how long you think a single completionist playtrough will take?

[Cantousent]

I think people in this thread are mistaking playtime for taking it slow.

 

And it's not wrong to play like that. But let's not act like purposefully nitpicking over every detail is a contributing factor to the full playtime. 

Well, the OP, in the title of the thread, asked a specific question about a completionist playthrough.  Seems to me that you'd expect fellow completionists to discuss it.  Apparently, we're a nit picky crowd.

[Abel]

Wow. I feel Bryy never denied the completionist thing. He spoke about effective time play. And in his idea, the time spent not effectively playing (like when reading) should not be counted when it comes to measuring the game lenght. I don't think he said it was wortless to read, and explore all the stuff. His point is more about whether or not the time spent reading a book should or should not be counted when speaking of hours needed for a completionist run. He never meant to say enjoying the details was worthless.

[Valmy]

I think people in this thread are mistaking playtime for taking it slow.

 

And it's not wrong to play like that. But let's not act like purposefully nitpicking over every detail is a contributing factor to the full playtime. 

 

I don't really nitpick over every detail but completionist means 80+ hours if doing a game bigger than BG1 to me.  That just says exploring all available areas and doing all available quests to me.

[Cantousent]

I for one didn't take offense at his comments, but I would also take those nitpicky things as completionist.  My belief right now is that the game length will be perfectly long enough by a reasonable standard, so the point of the thread really is geared for nit picky things.  That doesn't mean I'm manning the barricade and trying to repel Bryy, although some people have thought I was repellant.

 

On the other hand, completionist need not mean reading every book or pouring over every item.  So maybe we should have categories of speed run, regular, completionist, nit picky, and finally 'grabs an editor to scour for dialogue and text he couldn't find in several playthroughs.'  :Cant's tongue in cheek grin icon:  I don't know if that last category counts as playtime, though.  <.<

[morhilane]

Wow. I feel Bryy never denied the completionist thing. He spoke about effective time play. And in his idea, the time spent not effectively playing (like when reading) should not be counted when it comes to measuring the game lenght. I don't think he said it was wortless to read, and explore all the stuff. His point is more about whether or not the time spent reading a book should or should not be counted when speaking of hours needed for a completionist run. He never meant to say enjoying the details was worthless.

 

Completionist means completionist, if you are not reading dialogs or books and aren't trying to unearth all the game secrets you are not doing a completionist playthrough.

[Abel]

 

Wow. I feel Bryy never denied the completionist thing. He spoke about effective time play. And in his idea, the time spent not effectively playing (like when reading) should not be counted when it comes to measuring the game lenght. I don't think he said it was wortless to read, and explore all the stuff. His point is more about whether or not the time spent reading a book should or should not be counted when speaking of hours needed for a completionist run. He never meant to say enjoying the details was worthless.

 

Completionist means completionist, if you are not reading dialogs or books and aren't trying to unearth all the game secrets you are not doing a completionist playthrough.

 

 

No, no. I agree with you, totally. All i say is that the Bryy's concern seemed to be whether the time doing so should be counted as time needed to achieve a completionist run or not. Like i said, to me, since it's part of the fun, and even if it's not actually playing, i would count this time when measuring the game lenght. But i think what he says is not stupid since reading is not actually playing (e.g. solving quests, looting, clicking, fighting, crawling, and so on). The question here is NOT whether we should read books in a completionist run, but whether the TIME spent doing so is to be counted as playing time. That's all i guess.

 

 

I for one didn't take offense at his comments, but I would also take those nitpicky things as completionist.  My belief right now is that the game length will be perfectly long enough by a reasonable standard, so the point of the thread really is geared for nit picky things.  That doesn't mean I'm manning the barricade and trying to repel Bryy, although some people have thought I was repellant.

 

Well, i didn't thought you were. I just felt that there was a misunderstanding about what Bryy meant. But since english is not my native language, i may be the one who misunderstood.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Abel

[Sedrefilos]

We'll find out soon enough. I say we all have a timer on the side, starting it when we start play and pausing it when the game loads or when we go to the toilet, answer the phoce etc.

Then come back here on by one when we finish it and post in the "official playtime time" thread our playtime, in days, hours, minutes and seconds

[Abel]

We'll find out soon enough. I say we all have a timer on the side, starting it when we start play and pausing it when the game loads or when we go to the toilet, answer the phoce etc.

Then come back here on by one when we finish it and post in the "official playtime time" thread our playtime, in days, hours, minutes and seconds

 

I wouldn't be surprised if some gamers actually do these things.

[etagloc]

I'm hoping for around 30 hours.  I'm too busy for anything more.

Sounds serious.. how long do you have left to live?

[morhilane]

 

 

Wow. I feel Bryy never denied the completionist thing. He spoke about effective time play. And in his idea, the time spent not effectively playing (like when reading) should not be counted when it comes to measuring the game lenght. I don't think he said it was wortless to read, and explore all the stuff. His point is more about whether or not the time spent reading a book should or should not be counted when speaking of hours needed for a completionist run. He never meant to say enjoying the details was worthless.

 

Completionist means completionist, if you are not reading dialogs or books and aren't trying to unearth all the game secrets you are not doing a completionist playthrough.

 

 

No, no. I agree with you, totally. All i say is that the Bryy's concern seemed to be whether the time doing so should be counted as time needed to achieve a completionist run or not. Like i said, to me, since it's part of the fun, and even if it's not actually playing, i would count this time when measuring the game lenght. But i think what he says is not stupid since reading is not actually playing (e.g. solving quests, looting, clicking, fighting, crawling, and so on). The question here is NOT whether we should read books in a completionist run, but whether the TIME spent doing so is to be counted as playing time. That's all i guess.

 

If it is done in the gameworld while playing the game it should be counted as part of the game session and thus the time it took to play the game. The in-game books are there to be read while playing, they are part of the game.

 

Saying that, I expect most PoE players aren't going to read them.

[Valmy]

 

I haven't used a timer for my BG2 playthroughs, but I would be very surprised if my last individual playthrough, including the overwhelming majority of optional side content (Stronghold, Dragons, Kangaxx, etc), topped 50 hours.

 

 

Sorry I missed this post earlier.

 

Wow you play that lightening fast, I cannot imagine doing a playthrough of BG2 in that length of time.  Maybe for you it is 30-40 hours.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

^Josh played and "finished"* 1 level of the mega dungeon in about 20 minutes (Of course, it was only level 3, I think, and the levels will probably get tougher and tougher as you go further down). You're going to have to walk really slowly to get 25-30 hours out of that dungeon I would guess the dungeon itself is 10 hours, tops 15 hours.

 

ruzen has an excellent point though. Setting the bar/expectation at 100+ hours sounds like setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

*Well, nearly finished it. Maybe 30-35 minutes if he had explored all of it. Then again, hm, might take longer for us depending on how much we have learned the combat system when we get there and depending on what difficulty we play on.

Wasn't Josh playing on a lower difficulty though?/ In the backer beta difficulty level makes a huge difference because it exponentially amplifies the amount of time you spend paused in combat.

[Kjaamor]

I think people in this thread are mistaking playtime for taking it slow.

 

And it's not wrong to play like that. But let's not act like purposefully nitpicking over every detail is a contributing factor to the full playtime. 

 

I'm with Bryy on this one.

 

The first time I played through Final Fantasy VII, I smashed in several hundred hours of gameplay, finding every secret piece of story, killing all the weapons, maxing out the huge materia, and ensuring all characters had 255 for all their stats.

 

I would not, in a million years, use this as a benchmark for the "playtime" of FFVII.

 

Similarly, in Morrowind, I played to completion the available guild quests, explored all the map's significant locations and many of the insignificant ones, maxed out my level and completed the main quest.

 

What I did not do, was harvest every single tome in that game and meticulously read it, speak with every npc and map out every single section of land and sea around the island, and I would balk at the idea that only in doing so can we find the "playtime".

 

I don't believe for a second that Bryy was describing anything close to just hammering on the critical path and ignoring everything else, although some people have suggested that he was.

[Valmy]

 

I would not, in a million years, use this as a benchmark for the "playtime" of FFVII.

 

 

See I would.  I generally play games once and play them that way.

[Osvir]

 

^Josh played and "finished"* 1 level of the mega dungeon in about 20 minutes (Of course, it was only level 3, I think, and the levels will probably get tougher and tougher as you go further down). You're going to have to walk really slowly to get 25-30 hours out of that dungeon I would guess the dungeon itself is 10 hours, tops 15 hours.

 

ruzen has an excellent point though. Setting the bar/expectation at 100+ hours sounds like setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

*Well, nearly finished it. Maybe 30-35 minutes if he had explored all of it. Then again, hm, might take longer for us depending on how much we have learned the combat system when we get there and depending on what difficulty we play on.

Wasn't Josh playing on a lower difficulty though?/ In the backer beta difficulty level makes a huge difference because it exponentially amplifies the amount of time you spend paused in combat.

 

On the stream from January? I think he says "I'm playing on Hard so I might die depending on where I go", before going down into the dungeon. But you have to also consider that Josh is most likely a Master Sensei of the system (I mean, he designed it). He probably knows the weaknesses of all enemies the second he sees them, and what type of weapons and abilities are strongest against every enemy as well as how to get the most out of his party members through leveling/building (party optimization).

 

I think the joke of "IRollD20s" in the console on PAX East was also a way of him saying to us "I'm really good at this game". So, even if we'd have the same party composition as he did in the mega dungeon, on the same difficulty, same skills/abilities/gears and everything, it isn't certain that we'd blow through it (like he did) on our first try/first playthrough.

 

EDIT: What I wanted to convey with my comment from the previous post "Setting the bar/expectation at 100+ hours sounds like setting yourself up for disappointment" was that... the less you expect, the more you get.

 

If I expect that a completionist run is only 1 hour, boy am I in for a treat!

 

Would you rather "expect" 100 hours, but fall short on 80 hours? Or would you rather "expect" 50 hours, and get 30 extra hours on top of it?

 

I try to not have too many if any expectations. I just know I'll enjoy the ride for as long as it lasts

Edited March 11, 2015 by Osvir

[Stun]

What I did not do, was harvest every single tome in that game and meticulously read it, speak with every npc and map out every single section of land and sea around the island, and I would balk at the idea that only in doing so can we find the "playtime".

Are these things not in the game? Are they not the very definition of game content? Are the various extra secrets, dialogues, weapons, areas, people, books, journal entries, character building, and other activities not specifically placed in the game by the developers so that the players can get more playtime out of the game?

 

There are people who will milk a game/playthrough for everything it offers. We call these people "completionists". And then there are people who do just enough to get to the end or just a little more. They're the non-completionists. And you'll notice when developers are asked "how long is this game?", they almost always make a distinction between the 2 playstyles. They do this because they designed their games to appeal to both.

 

This is why, to me, Bryy's comment reads like "Completionist runs do not count when measuring how long a game is".

Edited March 11, 2015 by Stun

[Failion]

20-30 hours If I have to make a bet. 30-40 maybe.

 

The longest game single player game I ever played where I actually spend 100 hours of my time to beat the main story and complete everything had to be front mission 3. I don't take account open world sandbox games like skyrim because of their redundant gameplay and because beating the main story in those games takes like 5-10 hour tops. 

[Valmy]

20-30 hours If I have to make a bet. 30-40 maybe.

 

 

A completionist run of a game that is supposed to be longer than BG1?  20 hours?  How much money are we talking about betting here?

Edited March 11, 2015 by Valmy

[Emerwyn]

 

 

I would not, in a million years, use this as a benchmark for the "playtime" of FFVII.

 

 

 

 

If we're going to be nitpicky, "playtime" is formed by two words. Play and time, meaning, the time you spend playing. My playtime for any game begins when I create a character and ends when I uninstall it intending to never play it again. It's impossible to put a number of hours on that, as each person is different, and enjoys the game differently. Some people may replay it ten times and someone might just stop playing after not liking the first quest.

 

But here the OP is asking about a single, first timer (meaning, with no previous knowledge of the game beyond screenshots/media reviews) completionist play-through. Completionist isn't even a correct English word, but we all know what it means. Exploring every little corner, finishing every little achievement, discovering every secret, maxing out your party weapons and armours, and beating every challenging encounter/dungeon/cave in the game. In short, completing 100% of the game.

 

So my guess keeps being 80-100 hours for a first-timer completionist play-through, especially in Hard/Path of the Damned difficulties.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Emerwyn

[Lephys]

Completionist means completionist, if you are not reading dialogs or books and aren't trying to unearth all the game secrets you are not doing a completionist playthrough.

That's not entirely true. You can "complete" all the game's dialogues without reading them, for example. Or you can unearth all the books without actually reading them. Especially if it's not your first run of the game, like with speedrunners (which is perhaps why Cantousent brought up speedrunning? *shrug*). They already know how the dialogue goes, so even if they're doing a "100%" run, they're still skipping through dialogues and not really fiddling with much little stuff at all.

 

Basically, there's still a difference between "doing" everything in the game, and taking your time with everything in the game. For what it's worth...

[morhilane]

 

Completionist means completionist, if you are not reading dialogs or books and aren't trying to unearth all the game secrets you are not doing a completionist playthrough.

That's not entirely true. You can "complete" all the game's dialogues without reading them, for example. Or you can unearth all the books without actually reading them. Especially if it's not your first run of the game, like with speedrunners (which is perhaps why Cantousent brought up speedrunning? *shrug*). They already know how the dialogue goes, so even if they're doing a "100%" run, they're still skipping through dialogues and not really fiddling with much little stuff at all.

 

Basically, there's still a difference between "doing" everything in the game, and taking your time with everything in the game. For what it's worth...

 

 

It is true in my book, when I decide to do a completionist run I read all codex, books, dialogues, present in the game. I even harvest everything I can find. I do these after I played the game once (or even twice like in the case of BG2). I usually do these with the help of wiki/guide to be sure I haven't missed anything as well.

[Failion]

 

20-30 hours If I have to make a bet. 30-40 maybe.

 

 

A completionist run of a game that is supposed to be longer than BG1?  20 hours?  How much money are we talking about betting here?

 

The infinity engine games don't take long to clear. Blast through one map and another before u know it the games over. Especially since this game has a fast forward feature it'll be even easier. I can think of so many older game that took longer to beat then BG1. Blood omen, jet force gemini etc. BG1 was one of those short game on the PC for me that you blaze through like vampire redemption.

[Stun]

The infinity engine games don't take long to clear. Blast through one map and another before u know it the games over you've burned though 50+ hours of your life.

Fixed.

 

Hyperbole is pointless here when the majority of us have played the IE games. You cannot just "blast through one map after another" in the IE games. You have loot to Identify and sell; you have inventories to manage; you have HP pools to heal; You have NPCs to talk to; you have quests to turn in; you have characters to individually level.

 

And occasionally, you have encounters that require time, planning, pausing, and waiting to deal with.

 

And none of this takes into account the first playthrough, which is what we're discussing here.

[Valmy]

 

The infinity engine games don't take long to clear. Blast through one map and another before u know it the games over. Especially since this game has a fast forward feature it'll be even easier. I can think of so many older game that took longer to beat then BG1. Blood omen, jet force gemini etc. BG1 was one of those short game on the PC for me that you blaze through like vampire redemption.

 

 

Ok I played BG1 and I have no idea what game you are describing but maybe we played different BG1s.

 

The question is not a speed run, not blazing through maps.  This is a completionist first time playthrough.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Valmy

[Cantousent]

Like most threads, there's more than one thing going on.  There's the original post about completionist runs (which isn't completely defined there) and then there's the thread about general length.  There's even other stuff swirling around.  If you want to do a crit path speed run, and you have mad skills, you're going to run through most games like greased lightening.  However, like the completionist route, speedruns aren't a reasonable standard.  Even the reasonable standard of going in, playing with character creation, starting a game, doing the things that strike you as cool while playing, and finally getting to the crit path ending is only a general measure.  It's not like there's a golden yardstick.  If folks generally complete the game in 20-30 hours, there will be significantly more complaining than if it take 40-50.   The OP asked about a completionist run, which is what I generally do, but there's virtually always some new stuff to plunder later that I find.  Even experimenting and trying new things, a second completionist run always goes faster for me because I already know where the broad mass of content is and how to approach it.

 

I would think that, for game length purposes, only the first run would matter.  However, extra runs would have to count as replayability.  :Cant's relishing the replay grin icon: