Legend11 said: Sqrl said: Legend11 said: Sqrl said: RolStoppable said: 12-15 hours is twice the length of the first God of War game. Action games of that kind are usually about 10 hours long, so Heavenly Sword isn't doing bad at all. Yes, I can see the problem with this trollish post, how dare Rol support Heavenly sword in responce to the OP's question. /sarcasm off Yeah because you obviously don't think that taking a dig at another game is trollish. Care to site an example? You are inferring a hell of a lot, and making a big deal out of nothing. Go to Gamerankings and check out the reviews for God of War. Lets assume these people reviewing them for media outlets are actually halfway decent at games and can give a rought estimate of a game's length (for the average player). Check out ones like Eurogamer, IGN, Gamespot... Get back to me on what they say.

What are you talking about? Try to keep up please.

The issue isn't how long reviewers think it takes to beat the game, the issue is whether Rol legitimately thought that was the normal play time for the game.  Because if Rol was just making an honest statement it wasn't a jab or trolling it was just a statement that you latched onto.

I really think this is an innocent comment that has been blown way out of proportion, and is starting to derail the thread at this point.  So lets just drop it please. 

Bodhesatva said: Legend, calm down please. You're going off the deep end again. I like you, you know that.

Umm I'm not worked up at all ;)  In fact it's like paradise here today :)  Sunshine with a nice breeze coming up from the river, a bird singing outside my window, nice looking women walking down by the trail/boardwalk, the only way I could be more relaxed posting here is if I had a laptop so I could lay outside.

RolStoppable said: Legend11 said: Sqrl said: RolStoppable said: 12-15 hours is twice the length of the first God of War game. Action games of that kind are usually about 10 hours long, so Heavenly Sword isn't doing bad at all. Yes, I can see the problem with this trollish post, how dare Rol support Heavenly sword in responce to the OP's question. /sarcasm off Yeah because you obviously don't think that taking a dig at another game is trollish. I don't see what's wrong with my first post in this thread. The OP even asked how long the GoW games were. I haven't played the second game, so I only commented on the length of the first game. I also don't see how it is "taking a dig at another game" if you say game X is twice the length than game Y. More content doesn't automatically make a game better nor does less content automatically make a game bad. Legend11 said: Anyways it's probably good that people like Rolstoppable does make outrageous complaints because it makes it much easier to single out the people who's opinions we can't trust. Seeing that several members supported me in this thread shows me that I am somebody whose opinions can be trusted, at least most of the time.

Every person who supported you is a Wii fanboy to one degree or another.  As long as you were taking a dig at a Sony game you were guaranteed to get support.

I'll drop it though since I was just pointing out something that in my opinion was a ridiculous statement but that some others obviously don't see that way.

Legend11 said: RolStoppable said: Legend11 said: Sqrl said: RolStoppable said: 12-15 hours is twice the length of the first God of War game. Action games of that kind are usually about 10 hours long, so Heavenly Sword isn't doing bad at all. Yes, I can see the problem with this trollish post, how dare Rol support Heavenly sword in responce to the OP's question. /sarcasm off Yeah because you obviously don't think that taking a dig at another game is trollish. I don't see what's wrong with my first post in this thread. The OP even asked how long the GoW games were. I haven't played the second game, so I only commented on the length of the first game. I also don't see how it is "taking a dig at another game" if you say game X is twice the length than game Y. More content doesn't automatically make a game better nor does less content automatically make a game bad. Legend11 said: Anyways it's probably good that people like Rolstoppable does make outrageous complaints because it makes it much easier to single out the people who's opinions we can't trust. Seeing that several members supported me in this thread shows me that I am somebody whose opinions can be trusted, at least most of the time. Every person who supported you is a Wii fanboy to one degree or another. As long as you were taking a dig at a Sony game you were guaranteed to get support.

 What fantasy world do you live in? A lot of the people you are referring to are far far less bias'd towards a console then you are and have actually played AND enjoyed the game you seem to think is being bashed.  Including the person you think is bashing it.  On several threads now you cause these problems and completely derail things, then you leave, and its is really annoying. There was a legit discussion going on and its all but dead now because you had to nitpick at one little comment. 

So no I will not let you just take one last shot at us and then call it a day, and no you don't get to pretend like it was the big bad fanboys ganging up on you. You were wrong, you can't admit it, so you blamed it on the "fanboys", and now you're finally moving on like you should of done 6 or 7 posts ago.

 

LOL a soap opera it was....wow legend I understand..nevermind the topic is dropped...O_O

gitanil said: 12-15 hours for an action-beat-em-up is more than enough. Both Gears and RE4 were shorter than that. Games like these are usually in the range of 10-12 hours.

 

Ouch -- I'm about 17 hours into RE4 right now and just coming up to the end of Act 4.  I'll admit to being a little bit methodical and careful with these kinds of games, and doing a fair amount of backtracking to save points when I'm in uncharted territory and feel like I've accomplished something (holdover from my text adventure days, I suppose!)  But I don't think it would be common to complete the game in less than 12 hours unless you had already played through it once or used some kind of a strategy guide.  Or am I just extremely slow?  The style doesn't really encourage run-and-gun, and there are definitely scenarios I've replayed after realizing I could get through them with significantly less ammo/health resource consumption.

RolStoppable said: ddobson said: gitanil said: 12-15 hours for an action-beat-em-up is more than enough. Both Gears and RE4 were shorter than that. Games like these are usually in the range of 10-12 hours.   Ouch -- I'm about 17 hours into RE4 right now and just coming up to the end of Act 4. I'll admit to being a little bit methodical and careful with these kinds of games, and doing a fair amount of backtracking to save points when I'm in uncharted territory and feel like I've accomplished something (holdover from my text adventure days, I suppose!) But I don't think it would be common to complete the game in less than 12 hours unless you had already played through it once or used some kind of a strategy guide. Or am I just extremely slow? The style doesn't really encourage run-and-gun, and there are definitely scenarios I've replayed after realizing I could get through them with significantly less ammo/health resource consumption. Don't worry, it took me about 16:30 to beat RE4 the first time. I took my time to search for the treasures and I had to do quite a lot of retries. Personally I would put RE4 in the 15-20 hours range. What's strange is that someone I know from another forum was able to beat the game below 13 hours on his first try even though I usually was way faster and better in any other game we talked about. I guess he just didn't bother for treasure hunting at all. Of course if you know the game and have the unlockable weapons in your inventory it's possible to beat the game much faster. Another chance to brag, so I'll take it: my best time is 2:17. I think the fastest players managed to get just below 2 hours, but my time isn't that bad either.

2:17 minutes o_O. Speed runners are scary. My best time (when I'm trying to go fast) is 5:37 minutes. *hides in shame*

Edit: I should point out that I haven't tried to speed run the Wii version yet.  I could probably go faster with it due to the aiming. 

naznatips said: RolStoppable said: ddobson said: gitanil said: 12-15 hours for an action-beat-em-up is more than enough. Both Gears and RE4 were shorter than that. Games like these are usually in the range of 10-12 hours.   Ouch -- I'm about 17 hours into RE4 right now and just coming up to the end of Act 4. I'll admit to being a little bit methodical and careful with these kinds of games, and doing a fair amount of backtracking to save points when I'm in uncharted territory and feel like I've accomplished something (holdover from my text adventure days, I suppose!) But I don't think it would be common to complete the game in less than 12 hours unless you had already played through it once or used some kind of a strategy guide. Or am I just extremely slow? The style doesn't really encourage run-and-gun, and there are definitely scenarios I've replayed after realizing I could get through them with significantly less ammo/health resource consumption. Don't worry, it took me about 16:30 to beat RE4 the first time. I took my time to search for the treasures and I had to do quite a lot of retries. Personally I would put RE4 in the 15-20 hours range. What's strange is that someone I know from another forum was able to beat the game below 13 hours on his first try even though I usually was way faster and better in any other game we talked about. I guess he just didn't bother for treasure hunting at all. Of course if you know the game and have the unlockable weapons in your inventory it's possible to beat the game much faster. Another chance to brag, so I'll take it: my best time is 2:17. I think the fastest players managed to get just below 2 hours, but my time isn't that bad either. 2:17 minutes o_O. Speed runners are scary. My best time (when I'm trying to go fast) is 5:37 minutes. *hides in shame* Edit: I should point out that I haven't tried to speed run the Wii version yet. I could probably go faster with it due to the aiming.

 Yeah, I was talking about a speed run obviously. Took me around 15 hours the first time. In speed runs, it's easily possible to do below 3 hours.

IIRC the record for Mario 64 is around 20-25 minutes, speed completion should be an Olympic sport!

PS - This thread is so far gone now, I don't think it even matters what we post =P