Gameplay lenght

[Darji]

For the story length I do not really care if its 10.20 40 or even 100 hours as long it has no stuff that just look like filler. If they can keep the story interesting and good for 100 hours sure. Give it all to me. If they only can do that for 20-30 hours I am totally fine with it as well.

 

As for side stuff. Again I rather have a less amount of sidequests which are really good instead of kill 4 wolves or bears or bring me 10 herbs etc fetch quests. Of course fetch quests also should be in such a game but not too many please. I rather would cut the length of the game than having these quests over and over again.

[Jozape]

Are we counting replays in terms of game length? a 20-30 hour main game can turn into 100+ if multiple playthroughs are rewarded by a branching plot.

 

I thought the poll was in terms of hours to go through all the content. A 'main story' that does not have an urgent plot that only takes 20 hours is perfectly fine and dandy with me if there is sufficient optional content.

[Flouride]

20-30 hours of gameplay with great amount of c&c that will keep me playing the game over and over again. Quality > Quantity. I don't want to grind in some generic caverns for hours (yes I'm looking at you DA). Nor do I want to play the same map over and over and over again (DA2).

[Nonek]

Yes never mind the length, feel the breadth. Sorry.

[dlux]

60-80 hours is sufficient.

 

BUT WITHOUT numerous damn fetch quests. God, I hate those... Skyrim has like 150 hours of that crap.

[Any_ILL]

Since it's a new project, funded by us (and no, 1 to 3 million is not a lot) I consider 50 to 80 to be sufficient. As long as it's quality content with in depth story and mechanic and not artificial duration it's ok for me.

[nikolokolus]

Given their likely budget, I think 20-50 hours is pretty reasonable, otherwise you might end up with a lot of low quality filler just trying to stretch out the time.

 

Like others have said I value quality and depth over hours burned on single play-through. Replayability through variety in the ways you can tackle problems or encounters or branching story-lines are going to make me want to play the game over and over.

Edited September 16, 2012 by nikolokolus

[GhostofAnakin]

I voted 20-50, mainly because of the delicate balance between quality and quantity required to make a great game, coupled with the resources available to the developers to achieve that balance. 20 to 50 hours is right around a solid length where that balance can be met.

[TechnoPallidin]

I love 100+ hour type games. The main story line can be around 20-30 hours but if you do everything it's more like 100+, could be extended through New Game+ type of scenarios, like Diablo's or Sacred's increasing difficulty levels.

[Chaos Theory]

Anything less than about 60 hours would disappoint me. I realize that the vast majority of players will never see the end in that scenario but.... I simply don't care. It's tough to be "epic" without a significant time sink, provided the quality maintains its integrity.

[Tamerlane]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

[The Sharmat]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

I wouldn't be surprised if the game is 20 hours and has diverse enough options to support 5 playthroughs. Does that count?

[Chaos Theory]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

I wouldn't be surprised if the game is 20 hours and has diverse enough options to support 5 playthroughs. Does that count?

 

If it's 20 hours, please confirm prior to the 16th so I can lower my donation. I want a game, not an expansion pack.

[Tamerlane]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

I wouldn't be surprised if the game is 20 hours and has diverse enough options to support 5 playthroughs. Does that count?

I... don't know?

 

I cast my vote under the assumption that we were talking about a single playthrough.

[The Sharmat]

That was a random and very conservative estimate. However keep in mind that this is a game with a small budget. You're more likely to get a longer game by keeping your pledge high.

 

EDIT: For the record, I cast my vote for the 20-50 hours mark. 40 or so would be ideal for me.

Edited September 16, 2012 by The Sharmat

[Darji]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

I wouldn't be surprised if the game is 20 hours and has diverse enough options to support 5 playthroughs. Does that count?

 

If it's 20 hours, please confirm prior to the 16th so I can lower my donation. I want a game, not an expansion pack.

 

Seriously what do you expect a Baldurs Gate 3? This game has a small budget and if the Main story is like 20 hours its a decent length if they also include lot of side stuff which is interesting.

[Tigranes]

Game length in hours are the same as battery life on gadgets - it's almost an arbitrary number that will rarely correspond to your actual experience.

 

I finished Jade Empire in less than ten hours; it took others thirty. A relatively 'complete' run of BG2, depending on player and other things, can take anything between ~25 hours and, by some accounts, well over 100.

[The Sharmat]

I think Torment took me thirty or so, and I was satisfied.

[Jozape]

Game length in hours are the same as battery life on gadgets - it's almost an arbitrary number that will rarely correspond to your actual experience.

 

I finished Jade Empire in less than ten hours; it took others thirty. A relatively 'complete' run of BG2, depending on player and other things, can take anything between ~25 hours and, by some accounts, well over 100.

 

It's at least 100 hours for me. It felt like I played that game for an eternity when I played it. And I only played it once and never finished the expansion.

[Sammael]

I'm hoping for at least 50-60 hours. The map that was teased promises a large number of interesting locations, but we'll see how many actually get implemented in the first installment.

 

Of the original IE games, Torment (~30 hours) felt a bit too brief (particularly because some of the end-game locations were obviously rushed), whereas BG1 (~120) seemed to take way too long and have too much stuff going on, particularly in the titular city.

Edited September 16, 2012 by Sammael

[Nakia]

I don't care. It is quality I am hoping for. If it has replayability then I get more play time. Also the longer the play the longer to make the game. April 2014 is actually a short time. I would prefer less play time with an expansion . Please just make the game as bug free as is humanly possible.

 

Quality over Quantity.

[vogon]

I'm certainly hoping for a large game. For me, the question of scale is more significant than "more must be better". The sense of vast unknown territories to explore is a key part of my experience in this style of game. The great joy of Baldurs Gate was wandering about in unkown woodlands, listening to the atmospheric effects and soundstrack, then stumbling accross a ruined temple overun by lethal creatrures that I could not defeat, and making a note to return one day when I was tougher. That feeling has not been acheived in more modern RPGs, with their repeating 3D spaces and levelled enemies. My hope is that by eschewing 3D models and voice acting, a much larger and richer world can be created. I would be very dissapointed if Project Eternity turned out to be pint-sized.

[Chaos Theory]

Is anyone really expecting 100+ hours?

I wouldn't be surprised if the game is 20 hours and has diverse enough options to support 5 playthroughs. Does that count?

 

If it's 20 hours, please confirm prior to the 16th so I can lower my donation. I want a game, not an expansion pack.

 

Seriously what do you expect a Baldurs Gate 3? This game has a small budget and if the Main story is like 20 hours its a decent length if they also include lot of side stuff which is interesting.

 

Why yes, I would like BG3! That said, I'd rather have a longer, more interesting story than a short one with a whole lot of replayability. I will maybe replay an RPG several years after my initial playthrough, but only if it was very good. Choosing different companions or deciding to go tackle "X" questline prior to "Y" questline this playthrough isn't really a draw for me. It's still, ultimately, the same story.

 

Plus, I consider myself a "completionist" when it comes to RPGs, so I squeeze every ounce of content out the first time through. Admittedly, if there's one thing I miss by doing that, it's that I will then not get the content provided by the companions I don't hang with. However, there's a reason I didn't have them in my party the first time, so they wouldn't present enough interest by themselves to prompt a 2nd run.

Edited September 16, 2012 by Chaos Theory

[The Sharmat]

I'm hoping that since they're actually going to be aiming for graphics and environments that were standard ten years ago, that those things have gotten so easy and cheap to do now that they can get a lot more bang for their buck in terms of content.

[Tamerlane]

That was a random and very conservative estimate. However keep in mind that this is a game with a small budget. You're more likely to get a longer game by keeping your pledge high.

 

EDIT: For the record, I cast my vote for the 20-50 hours mark. 40 or so would be ideal for me.

D'accord. I'm just surprised that anyone is actually expecting more than that.