By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Fable 2: To Be Short - about 12 hours long for main game!

WRPGs are not about a race to the finish line, the ending. Even one's with focused main quests have side quests that have direct tie ins and effects to the main quest.

Plus the best WRPGs have quite challenging battles, requiring alot of time consuming micromanagement and many reloads.

But the shorter game times are symptomatic of the current dumbing down of RPGs. Games like Mass Effect, recent Final Fantasies, etc. are cakewalks compared to the RPGs of a decade ago



Around the Network

12 hours is,nt bad some are way shorter these days.



 

 

 

 

ArtznCraphs said:
WRPGs are not about a race to the finish line, the ending. Even one's with focused main quests have side quests that have direct tie ins and effects to the main quest.

Plus the best WRPGs have quite challenging battles, requiring alot of time consuming micromanagement and often reloads.

But the shorter game times are symptomatic of the current dumbing down of RPGs. Games like Mass Effect, recent Final Fantasies, etc. are cakewalks compared to the RPGs of a decade ago

The only reason the recent RPGs are cakewalks compared to the RPGs a decade ago is because the games overall were shorter than they are today. For example, the classic style Castlevania games would have only taken 20 minutes to beat if they were easy. Developers purposely made the games harder to hide system limitations. When the CD/DVD format became widely used for video games, the games became longer and they made the games a little easier as a result.

 



This didn't hurt the original Fable much. Although I was taken by surprise when it ended... I guess I shouldn't have been I maxed out all my stats. :)



So disappointing. I found Fable short and now this? Ugh...



Around the Network
chasmatic12 said:
So disappointing. I found Fable short and now this? Ugh...

If you want a 30-40 hour main story, go play a JRPG.  WRPGs have more emphasis on sidequests than the main story

 



Riachu said:
ArtznCraphs said:
WRPGs are not about a race to the finish line, the ending. Even one's with focused main quests have side quests that have direct tie ins and effects to the main quest.

Plus the best WRPGs have quite challenging battles, requiring alot of time consuming micromanagement and often reloads.

But the shorter game times are symptomatic of the current dumbing down of RPGs. Games like Mass Effect, recent Final Fantasies, etc. are cakewalks compared to the RPGs of a decade ago

The only reason the recent RPGs are cakewalks compared to the RPGs a decade ago is because the games overall were shorter than they are today. For example, the classic style Castlevania games would have only taken 20 minutes to beat if they were easy. Developers purposely made the games harder to hide system limitations. When the CD/DVD format became widely used for video games, the games became longer and they made the games a little easier as a result.

 

They made the games harder to provide satisfying strategic combat.  You had to know the game rules inside out, how each stat affected to your choices , how to think ahead and plan, spell effects and the counters to those effects, where to position your characters depending on their strengths and weaknesses and the abilities of your enemies.  If not then you're party would get raped.

Now you're typical rpg is designed for the mindless button pushers who want to coast through an interactive movie/anime.

 



ArtznCraphs said:
Riachu said:
ArtznCraphs said:
WRPGs are not about a race to the finish line, the ending. Even one's with focused main quests have side quests that have direct tie ins and effects to the main quest.

Plus the best WRPGs have quite challenging battles, requiring alot of time consuming micromanagement and often reloads.

But the shorter game times are symptomatic of the current dumbing down of RPGs. Games like Mass Effect, recent Final Fantasies, etc. are cakewalks compared to the RPGs of a decade ago

The only reason the recent RPGs are cakewalks compared to the RPGs a decade ago is because the games overall were shorter than they are today. For example, the classic style Castlevania games would have only taken 20 minutes to beat if they were easy. Developers purposely made the games harder to hide system limitations. When the CD/DVD format became widely used for video games, the games became longer and they made the games a little easier as a result.

 

They made the games harder to provide satisfying strategic combat. You had to know the game rules inside out, how each stat affected to your choices , how to think ahead and plan, spell effects and the counters to those effects, where to position your characters depending on their strengths and weaknesses and the abilities of your enemies. If not then you're party would get raped.

Now you're typical rpg is designed for the mindless button pushers who want to coast through an interactive movie/anime.

 

I don't mind if an RPG(or any game for that matter) is an interactive movie, just as long as the story is decent enough, if not fantasic. Not all real time battle systems in RPGs are mindless button mashers.

 



The game is gonna be awesome. 12 hours main quest, many more hours side quests. Is to be expected. I believe Peter said that if you beat the game in twelve hours, your hero will be a sad, poor looking sap.



JaggedSac said:
The game is gonna be awesome. 12 hours main quest, many more hours side quests. Is to be expected. I believe Peter said that if you beat the game in twelve hours, your hero will be a sad, poor looking sap.

 

That is why everyone playing this will will be doing sidequests.  I want my experience with this game to be as fulfilling as possible