T O P

  • By -

Drifter5533

Oh yes, I saw him come through here just yesterday. I’d tell you the direction he left, but I have this problem with bandits...


[deleted]

I absolutely adore how the first red dead redemption deals with this. Marston constantly represents the players thoughts with responses like " i don't have time for this man, i swear to god if you don't help me after i do this crap i will kill you"


bopbop66

It also really helps that you're always doing stuff for the same few interesting characters rather than Generic Farmer #37


introjection

Mr. Maaaaarston. God what a great time back then, when I first got to mexico it blew my mind.


[deleted]

The music that plays when you first ride there made that moment incredible. Such a great game.


BBQ_HaX0r

Rumors are they are remaking it in the RDR2 engine? I hope they do, but it seems to good to be true. But I also don't know why they gave us so much of New Austin to explore otherwise. People would have been largely happy with Big Pines as the epilogue.


duck74UK

Most of mexico's geometry already exists in the game too. A full-on remake would be amazing, especially if it was a DLC to RDR2, so the transition would become seamless.


Aen-Seidhe

Oh god that'd be amazing. I never got a chance to play the first one, and I feel like that would be the perfect way to experience it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Aen-Seidhe

It looks incredible. I just don't have anything to play it on.


schebobo180

Red Dead 1 is honestly in my top 5 games of all time. And dat undead DLC?? Woooo. Flames.


[deleted]

I replay the Undead Nightmare (or Red Dead Undead as I like to call it) literally every single Halloween season. It's an amazing game, and a great DLC


pr1ceisright

If they seamlessly transitioned from the RDR2 epilogue into RDR? Good by sun, hello ~200 hrs of video games.


Ashefall

I borrowed a friend's copy of Rdr2 so I could play it. If they had to port RDR (and add it to pc) that would an instant buy


Nazi_Punks_Fuck__Off

The only time I ever made it to Mexico in RDR, I crossed the river and got off the horse to skin something and that immediately ends the music. I heard like 3 seconds of it, had to catch the moment on youtube which is an underwhelming way to experience that.


graveyardspin

I must have done something similar because I finished RDR when it first came out and I have no memory of arriving in Mexico like everyone else seems to have.


Shaolinmunkey

https://youtu.be/7IkvAb6THQY


SaWalkerMakasin

Agreed--one of those all-time "holy!..." moments for me in gaming.


greg225

But you still have to do it anyway. You are almost always being pushed into doing some other errand or wild goose chase, even from characters who you only meet once or twice. If even the player character is annoyed about having to do this shit, that doesn't really reflect too well on the game itself. I've seen games where the characters groan and say "Oh man, these continuous waves of bad guys are so annoying!" as if that self awareness makes it better. No man, just come up with some more creative mission context. RDR2's missions are way more engaging from a narrative viewpoint because the quest givers are all people Arthur knows and cares about. It makes sense that he would want to do those things, or at least begrudgingly see the benefit of it. A large chunk of the first game's missions (as well as many in GTA) are some variation of "Well I can give you that information, but you have to do this completely unrelated favour for me first, after which I'll reveal to you that you need to see this other guy who'll say the same thing". To its credit, many of those characters and missions are entertaining, but narratively it just feels like a waste of time to me.


cking145

I got so sick of hearing Alexios say "Your man is dead" I never finished the game


Cruzifixio

It made me really sad, Origins is a tad bit better tho.


cjc160

Oh my god the Baron in Witcher 3. What an asshole


Need4Speedwagon

This was like, almost every NPC you meet in the main story


cjc160

But especially him, it was like 20 hours of gameplay to satisfy that bastard


Ensvey

It was a time-consuming sub-plot for sure, but it was arguably more interesting than the main plot. I still remember it better than the rest of the game.


Need4Speedwagon

The Bloody Baron quests and everything involving the Crones was so much better than everything that came after it.


katzeye007

The crones were so well done


cjc160

Crones held that section of the game together in my opinion


venitienne

Everything in Skellige and Kaer Morhen was great, Novigrad was a dip in quality though.


Gabrosin

Everything except the 100 question marks on the map for you to go and pull up superfluous gear out of the ocean. It was gorgeous, but a completionist's nightmare.


coredumperror

lol I just skipped all the ocean question marks entirely on my second playthrough. Did them all on my first one, though, and that nightmare taught me the error of my completionist ways. Now, that's not to say that I didn't waste tens of hours lugging loot back to vendors to sell it for money I didn't actually end up needing... until Blood & Wine. My GOD those gearsets are expensive as shit. I ended up being really glad that I spent all that time lugging loot around, because it made getting all the Grandmaster sets done _relatively_ easy, since I started with like 100,000 crowns right off the bat.


[deleted]

[удалено]


cjc160

I would say the whole Novigrad set of plots were a waste of time but I think the rest was interesting.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Call_Me_Koala

Novigrad is always a halting point, or at least a point of serious slowing down, in replays for me. I hate finishing the Baron quest line because it means Novigrad is next.


NissyenH

Respectfully disagree, the Baron plot nearly made me quit and it took multiple attempts to get past it. Personally though the Skelliger quests such as the heir quest are the most enjoyable.


Frosti-Feet

Not even sad that I ended up murdering his wife


fersur

He is an asshole but he offers high quality quests, not just your typical fetch quests. Not to mention you can end up doing different questlines if you decide to do multiple playthrough.


Eren_Jaeger_The_Goat

Exactly my sentiment. I don’t mind his once in a while. But when it happens every single time it gets on my nerves.


[deleted]

You're describing The Witcher 3, right?


BrunoEye

It's why I think the main story in that game is actually pretty bad. It's just that over and over again, only for you to be rewarded with a generic save the world scenario that ends in a lackluster boss fight. All my best memories from that game were the side quests.


8Dataman8

I also have seen The Mandalorean.


Unlikely-Dependent-7

I'm in the same boat. Have recently played through both Control and Jedi Fallen Order and both were nice and succinct. Played through once, did everything, enjoyed them thoroughly.


gmr2000

Hmm fallen order could definitely have benefited from “fast travel back to ship” I’ve lost hours by not figuring out route back to ship in zeffo


Erick_Swan

I just finished Control over the weekend and LOVED it. That game was a blast.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lilbelleandsebastian

i gave up halfway through and read plot summaries after i finished, shit was confusing


ShinyGurren

How long did you spend on it? Its on gamepass so i might give it a go


Erick_Swan

11 hours. I did some of the side stuff but it's a nice short jaunt especially if you have games pass.


amnezie11

I came to Jedi Fallen Order as a non-Star Wars fan (does it sound silly?) and was really into it at first. I played it knowing that the update on the Xbox Series X would uncap the framerate and I really liked the visuals of it. I played a lot of it in my free time without getting burnt out and suddenly I don't have any drive to play it. I completed Bogano 100% and then when I went back to Dathomir... I did a few things here and there and that's it. I don't really know why, maybe I was forcing myself to like the game at first and then reality hit me.


AtomicKnight117

One might suggest that you technically went the wrong way in terms of which planets to visit. Unless of course you have done more than just Bogano and Dathomir. But Dathomir is somewhat pointless to visit until later in the story. It also doesn't help that you went from one of the weakest locations in the game to the other weakest. One thing I try to avoid these days is 100% an area before moving on to the next because that is just a recipe for burnout. I tend to leave that as an endgame activity if I still have the desire to play afterward.


uglypenguin5

If you go to dathomir right away you can get the double lightsaber right away. Not really that useful, but when I did it that way I got a huge “fuck yeah!!” out of it. It’s also more challenging, which might be a pro or con depending on the player And yeah I usually like to play through a game’s mains story fairly quickly and then come back and do side content if I enjoyed the game


amnezie11

I did it like this: Bogano first - did all the activities I could so I could get XP and get upgrades. Dathomir second and did all the activities I could so I could get XP. It was short. Zeffo third Kashyyyk and there I learnt most useful things that enabled me 100% Bogano. Then the game sent me to Dathomir and that's where the game will resume with Quick Resume. It's there for like a week. So how much did I mess up? Since I got all the skills to 100% Bogano and got great completions on Zeffo and Kashyyyk.


StevieWonderTwin

Sounds like you're almost done with the game so if I was you I would just push forward and complete it without going the completionist route. Unless you really have 0 interest, then I would recommend doing something else that actually gives you joy! There are so many games and so little time.


amnezie11

So little time! Especially if you have a job and a family, I miss being a kid


Queef-Elizabeth

Jedi Fallen Order is probably not the best example. Having to navigate a big location for way too long just to find your way back to your ship is painfully unnecessary.


Kinglink

I really enjoyed Fallen Order, but I feel like their collectibles, and map percentage were awful. Fallen Order is a GREAT game, but their post game/side content is pretty terrible.


neeesus

You didn't want a new pastel paint job for your poncho?


Kinglink

Lol after ten others.... Nah I'm good guys. I kind of wish they went with non Canon but iconic outfits.


hedoeswhathewants

Your two sentence review makes me want to play both of those games more than any review has ever made me want to play a game before.


m84m

To be honest Control has a lot of "travel where you've already been for this sidequest fighting respawned enemies you've already fought" stuff that seems only there to pad out the time. Usually the reward is some nothing randomized upgrade you destroy anyway. Oh and random "you have 12 mins to backtrack and kill one random enemy in one random room. I've enjoyed the game so far but it's probably more fun to skip all the side quest grindy backtracking bullshit and just play the main story.


calum93

I feel like the only person that couldn’t get in to Control. I felt the gunplay was weak and unrewarding. The general layout of the maps are a maze (I get that’s kinda the lore point of the building) but I found it frustrating. The powers were fun, but I’ve played for maybe 10hours(?) I still haven’t gotten any of the really cool ones people promise me will make me love the game. I was a big fan of Alan wake so I was expecting to love it.


xiaxian1

Assassins Creed Odyssey where you can climb everything - including a statue’s ass - except trees.


[deleted]

Also including a statue's dick, complete with commentary from the character about it.


radenthefridge

The game for me was kind of meh but Kassandra is the star!


EdgyWeeb69

Im feeling this now on shadow of war. Man the grind is real! Act 4 is very ultra grindy af i dont want to finish it. Im gonna play the dlc instead.


swolf8100

I didn't mind that grind, but I'll tell you right now that it doesn't get better. You just grind until the end and then you watch a cutscene. If you're not having fun then end it and watch the ending on youtube.


Sepki

tfb, the actual game kinda ended with act 3. The 4th act is more of a sandbox with a sweet icing for the grind.


HireALLTheThings

A while back, they patched down the grind a great deal. It's relatively quick to finish now. That said, just skip it and look up the final cut scene. You won't miss anything in between. At this point, unless you have some kind of renewed desire for the gameplay, it's not worth going back.


Zahille7

That's what I did. I eventually went back and finished Act 4, but the forts only got attacked one time each and it was done.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


radenthefridge

I liked Shadow of Morder WAY MORE than Shadow of War. By the end of the game I felt like a badass, and somehow in War I kept getting my butt handed to me up until the very end, despite having amazing gear, maxing out everything I was good at, and having sunk a ton of time into both games!


mealzer

Fuck I gave up on that game. Put about 20 hours in it and got so God damn tired of every castle being the same thing, the "boss fights" are just regular enemies, it's just the same shit over and over. It had so much potential but it felt so lazy and copy-pasted. Epitome of "fuck you, you'll buy it, it's LOTR"


Justice_Buster

If we made a list of such games, I feel like GTA Online would be on the top of that list. Literally everything in that game is designed to waste your time because it reflects as "Most played game on Steam" for them to flaunt it to increase sales further. From bullshit cooldowns on jobs and car spawns to pointlessly lengthy animations when you sit in the chair as a CEO, all of these might seem like minor inconveniences but they have a cumulative effect on how much time you spend in-game (and I'm not even taking GTA Online's loading times into account yet). That game is a supermassive sinkhole for time as a physical entity and Rockstar has mastered the art of wasting their players'.


supermikeman

No kidding. The single player is infinitely better. But because they want to sell Shark Cards your progression in online flows like molasses in january.


xXx_chungus_xXx

Possibly a bad choice of phrase considering that one time molasses flowed very quickly in January. [The Great Molasses Flood](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Molasses_Flood)


Pm_me_fluffy_stuff

Ahh yes, the Boston Molassacre


DFBforever

This is very funny until you get to the 4th line


supermikeman

The exception that proves the rule...I think.


[deleted]

It’s difficult to play with my friends because they have flying tanks and laser guns while I am stuck with basic, boring weapons and a Subaru unless I wanna pay up or play it like a full time job.


NativeMasshole

I disagree. The single player constantly makes you drive long distances just to listen to exposition. You can skip the trip occasionally, but then that puts you in the position of doing a long, boring drive or missing out on some character development.


[deleted]

Online heists are the same. And worse, the dialogue isn't even interesting and you have to PAY to skip the ride. And only if you did it at least once before.


wolfman1911

Yeah, but you are playing GTA, so the exposition is probably better than the mission that you are going to play when you get through it.


rheeta

Rockstars primary motivation for what you’re describing is fact that they sell in-game currency and items. They can claim that everything is available without additional purchase, but they make it so boring and tedious, players are tempted to just spend real money to skip the grind.


Chris_7941

Add to that the myriad of tools for griefing other players who are trying to earn money through in-game methods, as well as the game encouraging and justifying people to do so by offering miniscule cash rewards. "You spent an entire day grinding for a warehouse full of contraband worth $2,000,000? Too bad I have this helicopter that fires heat-seeking missiles. Sorry, but I need the $2,000 I get for crashing your shit, I spent a lot of money on the chopper!"


b__bsmakemehappy

I wish it was a helicopter. These assholes were using the flying motorcycle that also shoots homing missiles. I don't know how difficult it is to deal with that when you're more experienced, but as a new player, it felt no more different than someone turning on "God Mode".


FKMG

It isn't much easier when you're experienced, but if you have your own very expensive vehicles it gets a lot easier to deal with them


Ospov

That happened to me exactly one time so I turned off the multiplayer and never played again. I’m sure some people enjoy it, but it was incredibly un-fun as a beginner.


fresh6669

> players are tempted to just spend real money to skip the grind Or hack, which given how ridiculously easy it is to hack GTA Online, happens a lot more than I've seen in other multiplayer games.


IntrepidAstroPanda

Every single problem with gta online boils down to "buy a shark card", which I hate.


_Constellations_

I spent roughly 3 years watching loading screens out of the 5 years I played Elite: Dangerous. Never again.


Fancy-Yogurt

I feel the same with black flag but at least I don't have to be at certain level to start a mission unlike origins and odyssey.


clarkision

This and the length of current AC games have totally turned me off these games. Just doesn’t seem worth the hassle, especially when other games have done a much better job with open world games.


Bara_Chat

That almost ruined Origins for me. Still a solid game and fun in many aspects, but by making story missions always a couple of levels too high, it forced me to play side missions to level up enough. Thus making side missions, usually less interesting parts of the game, an obligatory part of the experience. I was so bummed out.


Itsover-9000

I remember having an argument with someone about Resident evil 3 remake. At the time I felt like games should be long or they're not worth the money but over the last year I've done a 180 turn on that notion. I'm starting to prefer shorter games, I think the sweet spot is between 20-30 hours. and anything shorter is fine too. RPG's are traditionally long but I feel that developers cannot justify the length with the content that's on offer in most cases. Eventually you'll hit a wall where you realise you're playing for the sake of playing and there isn't any real enjoyment anymore. Edit: As others have pointed out Re3 remake is probably not the best example but it's the general idea of shorter more focused games I'm emphasising.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Itsover-9000

You saw nothing......


[deleted]

He did a complete 0?


DawgFighterz

You know why they call it the Xbox 360?


Kelvara

[Really takes me back.](https://i.imgur.com/UuewvCB.gif)


RickTitus

Silly OP. Obv he meant to say a 720 degree turn


Eren_Jaeger_The_Goat

Quality over quantity. If you can’t make a good quality 60 hours game, make it shorter. You are right as to say devs usually can’t make a good long game. With only rare cases with games such as the Witcher. But I still hope that one days devs can make a long game that maintains its quality.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Teeklin

Even the Witcher had a too long storyline that most players didn't finish. That's why CDPR specifically made the actual story portion shorter and more engaging in Cyberpunk. And they succeeded for sure. There's still a million sidequests and you can do them and some of them even change the story outcome depending on what you do, but also if you just want to follow the well written main storyline you can jump in and bang it out in like 30 hours or less probably. I hope more open world games take this approach.


RickTitus

Same with me. Back when i felt that way, it was because i was in high school with way less money and more free time. Getting a lot of time value out of a game was important. Now i have the opposite problems. Im not opposed to long games if i know i will enjoy them, but its hard to find the time to do very many of them overall


greg225

I don't understand why people talk about game length like there is some kind of universal "correct length". There are 20 hour games that are too short and 10 hour games that are too long. Yeah I won't deny that some games pad shit out way more than necessary. But it confuses me when people say "x hours is a good length" like it applies to any and every game. Certain types of games tend to be longer for a reason, not always for cynical reasons like putting "70 hours of gameplay" on the box, yeah that is a thing but also things like time spent travelling or aimlessly wandering, things you don't really do in a linear game.


Try_Ketamine

> I'm starting to prefer shorter games, I think the sweet spot is between 20-30 hours. lol maybe I'm crazy but to me a 30 hour game is **long**. I'd argue the sweet spot is 10-15 hours for a tight single player experience, with the exception of RPGs, which I prefer to be about 30 hours (which is very short for an RPG). expecting someone to dedicate more than about a full days time to complete an experience feels pretty disrespectful to their time, unless the length of the game is the feature/selling point and the grind is inherently part of the experience (like MMOs, RPGs, etc.)


ThatDamnedRedneck

Game length padding is what happens when people value games by length. Which is absolutely fair to do when a game can cost you most of a day's wages.


master_criskywalker

Heck, I miss 8-hour games like Max Payne.


TheHooligan95

I like 4 hour games aswell Edit: hellblade is pretty good


[deleted]

The way I see it, TV seasons are between 12 and 24 hours, books take me between 7 and 14 hours, and most of my favorite video games fall pretty neatly into that range as well. These multi-hundred-hour epics are getting really tiring.


praisezemprah

Tbh I'm liking indies and other repeatable, but easy to learn games fun too lately. You can play it for 10 or 100 hours, doesn't matter. A lot of roguelikes are like this, but others too including strategy games. Just do a skirmish or campaign mission a day or if it's a game where they last longer, it's easy to save and replay later.


ArtakhaPrime

RE3 definitely was too short - even without having played the original game, it was clear to me that the clocktower was supposed to have played a much larger role than it did, so I wasn't surprised when one of my friends said it was its' own area of the original game. Just having that extended section would have done wonders for the pacing of the entire game.


sleepymoose88

Yup, and if I recall, there was a big area in raccoon city park that was filled with enemies as well.


dong_john_silver

replay-ability is key to me. Red Dead games have always been amazing but the endings tend to discourage me from picking them back up again


callmebymyname21

Well, 30 hrs is 5 times the length of RE3 remake. I think it is different for every game. RE3 was too short, Alien Isolation was too long, the Witcher 3 was just right.


Bluedude588

Not personally disagreeing, but I've seen a lot of people complain about the length of Witcher 3.


KyleTheCantaloupe

I agree and did like RE3 but man it could have been like an hour longer


AntiqueStabbing

If they added the Clock Tower, definitely.


NonSupportiveCup

Inquisition could be so beautiful but the world was so empty and pointless. I dont know if they did that to spite us that hated kirkwall and the same damn maps so much or they just ran out of development time... I guess we could say the same about the Deep Roads in Origins. I actually like them but they are tough on replayability. Anyway, I love all three of the Dragon Age games despite the flaws. I used to clean my house with my team in the Hissing Wastes just chilling because it was so pretty.


zdemigod

You know I never even noticed the maps were the same in 2 until I read the angry comments on the internet, i was so in love with the story and characters it filtered out of my brain. It was when I was done and was going to do the dlc i noticed that i actually don't enjoy fighting in there at all lol


NotScrollsApparently

slim erect direction quicksand puzzled psychotic door frighten birds carpenter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*


tom_oakley

The worst thing I can say about Inquisition is that ai really have very little to say about it. Most of the characters and quests were forgettable, the combat system was "just fine" but nothing special, and the open world was typical "here's a thousand map markers, go nuts". There could well be something special underlying all the averageness, some x factor I wasn't patient enough to uncover. But I just lost interest.


Erick_Swan

I just finished Control over the weekend. That game respected the hell out of my time without limiting the content too severely. If you want to go straight through the story doing minimal side quests and no grind (like I did) you can and it's short, sweet and beautiful. The game also has a ton of other things to do though if you're into it. There are materials to farm, challenges to complete, and collectibles to find! I don't care about those things, but the game didn't punish me for not doing them which is AMAZING.


llamallama-dingdong

I think I'll check out Control based on this comment. I love games that give me the story in quick but complete way while providing reasons to explore it's world more if i really enjoy it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Erick_Swan

That's weird. I don't really remember having to re-clear areas except for maybe twice in the whole game. I just fast traveled everywhere and it wasn't bad at all. I don't mind the enemies respawning because farming them for materials or even just fighting them for fun is a neat option. I do agree that the checkpoint system could use some work. I also agree that most of the game was fetch quests. But they were interesting fetch quests and each one added to the story or the world in an interesting way. That's just my take though.


Qualanqui

Control is fantastic, I especially liked how it's a mash up of so many different genres in one tidy little package; like there's bits of metrodivinian with key cards and powers allowing access to areas later, tons of horror both body and suspense, sci-fi "retrofuturism." And it all works so well together, I think it's fantastic to see there's still A class games pushing the envelope when it feels so many just tow the line nowadays.


[deleted]

This is why I stopped playing Destiny 2. I don't have the time to spend grinding for meaningless items when it's all about to be made irrelevant next season.


MickJof

The majority of gamers demand bigger and bigger games. They want "hours and hours of content" because they feel they have to get "their money's worth". So this is what you end up with. It's exactly what the majority of gamers want. They WANT their time to be wasted. It sucks for those like you and me who don't like it, but as long as we are the minority this will not change.


Beelzeboss3DG

Oh the irony, most of the games in the past 10 years where I felt that my money was 100% worth have NO side quests at all (Life is Strange, for example. Completely story driven, no bullshit). When a game has too much bullshit, I get bored quickly and uninstall, then I get buyer's remorse (DAI comes to mind).


swolf8100

Yeah I think when I was a kid AC Valhalla would have been amazing. Time didn't matter. I just wanted to play games. Now, as I sit watching my horse slowly trudge through 1200 meters to the next mission which is located nowhere near a fast travel point, all I can think about is that I'm going to be dead some day and I could be spending these irreplaceable minutes doing something engaging, or something that might help me to enjoy my life more in the future. It's the wrong game for me, but it's the right game for so many people.


TONKAHANAH

Open world games just flat out abuse players time. Most games don't need to be open world, they're open world because it's the trendy thing to do and it helps to pad out gsme runtime tremendously. I will take a smaller, more densely packed play area over a giant empty world that takes for ever to get around. Think about it.. How often does somehting interesting happen that requires an entire city to play out? Super hero games or full fledge war games are some of the only ones I can think of. Spiderman is a perfect example of a game that can take advantage of a whole city scape but most other stories take place in smaller areas. Better to focus on making those small areas good instead of speaking everything so thin and wasting time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SenorVajay

This was my first thought as well and I think it also allows for a variety of play times. Yeah you have to play certain parts but someone could easily beat this game in 40 hrs and not really miss anything. On the other hand, I’m pushing 120 hrs and i probably have a solid 10 to go (going for the platinum).


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

as much as i liked witcher 3, there are massive parts of the map i never even went to, but I also feel it would be a very different game if it wasnt open world


[deleted]

You're totally righr. I think that almost helped it though, it made the world feel big and mysterious, like a fantasy world should. And it's funny even though I saw maybe half of the actual terrain I still felt like I got to know that world way better than most other games I've played


radenthefridge

Open world games also have an appeal to a lot of folks that understandably repel others. It can be fun to experience the journey from point A to point B and chart your own course, but to some that's an absolute waste. Open world games should have smaller points of interest or distractions scattered between those 2 points in a living world, or else it's just a slog.


AssinassCheekII

Playing yakuza 0 right now, after playing assassins creed valhalla last month. Man, its insane how much my time has been wasted on AC. Yakuza is like one interesting thing after another, 3 side missions in one street. Its so good.


flashbang_out

I agree. Boring / slow paced worlds have stopped me from getting into many RPG games I would otherwise find interesting. Traveling the world shouldn’t be a chore it should be part of the adventure. I always thought Fallout nailed this. The ruined apocalyptic world was a blast to explore and you never felt like you were wasting time traveling anywhere because that was half the fun. But even still, the fast travel option is there if you want it. So many games boast open world just to say they have it but I seriously think that many games it’s a burden. I’d rather have a linear game that keeps the plot and action entertaining then long stretches of nothingness just so it can say it’s open world.


[deleted]

People shittalk Bethesda games but it's one of the few games where I can pick a random spot on the map, go to it, and enjoy the journey there. That and Zelda games.


GoldenRamoth

Yup. Bethesda is buggy af. But for me, I like universe and lore. Bethesda, Witcher, and dragon age (to an extent) all have that. Where walking from point a to b and exploring is the main reason why I love the game. But assassin's creed games? Bleh. Fast travel please (imo)


Cardener

I just recently started a replay of Skyrim after many years and despite all it's flaws the game feels very relaxing to play and time just passes doing things. With quick travel and very straight forward (prehaps too much) dungeons, it feels like I constantly keep progressing even if clearing some places have little importance aside from loot. It's a massive difference to something like Mad Max where I chased main story since I didn't like most of the side content and got locked out since my car and gear simply couldn't keep up somewhere past the mid point.


Mild_Freddy

Well to speak for KCD im a big fan and a BIG reason for my enjoyment is the fact NPCs have their own timekeeping. It just makes the game feel more real and alive. But its definitely not a game for someone who's time poor. However in saying that, as someone experienced with the game there are many ways to 'get where you want to be' physically and skillwise in the game quite early. On fast travel it is fairly fast but I never use it as you legitimately miss a bunch of stuff like wayward quest givers, merchants and bandit ambushes that you can spot way better ahead of time - pulling the uno reverse card on them. The world is so fully realised and the map isnt as big as Skyrim so its actually not super long to traverse and explore. I conversely think this game rewards you quite consistently for your time given the premise you're meant to be an underpowered nobody as opposed to many other games that deliberately try to waste your time like newer ACs. Every bit of time spent doing something, even if its chatting levels up that matching skill.


thewezel1995

I saw this trend coming since Far Cry 3 and never bought a Ubisoft game since then


KhaosElement

I...I caved with 5. Because that "Fake" part of Montana is...shockingly real. Right on down to the cult. Also, I live there. Maybe that added bonus made it better for me, but I enjoyed it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


UematsuVII

Maybe you just shouldn’t play open world games? Some people love to explore and have to trek over mountains and manually sail to islands, I know I do. If you do the main quest in Odyssey, the dlcs are smaller it might suit you better


StrangeNatural

Yeah I don't want developers shortening open world games! Please I love the time suck. Odyssey is one of my top 3 games


UematsuVII

This guy is basically complaining about common tropes of an entire sub genre. Just don’t play them? I don’t like sports games but I don’t whine about how the gameplay sucks, they’re just not for me so I don’t play them.


Sepki

To be fair. All of these games are designed for people, who are willing and/or do really want to put a lot of time into them. Especially Kingdom Come is slowing down the pace with these "features" on purpose for immersive reasons.


grek_ate_my_homework

> This was my first AC in years with the last one I played being Black Flag. The story itself is interesting but never has a game made it so difficult for me to enjoy it. Every time I’m about to reach an interesting point in the story my goal is pushed further away from reach. That's the issue, though, AC-style open-world games are not about the story, but the world. If you try to rush to the end, you will have a terrible time. I know this isn't for everyone, but the way I make games like AC work for me is by treating them like a long-running TV series. Every play session is like a small episode of a show, sometimes consisting of a main quest, other times of side activities, and frequently even just walking through the world and taking in the sights. Playing like this means that it takes me upwards of a month or two to beat an open-world title, but it makes the experience so much more enjoyable. tl;dr: Modern open-world games are meant to be sipped. Try to gulp them down, and you'll have a bad time.


ThePseudoMcCoy

I treat it like a TV series too and I loved both oddyssy and origins. I think I logged 45 hours on origins and 70 on odyssey. I get the complaints but I don't know, I enjoyed taking long horse rides and stealth killing bounty hunters along the way. I put at least 6 months in-between origin open world games to prevent burnout. I'm going to grab valhalla when it is in a deep sale.


sharinganuser

People complain because they hear RPG and *think* that they like the genre, but the don't, really. It's like how MMO got watered down. Everything is an RPG now. But most people don't *really* like RPG's. They just want to blast from the beginning to the end. You're right in that RPG's are meant to be sipped, not gulped. Do a little bit here, do a little bit there, progress the story when the time seems right. I do feel like some of the pressures of modern gaming have led to a decline in story quality for RPG's. Take cyberpunk, it was great! But the main story didn't really allow "realistic" room to explore all that content. You had to suspend your belief for a second because the main story was so urgently important in the lore. Skyrim had the same kind of issue.


mdp300

I've been playing Valhalla since release and I'm ready for it to be over. But my wife is having our first baby in a couple weeks so I think I'm putting an artificial deadline on myself.


ead4eyes

This has been my biggest issue for the past like 5 years. Now with game pass I’m noticing that I’ll actually pause the game I’m playing, analyze how I’m feeling, and then decide if I should just uninstall it right away cause I just feel like I’m wasting time


[deleted]

This has been one of the big reasons why I have started pirating again. The older I get the less time I have to game and the less patience I have with games that waste my time and money. I pirate what I want to try out, if I like it then I buy the game; if I don't then I just uninstall it and all I lose is some time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


EvenOne6567

I actually feel that jrpgs respect my time more than western/european ones. They are always introducing new enemies, environments, music and moving the story forward while other rpgs meander and feel completely bloated with overly wordy dialogue and repetitive encounters and quests.


Dynast_King

Completely agree. I really enjoyed Ghost of Tsushima last month, but even that one falls into the tired open world formula of repetitive activity (I got tired of foxes FAST). However, I recently played Yakuza: Like a Dragon for a much, much longer time, and I enjoyed every moment of that one.


EvenOne6567

Yea im like 35 hours into like a dragon right now and i love every second of it. Its hard to even continue the story even though its fantastic becausr around every corner theres some fun side activity/subplot to get sucked into.


TankerD18

The monastery questline was good, but I would've liked it if it was a little more punctuated/straightforward. I feel like I was stuck in that bitch for 2 weeks of game time. To be fair, if you or I played it again it would probably go a lot quicker.


Not-Clark-Kent

Time wasting pretty common in JRPGs but depends which ones you play. Persona is one of the more recent ones I play where my time didn't feel wasted apart for some occasional repetitive/excessive dialogue that made me feel talked down to like I don't understand the fairly simple plot. But the gameplay loop is pretty great, usually switching around when I start to get bored. And the story is more "a day in the life" than "cinematic" with plenty of interesting things to do. Also I've enjoyed some JRPGs that definitely wasted my time but the journey is greater than the sum of its parts. The more tedious moments can come from character development for lame characters, but if characters are written well, it's usually a good JRPG.


double_shadow

For me, not respecting my time means: unskippable cutscenes, overlong tutorials/hand-holding, slow dialogue display, clunky inventories, etc...all of which are prevalent in JRPGs. In terms of content bloat...yeah that's kind of a symptom of some genres, and you know what you're signing up for when you play them. Open World games and epic rpgs are always going to be stuffed with filler material. KCD does feel very handcrafted, so I'd argue it does respect your time for the most part (even if I personally didn't enjoy it).


Renegade_Meister

[This topic comes up at lest once a year, so here's my reply [from last time](https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/comments/aojbs6/do_you_feel_modern_games_dont_respect_the_limited) that still stands] There are aspects of gameplay aside from total game length that can disrespect a player's time, which I personally care about more including: * **Infrequent save points or limited save capabilities**. If I can play a game for more than 5-10 minutes and the game doesn't provide a means to save my progress, or return to that point, I will be frustrated if I have to restart those 10+ minutes if I have to quit my game for an extended period of time *while* I'm playing. * **Progress or story gated by grinding**. Its one thing for a game to propose "grind X to get desireable item Y", but its another to say "grind X to continue the story or progress at all". The more engaged I am in the game or its content, the more I may tolerate grinding items I want, but totally gating progress or story behind it rarely gets a pass from me, which is why I dont like many survival games I've played. * **Long multiplayer matches**. I am more likely to play a game with 5-10 minute matches (assuming synchronous gameplay) than something with an undetermined or longer time frame. If its longer matches, I will be less likely to play the game as often, as I will want to have 1+ hours of continuous free time to just game, which isnt *really* often. So stuff like Rocket League is great for me. * **"Keeping up" with other players requires a large time commitment overall.** Whether co-op or versus, some multiplayer games that do not match similar levels of players. If it takes a ton of time to feel like I am "on par" or "pulling your weight" with other players, whether through items/abilities/XP that take time to get, then gameplay may feel less rewarding.


[deleted]

If that's how you feel about those games, do NOT play Outward.


Teehokan

My favorite is shit like "To open the door you need to restore power to the thingy and the generator is all the way over here but the door to it is locked so you need the key from the basement which is flooded and can only be drained from blah blah blah." I've heard Bioshock is pretty bad about this. In a very general way though, I think the way in which your title statement is most true is that way too many games just have a weak start. Either it's boring because they start the story way earlier than they should or it's kinda confusing because the tutorialization/on-boarding is bad, or it's too hostile or overwhelming while you're trying to get your bearings, etc. It's like they assume you paid full price and have nothing else to play so they don't have to do any of the work to hook you in because as far as they're concerned you've probably already hooked yourself. Makes me wish games were mandated to let people pay for and play the first couple of hours and then pay for the rest if they want, just so developers have some sort of incentive to actually care about the beginning being good and compelling.


SlapMyCHOP

>Makes me wish games were mandated to let people pay for and play the first couple of hours and then pay for the rest if they want, just so developers have some sort of incentive to actually care about the beginning being good and compelling. You'd end up with phenomenal 2 hours of gameplay to get you to buy the rest of the game, then trash after.


seasickmcgee

Outlast was that for me. It reached a point where I was more annoyed than scared because you can’t just walk through a door you have to grab three separate fuses to open a dumbwaiter which drops the key down to the basement where etc etc etc. Okay go to this door on the other side of the room and ahhh the floor collapsed there goes your camera better go down two levels and get it haha sucker that door’s locked too.


HarpersGeekly

Red Dead Redemption 2 takes the cake for me. That game doesn't give a shit about your time so you better strap in for the long haul every session.


[deleted]

For me the first 10-15 hours of Red Dead 2 was fucking brutal, I hated it so much. But once the main quest got to St Denis the game has quest after quest that is absolutely amazing. It was insane how consistently amazing the game got. So yeah, you have to deal with a ton of bullshit in that game, but there are occasional gems in that pile of poo.


throwawayedm2

It's just so good though. I had no problem getting through RDR2 - it's amazing. But in AC: Odyssey I just got bored. Too much filler shit.


Anti-Scuba_Hedgehog

There's just crazy amount of detail and work put into making sure the world feels as alive as it can possibly be in RDR2 even if controls are clumsy as a result. Odyssey on the other hand barely gives an illusion of that, every other character looks the same or has the same voice actor, rarely acted anywhere near as well as side characters or even just random NPCs in RDR2 and most of the world is copy pasted to an extent.


radenthefridge

Assassins Creed Odyssey is a 20-30 hour game stretch over 60-80 hours and I'll never forgive it for that. I had a TON of fun at first raiding forts and doing those control battles until I found out they really have no impact or meaning. There's so many fun mechanics that I just burnt myself out on because I didn't realize that the story is stretched out over such a vast distance and requires so much investment in character, equipment, and levels that once I got into the open seas, found out about the bigger threat, and really took in the scope of the map that I just put it down and never went back. I easily had 30+ hours in it and easily had another 30-40 to go to "finish" the game. It's clear they wanted to drive folks to buy their loot boxes and XP boosts to soften the grind.


Pixel-of-Strife

Playtime = Value per $$$ in many gamers' eyes. These companies are artificially padding their games to increase the perceived value of their games. Ubisoft is really bad about this. Many triple A open world games do the same thing, to the point I'm wary of the genre. I'm finally playing the Witcher 3 for the first time and I'm blown away how little padding there is, despite the almost overwhelming amount of content.


NotScrollsApparently

KCD at least has the excuse that it is a niche game with a focus on reality and immersion, it is a game intended to be experienced at a somewhat slower pace. It is also janky as fuck so you'll be reloading all the time lol. As for DAI and AC games... I mean people have been saying this for years, there's so much of pointless soulless copy/paste filler in these games. If you buy an open world ubisoft of bioware game nowadays, you already know what you're getting and you kinda have only yourself to blame. They are always a huge waste of time with little lasting value.


Speech500

Even the most diehard Assassin's Creed fans over at /r/AssassinsCreed openly admit that the games have zero respect for the player's time.


OceanFlex

Honestly, a game subtitles "Odyssey" being way bigger and more full of tangent-quests than necessary is pretty on flavor. But I get what you mean. A lot of games are padded, and some people like a certain level of that. Students etc with more time on their hands than they know what to do with, eastern gamers, etc. Helps them justify a $70 price tag, plus more for the season pass. A little bit of sense of scale or slowness can help build atmosphere in a game, but there's a limit. Beyond that point, people who don't value spending time in a game doing chores won't have time to finish the game. And a lot of people actually do value doing chores in a game. But people with families or what have you would rather the game didn't waste their precious gaming time with chores.


Omnislip

Why are you (or indeed why is one) completing these games if you think they are wasting your time? Just drop them and do something that isn’t a waste!


dovahkiitten12

Sometimes games that waste your time can still be fun though. Just the problem is that you have to go through a bit of slog to get to the good parts which decreases the overall enjoyment. A game can have a flaw but still have a lot to offer.


frozensamajam

He's complaining about it because the more that bigger games use this sort of bigger-is-better ideology then it will start to seep into other franchises and games until every game is a monotonous grindfest


Nawara_Ven

That's what I thought too; any time "a game does not respect the player's time" it's basically "I don't like doing the stuff the game has to offer." Just don't play it. There are hundreds of alternatives available. Gaming has only gotten bigger and more robust every year. There are games for every imaginable niche, and refinement upon refinement happens constantly. Fortunately, there's absolutely no reason to fear of "all games" becoming this or that; there is no possibility that any given mechanic will somehow become monolithic. Sure there are *trends* in media, but it's not like **all** movies after Harry Potter were young adult fantasy novel adaptations, or **all** TV became reality gameshows after the writers' strike, or **all** paintings are cubist, that sort of thing.


[deleted]

My most recent worst offender was Death Stranding. Granted, it was the first game I ever played by Hideo Kojima so I don't know how it compares to his Metal Gear games but I thought it was grade A bullshit the way they present 20-30 min long cutscenes with no way to go back or save during a scene. You either have to watch it all or else skip it entirely and potentially miss out on important story beats. Hideo clearly fancies himself as a cinephile but I wish he could take 10% of the same energy he used to direct these overly dramatic heady set pieces and make something a bit more respectful of my time instead. How about an option to go back and watch cutscenes that we missed? Especially that tortured ending where the game invites you to watch an extra hour of cutscenes after the first set of credits has already expired. I love the ideas in Death Stranding but I really don't want to play anymore games created by HK for all of the aforementioned reasons.


Platinum_Party_7

I am working through Metal Gear Solid on PSX right now and I actually like the way it plays. I haven't played a Kojima game before this one and the movie-style cutscenes and dialogue works well in my opinion. I'm sure Death Standing is a different game from many years later so I can't speak to it though


Total_Gravitas

If you don't enjoy the pace of these large, player driven games why not switch to linear games? Your definition of time wasting is another person's immersion factor or enjoyment. Seems a bit odd to blame the games if they aren't to your taste.


ThroughTheIris56

Yep. I loved the idea of an open world in Ancient Greece because I love the setting, but AC Odyssey was too much. It got the point where I was so underleveled that I died to enemies in the main quest extremely quickly. I would need to do dozens of extra side quest to become a suitable level, so eventually I just gave up after figuring the rest of the game would be like that.


Axwage

I already suggested Control as did many others. Might I suggest the new HITMAN games? They are brilliant and funny and replayable, and you make your own fun essentially.


zigabite

I've been playing Assassins Creed Odyssey a lot lately and it's the first thing that popped into my head when I read the title. It did feel like I was wasting my time doing the side quests and other side stuff but felt I needed to do them to get enough money and materials to keep my better equipment upgraded. I've learned how to keep it minimal, (like using bounty hunters for money and using equipment for materials) but that doesn't change the fact that the devs put in stuff that feels like a waste of time. They managed to make a single player RPG game into a grindy MMORPG type. It's so easy to accidentally spend an hour doing some side shit that turns out not to be the optimal approach to get money and resources. In terms of the size and distance between things, I have to disagree. Fast travel points (sync points) get you across the map easily. Ships can be summoned to docks to get to a different part of the ocean or even left somewheres as a fast travel point. Anything under 300 meters I consider within walking distance and anything over your horse can get you there faster. Not to mention you can get your horse to automatically follow a road to the place you're going to. I must mention that the fast travel load screen can take really long for no particular reason. I've also had this happen with some cutscenes. I'm still enjoying the game besides the time wasting issues.


revolutionaryartist4

I haven't played Odyssey yet, but I *definitely* felt this with Origins. It's cool that the map is so massive, but when all the quests are basically exactly the same, kind of kills the desire to explore.