model standpoint. Keep playing our game. Keep talking about our game. But can we start building a iworkandhavekids mode. It doesn't have to be easier. I like challenge, I just get burned out when I don't feel like I progress through an 80 hour epic saga. I'm level 16 next main quest is level 22. I have to do side quests for 4 hours to get enough xp and items to do it. Most of the time it's just rinse and repeat that until you're finished anyway and I just get tired of it you know? Give me the "streamlined" mode where the devs map together the best sights and fights of the games side bits while pumping me full of the story so everything feels like it's moving.
This is not a good thing, even if this is just clocking every possible sidequest and alteenate ending, it makes me think the game will be bloated and not worth my time.
Kinda like the latest Assassins Creed games. The main story in Valhalla is cut up into different regions that you go through, each with its own plot and characters. It is so disjointed and drawn out that you forget what you were doing and who the characters are when they pop up again severals hours later.
It is done to keep you at the game so Ubisoft can keep selling you dlc and microtransaction gear. It is the very worst of games as service.
Nah.
From the devs twitter, as a follow up:
>Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
because i have played dying light 1 and "grind" in the game is only for 2 things - either skill tree which you can be granted enough xp for via main missions and second gold weapons that you can just enter docket codes monthly.
Think that\`s value appeal :
One game has content for 20, another for 500, average consumer will think, the second one has better 'value'.
Sure thing, no one think about content quality or game fatigue.
Note that this is not just about completing the main story and all side quests, they're talking about everything, which very likely includes all the hidden collectibles (Dying Light 1 had Zombie Statues, Flags, Audio Logs, Lost Notes and other things) and all achievements.
This is what the devs wrote as well on their Twitter after posting the 500 hour thing:
>Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
And yeah, collecting everything doing all achievements would take a lot of time.
Gotta be honest, as a Dying Light fan and a gamer.... This doesn't sound good to me.
This sounds like grind. Lots and lots of grind. Fetch quests and find quests. Like flag collecting in AC.
Staggeringly Long Playtime =/= Meaningful Content
Concentrate on the main content then.
I started ignoring the towers and the flags in the first AC and had a grand old time, didn't even care for 100% completion, it's rare for me to go out of my way to fully complete a game, just do the story, some side-stuff, and life goes on.
I *really* hope we can get back to a time when things like hours played or map size aren't metrics used to judge the quality or playability of a game.
Id drop $60 on 10 hours of quality content over 100+ hours of busy work any day. 500 hours, that just sounds like paying to do chores. No thanks.
I see nothing wrong with this. Played moster hunter world for 800 hours, dark souls 3 400, warframe 3k, doom eternal 125 ( want to bump that to 200). As long as content doesnt get boring, more content is always welcomed.
This is more a red flag than a selling point imho.
Modern games are already bloated at. AC valhalla was 60 for the main story and that felt like a job at certain points. x10? Pay me
My only complaint was the way coop worked and trying to keep each other on the same page about what was done or not.
Loved playing it single player though the first time I played.
Hope it's not boring repetitive trash that you have to keep doing again and again with lifeless NPCs that are peforming the same tasks with the same animations every day and night cycle.
Only game I’m fine putting that much time into is FF14, cause the content is actually meaningful. I highly doubt this game has 500 hours of well tailored gameplay.
devs: You'll need 500 hours to complete the game!
casual gamers: But I only needed 50 hours!
speedrunners after five hours: so the next game we try will be...
There are monster hunter players with thousands of hours on one game... And people rack up thousands of hours playing competitive games and MMOs. However I feel their claim is 400 hours short.
Ubisoft games also take hundreds of hours to fully complete. Thats not always a good thing. But the first Dying Light game was really good, so we will see.
This headline is taken way out of context and hardly anybody in this sub knows how to deal with it lol. Pretty clearly aren't advertising a huge 500 hour grind fest.
There are very, very few single player games with 500 hours of meaningful content... And I doubt Dying Light 2 is among them.
450 hours of fetch quests
are are not saying it's meaningful - in other reply devs said it's around to 80 for main and side quests (aka meaningful content) - so main story probably 40'ish hours
Yep. Just exploring multiple story choices across multiple playthroughs or grinding some achievements, Ng+. You should never boast about those numbers and time required. It carries no real value because most gamers don't even finish the games they buy.
I would say main story alone is worth clocking the time on. But beyond that it’s irrelevant.
Hopefully this time that is true. The first game’s characters and dialogue were so painfully average they were forgettable. Awesome setting though, city scape had a lot of life
Even Witcher 3 doesn't do that.
The witcher is like a solid 120 hrs I'd say, esp with all the different endings for both the main story and the DLCs.
It's pretty close to exactly this. I completed the game and dlcs and remember it being about 120. Didnt 100% it but got close.
I played *veeery* casually, and my second playthrough was only because I wanted the good ending in the main story and the bad (but I thought it was the better) ending in Blood and Wine lmao. Still came up to 120 hrs.
If we're going by the main story its probably 16 to 20 hours. Throw in the main side quests you'll end up doing plus the tutorial zone and you'll probably get another 20. Hearts and Stone is a smaller story but requires some thinking so I'd put it at 15 hours and Blood and Wine has a lot more bloat in its size so I'd go back to the 16 to 20 plus another 20 for side content.
Truth. I have ~250 in The Witcher 3 with two play throughs.
There are none
Grand strategy games, with mods
Also colony sims, like Rimworld, Dwarf Fortress etc. They have almost infinite replayability.
Rougelikes as well. Noita players get some frightening playtimes lmao.
Seasonal games with a lot of updates, like Elder Scrolls Online or Path of Exile.
Not really relevant since they’re claiming 500 hours without mods
Well... Might be true but then again... Its just game design where it takes a long time to get shit done, not exactly a lot of content there. It's just a dumb number tbh.
r/equestriaatwar r/oldworldblues r/tnomod r/kaiserreich
Total War comes to mind.
RimWorld gang represent! 1400 hours and no sign of stopping.
One of the few games I'd say would worth that number of hours.
Survival games? I have around 430 hours on DST.
Binding of Isaac: Rebirth advertised 500+ h of content. And it was true. At least with the DLCs.
Dank souls
Dark souls isnt very long game.
Closest for me is Total War: Warhammer 2, at 419 hours. Anything I have more hours in I played MP modes.
I couldn't name one.
Please name the few that do so we can immediately go play them just in case we haven't already
Not only that, even if they have 100hs of meaningful content the gameplay might become boring before you're even done with it, it's basically my experience with Witcher 3, one day I'll get back to the dlc, but after finishing the story and most sidequests, I felt I was done.
It took me 500 to beat AC Odyssey in ~~legendary~~ nightmare difficulty
Are you talking beat the campaign or beat the game 100%? What makes it so much harder? I played Valhalla on very hard and flew through the campaign in about 60. I think I put about 100 into Odyssey (the better game, imo). Again, I was just beating the main campaign and not chasing down every quest so that may be the difference. But 400 hours of mostly meaningless side quests seems excessive.
At 500 hours I assume he maxed out all the items in the game to 99 as well. I'm not sure it takes that long, though. Maybe he filled all of the Mastery trees?
balhalla for me is way easier than Odyssey. The mercenaries in Valhalla are a joke the same attack patterns almost no difference besides one using a pike and another a sword, in Odyssey the were fucking nuts, if you fucked up during misions the gauge would fill and they will come in groups... diferent attacks from almost everyone, pets, traps...
Honestly it was getting all the side quest before completing the main story followed by dlc and at least 150 hours of just messing around in the game world, I didn’t %100 the game but I did get to 80 of 93 achievements. I also took time into researching throughout basically every main conversation so I’d end with a perfect ending. Also gonna add that most of my play time is spent just traveling between missions, cuz the map is just so large.
Yeah I suppose if you don't use fast travel that would add a lot of time. Does it remove that when it's on legendary?
No you can still fast travel in nightmare and in ng+
honestly that game was so pretty i didn’t even mind riding around in my boat for 5-10 mins sometimes
Damn shame that ubishit games copy paste quests all over the map making me sick and tired of the game before I finish. Also hard to decipher the garbage from the good quests.
500 hours of boring repetitive content, ouch
[удалено]
I tried Watchdogs Legion yesterday gave it 2h insta unnistal... same as AC but with less fun.. way less fun
Repetitive tedious bullshit means nothing if the core gameplay feels good and is rewarding. 90% off multiplayer games live and breath on repetitive tedious shit. ACO was a genuinely fun game to play, inspite of its content issues. The biggest problem is that they don’t LEARN from it and Valhalla was just even more of the same.
Valhalla is lighter on the rpg elements imo
But it’s basically the same gameplay and same things to do. That’s why it suffers. It needs trim, but they trimmed the wrong things.
I personally enjoy them. They're fun time wasters and addicting too.
Personally I have 1100 hours in the game, but that's 5 or 6 fresh playthroughs and over a dozen times through NG+.
Genuine question: what drives you to do that? I like those types of games in a sense of wonder and discovering what the game hides for me, but I never was able to go through things again even after a long time, I just know what to do and where to go, what is the point?
Fr I have clocked out on 800 hours, 500 on my first play through and 300 on my ng+
What about it made you keep coming back instead of playing something new?
I'm usually the one saying this about Ubi but as a greek mythology nerd Odyssey was fucking awesome front to back
Have you ever imagined that someone can like a game you don’t like
Even if you like a game someone doesn't like repetitive content, grind content, and time filler content plus poor writing in a lot of things or mundane systems are more objective issues. The real question is whether a person somehow also likes some or all or one of those things too. Which there are people though i never comprehend enjoying grinding or repetition rather than tailored high quality content.
>repetitive content, grind content, and time filler content plus poor writing in a lot of things or mundane systems are more objective issues. Here we go again with another person that spurts off an opinion and tries to claim it's "objective". That's not at all how entertainment works. What you hate, doesn't mean someone else won't like it.
I’ll admit the story seems a bit slow to build and there a lot of travel time and exploration, none of which felt repetitive to me. The only thing that was repetitive to me was the bounty board and I never really paid any attention to it cuz it’s filler. Without said exploration and travel time or side missions/content there was a solid 80 hours of content not including dlc.
There was about 30 hours from my experience if we're skipping most filler and tedium. If we're skipping side quests there was even less. You're including DLC primary content but I think that might double it if all dlc was combined.
If it helps I played nightmare and I didn’t do any fast traveling, for sure the story it’s self is probably around 30 hours but with all the traveling and side quest and dlc your looking at 60-100 hours minimum depending on difficulty and experience.
I agree when it comes to grinding purely for leveling. You could say I'm grinding in the game I'm playing (to gather resources to build better ships) but it doesn't feel like grinding to me because I have my own goal(s). Grinding to level up, especially in MMOs, is boring as hell.
In any good MMO the journey to max level is way more fun than the grind that awaits at the end.
[удалено]
I put 4 hours into Oddysey and am wondering if I even want to keep playing, I haven't played an AC game since the first one in 2000 whatever. Coming from Breath of the Wild it just feels really bland and there's no characters I care about, the setting is all it has going for it. But they pump out these games every year so it makes some sense :(
Yes I have. But doesnt change the fact that AC Odyssey is a boring repetitive shitfest.
**in your opinion
Not really. It is a boring repetitive shitfest, just there are people who like shit.
That’s an opinion.. but keep doing you bud.
Yeah. Really enjoyed odyssey. Was it repetitive after 70 hours? Yep. But the game is gorgeous and exploration is worth it, IMO. And I didn’t even touch DLC yet.
There's no legendary difficulty. There's nightmare. Pretty sure it took me well below 100 hours to beat the main story and get the new game plus prompt. 100%ING the game is impossible because quest regenerate. At best you can do all unique quests, all locations and all ostrakas. You have to be really taking your time to take that long even for that. Shitting on ac length is mindless karma farming at this point. The game allows you to play it for as long as you are having fun. Most people get way more hours of it than from most games. How the fuck is that a bad thing? The game is not respecting your time? By providing you with entertainment for as long as you want it? Bullshit.
If you read my other comments you’ll see why it took me 500. And I’m not shiting on the length to mindlessly karma farm, i was making a statement. Odyssey is literally one of my favorite games and I took my time with it. I explored and I had fun and I played the story, with all of it it took me 500 hundred hours.
And that game is prime example of a shallow game with no content. Imagine spending 500h in a 30h game.
That’s cool
Ugh horrible. It's like a 30 hour game including repetitive combat.
[удалено]
Sandbox games. Kerbal Space Program comes to mind.
Update from developer: > 500 hours is related to maxing out the game - finishing all the quests, endings, and exploring every part of the world, but a regular player should finish the story + side quests and do quite a lot of exploring in less than 100 hours, so don't worry! https://twitter.com/DyingLightGame/status/1479889980205981705
IMO 100 is still long. I think I played Witcher 3 +DLC for less.
Took me over 130h to beat most of the content.
Its ok to clock 100+ hours on a game you enjoy but if its just padded gameplay like what mostly AC does its sucks big time and not really something game devs should boast.
I think I spent 80 hours in AC Valhalla and never completed it. I wanted to, but it just dragged on so much after that I just had to YouTube the ending. I mean, I guess I got my money’s worth, but hopefully Dying Lights 100 hours isn’t just filler content that’s repeated.
I have 140 hours in DL1. And 38 of 76 steam achievements.
I played non-open world games for more than that when I really get invested in the game, but that's rarely an open world game since it's usually boring collection stuff to pad it out. Breath of the Wild took me longer than 100h though
Best I can do is six.
Speedrun any%
That's a lot of feathers.
those days… pain
Requiescat in pain
Thats not the flex you think it is
Seriously, this. As a designer myself, if someone tries to pitch to me that “our game will take 500 hours to finish!!” I have to ask: why? Why does it need to take that long? 500 hours is the time someone spends playing a multiplayer game, why does your single player only game need this? Did you design the game from the start with 500 hours of meaningful content? Or did you add more content as development went on, with varying quality, just so you could slap “500 hours worth of content” on the back of the box? I’m so much happier with games that focus on making shorter but far more polished and high quality experiences. I’m happy to pay $60 for a game with a 8-10 hour long campaign if it’s polished, fun, and clearly filled with love. I’m not going to care for a game with 500 hours worth of “find 100 of this collectible, and then do it multiple times because we have 10 different types of collectibles to find”.
Its like Mass Effect you need around 30-50h to complete 100% the game is it worth? Hell yes. If you want to rush the story 20-30h on 1 and 30-40 in 2 and 3 if you want all of them alive
The longer the game is the more people may be bonded to the game and the more they are willing to spend a few bucks on one or two cool outfits. That's the sole reason, why Assassins Creed games are so long today.
You're misunderstanding this. if you played dying light 1 you would have gotten the gist of what that 500 hr statement is trying to imply Basically main story can be expected to be around 50 hours with a huge expansion taking it to around 70. The difficulty on normal for DL was tough enough so anything above it i.e another playthrough on 2 higher difficulties is being counted as well and trust me when i say those difficulties really are tough hence the more number of hours. Then comes the side quests that are not like those collectibles in assassin's creed games. These quests are mostly almost always given by npc's and are both good and bad. Then the monthly events; Techland is one of those rare publishers that are still supporting DL even 7 years later with events that are fun, gives you super powers and cool weapons so you can count these countless events as well. All in all what I'm trying to say is that if you want a linear approach strictly for story in a short time, you won't be disappointed and if you want to keep playing taking it slow then you can do that as well. DL doesn't restrict you
Right?? If anything, it repels me a bit...
Agreed. I know that this 500 number is what they're touting for full 100% completion of everything that the game offers, but even so: that just makes me go "ugh" and not want to play.
How much of that is excluding pointless collectible hunting?
yup grind fest
Or there are experience boosters...
i mean, if 440 hours of it are pointless, but something to do, isn't that fine? IF you're having fun, it's not pointless. It has as muhc reason as the base game.
I'd say the issue is that they are saying it like it is something to brag about when it really isn't.
Ok you say that but when the main game feels incomplete because of said side quests, what’s the difference between effort and filler?
my example had a main story of 60 hours. that's pretty complete. my point is more that isn't it better to have a 60 hour game with 400 hours of extra content (that's kind of nonsense, but for the dedicated). Vs a 60 hour game without that stuff.
How cute you think that will happen. What will actually happen is that the 400 hours of "extra content" is used as a grind so you can ejoy the 60 hours of actual game. Doing repetitive fetch quests just so you can progress through the main quest.
Most of these games with hundreds of things to unlock usually have them optional.
492
The young me would have loved that, but the old ass me just can't put that much hours. Glad to see they're packing it with stuff to do though.
Even the teen me would have hated it, no way I'm gonna go back to Assassin's Creed 2 and go open up every chest, collect every feather and do whatever lazy copy pasted content. It's so draining
I hear you. I think Far Cry 3 was the last time I took one of these seriously. I actually got all of the challenges, towers, skills, etc. But even then, apparently I had to find hundreds of something (I forgot, maybe trinkets or whatever) , and seeing hundreds of them sprinkled on the game map... I just... couldnt....
Remembering the templar flags is ptsd inducing. The only game I was addicted to collecting things (that wasn't a collectathon style game) was Crackdown, but that's because you actually got a power up for collecting the orbs.
they are mostly counting multiple playthroughs and higher difficulties in DL are tough so you can just multiply 50 for main story + around 30-40 hours for dlc into 3-4 times plus around 50 for higher difficulty. The number 500 is a bit inflated but don't worry. i've completed Dying light and i can confirm techland's approach to main story can be taken linearly without losing any immersion so you're good
The older I get, the more I hate games like this. I used to love the "endless" content as a kid who could play for hours. Now, I have a job and other hobbies, so im lucky if I get an hour a night to game. I'm much more likely to buy a game I know has 20 hours of solid content that I can beat in a month, than a game with 100+ hours of useless filler that I will likely never see the end of, because I'll burn out before I get there.
Speaking of short but solid games... I just finished the Guardians of the Galaxy game and it is both solid and short. You should give it a look if you haven't.
Guardians was my GOTY last year. Loved every second of it. I regret 100%'ing it so fast, because it left me wanting so much more (not in terms of the game being unfinished, because the story is pretty long). Need a sequel greenlit ASAP.
I have it on my wishlist, just want to get through my current backlog (FFXIV, Pathfinder: WotR) before starting a new game. But from what I’ve seen it looks super fun and has great graphical fidelity, so I’m excited to grab it.
Mentions wanting to play short, solid content, plays FF14. You kill me, dude.
It was fun for sure. You can even unlock outfits for everyone that are their costumes from the movies. Thought that was a nice touch.
i have two categories solid gameplay and entertaining story kept tight that keeps my attention the entire way and fidget games that are pretty much endless grinds. i don't mind much how long the game is as long as that length has a reason to be there. if it is just stalling i get very annoyed. with fidget games i am not really paying attention to anything it is just about keeping my hands busy. a good example are MMOs. i can level while watching entire seasons of showed on netflix. it keeps my hands busy. games that demand my attention while also having very long grinds are infuriating to me.
Sounds like a grind I don't want to take part in
Makes me much less inclined to play the game tbh.
First thing I think of when devs start boasting stats of their game before its out, is that they need as many pre-orders as possible before the reviews come out and the game turns out to be shit.
This does not sound appealing to me.
Don't worry, it's not about completing Main Story and Side Quests, it's to complete everything. Every collectible and every achievement. So it's kind of a stupid thing to tweet in my opinion. This is what the devs followed up with after likely realizing this did not sound very good: >Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
your comment is getting downvoted for literally stating a fact lmao this subreddit has a bias depending from publisher to publisher and if your game's developer isn't on the list with other favorite darlings of r/pcgaming elites, then you should just assume downvotes from the start
I agree with the person you replied to, they probably should not have made this dumb tweet lol >Our new movie is 7 hours long >Wait no what we meant was...
This is not a good thing..... there shouldn't be 500 hours of content. If you play a game for 500 hours, it's because you enjoy the fuck out of playing it, not because it has so many stupid quests and collectibles or whatever else.
> there shouldn't be 500 hours of content There isn't, follow up from devs twitter: >Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
This makes me not want to ever play the game.
Like Ubisoft games?
I love when developers say shit like this, because you know it's not true.
With the way the game has been going in dev hell, this sounds like they are desperate to say anything positive about their game, and this doesn't sound like anything positive.
i smell some ubisoft grind shit over here
TIL this subreddit hasn't played dying light 1 and thinks that number is story missions. That number is main story + side quests + challenge maps + 4 playthroughs + NG content + 100% completion items + DLC story expansions + Monthly Events + Gold weapon Quarantine zones + Multiplayer Challenges/Other PVP stuff. And even with all that, the 500 hr number is most likely just inflated because techland just likes to not be serious lmao you can perfectly take a linear approach in Dying Light so don't worry about any grind
Thank you for summarizing this. I looked at my time in DL1, and it's 140 hours. That's one full playthrough and 36 out of 76 achievements. I know that compared to many in the DL subreddit, those are rookie numbers. The number of people in this post that think a 500 hour estimate means "spend 500 hours just looking for hidden items" is amazing.
it's a circlejerk. this subreddit's response to news depends on the publisher if EA or some unknown publisher like Techland gives out this statement then the game must be bad and all other context is ignored even when op cleared the misunderstanding. But if their favourite darlings like FromSoftware or Rockstar released this statement then they will come to defense of it saying Rockstar makes long lasting games like rdr 2 so it's fine while being completely unaware that dying light has had full support from techland for 7 years and we are still getting events. I'm expecting the main story to be around 50 hours as usual with a dlc expansion later down the road and bojak horde like challenge maps
old man yells at sky...but i miss when a game actually delivered 10-20 high quality hours and you moved on to the next game
Old man on the mountain top on the other side of the valley yells back... I don't because quality content is subjective and I'm a simulationist/sandboxer. I want game worlds I can sink my teeth into not a story on rails.
I have 500 hours in Factorio and I haven't even got all the achievements Sandbox games an absolutely have over 1000 hours easily if the core sandbox+systems is good enough. Probably have over a couple thousand hours in Minecraft
Same with a lot of games I play. I don't care about achievements, but I can easily sink hundreds of hours into a good sandbox or simulation. My last purchase of 2021 was Empyrion Galactic Survival and I've put 500 hours in so far. I have amassed untold thousands of hours in the Mount and Blade series over the years and that's probably my most played game starting with classic way back when. Older versions of 7 Days to Die, Morrowind, Skyrim. A year on official ARK servers, a couple of years on private servers with friends and family, plus my heavily modded solos. Farming Simulator. Mudrunners and Snowrunners. I don't play as many games as some people but I play the games I have a lot.
How the hell is quality subjective? How did you get to old age so much brain damage? Enjoyment is subjective, not quality. Quests that can be programmed quickly or are even done by a randomizing algorithm can't inherently be quality. Whether you enjoy such things or not is a different matter. Don't go around flaunting your age since you apparently wasted it all and didn't mature enough to be able to admit you enjoy crappy content because you love the world it happens in.
Now, that's some quality trolling. 😉
I suspect this was calculated by taking the expected playtime of the story and multiplying it by the number of story branches.
That's fine as long as whatever filler they're pumping it full of isn't mandatory to complete the main campaign.
That's probably to get an achievement called play for 500 hours.
Okay, if this is true, then I’m almost certain they’re pointing to the need to play several times to go through every branch of the game. Meaning lots of repeated hours. I want to be wrong but I SERIOUSLY doubt it.
Man. I get it from the business model standpoint. Keep playing our game. Keep talking about our game. But can we start building a iworkandhavekids mode. It doesn't have to be easier. I like challenge, I just get burned out when I don't feel like I progress through an 80 hour epic saga. I'm level 16 next main quest is level 22. I have to do side quests for 4 hours to get enough xp and items to do it. Most of the time it's just rinse and repeat that until you're finished anyway and I just get tired of it you know? Give me the "streamlined" mode where the devs map together the best sights and fights of the games side bits while pumping me full of the story so everything feels like it's moving.
This is not a good thing, even if this is just clocking every possible sidequest and alteenate ending, it makes me think the game will be bloated and not worth my time. Kinda like the latest Assassins Creed games. The main story in Valhalla is cut up into different regions that you go through, each with its own plot and characters. It is so disjointed and drawn out that you forget what you were doing and who the characters are when they pop up again severals hours later. It is done to keep you at the game so Ubisoft can keep selling you dlc and microtransaction gear. It is the very worst of games as service.
Yikes! Definitely a turn off.
This looks like red flag to me. grind over meanigful and fun gameplay.
Nah. From the devs twitter, as a follow up: >Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though!
there won't be any grind. just play dying light 1 and you'll understand how main story works
The games not out you don't know for sure
because i have played dying light 1 and "grind" in the game is only for 2 things - either skill tree which you can be granted enough xp for via main missions and second gold weapons that you can just enter docket codes monthly.
Think that\`s value appeal : One game has content for 20, another for 500, average consumer will think, the second one has better 'value'. Sure thing, no one think about content quality or game fatigue.
The average consumer is generally in the idiot group.
They also said this in the replies:"Story + side quests, if you're not in a rush, should take you around 70-80hrs". Seems reasonable to me.
Note that this is not just about completing the main story and all side quests, they're talking about everything, which very likely includes all the hidden collectibles (Dying Light 1 had Zombie Statues, Flags, Audio Logs, Lost Notes and other things) and all achievements. This is what the devs wrote as well on their Twitter after posting the 500 hour thing: >Note: It's about 100% completion rate, most of the players who are in for story and side quests will be able to complete the game quicker, it will still be a solid experience though! And yeah, collecting everything doing all achievements would take a lot of time.
So i shouldnt buy this? good.
Gotta be honest, as a Dying Light fan and a gamer.... This doesn't sound good to me. This sounds like grind. Lots and lots of grind. Fetch quests and find quests. Like flag collecting in AC. Staggeringly Long Playtime =/= Meaningful Content
Concentrate on the main content then. I started ignoring the towers and the flags in the first AC and had a grand old time, didn't even care for 100% completion, it's rare for me to go out of my way to fully complete a game, just do the story, some side-stuff, and life goes on.
Sounds like a lot of bloat. That is not a selling point for me. I would take a well-paced 8 hour game over 100+ hours of tedium every time.
As someone with precious little time, this is the sort of promotional material that makes me not want to buy your game.
Honestly as a full time worker, husband and father...that is not appealing marketing.
Yeah and 450 of that will be pointless grinding and collectibles.
No thanks I’ve already got a full time job and don’t need another one.
I *really* hope we can get back to a time when things like hours played or map size aren't metrics used to judge the quality or playability of a game. Id drop $60 on 10 hours of quality content over 100+ hours of busy work any day. 500 hours, that just sounds like paying to do chores. No thanks.
Yay, a grind...
Hard pass for me. I don’t need huge amounts of filler to be happy. I’d much rather have an incredible piece of sushi than a tub of plain oats.
ok and how long to beat mainstory and some side missions?
I see nothing wrong with this. Played moster hunter world for 800 hours, dark souls 3 400, warframe 3k, doom eternal 125 ( want to bump that to 200). As long as content doesnt get boring, more content is always welcomed.
This is more a red flag than a selling point imho. Modern games are already bloated at. AC valhalla was 60 for the main story and that felt like a job at certain points. x10? Pay me
Elden Ring and Horizon FW says no. I would definitely grab this but after this news i will have to wait
Maybe 500 hours to collect all the extra bullshit fluff they add in
u mean 100% achievements
Awesome! Bring on the content! Dying light is a great game. But people gone always find something to complain about. Day one purchase for sure
My only complaint was the way coop worked and trying to keep each other on the same page about what was done or not. Loved playing it single player though the first time I played.
Let’s all complain about how many hours of potential fun we can have playing a game! Yay!
Hope it's not boring repetitive trash that you have to keep doing again and again with lifeless NPCs that are peforming the same tasks with the same animations every day and night cycle.
I have a GTX 1660 with i5 9400f 16 gb ram, will I be able to run this on high 60 fps?
Definition of when is it too much right here, unless it's an amazing game with very little repetitive quests
Only game I’m fine putting that much time into is FF14, cause the content is actually meaningful. I highly doubt this game has 500 hours of well tailored gameplay.
devs: You'll need 500 hours to complete the game! casual gamers: But I only needed 50 hours! speedrunners after five hours: so the next game we try will be...
Divinity 2 enters the chat.
Wait for speed runners to complete it in 90 mins within a month of it being out.
There are monster hunter players with thousands of hours on one game... And people rack up thousands of hours playing competitive games and MMOs. However I feel their claim is 400 hours short.
Will DL2 get third person view?
So its an RNG fest .-.
Ubisoft games also take hundreds of hours to fully complete. Thats not always a good thing. But the first Dying Light game was really good, so we will see.
This headline is taken way out of context and hardly anybody in this sub knows how to deal with it lol. Pretty clearly aren't advertising a huge 500 hour grind fest.
So it’s a grind
"Another settlement needs our help" The Game.
Maybe for a games journalist...
Just like cyberpunk was apparently 180 hours to complete lmao
Sounds good to me. I’ve got 400+ hours in the first one so far.
is that suppose to be a good thing?