Dragon Age 2 shorter than Dragon Age - "a bit longer than Mass Effect 2"

[Tinman]

Dragon Age 2 shorter than Dragon Age, bit longer than Mass Effect 2

Don't expect 50+ hours out of Bioware's fantasy RPG sequel

[Duke Dude]

Nooooooo!!!!!!
I so want an epically long story

[Blaze786]

Well they brought it out quite quickly after DA so I am not suprised.

[Isengard]

So a 40 hour game. Well that's enough for me tbh, I really cant do another 80+ hour game. It is a pity for those who loved the length of DAO.

[Duke Dude]

So a 40 hour game. Well that's enough for me tbh, I really cant do another 80+ hour game. It is a pity for those who loved the length of DAO.

I was one of those that loved the length of DA:O! ME2 was a nice length but it did feel a bit short, now DA (Who's setting is my favourite, fantasy) is almost half the length of DA:O

Damn it!!!

[Lycanthrope]

Dragon Age: Origins was a ridiculously long game, with some players reporting over 100 hours of gameplay depending on how many side quests you pursue.

I was a bit of a completionist during all my playthroughs in DA:O, I think one playthrough (all side-quests, chantry boards, etc) took maybe 70 hours to do.

In essence, Dragon Age: Origins was a short game. You basically just did three things (get the dwarves, Dalish and humans to side with you) then you wiggled your fingers and killed the Arch Demon. It was hardly a "long" game. The part that took the longest was the Deep Roads and, facing facts, character side quests (not to even mention the chantry board/mage collective ones) were exceptionally short and only modestly gratifying.

As I said, Dragon Age: was already a "short" (read: average-length) RPG, only about a few hours (10-15?) longer than The Witcher. The idea of it being shorter than that just makes me worry about how much there actually is to do in the world of DA2.

Much of Dragon Age: Origins' appeal was in the replay value (different origins, genders, classes and ways of dealing with situations). According to XFire, I've raked up 204 hours in Dragon Age over three (full) playthroughs including all the DLC. That's 68 hours per playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins was definitely not a "long" game and many of the side-quests felt like "run over there, kill this" so hardly anything challenging or immersive. I only have one playthrough of The Witcher logged on XFire and that stands at 54 hours. So, basically, DA2 will be the same length as The Witcher. Interesting and somewhat disappointing.

Strangely, The Witcher felt like a much more cohesive experience than Dragon Age: Origins.

Bah.. speculation won't get me anywhere. Will judge DA2 (and its shortness) when I've played it. I just hope that much of its 50 hours aren't made up of dragged out areas.

[Duke Dude]

I was a bit of a completionist during all my playthroughs in DA:O, I think one playthrough (all side-quests, chantry boards, etc) took maybe 70 hours to do.

In essence, Dragon Age: Origins was a short game. You basically just did three things (get the dwarves, Dalish and humans to side with you) then you wiggled your fingers and killed the Arch Demon. It was hardly a "long" game. The part that took the longest was the Deep Roads and, facing facts, character side quests (not to even mention the chantry board/mage collective ones) were exceptionally short and only modestly gratifying.

As I said, Dragon Age: was already a "short" (read: average-length) RPG, only about a few hours (10-15?) longer than The Witcher. The idea of it being shorter than that just makes me worry about how much there actually is to do in the world of DA2.

Much of Dragon Age: Origins' appeal was in the replay value (different origins, genders, classes and ways of dealing with situations). According to XFire, I've raked up 204 hours in Dragon Age over three (full) playthroughs including all the DLC. That's 68 hours per playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins was definitely not a "long" game and many of the side-quests felt like "run over there, kill this" so hardly anything challenging or immersive. I only have one playthrough of The Witcher logged on XFire and that stands at 54 hours. So, basically, DA2 will be the same length as The Witcher. Interesting and somewhat disappointing.

Strangely, The Witcher felt like a much more cohesive experience than Dragon Age: Origins.

Bah.. speculation won't get me anywhere. Will judge DA2 (and its shortness) when I've played it. I just hope that much of its 50 hours aren't made up of dragged out areas.

I always dig reading your views mate !
You get them across is such clear and cohesive ways

[OmegaFenix]

I was a bit of a completionist during all my playthroughs in DA:O, I think one playthrough (all side-quests, chantry boards, etc) took maybe 70 hours to do.

In essence, Dragon Age: Origins was a short game. You basically just did three things (get the dwarves, Dalish and humans to side with you) then you wiggled your fingers and killed the Arch Demon. It was hardly a "long" game. The part that took the longest was the Deep Roads and, facing facts, character side quests (not to even mention the chantry board/mage collective ones) were exceptionally short and only modestly gratifying.

As I said, Dragon Age: was already a "short" (read: average-length) RPG, only about a few hours (10-15?) longer than The Witcher. The idea of it being shorter than that just makes me worry about how much there actually is to do in the world of DA2.

Much of Dragon Age: Origins' appeal was in the replay value (different origins, genders, classes and ways of dealing with situations). According to XFire, I've raked up 204 hours in Dragon Age over three (full) playthroughs including all the DLC. That's 68 hours per playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins was definitely not a "long" game and many of the side-quests felt like "run over there, kill this" so hardly anything challenging or immersive. I only have one playthrough of The Witcher logged on XFire and that stands at 54 hours. So, basically, DA2 will be the same length as The Witcher. Interesting and somewhat disappointing.

Strangely, The Witcher felt like a much more cohesive experience than Dragon Age: Origins.

Bah.. speculation won't get me anywhere. Will judge DA2 (and its shortness) when I've played it. I just hope that much of its 50 hours aren't made up of dragged out areas.

In an industry where the majority of titles last between 6 - 8 hours and u get the odd 20 hour game 70 hours is long.

[Dentar]

I was a bit of a completionist during all my playthroughs in DA:O, I think one playthrough (all side-quests, chantry boards, etc) took maybe 70 hours to do.

In essence, Dragon Age: Origins was a short game. You basically just did three things (get the dwarves, Dalish and humans to side with you) then you wiggled your fingers and killed the Arch Demon. It was hardly a "long" game. The part that took the longest was the Deep Roads and, facing facts, character side quests (not to even mention the chantry board/mage collective ones) were exceptionally short and only modestly gratifying.

As I said, Dragon Age: was already a "short" (read: average-length) RPG, only about a few hours (10-15?) longer than The Witcher. The idea of it being shorter than that just makes me worry about how much there actually is to do in the world of DA2.

Much of Dragon Age: Origins' appeal was in the replay value (different origins, genders, classes and ways of dealing with situations). According to XFire, I've raked up 204 hours in Dragon Age over three (full) playthroughs including all the DLC. That's 68 hours per playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins was definitely not a "long" game and many of the side-quests felt like "run over there, kill this" so hardly anything challenging or immersive. I only have one playthrough of The Witcher logged on XFire and that stands at 54 hours. So, basically, DA2 will be the same length as The Witcher. Interesting and somewhat disappointing.

Strangely, The Witcher felt like a much more cohesive experience than Dragon Age: Origins.

Bah.. speculation won't get me anywhere. Will judge DA2 (and its shortness) when I've played it. I just hope that much of its 50 hours aren't made up of dragged out areas.

I agree. Origins might have been long in hours, but not so much in content.

[Lycanthrope]

I agree. Origins might have been long in hours, but not so much in content.

*nod* That's my point in a nutshell. Longevity means nothing without content. Some people can play Diablo or Titan Quest for hours upon hours upon hours that could put the time people have spent with a gem like Dragon Age to shame, but without content, hours mean nothing.

I always dig reading your views mate !
You get them across is such clear and cohesive ways

Thanks, although Dentar has a way of cutting through my verbosity and succinctly articulating my point

In an industry where the majority of titles last between 6 - 8 hours and u get the odd 20 hour game 70 hours is long.

Ah, but I don't have much of an interest in the majority of titles. I have higher expectations and standards when it comes to RPGs since it's my favourite genre.

Don't get me wrong, Duke Nukem Forever, for example, I'd be happy with the 10-15 hours it promises which, for a FPS, is a lot of time. However, for an RPG, I want more content, more time to live in and love the world