-
I guess it boils down to preferences once again. Personally I dont look to buy a game and complete it quickly, to then wait around for more levels or additional material to be put out again later. I prefer the route of a long game that takes a while to complete in the first instance. I think that is much more enthrawling. Take HL2... great graphics and a great engine but after over 4 years in the planning the actual time it took to get through it was less than a week.... and to me that is poor!
-
It's a shooter. Of ocurse you'll blow through it quickly.
I took 49 hours to complete KOTOR 1.
I took 3 weeks to finish Might and Magic 4 Worlds of Xeen in '92.
Shooters normally take faster to finish than RPGs
-
I agree..... I was just making the point that in the newer games (shooters) of today..... the single player games take a lot shorter time to get through then they did before......
doom and Half life are good examples of this........
-
Re: Fable
i have played fable through going good first then just played around going evil and trying to glitch to other areas i also own all of Knothole Glade and Oakvale but one day i left the game on but not palsed so when i got back to my dorm on sunday night i had racked up some impressive hours so i just clear out an area then go somewhere instead of palsing i am currently at 96 hours and some odd minutes and have gone to the final round in the arena then done a hero save and loaded it so i keep my money and exp. earned but start the quest over i have done this atleast a half dozen times just trying to max out my stats. it is a good game but the length was quite dissapointing i play a lot of old RPGs and they are much longer than the 9 hours i beat Fable in originaly (a friend was always talking about the game so i knew where to go and i didnot do many side quests.) i personaly think it wont be very good on PC.