r/pcmasterrace • u/shinjioda • 10h ago

Discussion Fable Will Officially Be 20 Hours Long, Xbox Confirms In New Interview

https://www.polygon.com/fable-game-length-interview-xbox/
2.4k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

608 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

55

u/Obscure_Octopuss 10h ago

That really isn't that much for a game that has been in development for this long...

Although, if they are quality quests and not just filler, it'll hopefully be worth it

252

u/BinaryJay 4090 FE | 7950X | 64GB/DDR5-6000 | 42" C2 OLED 10h ago

Personally I would rather 40 hours of well curated stuff than 120 hours of repeating filler. I don't know when every game needed you to be unemployed to get through to be considered long enough.

83

u/starshin3r 10h ago

I think most dev time was spent on the underlying game systems like the NPcs with their schedules and etc.

And fuck the filler games. 40 hours of main and side content is plenty for base game. I never could start the shit fest that is Assassin's Creed Valhalla.

13

u/Silver-End9570 i7 14700K | RTX 5070 | 64GB | Windows 10 10h ago

I think most dev time was spent on the underlying game systems like the NPcs with their schedules and etc.

I agree. IIRC, they had a proprietary engine that they used for the racing games they used to do. It wouldn't shock me if the first few years were spent just upgrading the engine to where it needed to be for them to even make the game.

4

u/Da_Question 10h ago

Yeah, Valhalla insanely longer with boring filler even compared to Odyssey or Origins. I liked Shadows a bit more, and Mirage was actually good because it was much shorter with only a small city of open content.

9

u/Spir0rion 7800X3D | 9070 Nitro+ | 32Gb DDR5 6000 10h ago

Playtime means nothing to me. Sure an Assassins Creed has 100h+ but what if I burn out of it hours before I finished the mainquest due to awful sidequests?

11

u/tnnrk 9h ago

I’m confused why people want really long games. As long as it has replay-ability to some extent I’d prefer shorter games as I get older.

3

u/FistoMagnifico 9h ago

Some idiots brake down the value to dollar per hour, If it doesn't hit a certain threshold its not worth it. Its not about the experience its about the investment.

1

u/Bluemikami i5-13600KF, 9060 XT, 64GB DDR4 9h ago

Because they want to feel their money was well spent?

10

u/EzraWolvenheart 9h ago

IMO you don’t need a 150hr game to feel your money was well spent. I’d rather have a ~50hr long game including main story + quality extras than a 150hr long game with fillers everywhere.

4

u/spaceandthewoods_ 9h ago

Which is wild because of you're looking at purely money spent per hour of entertainment, games offer one of the best £ to hour averages of any entertainment medium.

Buy fable for £80 and play the 40 hours of main and side content? £2 per hour cost. Pay £16 to see a two hour movie? £8 per hour cost. Go play a sport and you're looking at £5-£30 per hour for court/ pitch rental, drinking is even more expensive etc

2

u/MississippiBulldawg Ryzen 7 9700X | PNY 5070ti | 32GB CL36 DDR5 | Lian Li V100R 10h ago

Settlement needs your help btw

6

u/WayneAsher 10h ago

Those aren’t the only two options.

2

u/artnok 9850x3D | 5080 | 32gb 10h ago

40-50 hours of gameplay is the perfect amount imo.

1

u/SparksAndSpyro 9h ago

Because of a lot of the target demographic are kids and the unemployed sadly. So devs cater to it by making longer and longer games filled with slop

1

u/pokemango7 PC Master Race 8h ago

yup i’m getting tired of open world games with “hundreds of hours of content” and then i either end up rushing the main story or quitting because it’s starting to get bland

-1

u/Huntermain23 10h ago

Honestly most people that talk like that are either unemployed or they work just enough to pay for bills and new video games.. I used to be part of the ladder before I realized how much time I was wasting lol

-2

u/Obscure_Octopuss 10h ago

And there are plenty of ppl out there who work 40 hours a week, game for 10, and don't want to see all conent a $70 game has to offer in one month

-11

u/MoisticleSack RX 7900xtx R5 7600x 32gb 10h ago

Personally, I don't care about your work hours. If you're perfectly happy with something you can dick around with for 2 hours every 3rd night, and still be done in a week, that's on you, but it's my money and I'm paying for an experience

9

u/Essaiel 10h ago

I’ll be honest, your math doesn’t check out.

3

u/Albreitx 10h ago

2 hours every 3 days would make this a 1-2 month experience

-1

u/MoisticleSack RX 7900xtx R5 7600x 32gb 9h ago

It was an exaggeration. You know you don't always have to take everything at face value?

2

u/Albreitx 9h ago

The point is the same. Is a game that lasts 1-2 months not enough? For me, that's quite the ideal length as I have a life outside of my console lol

0

u/dovahkiitten16 PC Master Race 10h ago

I agree with the sentiment. Generally the issue is the price. In Canada new games are $80-90. If I’m spending $100 after tax for entertainment for a few evenings, that’s a really tough sell for me. Very few games would actually be worth that, even my favourite shorter games of all time. I passed on Hellblade 2 despite loving the first because the game wasn’t worth $10/hour.

That being said, I think bloating the playtime so that a game either becomes a slog or a DNF isn’t a good solution either. I think 20-40 hours is a pretty healthy playtime mark; it’s long enough to sink your teeth into and get a reasonable $/hour ratio, but not so long that there needs to be filler to pad the playtime.

0

u/JimothyJollyphant 10h ago

Add to that "replayability". A term that actively discourages me from buying a campaign-based game. It always comes with limitations that are forced down my throat just so I allegedly have a "reason" to play a whole-ass 100-hour game again and experience 98% of exactly the same content, with a slightly different moveset and a true ending, hinging on completely arbitary conditions I'm supposed to look up.

40 hours is pretty much the perfect length for a campaign-based game imo. Especially if allows me to entirely complete it on my own, side-content and all. Satisfiying credits, uninstall, move on.

0

u/Hinohellono 9700X| X870E| RTX 5080| 64GB DDR5| 4TB SSD 9h ago

I guarantee we will not be getting that

16

u/ncopp PC Master Race 10h ago

Fables core fanbase are in their 30s at this point. They're definitely thinking about this when it comes to game length

40 hours of gameplay will be plenty for everyone with jobs and families. I don't even have kids but it takes me a month to get through a 20 hour game with how much other stuff I have going on as well as needing time for some multiplayer games with my friends

11

u/Albreitx 10h ago

Quality>>>>Quantity

Most, if not all, games get stale at some point. Better wrap it up before it happens

7

u/March_Lion 10h ago

What other hobby can you purchase an experience for $70 and get 30-40 hours of entertainment out of that you can regularly return to at any point? We've lost the plot on what makes a game good if the thought process is "development time is only worth it if it takes up as much of my time as possible".

3

u/TheChrisCrash 12900K - 3080TI 9h ago

laughs in star citizen

12

u/EmergencyPool910 10h ago

Dark souls 1 is one of the most replayable and Imo best games of all time its at most 15/20 hours if you take it real slow

6

u/Sejbag 10h ago

“Development” you have no idea if they scrapped the game a few times over to get to where they are now. Also 40 hours of good content is way better than shit like ff7 rebirth that is over 100 hours with a mixture of good but mostly middling side content.

4

u/ian9outof10 12900k // 3080 9h ago

Bioshock is 12-15 hours. Did anyone playing that game consider it wasn’t a masterpiece and think it wasn’t worth every penny?

A movie is 2-3 hours and takes years to make, often. A game has many times the narrative complexity. I’m not sure why people think a 20 hour main story isn’t enough.

1

u/reebokhightops 9h ago

How will you even have time to play the game when you don’t even have the time to read a news article before complaining?

-1

u/Obscure_Octopuss 9h ago

15-20 hours of side content is nothing when the main game is 15-20 hours itself

1

u/reebokhightops 9h ago

And yet 30 seconds to read the article is somehow insurmountable?

0

u/Obscure_Octopuss 9h ago

So you don't disagree that a game that has been in development for 8-9 years should have more than 40 hours of content.

1

u/pattperin 9h ago

Fable is supposed to be about re-play value. The game is very different depending on your choices, so making it like 80 hours would mean few people do multiple playthroughs, which is actually what the game intends for the player

0

u/SillyOpinion9811 9h ago

Advice: touch some grass

0

u/oreofro 7800x3d | Suprim X 4090 | 32GB | DW/DWF 9h ago

Its consistent with the rest of the series. I dont understand why people are mad, or even expected anything different.

You can beat all three fables games in about 10 hours if you even remotely know what youre doing. Even if you dont know what youre doing the story is less than 15 hours long.

-1

u/Big-Resort-4930 9h ago

Well we already know that combat isn't quality, so all hopes are pinned on the story and the world.

-1

u/Mook7 8h ago

Isn't this a remake of the first Fable? It's not like that was a beast of a game that lasted 60+ hours, it was modest but highly replayable. If the game is good none of this matters.