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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Super Mario Galaxy between 7-15 hours long...

This thread is a joke, Legend11 is a joke.



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

Around the Network

I always imagined Galaxy would be the same as Super Mario 64 and every other major Mario game: if you run throug h it as quickly as possible you can beat it in a rather short time, even in a matter of minutes if you really know what you're doing, but trying to see anywhere close to everything will require a length of time rivalling jRPGs, but filled with actual quality gameplay instead of grinding and FMV.

This is a pure-bred Mario game, not the kind of game where you run through a single corridor with nothing else for 10 hours and finally reach the end, that we've been getting far too many of lately. You can't assign an hour count to a Super Mario game and compare it to other games. Mario is so much above anything else that it'll never work. =P

I never expected the multiplayer to be more than a little something to spice things up if you have friends or family watching, and it looks like that's exactly what it is.



I'll be fairly pissed if the game is shorter than what I'd expect from a Mario game. I have pre-conditioned expectancies for the lengths of  certain types of games. Take Eternal Sonata, for example. I didn't spend the 59.99 +tax to buy it, simply because of it's proposed 20-25 hour gameplay. For a game that's in the vein of Star Ocean, Tales of Symphonia etc., I expect to go without sleep for at least several days. But a Mario PLATFORMER? They never take an astounding amount of time to 100%. 20+ hours for a Mario game sounds just about right to me. But  7-15? I'll never believe it!!!



R9 5950x - RTX 3090 - Odyssey G9

Those other, shorter, games have all these other achievements, merely tacked on, to artificially extend the game. Collecting all the stars in Super Mario Galaxy isn't something, artificially extending the game, for it "is" the game.



...and Super Mario 64 is about 16 minutes.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6493722340610946105&q=mario+64+time+attack

No, but really, I think the game time in most of the games vary alot of which type of gamer you are. For example it took me 70 hours to finish Twilight Princess(!), but I really like to explore each little pixel and finish all side quests/mini games.

So 15 hours from some reviewer sounds like 40 hours for a guy like me. And the re-play value of Mario game is great, I can't imagine how many times I've played through Mario 64.



Predictions for December 31st 2008:
Wii 38,000,000
DS 84,500,000
PS3 17,000,000
PSP 41,000,000
X360 23,000,000

Around the Network

Always good to see Neogaf users as credible sources.

Ah Legend, Legend, Legend... You've become quite cheeky as of late, though I suppose you feel you've got quite to live up to since you're arguably the only 360 troll on the entire forum. Keep dancing that fine line, it won't be long before you're in ban land if you keep up these antics or will you try and exile yourself from VGchartz a third time?



DOnt know if its true ,but if it is its very few hours for a Mario game ....



Yet is got a 9.5 from 1up, it must be the best 7-15hours of your life then...



It's better to have great fun for 7-15 hours than play a borefest for twice as long. Mario 64 was quite short as well, but great nonetheless.
Some games are actally weakened by their length, like Bioshock.



Contradictions make my day 

 This thread was about HL being short. The OP said it would be 12-15 hours. Rol said that was double GOW lenght and that was not so short. Legend11 used the following arguments. I selected the parts that contradict his logic in the current thread. Red are my observations.

The irony is that HL was even shorter than GOW. Rol was considered a fanboy for saying good things about a game that got crushed by the reviewers (its lenght). 

 

 

RolStoppable said:
ckmlb said:
RolStoppable said:
12-15 hours is twice the length of the first God of War game.

This isn't true, it was more like 9-10 hours long, the second one was about 11-12 hours so Heavenly Sword has got them both beat if we go by this statement of length.

12-15 hours sounds good, I think it will be closer to 12 not 15.

Edit: Nice attempt at a flame thread though.


I finished God of War below 7 hours, so 12-15 hours is twice the length of the first GoW game.

I am a fast player, for example I finished Twilight Princess in 30 hours on the first playthrough, that's probably way faster than the majority of gamers out there.


Based on reviews God of War takes around 12 hours to complete for the average player. For you to take another game with an expected completion time of 12-15 hours and imply it's double the length of God of War is idiocy.

Also why do you bother comparing games in different genres? What point are you trying to make? That a game with a longer length is better than one with a shorter length? Does that mean Oblivion which players can spend over 100 hours in and in which you can play through multiple times in multiple ways (as mainly a thief, or fighter, or wizard) is twice as good as Twilight Princess?

Feel free to keep trolling this thread though, it's doing wonders for your credibility when you speak about games on systems other than the Wii.

 Like comparing Mario Galaxy, COD 4 and HL?

 

Bodhesatva:

Please, Legend, he was far from trolling. He complemented Heavenly Sword, and then others attacked him for it. Obviously, he did not know that God of War took 12 hours to complete for the average player (nor did I? Where did you get such information?). For example, I beat Obivion in well under 40 hours, with pretty much everything complete; I didn't think "Wow I'm awesome," I just assumed that was about the amount of time it took everyone to complete the game. How would I know differently?

The Twilight Princess example was used to show that Rol can complete games quickly. When someone said that God of War was longer than Rol suggested, he used TP as evidence to show that he may be faster than average.

I really don't see what the problem is here, Legend :/

 

Bodhesatva,

Your bias blinds you.  I think we all know that you love the Wii and PC so much that whenever you bash the PS3 and Xbox360 and I bring up a point that I know is valid you simply can't see or accept it.  For example when you were bashing violent videogames and I brought up Unreal Tournament 3 because I knew you were eagerly anticipated it, I knew you would find some excuse to well excuse it from the bashing, and it came as no surprise to me when you did by claiming Unreal Tournament 3 wasn't violent.  I mean who are we kidding here?  You honestly can't see how the claim that God of War is half the length of another 12-15 hour game is ridiculous?  Look I'll be honest, I've given up on expecting you to be fair and balanced when it comes to the consoles, so I'll stop wasting my time debating with you with this post.

Some people may think I'm an Xbot or whatever but when it comes to games I treat each system's games fairly, that's the difference between me and many of the actual trolls that are on this board.  I'd never see an rpg that claims to be 50 hours in length and say something obviously biased like "Wow, that's twice as long as Zelda Twilight Princess.".  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.

I wonder what the objective of this thread was in the first place them.UR MR GAY is 7-15 hours long, so it must be awesome.

 

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.

 Average player now is important.

ItsaMii said:
I have to support Rol. Speed runers are some of the most talented gamers out there. I finished God of War in 9 hours on my first time playing on spartan., so a skilled player can finish the game in 6 hours. There is a speed run for the game in 2:17.
 
 
 

It wasn't about speed runners.  The original article in this thread was talking about the average time it would take to finish HS (12-15 hours).  Rol then comes in and says the game is twice as long as GoW even though the average time of GoW is around the same length of time (12-15 hours).  It doesn't matter how much time it took Rol, if someone else was the fastest person alive at GoW and somehow finished it in 3 hours would it make sense for them to come into this thread and say HS is 4 - 5 times longer?

About the rest of your post.  Whenever I say "I must have been mistaken" it usually means that I give up trying to argue something because those I'm arguing with are not using logic and have instead resorted to emotions and fanboyism.  As for asking people if they own Xbox 360s when I see people complaining about it, well that's sadly because in my experience the majority of the people I came across doing that don't own one.  Yes one person I asked was able to prove he did own one but that doesn't discount the fact that others disappeared or simply refused to provide any proof.  One of the other people I asked turned out to be a Gballzack sockpuppet claiming to own one but in fact didn't.

As for Halo, I see many threads and people bashing it and it seems like many of them have never actually tried it multiplayer or even single player for that matter.  They also seem to accuse it of being more of the same dispite the fact that many of the biggest games coming out are sequels and that many of the people bashing it for being more of the same then play up another game like Super Smash Brothers Brawl, does that make any sense to you?

Anyways I am not a Don Quixote because what I'm fighting is very real and that is ignorance and bias.  If someone is going to say something that is blatantly wrong then there's a good chance I'll call them on it.

 Speed running is irrelevant unless it helps his arguments.

 

RolStoppable said:

@Legend11

The average time suggested in reviews I read in german media outlets for GoW was 8-9 hours. So technically my original comment in this thread was a little of a stretch. Of the people I know in person who've played the game (my brother and 3 friends), everyone finished the game below 8 hours. 


Every review I've read about the game that mentions average length says 12 hours or more (Gamespot, IGN, Eurogamer, etc).  Could you post a link to one of the german media outlets that said GoW averages 8-9 hours?

Demanding credible source links when he cannot do it himself.



Satan said:

"You are for ever angry, all you care about is intelligence, but I repeat again that I would give away all this superstellar life, all the ranks and honours, simply to be transformed into the soul of a merchant's wife weighing eighteen stone and set candles at God's shrine."