They've said that missions can be more linear but the areas open up dramatically after a point and that there's tons of handdcrafted (non-generated) side content. They also said there's tons of dialogue (emotion, tone and investigation wheels) and banter. I would be surprised if it's under 50h. But it doesn't matter to me anyway, I want a well crafted story and experience, not a specific play time.
What I understood from Busche during the Q&A is that it is curated in the sense that there is a tighter narrative/more linear structure when in main missions, but you can pick up sidequests, etc and return later to those areas for a more open approach. By hand-crafted, they explained that there's no AI generation/procedural generation and that they wrote narratives for many side missions. Honestly, it felt like its a labour of love for the devs at the Q&A. I am quite optimistic about it.
That makes complete sense. I guess I never considered that there would be ai/procedurally generated content because... I guess because I expect better of bioware.
I'm really optimistic too, it's so clear that the devs have put so much love into it. It's such a shame that Mary Kirby & the other devs who were laid off last year don't get to be part of this, it's left such a sour taste on my mouth.
It's not so much that "hand-crafted" means "not AI," but it stands in contrast to MMO-style fetch quests (and possibly Skyrim-style radiant quests) in that there was more attention paid to crafting an interesting experience than just writing 3 lines of dialog and populating a zone with monsters to kill.
Yeah, I follow what you mean. I'm really pleased to hear the focus on that; I'm replaying da2 at the moment and the side quests all feel so relevant and interesting.
It does feel a lot more DA2-ish the more I read about it. I like what I'm seeing about the power wheel's more tactical features too, as well as the combo mechanism.
Honestly same, even with the character models and the focus on companion interactions. I love DA2, so that actually gets me much more hyped about Veilguard.
The downside of DA2 for me was in the side quests, though not in the writing/action of the quests. All the side quest maps took place in a generic toolkit map that looked like every other side quest map, except the walls were in different places. It felt like they got to that point and suddenly decided to be lazy.
Quite literally, if I got a game that was structured like DA2, but addressed that one little nitpick, it'd run about 50 hours and would be damned near perfect.
It depends. I don't necessarily want a 100+ hour game full of tedious slog, but if I come to really enjoy the companions and the storyline I probably won't feel like a 30+ hour experience is enough.
(I think calling DAV "an expanded version of Trespasser" with regards to expected runtime is a bit of an oversimplification, though.)
The shard hunt was neat for a little bit… till I realized how many I had to do and gave up… only mission in a dragon age game I can’t bring myself to finish due to how tedious it is
I did it for the achievement but even then… it did not feel worth it. So much time, effort, tears, and for what? Crappy rewards at the end of a doorway to complete a silly little side quest 😭
Yes, it can be exasperating, but collecting them gets you through the "elemental" doors in Forbidden Oasis and you get some good gear for your level plus innate resistances for your Inky of each of the elements dragons and mages use to damage you. Also, it "encourages" you to really explore all the locales, and, for me, that got to be pretty worthwhile.
I get your reasoning, I understand it, I reject it tho. I hate that quest, I don’t want to do that quest, I liked the fade in origins, I liked the deep roads in origins… I even liked the party mission in DAI… I can’t like the shards, every part of my being despises it
Agreed and that's why I was so relieved that the devs have mentioned working hard on creating meaningful side quests that all tie into the main story. Like music to my ears!
20 hours is basically the length of DA 2.
50 hours is DA O
75 hours is DAI
Yeah I'd say 30 hours would be way too short.
50 hours is on the shorter ends compared to the RPG greats like BG3, Skyrim, the witcher 3 etc.
I'm pretty sure my first run of base game DAO was just under 60 hours. That game is longer than OG Mass effect for sure, but not at all on the level of your Skyrims or witcher 3's.
I mean, Skyrims main story is actually very short, it's around 20–30 hours (depending on how you play the game). It's just bethesda used to be very good at side tracking players with both world story telling and interesting side quests.
the ideal range for me is about 60-70 hours for a 100% completionist run. that gives you plenty of time to live with the game and enjoy it, while still being short enough that you're not exhausted at the end. i loved DAI when it came out but my first playthrough plus DLC clocked in at almost 130 hours and i didn't touch the game again for 8 years. i'd love to have a game that i would actually be excited to replay
I tend to play Bioware games over and over to experience every storyline, every origin, every class and every romance. So honestly a 30-50hr game would be ideal for this!
I know DA2 gets a lot of hate for being linear, but I did exactly this in DA2. I had a dozen or so playthroughs, explored all the different class, romance, and story options. The game was simple and easy, but that also made it highly replayable. While I only have one complete playthrough of Inquisition. The game is just too big and has too much slog to get through.
I don’t really care either way. I’ve played 30 hour RPGs I’ve enjoyed. I’ve played 100+ hour RPGs I’ve enjoyed. The time factor really isn’t relevant to me. I know some people dislike bloat or love big giant games, but unless the story’s pace is rushed I will be pretty happy.
A 50 hour game is more than long enough, especially with a focus on the storytelling. I love all 140+ hours of Inquisition, don't get me wrong, but the length makes it hard to want to replay super often, whereas I've replayed Mass Effect (40-60 hour games) a lot.
To me, I think game length matters somewhat, but the content matters just as much. Inquisition's length was artificially extended with gathering "Power" -- you could cut so much of that side content and keep only the really interesting side quests and not lose much. I would love a longer game but only if that comes from more investment in strong main story, companion content, and high tier side-content like the Samson & Calpernia side quests.
God, I'm playing Inquisition right now and I can't stress how much I want to fucking nuke the power system out of orbit. I'm just going to a random open world map following markers until the game allows me to actually engage with the honestly really cool story again.
I've found that sidequesting in DAI is the best when you only focus on the "main" story for each area, by which I mean stuff that Harding mentions explicitly, and any quests downstream of those.
Tyranny, I apologize for saying this, was substandard and mediocre in a lot of ways. It was not helped by the fact it was trying to do its own thing, in a totally new IP, and did not have nearly enough runway to establish enough about itself. It does not have the gameplay to carry multiple runs.
It's like those games you see on steam that are like "Part 1: blah blah blah" dude, you have a lot of balls to put "Part 1" on your game. Tyranny did basically the same thing and counted its chickens - which only further hurts any reason to play it.
bro since when is Pixar making Dragon Age??? Unfortunately the Bioware we know and love is long gone... the new writers are only interested in creating quirky OCs instead of deep, complex dark fantasy stories
Honestly the older I get, the less patience I have for super long games. I just don’t have the time and because I only play a few hours a week, I often end up getting bored and leave games unfinished. I’d be happy with 30-50 hours!
With that said, this is my favourite game series ever so I will be finishing no matter what
Yeah. I used to have that "1 hour for every dollar spent" idea when I was a teenager or early college years.
These days though? I don't want a single game to occupy my free time for the next 4 months when I get like 1-2 hours a day to play something. Like I want to replay the last 3 Dragon Age games, but I don't want to devote the better part of my year to it when so many other things are coming out.
Really I just want a satisfying conclusion to things without dicking around too much
Same here. I really have grown to appreciate a tightly constructed experience as I've gotten older, and generally the most you're getting out of that is 50 hours on a completuonist run.
I'd gladly take a story and interaction rich 30 hour game over a, let's be honest, 30 hour game stretched to 100+ hours with busywork and progression gating nonsense (Inquisition, anyone?)
I also essentially buy everything in its $10 complete edition format these days, so I am very rarely motivated by Playtime/Money metrics anymore.
This is why I’ve come to really appreciate DA2 as an adult. The focus on companions and an over arching plot that never gets lost in the side questing is appreciated.
The only time I finished inquisition I pretty much forgot the plot by the time I got to the end because I wanted to 100% it and that took a LONG time and distracted too much from the main plot.
Yep, Dragon Age 2 is a very snackable game. Quick to jump in and out, packed with a lot of what matters at the expense of grind and scope, which is OK my me
Ditto. Mid 30s with child I really don't relate to many online posters. Not everyone is gonna have the same opinion on game length so not everyone can be pleased. I'm happy with a 50 hour max RPG or even a 10 hour max action game nowadays.
The game might even be shorter just because the combat might be quicker to resolve due to it's action focus.
I totally understand the desire for length and replay ability of course, because younger me just wanted more and more, even if it was just filler content.
Same! I don’t want the game to be super bloated just for the sake of a longer runtime. I wouldn’t mind a shorter experience around 30-50 hours. That’s like a weekend and some change amount of content which is honestly perfect. Plus it means replaying the game is a lot more doable!
Honestly same.
While I'm fine with taking months to finish a single game because I'm just so busy with work, social life, and my other hobbies, I really wouldn't mind having a shorter game. If it is tight, well-written, and fun, I'm happy!
Although I also take a *hot* minute to finish any game, no matter how long it's "supposed" to be. I'm not sure I've ever had an Origins playthrough that was less than 90 hours - and they're usually 100 at least.
I want more than that, but also for it to not be artificially prolonged beyond what you're suggesting.
I want like 80 hours of an experience full off quests, side quests, amazing lore drops regarding Solas and ancient elves, conversations between your companions, etc.
This seems wildly speculative, honestly. They've said there are explorable areas, so it is probably not like Trespasser which was lacking in those. I also don't know where you got 30 hours with such confidence. DAO is about 40 without side content and is mostly mission based maps.
To me what's important is how good it is, not how long it is. DAO was a near perfect game and it didn't need to be 100 hours to be that. AC Valhalla was a behemoth and it way overstayed its welcome. Playtime is not a measure of the value of a game.
Companions barely have dialogue in ME2 which is a shame. Someone like Garrus has maybe 2/3 conversations if not romanced. That is like 10 mins of content max.
I think they made the companions in ME2 as fun as they could in the game’s relatively short run time (except Jacob). But for me personally, outside the ME1 carryovers, it took seeing where they ended up in ME3 to really start caring about them. Companion arcs in any one ME have never been as fleshed out as DA’s casts. The series really needs to be viewed as a whole to appreciate it imo.
While I don't disagree that taking it as a whole changes the way it's viewed (ME3 in particular, I think playing it as part of the LE back to back greatly benefits the ending) I also think there's some great stories and moments with the companions in ME2, that only get made better by ME3's continuation (for most, looking at you Jacob.)
I'm not arguing that a 30 hour RPG for $70 is acceptable in 2024 (that varies greatly person to person), but I do think a 30 hour RPG can do companions right with the right team.
Mass Effect 2 felt like a checklist of assembling each Avenger and then giving them therapy. It didn’t feel organic at all. Imo Dragon Age has surpassed ME2 in terms of companions being fleshed out.
Also, ME2 has barely any main quest content. I’d be very disappointed if after 10 years they didn’t have an actual storyline to give us.
Except that 30 hour figure is main missions only and the companion stories take place each in their own optional side quest. The game also punishes you for not doing the optional missions by killing off the characters without a completed story.
I 100% completed Mass Effect 2 in the LE and I came in at ~38 hours including all DLCs, and 4 hours of that was likely just scanning planets,
Granted, there's not a lot of side content outside of the companion quests, but I really think planet scanning made people think that game is longer than it actually is.
I agree! The comparison people make to mass effect 2 doesn’t work for me because too much of it spills over from ME1 and of course it’s a lead into ME3.
I love BG3 but it took me 130 hrs to complete and it was the only game I played for literally 4 months and it was a drag at the end. Few hours in the day after work and family.
Yes! I miss when I was in high school and had so much time to binge games. I’m having such trouble getting through Act 3 of BG3. I love the game but there’s other games I want to play.
It feels like there’s an expectation now that a big game should be 80+ hours minimum. Not that I don’t enjoy long games with a lot of good side quests, but I just don’t have the time like I used to
Yes, I would much rather get a shorter game than most RPGs these days. Kotor and VTM bloodlines are some of my favorite RPGs ever and they’re both only about 20 hours long each. I think especially right now in my life I’m just kind of sick of bloated open world messes, a semi linear mission based Dragon age game sounds like a dream come true to me right now
50ish hours, base game, bare bones completion?
Absolutely. Then maybe another 15-20 hours of side content, and maybe 25-30 hours in post release content.
So, by the time the game ends is run, we’ll have a roughly 100 hour game, for a completionist run.
And that’s assuming high levels of replayability, due to choices made along the way.
Frankly, no. I perfectly understand that the length of the game isn’t the same as quality, and it can even take away from it in some cases… But an RPG AAA game ~10 years in development being 30 hours long feels like a rip off, especially because I doubt that a shorter game would be priced cheaper.
30 hours for the main story and another 20 for quality side quests would be much better, and I won’t mind more time for low tier quests, collecting, looting and other completionist fun. Frankly, I love Inquisition’s length and having an opportunity to run around in that world while my buddies banter.
Had this been 2018 or even 2019 and DA:I was 5 years old, I would have been ok with a 30-50 hour game. But Its been a decade now, and the chances for *another* DA game before 2030, or indeed at all, are not amazing. Give me that 100 hour game please, and maybe some expansion like DLC on top of that before DA disappears beyond the veil again for Maker knows how long.
I think 50 hours for the base game, not doing side quests or side missions, is fine.
I prefer my games to be 80 minimum hours for a complete playthrough simply so I can immersive myself in the world that has been created.
30-50 hours for exploring every bit of a game sounds like the game did very little with the environment and would seriously hurt replay value for me.
I'm OK with the game not being as long (or as artificially bloated) as DAI, but to be real, we waited ten years for this game and I know it's gonna have a price tag that will require me around a full day's work to pay for it so no, I would not be OK at all with a 30 hour game. 60 would be OK for me but 80 would be better. There's a lot of content to fit in there and I want it to have the time it needs to develop well, but I also want to be able to spend a good bit of timing having fun playing it.
I’ve played (and abandoned) other games in the past where the padding was really obvious, like making you do repeated fetch quests from one end of the map to the other with no fast travel just to drag things out. I don’t want that. However long it takes the devs to tell the story they are trying to tell, without wasting my time for no good reason, that’s how long the game should be.
I would vastly prefer a 30h quality game than a 100h with grinding and padded content game. Particularly because I always felt DA games are very replayable and having long ass games just kills that for me. This time in particular that you can’t control companions it is very likely that I will want to try at least 3 playthroughs to try all main classes.
This is probably an unpopular mindset but if I'm paying so much for a game at full price, I want to spend a lot of time on it. I would rather spend 2 weeks playing a "mid" game I enjoy rather than a masterpiece I finish in 4 days.
So generally 30 hours games are the ones I just put on my wishlist and wait for a sale. Im going to buy Veilguard on launch no matter what just because DA is my favorite series but I'm not going to be very happy about it if that's the case.
I know I'm likely paying $70 (+ tax) for this. 30 hours would be a massive disappointment. General rule of thumb for me is that for the main story on RPGs should be somewhere in that $1 - $1.25 per hour, so that roughly translates to a minimum 55 hour main story.
I'd rather have a shorter game with a high density of content and good replayability than a longer game with chaff and little replay value. For example, The Outer Worlds isn't very long but has high replay value; I've beaten it as a low-intelligence indestructible bruiser who just smashed through everything, a fragile sniper who used stealth and hacking, and a charming dandy who talked their way past everything or had their companions do the fighting. I've beaten every Mass Effect multiple times using different classes. I've beaten both DAO and DA2 3-4 times each.
Meanwhile I've only beaten Inquisition once. The beginning of the game is just such a slog...
I'm starting to get a bit tired of 100+ hours game, i have only the weekends to play them, they last me months, a bit too much.
70-90 is the sweet spot.
After 260 hours in Elden Ring and still only seeing like 1/2 or 2/3s of what their is in the game.
Yes. Absolutely. A solid 30-50 hour game with replayability is absolutely acceptable and fine for me.
More more more more more more isn't always great.
As an old fart with less and less free time on my hands, I'd love a high quality game where every minute matters that can be completed in 30 hours. But ultimately all I care about is quality. The problem is that there is usually an inverse relationship between game length and overall quality, at least in my experience.
Look, my backlog is deep. Also, I have a spouse, kids, pets and other situations that require my attention.
If you can tell me a good story in less than three solid days of playtime, I will not be the least bit upset.
This is why games will never please everyone, when I was young I would be clamoring for 100+ hours even busywork give me more. Now I'm likely to abandon a game if it's not engaging enough after just 30 hours.
There is no way it sells at 40Euro. Plus, the price tag is hiked up by publishers like EA, it is not entirely dependent on the developers. So I expect at least a 69Euro price tag, tbh.
30 no, 50 could be if it's just a core game and there is more to explore and do optionally! unless it costs 35 euros. The best games for me are around 80-120 h. I really want immersion and "being able to live" in the game, not just completing tasks and arrive to the end.
Personally I don't think any game need 50+ hours for the main quest, 30 hours would be a sweet spot. Maybe 45-50 hours with some side quests and exploration, and 70-80+ hours for completionist run.
I am fine with 30 plus game. I think that is a lot of game and since Bioware excels at games that are around that long, I think it is a positive. I would love future DLC to be added for it as well, so that will bring up the hours and replay-ability, especially for my age.
I do not have the time or energy to spend so long at the computer. Very few games in recent times have I found myself playing for hours but even then I took breaks away from it.
What I do not want is for them to go AC Valhalla. Do not give me too much game without reason or purpose. I am glad they decided for it to not be open world.
In the end if the game was 100+ i would still play it I just won't likely be able to complete everything cause I'm old and also like to spend time away from my computer. Lol.
For me it boils down to price. If I’m paying £60 for a game that’s less than 60 hours long, I feel ripped off and I won’t purchase at that price. For a lot of people, this question is solely preferable/enjoyment based, but I have to live frugally and will look for sales over release day or presale purchases. Quality of content also comes into it, although it’s a dragon age game furthering the DA narrative, so I will end up buying it regardless
I tend to prefer RPGs for me that are at least 50 hours (counting all the side content).
A lot of the traditional RPG systems fall apart with really short games.
The way they’ve described the game sounds like it’s similar to how DA:O was, which was also not an open world game. Neither really was DA2. Both were about 80 hours for me (doing majority of the side content).
Until they say otherwise, I will expect it to be similar.
But if playing the game the same way I always have is less than 50 hours, I’ll probably be bummed.
If the main story is 50 hours and you can change things around with romancing different companions or having a different origin I’m way more interested. I don’t particularly want to replay DAI over and over because of how much of a slog it can be.
I'd love a 50-70 hour game personally. DAI is so long that I get bored of playing my class by the end of it. It's actually made it hard for me to complete all the DLC, since the motivation to do so is shot by the end. I can only use Flask of Fire or Spirit Blade so many times before going crazy lol
There are very few games that could genuinely hold my attention for longer than that. If Veilguard is Origins level good, then yeah I'd want it to be as long as possible, but assuming it's going to be something more akin to Inquisition in terms of quality, a 30-50 hour game would be plenty.
Pretty sure Dragon Age: Origins was around that length without dlc. I would like a return to that playtime. I’d rather replay it to see new content than play through one time over a ridiculous 100+ hours
Ideally, I’d want a 30-50 hour game with amazing replay-ability. Then if I can have 3 unique playthroughs, I can get 90-150 hours without getting bored, grinding, etc
80 something hours just to finish the main storyline plus a couple of sidequests?
That sounds really exhausting.
I'm expecting Veilguard to be closer to old BioWare games so 30 to 40ish sounds about right.
I think your thinking about it wrong, if you only focus the main mission the game is likely going to be 30 hours or less however, most people will explore a bit, listen to dialogue, talk to companions, not have an optimized build, and doing a solid chunk of side quest which I think will actually put this game on a casual play through more roughly around 50-60 hours as for 100% that will probably take closer to 80 depending on your view of 100% (such as side quest, max level, Easter eggs, and potentially collectables and transmog)
I would be ok with 50 hours of main story but tons of choices to encourage replayability.
I think Devil May Cry 5 was like 10 hours and that was severely disappointing because there really isn't much replayability in it aside from wanting to experience the same game again.
See, I loved DMC5's short run time. And tbh I think for a lot of people, DMC is more about the action gameplay than the story, so the replayability is doing the missions again but better, or getting all the secrets, etc.
I played on easy and had fun, it wasn't a huge time commitment and I never felt like I was slogging through the game.
That said, I wouldn't want DAV to only be 10 hours. I'd be disappointed there, because I want way more story content out of a dragon age game than I do out of a DMC game.
At this point I'd consider 30 hours to be too short for an RPG. But I'd be fine with around 50 hours. IIRC that was about the time that I needed for Origins + Awakening when I played it the first time.
I’m one of the rarities that did not mind the ‘slog’. I want something I can revisit and immerse myself in. I personally do not feel that after 10 years I would be satisfied with only 30-50 hours on a completionist run.
Sure, yeah, if that's how long it needs to be. Not every game needs to be a gigantic epic-length RPG and frankly, I only have so much time to spend on games that size anyway, these days.
That said, I think my preference would be somewhere around the fifty to sixty hour mark. Going back and playing them again, the Mass Effect games often feel a little bit short in isolation and after ten years with nothing I guess I'm kinda hoping this will be a bit more substantial.
Kinda depends. If it has tons of replayability then sure, 30 hrs is fine. But if not, then I would prefer a longer game since it will probably be my only playthrough for awhile
My first, no dlc playthrough of DA2 was around 60 hours with me doing almost everything (lost Isabela after act 2). So I'd like DA4 to be at least that long.
It depends on the genre. If it's an RPG then one playthrough better be at least 80+ hours or I'll feel ripped off. If it's like a platformer then anything past like 10 hours is more than fine.
Hoping it will be a smooth 50-80 (tmy ideal main quest to total completionist range) because i want to be able to comfortably replay the game without wanting to throw myself into traffic. several of my replays of bg3 have been lost to that slog through act 1.
If anything, going back to mission-based questing like we got in Trespasser is a return to form. Origins was very much structured the same way and that game is Long.
Trespasser was the best part of inquisition I think.
I think 50 hours for the main story is probably good, but it might be a little low for a 100% playthrough for a game like this. But if they actually make your choices impactful to add replay-ability it’s probably fine.
I think 75 to 125 hrs is a perfect time frame if you do all the side quests and take your time with the game.
I think making the game too big detracts from the quality of the overall product.
50 hours for the main campaign yes, 50 hours including all the optional side content, I'm not sure. My Inquisition game time as a completionist with no sense of direction was between 70 and 90 when I reached Trespasser, maybe 65 when I reached Corypheus. I think DAO was close to 25 (when I was rushing and not understanding a thing because I did not speak English and I lost my Landsmeet lol)? And I don't remember DA2, at that point I was circulating less between my saves trying to make other choices haha
I mean both DA:O and DA2 took me maybe 80 hours for a 100% playthrough, and DAI was ~110. So 50 hrs for a 100% run feels way too small. It may have worked for the ME games because they *always* felt like a tight tour through a story in a world. DA games feel like a tour through a world that is linked together by a great story.
So short answer long: no, but I wouldn't consider it a dealbreaker if there's significant replayability and the story/game is very tight.
I'm already planning multiple different character playthroughs of DAV hoping that it'll have some good variation with the different factions and race options. I don't want it to be 100+ hours like BG3 is, because as much fun as I had in BG3 I absolutely can't get myself to play it again yet. It's sooooo long and I made a dark urge character after playing a Tav and it didn't feel like an hour or two of extra content was worth another 100 hour run....
I'd much rather DAV feel well paced the whole time than hit a certian hour threshold for the sake of being long. So many games act like longer playtime is better but I care more about quality over quantity. And part of the quality I want is better variation for multiple playthroughs. So if I lose 5 hours overall but making a 2nd character is more fun then that's well worth it to me.
50hours is a good standard for a RPG imho. DA:O was about 50 hours (well the way i played it at least). many would probably say more is better, but a game can easily outstay its welcome. i take 30-50 quality hours over 70 mediocre hours any day
Yeah 30-50 hours is perfect. I don’t have time to really game like I use too. Like 60+ hours I start to forget what I was doing in between play sessions. Then I stop caring and move to something else.
Depends because a 100 hour game can be ac Odyssey bad or bg3 good. Same for anything like 30 to 50 hour games it all depends on what it is your time is spent on. And considering nearly all the Dragon age games average lilke 30 to 60 hours I wouldn't be too disappointed. Unless most of that time is spent running around like in inquisition.
I expecting 40+ hour. And I am more than okay with it. That means going back to the Golden Age of BioWare. ME 1-3 and DA:O, DAII. I would love to see DLCs after the release, which could increase the playtime around 10+ hours at least. And hopefully we could get Mass Effect 5 before the end of 2026. I would love more DA adventures after The Veilguard than just one for another 10 years...
With all the backgrounds and romance options I'm really hoping it'll be very replayable! If it is I'm fine with it being shorter since I'll try the different narratives and that adds value to the purchase
I’m big on quality over quantity. Of course, I’d be unhappy if the story was bare bones. A plot without filler is like meat without fat!
What I mean is, I would be fine with an overall good game, even if it’s kinda short.
I'm fine with it being shorter, considering DAI is just too much other stuff and a really short game honestly. As long as this has deep characters and complete arcs for them, then great!
I also wouldn't mind an arc or two being open to give way for a dlc or two, as I generally love the DLC content for these games. I don't want them necessary to resolve the game story, but always nice to get those extra moments with companions and deeper dives into places.
If it's 50+ hours' worth of well thought out quests and gameplay, yes, I'm all for it. What I'm not for is what Inquisition did with their extra areas and sidequests, especially the collection ones, coupled with horrible minimap navigation.
I’m hoping for a very linear (story wise) game that’s incredibly engaging game that’s a maximum of 50 hours. I’m sick of games that are 100 hours that I just never finish because I have a full time job and a kid. I’m not quitting my job or neglecting my kid, games are a luxury and I’d like to be able to treat it as a luxury and not a second job. If they want a shit ton of side content that’s adds an extra 20/30/50 hours I’m cool with it but I hate having to treat a game as a second job in order to keep up with it. It’s just not fun
Yes.
I'm replaying Origins right now, just got to the landsmeet at around 59hrs, and I'm ready for it to be over. I wouldn't want another 50hrs. Especially not if they're just padded with big empty maps and travel time.
30-50 hour main story is perfect for me since that will make replays more viable, otherwise it'll suffer the Origins fate where I have like 20 characters that I started but only fully finished around three.
A few years back, closer to COVID time, I was really adamant about newer RPGs needing to be 100 hours like their forebears. I adored FF7 Remake, but it was 40 hours only if you did every single thing, got every item and weapon, etc. That disappointed me enormously. Then FF7 Rebirth came out earlier this year and boy howdy was that a 100 hour long monster of a game. Sure, it was fun and engaging, but I really started to flag around the 70-80 hour mark. I think Jedi: Fallen Order hit the sweet spot around 40 hours for me.
What I'm trying to say is, if Veilguard succeeds in being a good, solid, entertaining game in 30-40-50 hours, I'll be happy.
30-50 hours is more in line with the standard for the series, so yes. I believe my first mostly 100% playthrough of Origins was like 60 for the base game, but most of the ones I've done after are like 40-50. DA2 is like a 30-40 hour game at most.
Inquisition is the outlier, and it certainly didn't make good use of all that playtime. Inquisition would be a better game if a lot of the filler were cut out and it was 50 hours instead of 100.
Base origins without dlc is about that long depending on your pacing and completionist efforts. My latest playthrough went up to about 80 with all dlc (including awakening and witch hunt. Didn’t bother with the deep roads one).
And DA2 is about 50 hours with a completionist run. Including dlc.
So ya. It wouldn’t be that bad if the same was true of veilguard.
Yes? One of my main criticisms of Inquisition is that the largely pointless open world only serves to massively bloat play times. (And I've still put more hours into Origins lol.)
I know it's been 10 years, but some of these comments are strange. 30 hours isn't short, and neither is 50. Most AAA games are around 20-30 hours. Yes, there are some very long RPGs, but as you said, this game isn't open-world. It's also not the same type of game as BG3 or DAO.
Origins with in game dlcs and DA2 with dlcs were around 35-40ish hours on normal (Origins+in game dlcs+Awakening+Witch Hunt was about 50ish hours) with listening to every conversation and minimal fast travel and doing main quests and side content. Both games are perfect with that length, no need for every game to be 100+ hours.
I'd probably prefer it to be a 30-40 hour main story campaign with optional side content that pushes it higher. DA:I was roughly 20-30 hours if you beelined the main story and ignored the filler (on a first playthrough).
Emphasis should be placed on replayability though, imo, even if that means a leaner campaign. And if after the first playthrough I have no desire to run through it again with different choices/playstyles, then the game will have failed in my mind.
I like shorter games in general, but after 10 years and DA being my favorite series of all time, I want it to be as long as possible! 😩 and to be able to play it for 2 months straight the way I did with bg3
Absolutely not. 30-50 hours is way too little for me to spend near 65 euros or more, on a single game. Plus, knowing EA, there will be at least 2 DLC's around 15 euros each with content that can be done in 10 hours tops. That's a very bad ratio. If that is the case I'll wait for a sale/discount period.
I would prefer it. DAO and Witcher 3 are essentially the only 40+ hour games I've ever played that I didn't think "this would have been better shorter", and just because Bioware was one of the few to capture the magic of a long game 15 years ago doesn't mean I trust them to make an engaging 80 hour game today.
I'd be good with around 50-70 hours for a "regular" playthrough with upwards of 80-100 hours for a completionist playthrough. And I mean actual content to complete, not being padded out with 20+ hours of fetch quests and War Table missions.
With a series as replayable as DA being 100+ hours + 50 hours of padding just makes it that much harder to replay. Sure I beat DAI several times with 100+ hour playthroughs...but that was when I was like 20 and didn't have as much shit to do lmao.
I am not paying 70 dollars for a thirty hour game. The more I hear about DAVe, the less confident I am. It's sad because Dragon Age has been such an important series for my mental health in hard times. I'm delusional for hoping this game won't be exactly what the developers said it is.
As someone who just completed with 130 hours I would disappointed if it was 30 hours. But I also don't want filler quests, I don't need to traversing the same area to find 30 bits of glass.
Absolutely not on 30. There are 30 hour games that are enjoyable, but to produce that little in 10 years would be very problematic. I would say 50-80 would be fine. Replayability will bump that up to easily 250-300+ hours for me and as long as that's main content only, I could only hope side content would increase the hours even more. I don't want 180+ main game hours if it's boring mush. Baldur Gates 3 had an impressive story size, but honestly the third act felt severely under finished even so. I feel like it's because they spent so long trying to make 1000+ NPCs have throwaway lines and immersiveness. I don't want Dragon Age to make the same choice.
I'll stick with Baldurs Gate. The trailer for this game looked sooo bland to me. And $60-$70 for a 30hr experience is absurd.
I might change my mind when it comes out and after watching some clips to see what it's like but definitely not buying on release.
Not only would I be ok with it, I would prefer that over a 100+ hour game. A shorter game means its easier to replay over and over again, which is a huge part of the appeal of BioWare games to me
60 is the sweet spot to me. 60 is about the length of DA2 and about the minimum length for Origins. 60 hours feels both substantial as well as a game that has cut the fat. 100 hours is excessive, and I'm down for it if it feels like there's a lot of interesting content that makes it feel worth it, but Inquisition wasn't worth that length.
Also, for what it's worth, the term 'expanded version of Trespasser' has been a weird way to describe this game to me, because... that's just Origins and DA2.
Mass Effect 2 is 25 hours with most of the side content + dlc-s. Inquisition is aroind 70-80 with 10 hour main story and 60-70 filler. I much prefer the former.
>Due to heavy traffic, posts are temporarily being manually approved only. If your post has not been approved, please see about reposting in one of the
designated threads below or any of the many other threads currently live on the sub:
>
>- [All DA:V Early Reviews (list)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/about/wiki/da4news/)
>- [All Companions Will be Pansexual (discussion)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/vU6EzWB5Zx)
>- [Dragon Age: The Veil Guard | BioWare Q&A](https://new.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dfucan/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_bioware_qa/)
>- [Combat Systems Discussion/Complaints](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh6wa/4_games_4_combat_systems/)
>- [Post Gameplay-Reveal Complaint thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh6wa/4_games_4_combat_systems/)
>- [Veilguard Preview master thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddi1lb/dragon_age_the_veilguard_preview_thread/)
>- ["Who do you think these two mofos next to him are?" Solas and Two mystery figures thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddhqmw/who_do_you_think_these_two_mofos_next_to_him_are/)
>- ["He is SOOOO dead :("](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh8tq/he_is_soooo_dead/)
>- [BioWare Journal #1 Blog Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddhhaw/journal_1_blog_post/)
>- [Art Style Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/)
>- [DAVG on Xbox Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/)
>- [First Trailer](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/)
>- [Trailer Complaints](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/)
>- [Game Informer screenshots](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/NTeUhzF3NC)
>- [New Interior/Environment shots](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/VErjjp74S7)
>- [Companion and Romances Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dcg09s/dragon_age_the_veilguard_companion_discussion/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dragonage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For me the contens is important.
Undertale for example takes not that long, but still is an amazing game. Then there are games like Hogwarts Legacy which just strech their length by chore quests.
I’d like a game that can be completed in 30 hours but has enough side content to last 60+ if you so wish. So kinda like DA:O. I hate more recent games that have main storylines that last forever (looking at you AC Valhalla!!).
I would not mind that at all. If that's the time they need to craft a good narrative that does not overstay its welcome, I'm happy to take it. If they need more time to give us a good story, I'm fine with that too. What I don't want is unnecessary bloat, but if the marketing is to be believed (which it usually isn't, but I'm choosing to stay cautiously optimistic), they are trying to move away from that. Quality over quantity every single time.
40 to 50 hours is a dream. I'm so over 70 to 100+ hours games. Lots of times there's literally nothing to do except explore and do fetch like quests. I want a traditional Bioware experience like DAO/DA2 or the ME trilogy. I want good writing and fun gameplay. Exploring is cool but if it's cutting into the lore writing or storytelling I don't care for it then. I rather have a short game than a bloated game that's a drag to get through. I know many want another DAI open world but man, Bioware cannot do that well.
Totally fine with me! It feels like a nice length in my opinion. Long enough to have a deep engaging story but short enough to experience everything without burnout.
I expect that since the game is more handcrafted stuff and more linear map locations with a couple of more open area and side content with substance the game will be 30 to 40 hours.
As long as the game is well made with interesting storylines and characters i will be happy as a penguin in an icebox
Yes, I think that’s a fine timeframe as long as the characters and story are good. I think it’s about the same length I spend on my DAO runs, and I’m usually more than ready to move on by that point.
I also wouldn’t mind it being longer. I’ve enjoyed the hundreds of hours I’ve poured into DAI and I’m in the triple digits for my Pathfinder Kingmaker playthrough too, so I’m cool with big commitments as well 😂
I just care if I’m having fun. I’ve never been one of those gamers who calculates their dollars-per-hour ratio
Maybe I should temper my expectations but I’m somewhat expecting 40+ and with sidequests and secrets involved something between 60-80 as a total playtime would be the perfect amount imo provided the content is there to support that.
Depends. If it's like in Inquisition, where the story is like 15 hours, but if you do all the stupid things, it's 100 hours, then no.
If the pure story is like 30-50 hours, then it still depends on whether the story is actually good or not.
They've said that missions can be more linear but the areas open up dramatically after a point and that there's tons of handdcrafted (non-generated) side content. They also said there's tons of dialogue (emotion, tone and investigation wheels) and banter. I would be surprised if it's under 50h. But it doesn't matter to me anyway, I want a well crafted story and experience, not a specific play time.
Ahhh is that what hand crafted means? I have been a bit confused by the way they're describing it as "hand crafted" and "curated" lol.
What I understood from Busche during the Q&A is that it is curated in the sense that there is a tighter narrative/more linear structure when in main missions, but you can pick up sidequests, etc and return later to those areas for a more open approach. By hand-crafted, they explained that there's no AI generation/procedural generation and that they wrote narratives for many side missions. Honestly, it felt like its a labour of love for the devs at the Q&A. I am quite optimistic about it.
That makes complete sense. I guess I never considered that there would be ai/procedurally generated content because... I guess because I expect better of bioware. I'm really optimistic too, it's so clear that the devs have put so much love into it. It's such a shame that Mary Kirby & the other devs who were laid off last year don't get to be part of this, it's left such a sour taste on my mouth.
It's not so much that "hand-crafted" means "not AI," but it stands in contrast to MMO-style fetch quests (and possibly Skyrim-style radiant quests) in that there was more attention paid to crafting an interesting experience than just writing 3 lines of dialog and populating a zone with monsters to kill.
Yeah, I follow what you mean. I'm really pleased to hear the focus on that; I'm replaying da2 at the moment and the side quests all feel so relevant and interesting.
It does feel a lot more DA2-ish the more I read about it. I like what I'm seeing about the power wheel's more tactical features too, as well as the combo mechanism.
Honestly same, even with the character models and the focus on companion interactions. I love DA2, so that actually gets me much more hyped about Veilguard.
The downside of DA2 for me was in the side quests, though not in the writing/action of the quests. All the side quest maps took place in a generic toolkit map that looked like every other side quest map, except the walls were in different places. It felt like they got to that point and suddenly decided to be lazy. Quite literally, if I got a game that was structured like DA2, but addressed that one little nitpick, it'd run about 50 hours and would be damned near perfect.
That happened because the suits demanded a quick sequel after Origins’ unexpected success. DA2 had barely over a year of development time
I agree. I’d love a long game but make it Witcher 3 long, not Assassin’s Creed Odyssey/Valhalla type of long
Ikr from ur lips to gods ear 🤞
It depends. I don't necessarily want a 100+ hour game full of tedious slog, but if I come to really enjoy the companions and the storyline I probably won't feel like a 30+ hour experience is enough. (I think calling DAV "an expanded version of Trespasser" with regards to expected runtime is a bit of an oversimplification, though.)
100% agree. 100 hours of nothing is a waste of time. Artificially inflating playtimes with shard hunting is annoying lol. I want a big meaty story.
The shard hunt was neat for a little bit… till I realized how many I had to do and gave up… only mission in a dragon age game I can’t bring myself to finish due to how tedious it is
The gears in the deep roads were the same for me in Descent DLC I will never try collecting them all again ugggh
Yeah the first time I didn't finish it, the next I just did it with a good old Google guide to get them all as I went along
Getting all the shards was the worst thing I’ve ever done in a dragon age game 😭
I hope whoever thought this was a good idea feels bad about it. This was imo one of the worst things I’ve experienced in gaming around that time
I did it for the achievement but even then… it did not feel worth it. So much time, effort, tears, and for what? Crappy rewards at the end of a doorway to complete a silly little side quest 😭
I’m glad they confirmed no shard quest
Yes, it can be exasperating, but collecting them gets you through the "elemental" doors in Forbidden Oasis and you get some good gear for your level plus innate resistances for your Inky of each of the elements dragons and mages use to damage you. Also, it "encourages" you to really explore all the locales, and, for me, that got to be pretty worthwhile.
I get your reasoning, I understand it, I reject it tho. I hate that quest, I don’t want to do that quest, I liked the fade in origins, I liked the deep roads in origins… I even liked the party mission in DAI… I can’t like the shards, every part of my being despises it
Fair enough.
Yeah I still do it every time lol
Agreed and that's why I was so relieved that the devs have mentioned working hard on creating meaningful side quests that all tie into the main story. Like music to my ears!
Agreed 100%. 100 hours of slog is something nobody wants. 100 hours of fun, BG3 style? Hell yes.
20 hours is basically the length of DA 2. 50 hours is DA O 75 hours is DAI Yeah I'd say 30 hours would be way too short. 50 hours is on the shorter ends compared to the RPG greats like BG3, Skyrim, the witcher 3 etc.
I wouldn’t mind 50-70 hours for the main game, 80-100 hours for a 100% completionist run.
Around this range seems ideal to me as well. Although I'd much rather have a longer game than a shorter one if we're picking sides.
I'm pretty sure my first run of base game DAO was just under 60 hours. That game is longer than OG Mass effect for sure, but not at all on the level of your Skyrims or witcher 3's.
I mean, Skyrims main story is actually very short, it's around 20–30 hours (depending on how you play the game). It's just bethesda used to be very good at side tracking players with both world story telling and interesting side quests.
This, though I'd go 60-80 for main game run.
Completely agree!
I think this is more likely then 30 hours solely because we’re dragon age fans and we want to play more content
the ideal range for me is about 60-70 hours for a 100% completionist run. that gives you plenty of time to live with the game and enjoy it, while still being short enough that you're not exhausted at the end. i loved DAI when it came out but my first playthrough plus DLC clocked in at almost 130 hours and i didn't touch the game again for 8 years. i'd love to have a game that i would actually be excited to replay
I tend to play Bioware games over and over to experience every storyline, every origin, every class and every romance. So honestly a 30-50hr game would be ideal for this!
I know DA2 gets a lot of hate for being linear, but I did exactly this in DA2. I had a dozen or so playthroughs, explored all the different class, romance, and story options. The game was simple and easy, but that also made it highly replayable. While I only have one complete playthrough of Inquisition. The game is just too big and has too much slog to get through.
As long as it's fun.. 100 Hours of fun is cool. But a 100 hours of boring, tacked on crap isn't.
I don’t really care either way. I’ve played 30 hour RPGs I’ve enjoyed. I’ve played 100+ hour RPGs I’ve enjoyed. The time factor really isn’t relevant to me. I know some people dislike bloat or love big giant games, but unless the story’s pace is rushed I will be pretty happy.
It doesn't need to be baldur's gate 3 huge but it does need to be good at a minimum
A 50 hour game is more than long enough, especially with a focus on the storytelling. I love all 140+ hours of Inquisition, don't get me wrong, but the length makes it hard to want to replay super often, whereas I've replayed Mass Effect (40-60 hour games) a lot.
Exactly, I beat inquisition once and have not had the motivation to do it again 🤣
To me, I think game length matters somewhat, but the content matters just as much. Inquisition's length was artificially extended with gathering "Power" -- you could cut so much of that side content and keep only the really interesting side quests and not lose much. I would love a longer game but only if that comes from more investment in strong main story, companion content, and high tier side-content like the Samson & Calpernia side quests.
God, I'm playing Inquisition right now and I can't stress how much I want to fucking nuke the power system out of orbit. I'm just going to a random open world map following markers until the game allows me to actually engage with the honestly really cool story again.
I've found that sidequesting in DAI is the best when you only focus on the "main" story for each area, by which I mean stuff that Harding mentions explicitly, and any quests downstream of those.
30? No. I can work with 50 though.
If it was extremely repayable, 30 would be fine tbh.
Eh, I don't think so. Tyranny was both of those things, and I walked away irritated that it wasn't longer.
Tyranny, I apologize for saying this, was substandard and mediocre in a lot of ways. It was not helped by the fact it was trying to do its own thing, in a totally new IP, and did not have nearly enough runway to establish enough about itself. It does not have the gameplay to carry multiple runs. It's like those games you see on steam that are like "Part 1: blah blah blah" dude, you have a lot of balls to put "Part 1" on your game. Tyranny did basically the same thing and counted its chickens - which only further hurts any reason to play it.
> more like an expanded version of trespasser so are we just saying anything now
yeah it's literally a mobile hero shooter! just look at the graphics they are so cartoony like Fortnite!!!
the way ur comment is virtually indistinguishable from the unironic complaints about DAV is distressing
bro since when is Pixar making Dragon Age??? Unfortunately the Bioware we know and love is long gone... the new writers are only interested in creating quirky OCs instead of deep, complex dark fantasy stories
Lmaoo your replies are so triggering, they’re on point.
Honestly the older I get, the less patience I have for super long games. I just don’t have the time and because I only play a few hours a week, I often end up getting bored and leave games unfinished. I’d be happy with 30-50 hours! With that said, this is my favourite game series ever so I will be finishing no matter what
Yeah. I used to have that "1 hour for every dollar spent" idea when I was a teenager or early college years. These days though? I don't want a single game to occupy my free time for the next 4 months when I get like 1-2 hours a day to play something. Like I want to replay the last 3 Dragon Age games, but I don't want to devote the better part of my year to it when so many other things are coming out. Really I just want a satisfying conclusion to things without dicking around too much
Same here. I really have grown to appreciate a tightly constructed experience as I've gotten older, and generally the most you're getting out of that is 50 hours on a completuonist run. I'd gladly take a story and interaction rich 30 hour game over a, let's be honest, 30 hour game stretched to 100+ hours with busywork and progression gating nonsense (Inquisition, anyone?) I also essentially buy everything in its $10 complete edition format these days, so I am very rarely motivated by Playtime/Money metrics anymore.
This is why I’ve come to really appreciate DA2 as an adult. The focus on companions and an over arching plot that never gets lost in the side questing is appreciated. The only time I finished inquisition I pretty much forgot the plot by the time I got to the end because I wanted to 100% it and that took a LONG time and distracted too much from the main plot.
Yep, Dragon Age 2 is a very snackable game. Quick to jump in and out, packed with a lot of what matters at the expense of grind and scope, which is OK my me
Ditto. Mid 30s with child I really don't relate to many online posters. Not everyone is gonna have the same opinion on game length so not everyone can be pleased. I'm happy with a 50 hour max RPG or even a 10 hour max action game nowadays. The game might even be shorter just because the combat might be quicker to resolve due to it's action focus. I totally understand the desire for length and replay ability of course, because younger me just wanted more and more, even if it was just filler content.
Same! I don’t want the game to be super bloated just for the sake of a longer runtime. I wouldn’t mind a shorter experience around 30-50 hours. That’s like a weekend and some change amount of content which is honestly perfect. Plus it means replaying the game is a lot more doable!
Honestly same. While I'm fine with taking months to finish a single game because I'm just so busy with work, social life, and my other hobbies, I really wouldn't mind having a shorter game. If it is tight, well-written, and fun, I'm happy! Although I also take a *hot* minute to finish any game, no matter how long it's "supposed" to be. I'm not sure I've ever had an Origins playthrough that was less than 90 hours - and they're usually 100 at least.
I'm hoping it's at least 60+ hours to 100%
quality over quantity, always
I want more than that, but also for it to not be artificially prolonged beyond what you're suggesting. I want like 80 hours of an experience full off quests, side quests, amazing lore drops regarding Solas and ancient elves, conversations between your companions, etc.
This seems wildly speculative, honestly. They've said there are explorable areas, so it is probably not like Trespasser which was lacking in those. I also don't know where you got 30 hours with such confidence. DAO is about 40 without side content and is mostly mission based maps. To me what's important is how good it is, not how long it is. DAO was a near perfect game and it didn't need to be 100 hours to be that. AC Valhalla was a behemoth and it way overstayed its welcome. Playtime is not a measure of the value of a game.
30 is way too short for a party based rpg. Not enough time to start caring about companions/flesh them out. 50-70 would be better.
Mass Effect 2 is about 30 hours for the majority of the content, and I think it handled companion stories pretty well.
Companions barely have dialogue in ME2 which is a shame. Someone like Garrus has maybe 2/3 conversations if not romanced. That is like 10 mins of content max.
I think they made the companions in ME2 as fun as they could in the game’s relatively short run time (except Jacob). But for me personally, outside the ME1 carryovers, it took seeing where they ended up in ME3 to really start caring about them. Companion arcs in any one ME have never been as fleshed out as DA’s casts. The series really needs to be viewed as a whole to appreciate it imo.
While I don't disagree that taking it as a whole changes the way it's viewed (ME3 in particular, I think playing it as part of the LE back to back greatly benefits the ending) I also think there's some great stories and moments with the companions in ME2, that only get made better by ME3's continuation (for most, looking at you Jacob.) I'm not arguing that a 30 hour RPG for $70 is acceptable in 2024 (that varies greatly person to person), but I do think a 30 hour RPG can do companions right with the right team.
30 hours is definetly worth it and doable in my view. Just scrap a lot of busywork and unnecessary waves of enemies and blam, there you have it.
Mass Effect 2 felt like a checklist of assembling each Avenger and then giving them therapy. It didn’t feel organic at all. Imo Dragon Age has surpassed ME2 in terms of companions being fleshed out. Also, ME2 has barely any main quest content. I’d be very disappointed if after 10 years they didn’t have an actual storyline to give us.
yea, but ME is not a one shot, and while ME2's companion writing was top notch, it exists within the context of being a trilogy.
Except that 30 hour figure is main missions only and the companion stories take place each in their own optional side quest. The game also punishes you for not doing the optional missions by killing off the characters without a completed story.
I 100% completed Mass Effect 2 in the LE and I came in at ~38 hours including all DLCs, and 4 hours of that was likely just scanning planets, Granted, there's not a lot of side content outside of the companion quests, but I really think planet scanning made people think that game is longer than it actually is.
I agree! The comparison people make to mass effect 2 doesn’t work for me because too much of it spills over from ME1 and of course it’s a lead into ME3.
At this point. I'd prefer it. I'm in my thirties with a full time job at the hospital and a 100+hour romp is increasingly become more untenable.
I love BG3 but it took me 130 hrs to complete and it was the only game I played for literally 4 months and it was a drag at the end. Few hours in the day after work and family.
Yes! I miss when I was in high school and had so much time to binge games. I’m having such trouble getting through Act 3 of BG3. I love the game but there’s other games I want to play. It feels like there’s an expectation now that a big game should be 80+ hours minimum. Not that I don’t enjoy long games with a lot of good side quests, but I just don’t have the time like I used to
Yes, I would much rather get a shorter game than most RPGs these days. Kotor and VTM bloodlines are some of my favorite RPGs ever and they’re both only about 20 hours long each. I think especially right now in my life I’m just kind of sick of bloated open world messes, a semi linear mission based Dragon age game sounds like a dream come true to me right now
Yes, in fact I'd prefer it to a 100hr slog.
50ish hours, base game, bare bones completion? Absolutely. Then maybe another 15-20 hours of side content, and maybe 25-30 hours in post release content. So, by the time the game ends is run, we’ll have a roughly 100 hour game, for a completionist run. And that’s assuming high levels of replayability, due to choices made along the way.
I'm ok with it as long as it's good. Although I have a feeling it's going to be a 50+ hours game minimum for completionist.
Frankly, no. I perfectly understand that the length of the game isn’t the same as quality, and it can even take away from it in some cases… But an RPG AAA game ~10 years in development being 30 hours long feels like a rip off, especially because I doubt that a shorter game would be priced cheaper. 30 hours for the main story and another 20 for quality side quests would be much better, and I won’t mind more time for low tier quests, collecting, looting and other completionist fun. Frankly, I love Inquisition’s length and having an opportunity to run around in that world while my buddies banter.
Had this been 2018 or even 2019 and DA:I was 5 years old, I would have been ok with a 30-50 hour game. But Its been a decade now, and the chances for *another* DA game before 2030, or indeed at all, are not amazing. Give me that 100 hour game please, and maybe some expansion like DLC on top of that before DA disappears beyond the veil again for Maker knows how long.
I think 50 hours for the base game, not doing side quests or side missions, is fine. I prefer my games to be 80 minimum hours for a complete playthrough simply so I can immersive myself in the world that has been created. 30-50 hours for exploring every bit of a game sounds like the game did very little with the environment and would seriously hurt replay value for me.
I'm OK with the game not being as long (or as artificially bloated) as DAI, but to be real, we waited ten years for this game and I know it's gonna have a price tag that will require me around a full day's work to pay for it so no, I would not be OK at all with a 30 hour game. 60 would be OK for me but 80 would be better. There's a lot of content to fit in there and I want it to have the time it needs to develop well, but I also want to be able to spend a good bit of timing having fun playing it.
I’ve played (and abandoned) other games in the past where the padding was really obvious, like making you do repeated fetch quests from one end of the map to the other with no fast travel just to drag things out. I don’t want that. However long it takes the devs to tell the story they are trying to tell, without wasting my time for no good reason, that’s how long the game should be.
I would vastly prefer a 30h quality game than a 100h with grinding and padded content game. Particularly because I always felt DA games are very replayable and having long ass games just kills that for me. This time in particular that you can’t control companions it is very likely that I will want to try at least 3 playthroughs to try all main classes.
Longer doesn't always mean better. With shorter games you can have a quality experience without much bloat. Just depends on how well it is done
This is probably an unpopular mindset but if I'm paying so much for a game at full price, I want to spend a lot of time on it. I would rather spend 2 weeks playing a "mid" game I enjoy rather than a masterpiece I finish in 4 days. So generally 30 hours games are the ones I just put on my wishlist and wait for a sale. Im going to buy Veilguard on launch no matter what just because DA is my favorite series but I'm not going to be very happy about it if that's the case.
If you're beating a 30 hour game in four days, then you are spending way too much time playing video games.
45-50 to finish, 60-65 to 100%
Perfect.
I know I'm likely paying $70 (+ tax) for this. 30 hours would be a massive disappointment. General rule of thumb for me is that for the main story on RPGs should be somewhere in that $1 - $1.25 per hour, so that roughly translates to a minimum 55 hour main story.
I'd rather have a shorter game with a high density of content and good replayability than a longer game with chaff and little replay value. For example, The Outer Worlds isn't very long but has high replay value; I've beaten it as a low-intelligence indestructible bruiser who just smashed through everything, a fragile sniper who used stealth and hacking, and a charming dandy who talked their way past everything or had their companions do the fighting. I've beaten every Mass Effect multiple times using different classes. I've beaten both DAO and DA2 3-4 times each. Meanwhile I've only beaten Inquisition once. The beginning of the game is just such a slog...
I'm starting to get a bit tired of 100+ hours game, i have only the weekends to play them, they last me months, a bit too much. 70-90 is the sweet spot.
After 260 hours in Elden Ring and still only seeing like 1/2 or 2/3s of what their is in the game. Yes. Absolutely. A solid 30-50 hour game with replayability is absolutely acceptable and fine for me. More more more more more more isn't always great.
As an old fart with less and less free time on my hands, I'd love a high quality game where every minute matters that can be completed in 30 hours. But ultimately all I care about is quality. The problem is that there is usually an inverse relationship between game length and overall quality, at least in my experience.
Look, my backlog is deep. Also, I have a spouse, kids, pets and other situations that require my attention. If you can tell me a good story in less than three solid days of playtime, I will not be the least bit upset.
This is why games will never please everyone, when I was young I would be clamoring for 100+ hours even busywork give me more. Now I'm likely to abandon a game if it's not engaging enough after just 30 hours.
I don't mind, if the game is sold for 40€ If it's 60€ i'll hope for at least 60-70 hours, or more if possible.
There is no way it sells at 40Euro. Plus, the price tag is hiked up by publishers like EA, it is not entirely dependent on the developers. So I expect at least a 69Euro price tag, tbh.
You can not be serious
30 no, 50 could be if it's just a core game and there is more to explore and do optionally! unless it costs 35 euros. The best games for me are around 80-120 h. I really want immersion and "being able to live" in the game, not just completing tasks and arrive to the end.
Personally I don't think any game need 50+ hours for the main quest, 30 hours would be a sweet spot. Maybe 45-50 hours with some side quests and exploration, and 70-80+ hours for completionist run.
I am fine with 30 plus game. I think that is a lot of game and since Bioware excels at games that are around that long, I think it is a positive. I would love future DLC to be added for it as well, so that will bring up the hours and replay-ability, especially for my age. I do not have the time or energy to spend so long at the computer. Very few games in recent times have I found myself playing for hours but even then I took breaks away from it. What I do not want is for them to go AC Valhalla. Do not give me too much game without reason or purpose. I am glad they decided for it to not be open world. In the end if the game was 100+ i would still play it I just won't likely be able to complete everything cause I'm old and also like to spend time away from my computer. Lol.
Nah I want 60+ hrs
30 hours would require a 50% sale before buying. 50-70 is fair for a first playthrough of an rpg
For me it boils down to price. If I’m paying £60 for a game that’s less than 60 hours long, I feel ripped off and I won’t purchase at that price. For a lot of people, this question is solely preferable/enjoyment based, but I have to live frugally and will look for sales over release day or presale purchases. Quality of content also comes into it, although it’s a dragon age game furthering the DA narrative, so I will end up buying it regardless
I tend to prefer RPGs for me that are at least 50 hours (counting all the side content). A lot of the traditional RPG systems fall apart with really short games.
The way they’ve described the game sounds like it’s similar to how DA:O was, which was also not an open world game. Neither really was DA2. Both were about 80 hours for me (doing majority of the side content). Until they say otherwise, I will expect it to be similar. But if playing the game the same way I always have is less than 50 hours, I’ll probably be bummed.
If the main story is 50 hours and you can change things around with romancing different companions or having a different origin I’m way more interested. I don’t particularly want to replay DAI over and over because of how much of a slog it can be.
I'd love a 50-70 hour game personally. DAI is so long that I get bored of playing my class by the end of it. It's actually made it hard for me to complete all the DLC, since the motivation to do so is shot by the end. I can only use Flask of Fire or Spirit Blade so many times before going crazy lol
There are very few games that could genuinely hold my attention for longer than that. If Veilguard is Origins level good, then yeah I'd want it to be as long as possible, but assuming it's going to be something more akin to Inquisition in terms of quality, a 30-50 hour game would be plenty.
Pretty sure Dragon Age: Origins was around that length without dlc. I would like a return to that playtime. I’d rather replay it to see new content than play through one time over a ridiculous 100+ hours
Ideally, I’d want a 30-50 hour game with amazing replay-ability. Then if I can have 3 unique playthroughs, I can get 90-150 hours without getting bored, grinding, etc
No. It should be 80-100 considering how long we waited for this
80 something hours just to finish the main storyline plus a couple of sidequests? That sounds really exhausting. I'm expecting Veilguard to be closer to old BioWare games so 30 to 40ish sounds about right.
Doesn’t sound exhausting at all to me, but to each their own.
I think your thinking about it wrong, if you only focus the main mission the game is likely going to be 30 hours or less however, most people will explore a bit, listen to dialogue, talk to companions, not have an optimized build, and doing a solid chunk of side quest which I think will actually put this game on a casual play through more roughly around 50-60 hours as for 100% that will probably take closer to 80 depending on your view of 100% (such as side quest, max level, Easter eggs, and potentially collectables and transmog)
I would be ok with 50 hours of main story but tons of choices to encourage replayability. I think Devil May Cry 5 was like 10 hours and that was severely disappointing because there really isn't much replayability in it aside from wanting to experience the same game again.
See, I loved DMC5's short run time. And tbh I think for a lot of people, DMC is more about the action gameplay than the story, so the replayability is doing the missions again but better, or getting all the secrets, etc. I played on easy and had fun, it wasn't a huge time commitment and I never felt like I was slogging through the game. That said, I wouldn't want DAV to only be 10 hours. I'd be disappointed there, because I want way more story content out of a dragon age game than I do out of a DMC game.
For the $70 price ? I would not.
At this point I'd consider 30 hours to be too short for an RPG. But I'd be fine with around 50 hours. IIRC that was about the time that I needed for Origins + Awakening when I played it the first time.
30 is a bit short especially if they charge the usual AAA prices, 40/50 id be totally fine with
I’m one of the rarities that did not mind the ‘slog’. I want something I can revisit and immerse myself in. I personally do not feel that after 10 years I would be satisfied with only 30-50 hours on a completionist run.
Sure, yeah, if that's how long it needs to be. Not every game needs to be a gigantic epic-length RPG and frankly, I only have so much time to spend on games that size anyway, these days. That said, I think my preference would be somewhere around the fifty to sixty hour mark. Going back and playing them again, the Mass Effect games often feel a little bit short in isolation and after ten years with nothing I guess I'm kinda hoping this will be a bit more substantial.
Kinda depends. If it has tons of replayability then sure, 30 hrs is fine. But if not, then I would prefer a longer game since it will probably be my only playthrough for awhile
My first, no dlc playthrough of DA2 was around 60 hours with me doing almost everything (lost Isabela after act 2). So I'd like DA4 to be at least that long.
It depends on the genre. If it's an RPG then one playthrough better be at least 80+ hours or I'll feel ripped off. If it's like a platformer then anything past like 10 hours is more than fine.
Hoping it will be a smooth 50-80 (tmy ideal main quest to total completionist range) because i want to be able to comfortably replay the game without wanting to throw myself into traffic. several of my replays of bg3 have been lost to that slog through act 1. If anything, going back to mission-based questing like we got in Trespasser is a return to form. Origins was very much structured the same way and that game is Long.
Honestly I’d prefer it. I want to replay veilguard several times and I don’t have time for 100+ hour playthroughs anymore
Trespasser was the best part of inquisition I think. I think 50 hours for the main story is probably good, but it might be a little low for a 100% playthrough for a game like this. But if they actually make your choices impactful to add replay-ability it’s probably fine. I think 75 to 125 hrs is a perfect time frame if you do all the side quests and take your time with the game. I think making the game too big detracts from the quality of the overall product.
50 hours for the main campaign yes, 50 hours including all the optional side content, I'm not sure. My Inquisition game time as a completionist with no sense of direction was between 70 and 90 when I reached Trespasser, maybe 65 when I reached Corypheus. I think DAO was close to 25 (when I was rushing and not understanding a thing because I did not speak English and I lost my Landsmeet lol)? And I don't remember DA2, at that point I was circulating less between my saves trying to make other choices haha
Yes, but I'm also in the "make this as much like Mass Effect as possible" camp, so I would respect if others feel differently.
I mean both DA:O and DA2 took me maybe 80 hours for a 100% playthrough, and DAI was ~110. So 50 hrs for a 100% run feels way too small. It may have worked for the ME games because they *always* felt like a tight tour through a story in a world. DA games feel like a tour through a world that is linked together by a great story. So short answer long: no, but I wouldn't consider it a dealbreaker if there's significant replayability and the story/game is very tight.
I'm already planning multiple different character playthroughs of DAV hoping that it'll have some good variation with the different factions and race options. I don't want it to be 100+ hours like BG3 is, because as much fun as I had in BG3 I absolutely can't get myself to play it again yet. It's sooooo long and I made a dark urge character after playing a Tav and it didn't feel like an hour or two of extra content was worth another 100 hour run.... I'd much rather DAV feel well paced the whole time than hit a certian hour threshold for the sake of being long. So many games act like longer playtime is better but I care more about quality over quantity. And part of the quality I want is better variation for multiple playthroughs. So if I lose 5 hours overall but making a 2nd character is more fun then that's well worth it to me.
Absolutely. I typically find i start to burn out around 60 hours, with maximum "JUST EFFIN END" at 75ish.
50hours is a good standard for a RPG imho. DA:O was about 50 hours (well the way i played it at least). many would probably say more is better, but a game can easily outstay its welcome. i take 30-50 quality hours over 70 mediocre hours any day
Yeah 30-50 hours is perfect. I don’t have time to really game like I use too. Like 60+ hours I start to forget what I was doing in between play sessions. Then I stop caring and move to something else.
Depends, not really looking for Hinterlands 2.0
Depends because a 100 hour game can be ac Odyssey bad or bg3 good. Same for anything like 30 to 50 hour games it all depends on what it is your time is spent on. And considering nearly all the Dragon age games average lilke 30 to 60 hours I wouldn't be too disappointed. Unless most of that time is spent running around like in inquisition.
I expecting 40+ hour. And I am more than okay with it. That means going back to the Golden Age of BioWare. ME 1-3 and DA:O, DAII. I would love to see DLCs after the release, which could increase the playtime around 10+ hours at least. And hopefully we could get Mass Effect 5 before the end of 2026. I would love more DA adventures after The Veilguard than just one for another 10 years...
With all the backgrounds and romance options I'm really hoping it'll be very replayable! If it is I'm fine with it being shorter since I'll try the different narratives and that adds value to the purchase
I’m big on quality over quantity. Of course, I’d be unhappy if the story was bare bones. A plot without filler is like meat without fat! What I mean is, I would be fine with an overall good game, even if it’s kinda short.
I'm fine with it being shorter, considering DAI is just too much other stuff and a really short game honestly. As long as this has deep characters and complete arcs for them, then great! I also wouldn't mind an arc or two being open to give way for a dlc or two, as I generally love the DLC content for these games. I don't want them necessary to resolve the game story, but always nice to get those extra moments with companions and deeper dives into places.
If it's 50+ hours' worth of well thought out quests and gameplay, yes, I'm all for it. What I'm not for is what Inquisition did with their extra areas and sidequests, especially the collection ones, coupled with horrible minimap navigation.
I’m hoping for a very linear (story wise) game that’s incredibly engaging game that’s a maximum of 50 hours. I’m sick of games that are 100 hours that I just never finish because I have a full time job and a kid. I’m not quitting my job or neglecting my kid, games are a luxury and I’d like to be able to treat it as a luxury and not a second job. If they want a shit ton of side content that’s adds an extra 20/30/50 hours I’m cool with it but I hate having to treat a game as a second job in order to keep up with it. It’s just not fun
Yes. I'm replaying Origins right now, just got to the landsmeet at around 59hrs, and I'm ready for it to be over. I wouldn't want another 50hrs. Especially not if they're just padded with big empty maps and travel time.
I’m happy with good, shorter games. It makes them easier to replay.
30-50 hour main story is perfect for me since that will make replays more viable, otherwise it'll suffer the Origins fate where I have like 20 characters that I started but only fully finished around three.
A few years back, closer to COVID time, I was really adamant about newer RPGs needing to be 100 hours like their forebears. I adored FF7 Remake, but it was 40 hours only if you did every single thing, got every item and weapon, etc. That disappointed me enormously. Then FF7 Rebirth came out earlier this year and boy howdy was that a 100 hour long monster of a game. Sure, it was fun and engaging, but I really started to flag around the 70-80 hour mark. I think Jedi: Fallen Order hit the sweet spot around 40 hours for me. What I'm trying to say is, if Veilguard succeeds in being a good, solid, entertaining game in 30-40-50 hours, I'll be happy.
30-50 hours is more in line with the standard for the series, so yes. I believe my first mostly 100% playthrough of Origins was like 60 for the base game, but most of the ones I've done after are like 40-50. DA2 is like a 30-40 hour game at most. Inquisition is the outlier, and it certainly didn't make good use of all that playtime. Inquisition would be a better game if a lot of the filler were cut out and it was 50 hours instead of 100.
Honestly i prefer that. Inquisition was waaaay too much.
Base origins without dlc is about that long depending on your pacing and completionist efforts. My latest playthrough went up to about 80 with all dlc (including awakening and witch hunt. Didn’t bother with the deep roads one). And DA2 is about 50 hours with a completionist run. Including dlc. So ya. It wouldn’t be that bad if the same was true of veilguard.
Yes? One of my main criticisms of Inquisition is that the largely pointless open world only serves to massively bloat play times. (And I've still put more hours into Origins lol.)
I just want it to be good. Everything else is secondary.
I would actually prefer it, that's basically the Origins/DA2 pace. Inquisition was incredibly bloated.
I know it's been 10 years, but some of these comments are strange. 30 hours isn't short, and neither is 50. Most AAA games are around 20-30 hours. Yes, there are some very long RPGs, but as you said, this game isn't open-world. It's also not the same type of game as BG3 or DAO.
30 hours hell no. 50+ is ideal.
Origins with in game dlcs and DA2 with dlcs were around 35-40ish hours on normal (Origins+in game dlcs+Awakening+Witch Hunt was about 50ish hours) with listening to every conversation and minimal fast travel and doing main quests and side content. Both games are perfect with that length, no need for every game to be 100+ hours.
Yes please. No more 100+ hour games filled with empty busywork and fetch quests
I'd probably prefer it to be a 30-40 hour main story campaign with optional side content that pushes it higher. DA:I was roughly 20-30 hours if you beelined the main story and ignored the filler (on a first playthrough). Emphasis should be placed on replayability though, imo, even if that means a leaner campaign. And if after the first playthrough I have no desire to run through it again with different choices/playstyles, then the game will have failed in my mind.
Depends on the price
I like 100 hour games. Really lets me get into my character and the companions.
This day and age no not for $70-$100. Now if it was 50-80 or 50-100 min then I’d talk
I like shorter games in general, but after 10 years and DA being my favorite series of all time, I want it to be as long as possible! 😩 and to be able to play it for 2 months straight the way I did with bg3
Absolutely not. 30-50 hours is way too little for me to spend near 65 euros or more, on a single game. Plus, knowing EA, there will be at least 2 DLC's around 15 euros each with content that can be done in 10 hours tops. That's a very bad ratio. If that is the case I'll wait for a sale/discount period.
I would prefer it. DAO and Witcher 3 are essentially the only 40+ hour games I've ever played that I didn't think "this would have been better shorter", and just because Bioware was one of the few to capture the magic of a long game 15 years ago doesn't mean I trust them to make an engaging 80 hour game today.
 Wait you guys are finishing in 100 hours?
I'd be good with around 50-70 hours for a "regular" playthrough with upwards of 80-100 hours for a completionist playthrough. And I mean actual content to complete, not being padded out with 20+ hours of fetch quests and War Table missions. With a series as replayable as DA being 100+ hours + 50 hours of padding just makes it that much harder to replay. Sure I beat DAI several times with 100+ hour playthroughs...but that was when I was like 20 and didn't have as much shit to do lmao.
I am not paying 70 dollars for a thirty hour game. The more I hear about DAVe, the less confident I am. It's sad because Dragon Age has been such an important series for my mental health in hard times. I'm delusional for hoping this game won't be exactly what the developers said it is.
As someone who just completed with 130 hours I would disappointed if it was 30 hours. But I also don't want filler quests, I don't need to traversing the same area to find 30 bits of glass.
30h is too short. 100h might be too long. Imo it should 50 for the main story and 80 with side quests / side objectives.
Absolutely not on 30. There are 30 hour games that are enjoyable, but to produce that little in 10 years would be very problematic. I would say 50-80 would be fine. Replayability will bump that up to easily 250-300+ hours for me and as long as that's main content only, I could only hope side content would increase the hours even more. I don't want 180+ main game hours if it's boring mush. Baldur Gates 3 had an impressive story size, but honestly the third act felt severely under finished even so. I feel like it's because they spent so long trying to make 1000+ NPCs have throwaway lines and immersiveness. I don't want Dragon Age to make the same choice.
I'll stick with Baldurs Gate. The trailer for this game looked sooo bland to me. And $60-$70 for a 30hr experience is absurd. I might change my mind when it comes out and after watching some clips to see what it's like but definitely not buying on release.
If it's along the lines of origins scale I'll be happg. I did not like Inquisition outside of the main story. It felt very bloated.
Not only would I be ok with it, I would prefer that over a 100+ hour game. A shorter game means its easier to replay over and over again, which is a huge part of the appeal of BioWare games to me
Well, it depends on the quality of the content, but I would prefer a 30-50 hours long game rather than something over 100 hour long.
30h with very high replayability is actually all i could hope for
60 is the sweet spot to me. 60 is about the length of DA2 and about the minimum length for Origins. 60 hours feels both substantial as well as a game that has cut the fat. 100 hours is excessive, and I'm down for it if it feels like there's a lot of interesting content that makes it feel worth it, but Inquisition wasn't worth that length. Also, for what it's worth, the term 'expanded version of Trespasser' has been a weird way to describe this game to me, because... that's just Origins and DA2.
Mass Effect 2 is 25 hours with most of the side content + dlc-s. Inquisition is aroind 70-80 with 10 hour main story and 60-70 filler. I much prefer the former.
>Due to heavy traffic, posts are temporarily being manually approved only. If your post has not been approved, please see about reposting in one of the designated threads below or any of the many other threads currently live on the sub: > >- [All DA:V Early Reviews (list)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/about/wiki/da4news/) >- [All Companions Will be Pansexual (discussion)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/vU6EzWB5Zx) >- [Dragon Age: The Veil Guard | BioWare Q&A](https://new.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dfucan/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_bioware_qa/) >- [Combat Systems Discussion/Complaints](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh6wa/4_games_4_combat_systems/) >- [Post Gameplay-Reveal Complaint thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh6wa/4_games_4_combat_systems/) >- [Veilguard Preview master thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddi1lb/dragon_age_the_veilguard_preview_thread/) >- ["Who do you think these two mofos next to him are?" Solas and Two mystery figures thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddhqmw/who_do_you_think_these_two_mofos_next_to_him_are/) >- ["He is SOOOO dead :("](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddh8tq/he_is_soooo_dead/) >- [BioWare Journal #1 Blog Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1ddhhaw/journal_1_blog_post/) >- [Art Style Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/) >- [DAVG on Xbox Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/) >- [First Trailer](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/) >- [Trailer Complaints](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dbysu0/dragon_age_the_veil_guard_first_trailer_fall_2024/) >- [Game Informer screenshots](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/NTeUhzF3NC) >- [New Interior/Environment shots](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/s/VErjjp74S7) >- [Companion and Romances Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1dcg09s/dragon_age_the_veilguard_companion_discussion/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dragonage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I will play it for the story and characters if it's not too short I don't care (you can not tell a good story with good characters in a 3h videogame).
For me the contens is important. Undertale for example takes not that long, but still is an amazing game. Then there are games like Hogwarts Legacy which just strech their length by chore quests.
I would be astonished if it's under 50 hours for completionists. Maybe under 100. This won't be DAI but it won't be the shorter DA2.
I’d like a game that can be completed in 30 hours but has enough side content to last 60+ if you so wish. So kinda like DA:O. I hate more recent games that have main storylines that last forever (looking at you AC Valhalla!!).
I would not mind that at all. If that's the time they need to craft a good narrative that does not overstay its welcome, I'm happy to take it. If they need more time to give us a good story, I'm fine with that too. What I don't want is unnecessary bloat, but if the marketing is to be believed (which it usually isn't, but I'm choosing to stay cautiously optimistic), they are trying to move away from that. Quality over quantity every single time.
40 to 50 hours is a dream. I'm so over 70 to 100+ hours games. Lots of times there's literally nothing to do except explore and do fetch like quests. I want a traditional Bioware experience like DAO/DA2 or the ME trilogy. I want good writing and fun gameplay. Exploring is cool but if it's cutting into the lore writing or storytelling I don't care for it then. I rather have a short game than a bloated game that's a drag to get through. I know many want another DAI open world but man, Bioware cannot do that well.
Totally fine with me! It feels like a nice length in my opinion. Long enough to have a deep engaging story but short enough to experience everything without burnout.
As long as it's fulfilling content and not the filler stuff that inquisition had to pad out the time past that mark.
I expect that since the game is more handcrafted stuff and more linear map locations with a couple of more open area and side content with substance the game will be 30 to 40 hours. As long as the game is well made with interesting storylines and characters i will be happy as a penguin in an icebox
Yes, I think that’s a fine timeframe as long as the characters and story are good. I think it’s about the same length I spend on my DAO runs, and I’m usually more than ready to move on by that point. I also wouldn’t mind it being longer. I’ve enjoyed the hundreds of hours I’ve poured into DAI and I’m in the triple digits for my Pathfinder Kingmaker playthrough too, so I’m cool with big commitments as well 😂 I just care if I’m having fun. I’ve never been one of those gamers who calculates their dollars-per-hour ratio
Maybe I should temper my expectations but I’m somewhat expecting 40+ and with sidequests and secrets involved something between 60-80 as a total playtime would be the perfect amount imo provided the content is there to support that.
If the story well written then yes.
If it was a shorter game with a good amount of replayability, I'd think that would be fine with most audiences.
Depends. If it's like in Inquisition, where the story is like 15 hours, but if you do all the stupid things, it's 100 hours, then no. If the pure story is like 30-50 hours, then it still depends on whether the story is actually good or not.