Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Check here to discuss Torment's gameplay topics. Please avoid spoilers in thread titles.

Moderator: Memovira Goons

Post Reply
mentaltyranny
Initiate
Posts: 13
Joined: December 16th, 2016, 10:17 pm

Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by mentaltyranny » March 26th, 2017, 2:25 pm

HowLongToBeat says this is only a 40 hr game for a completionist. Yet the Stretch Goals at 3.0M guaranteed 200% more gameplay and 4.25M promised even longer. Does this mean that the original, pre-Stretch Goal of the game, if it just made its initial funding goal, would have been less than 13 hours and 20 min? I am having a hard time believing that...

I am towards the end Sagus Cliffs, and already I am a little concerned about Fanthom gameplay looking like they described and the stronghold (in mind) appears to actually subtract from Fanthom play more. Don't get me wrong, I am enjoying the game, but I am getting the impression that aside from missed stretch goals , threre many more that are there in letter, but have minimal implementation, so much so the spirit of that stretch goal is wholly absent.

Personally I was hoping for a minimum of 60-80 hr of completionist gameplay, similar to the original torment and pillars of eternity. Your thoughts?

kilobug
Adventurer
Posts: 977
Joined: September 21st, 2014, 1:07 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by kilobug » March 26th, 2017, 3:18 pm

mentaltyranny wrote:
March 26th, 2017, 2:25 pm
Yet the Stretch Goals at 3.0M guaranteed 200% more gameplay and 4.25M promised even longer.
They removed the "200% more gameplay" and similar even before the Kickstarter campaign was finished, realizing that those who unrealistic promises that early in the game.
mentaltyranny wrote:
March 26th, 2017, 2:25 pm
I am towards the end Sagus Cliffs, and already I am a little concerned about Fanthom gameplay looking like they described and the stronghold (in mind) appears to actually subtract from Fanthom play more. Don't get me wrong, I am enjoying the game, but I am getting the impression that aside from missed stretch goals , threre many more that are there in letter, but have minimal implementation, so much so the spirit of that stretch goal is wholly absent.
The game did have a rough development, they aimed very high and therefore couldn't fullfill everything - remember that when they runned the Kickstarter they didn't expect such a success, so they started proposing new stretch goals in a very short timeframe (a few days), and estimating the cost and difficiluty of such addition to a non-existing game is a virtually impossible task. So they had to cut back some of the stretch goals, but we should judge the game on what it is, not on what it might have been.
mentaltyranny wrote:
March 26th, 2017, 2:25 pm
Personally I was hoping for a minimum of 60-80 hr of completionist gameplay, similar to the original torment and pillars of eternity. Your thoughts?
PsT and PoE are longer in huge part because of "trash mobs", repetitive battles that takes a lot of time to complete, but doesn't add much to production cost, they don't require any new art, or writer content, or translation, nor much scripting. I'm still in Seagus so can't say for sure how long TTON is, but I don't think it's much shorter than PsT without the trashmobs. In term of content (quests, written text, number of areas, ...) it seems roughly similar.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3729
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by Gizmo » March 26th, 2017, 6:12 pm

It's interesting [to me] to note that the original 'Dark Forces' FPS from Lucas Arts, shipped retail for the price of $54.95*, and used the selling point of having [an impressive] forty hours gameplay. It's amazing to me that the modern developer's work has become so devalued; for by all accounts the games now cost order(s) of magnitude greater amounts to make, are held to a much higher bar to be considered salable, and yet sell for significantly less money than before ~and are judged lacking for not delivering enough hours in content; and for some forty isn't enough hours?

*$54.95 then, is equal to $87.83 in today's US dollar. [sad but so] That's more money than many collector's editions cost now, and those games shipped Boxed, with physical manuals.

ChiffaN
Initiate
Posts: 4
Joined: February 23rd, 2017, 1:18 pm

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by ChiffaN » March 27th, 2017, 7:06 am

Did anybody get 40 hours out of this?

I finished the full story and all subquests in less than 14 hours. I did skip almost all of the Meres except 2 but if the remaining 26 hours were dumped in them, I'm glad I did.

mentaltyranny
Initiate
Posts: 13
Joined: December 16th, 2016, 10:17 pm

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by mentaltyranny » March 27th, 2017, 8:50 pm

Gizmo wrote:
March 26th, 2017, 6:12 pm
It's interesting [to me] to note that the original 'Dark Forces' FPS from Lucas Arts, shipped retail for the price of $54.95*, and used the selling point of having [an impressive] forty hours gameplay. It's amazing to me that the modern developer's work has become so devalued; for by all accounts the games now cost order(s) of magnitude greater amounts to make, are held to a much higher bar to be considered salable, and yet sell for significantly less money than before ~and are judged lacking for not delivering enough hours in content; and for some forty isn't enough hours?

*$54.95 then, is equal to $87.83 in today's US dollar. [sad but so] That's more money than many collector's editions cost now, and those games shipped Boxed, with physical manuals.
I don't think you would expect this, but I actually agree. I wish developers would charge a $100 or so a game and make them significantly better! Imagine if T:ToN did.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3729
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by Gizmo » March 27th, 2017, 9:11 pm

mentaltyranny wrote:
March 27th, 2017, 8:50 pm
I don't think you would expect this, but I actually agree. I wish developers would charge a $100 or so a game and make them significantly better! Imagine if T:ToN did.
I can agree with that.

However... It's actually about the maximum amount that many people will pay [despite ~and ignoring~ the inflation adjustment I mentioned], just a few years prior to Dark Forces... 3½ megabyte** games for 8088/8086 CPUs [with less than a megabyte of Ram] were selling for about the same price.
[** That's right, the entire game could be less data than a screenshot of today's games; and cost almost $50.]

If they made double the game for double the price, I doubt they would sell as many units; it wouldn't surprise me if they sold less than half as many. :(

This is why I don't mind DLC; or even holding a bit back for DLC. It raises the price of the game for those that want an expanded game.
(That still doesn't excuse Horse Armor DLC.)

acm
Acolyte
Posts: 77
Joined: March 11th, 2017, 4:12 am
Location: Tokyo

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by acm » March 29th, 2017, 1:03 am

Somehow I feel that inxile already knew better when they started the Kickstarter. Making a game is a costly business, and 1M in funding is nothing. So the stretch goal of ~4M should have rather been "get something that might resemble a cRPG" instead of high-flying promises. If they were not looking for funding 80%+ of the game themselves anyways at 1M I wonder what kind of game they would have delivered.

I did everything in the game in ~40h, but there is lots of dialogue hidden behind game choices. I'm not interested in another play-through, however. The main story stays mainly as is (uninspiring).

Ningauble
Novice
Posts: 34
Joined: April 17th, 2016, 7:26 pm

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by Ningauble » March 29th, 2017, 11:27 am

I think it was assumed their game would be replay-able, even desirable to do so. For example I have an unhealthy amount of game time for XCOM Enemy Unknown from all the replays. I for one, didn't finish T:toN due to a small bug. If I do finish, I'll likely, not play through another game until there is more content. Even intentionally avoiding some quest chains, I saw a minimum of impact on the game setting through player actions. You don't return to previous area's/zones... and the crisis which occurs at the Castoff's Sanctuary being a scripted event seems to lock in the absence of consequences for one's decisions. As to different skills and even ways to resolve combat, I was not that impressed. Although on occasion the impact on the world from not dying was fun for a moment on the whole much about the game feels gimmicky and simplistic. Almost a complete lack of strange discoveries which don't impact the main story but revel in a sense of wonder. Because the quest must be advanced largely without distraction. Except for the first map area of Sagus, most quests/goals felt intrinsically tied to the main quest - for example anything in the bloom which I did I was trying to figure out how to control/join the bloom... although I messed that up when I saw the decision didn't match my character's dominant tides. And while I appreciate the roleplaying gimmick of the tides... I think the thing about it I liked the most was that it'd make roleplaying a little more intuitive for some people.

Rink
Acolyte
Posts: 61
Joined: April 9th, 2012, 11:40 am

Re: Really Only 40 hr Gameplay?

Post by Rink » April 1st, 2017, 4:03 am

My first "completionist"-playthrough was more than 65 hours. But I may read slower than many of you, I am not a native English speaker. I did all meres and tried to understand their impacts/sometimes redid them to get additional information, sometimes repeated quests to see the violent option etc.
Now that I know the main story, this will enable me to better understand the memories and lore from the beginning of the story in Sagus. So I will make another attempt trying different party and different choices.
--------------------------------------------------------
You can't stay young - but you can refuse to grow old.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests