Zelda: The Twilight Princess

[Kabob]

Read a little bit of IGN's writeup on their test of the new Twilight Princess game and they're saying that to beat the game for the first time is expected to take 70 hours! That's one heck of a long game (which excites me because I think that most games nowadays are way too short). Heck, guy said he was on his 2nd time through and with 2/3 of the game completed he's already up to 27 hours.

I hope this game lives up to the hype. I was planning on just buying the Gamecube version but after reading the first page or so of this I think I'm gonna have to go with a Wii...

So now I've gotta decide if I wanna invest in a Wii or a X360...oh the decisions!

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Well this is a little surprising, considering most Zelda games usually don't last that long unless you really waste time goofing around and exploring seeing as how the game play / puzzles / enemies usually follow a familiar formula making it less difficult for veterans of the series.

I'm definitely getting a Wii; although if games such as Gears of War keep coming out for 360 I may eventually have to pick one up as well.

 

[Kabob]

Well, typically unless you find a really deep RPG most games are pretty short. Metroid Prime (the original) is one of my favorite games and first time through took most people I know 16 or so hours...now I can beat it in under 5...so I was expecting him to say "the first will take 70 and the 2nd time will take 15," but it looks like that'll not be the case. The fact that the 2nd time through without watching the cutscenes or doing any mini quests and such and it's shaping up to be a 45 hour trip the 2nd time...wow.

I don't know if I'd have enough time to play the game!

 

[Ika]

Oh man...

70 hours (first time) x 5 (replays) + 100 hours (finding everything) =

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Yeah, I remember beating OoT in about a weeks time, but certainly not playing 10 hours a day

 

[Ultralight]

70 hours?! Certainly getting your monies worth. The graphics look good.

 

[Kabob]

The Wii is not going to be a polygon pushing monster like the X360 or PS3, but it's geared towards much more...interractive games. But honestly, the graphics look pretty durn good in their own right!

 

[tuteja1986]

I doubt it ;! i bet i could finish the single player in 25hrs to 30hrs . They said the same thing for older zelda and it was not even that long. 70hrs would be if you do every single thing which i really don't.

 

[secretanchitman]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
I doubt it ;! i bet i could finish the single player in 25hrs to 30hrs . They said the same thing for older zelda and it was not even that long. 70hrs would be if you do every single thing which i really don't.

you would have to be skipping a lot of minigames, sidequests, and cutscenes to do that.

just like the mgs series. if you skip the cutscenes, the game is really short.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
I doubt it ;! i bet i could finish the single player in 25hrs to 30hrs . They said the same thing for older zelda and it was not even that long. 70hrs would be if you do every single thing which i really don't.

you would have to be skipping a lot of minigames, sidequests, and cutscenes to do that.

just like the mgs series. if you skip the cutscenes, the game is really short.

If you skip the cutscense than MGS would be really crap game. MGS has dumb AI , crappy game play , annoying dectection system. The whole game is like watching a movie and the only reason you want to play through all the stupid flaws is to know what happens next in the storyline. I really don't like to do sidequest and play mini game ;(. Like to play a game with eppic story , good combat system and not supper stupid ai. Also i never ever abort a cutscen because i am sort of story addict. Need to have good Narrative to keep me hooked in a game which is a little reason i don't end up liking many FPS.

I love Zelda Series but the 70hr is just stupid. If its true zelda title then it doesn't matter to me if its 70hr or 20hrs. I will play the game.

 

[secretanchitman]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
I doubt it ;! i bet i could finish the single player in 25hrs to 30hrs . They said the same thing for older zelda and it was not even that long. 70hrs would be if you do every single thing which i really don't.

you would have to be skipping a lot of minigames, sidequests, and cutscenes to do that.

just like the mgs series. if you skip the cutscenes, the game is really short.

If you skip the cutscense than MGS would be really crap game. MGS has dumb AI , crappy game play , annoying dectection system. The whole game is like watching a movie and the only reason you want to play through all the stupid flaws is to know what happens next in the storyline. I really don't like to do sidequest and play mini game ;(. Like to play a game with eppic story , good combat system and not supper stupid ai.

lol...anyways. i wasnt saying that mgs would be crappy, im saying the game is short if you skip the cutscenes.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: secretanchitman

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
I doubt it ;! i bet i could finish the single player in 25hrs to 30hrs . They said the same thing for older zelda and it was not even that long. 70hrs would be if you do every single thing which i really don't.

you would have to be skipping a lot of minigames, sidequests, and cutscenes to do that.

just like the mgs series. if you skip the cutscenes, the game is really short.

If you skip the cutscense than MGS would be really crap game. MGS has dumb AI , crappy game play , annoying dectection system. The whole game is like watching a movie and the only reason you want to play through all the stupid flaws is to know what happens next in the storyline. I really don't like to do sidequest and play mini game ;(. Like to play a game with eppic story , good combat system and not supper stupid ai.

lol...anyways. i wasnt saying that mgs would be crappy, im saying the game is short if you skip the cutscenes.

I don't think I can recall any Nintendo title that was heavy on the cutscenes, and there are many sidequests in the Zelda series that are usually of decent significance. Going out of your way to obtain highly useful and/or entertaining items and/or powerups isn't something I'd consider a waste of time. Finding all the little easter eggs or trivial items, definitely a time waster and something I don't care much for.

 

[Kromis]

Lol, I posted this article in another Zelda link but nobody seemed to care dammit!

 

[Bateluer]

Excellent, we need some longer games. So many titles today are way too short for their 50+ price tags.

 

[Ultralight]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Excellent, we need some longer games. So many titles today are way too short for their 50+ price tags.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Kabob]

Originally posted by: Ultralight

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Excellent, we need some longer games. So many titles today are way too short for their 50+ price tags.

My thoughts exactly.

+1.

Although I'll mention that one of the things that's appealing to me about the Wii is that they havn't boosted the price of the games over what the Gamecube games cost. Xbox 360 games are ringing in at $60, and PS3 games are...$70 or so I think. Glad to see the Wii games are still $50.

And Tuteja, eventually you might be hitting 30 hours to beat the game but considering one of the designers of the game is skipping the cutscenes and minigames and is STILL up to 27 with one third of the game left...it might take you a while.

 

[Atlantean]

The game looks awesome, can't wait until I pick up that game and my wii

 

[Kabob]

Originally posted by: Kromis
Lol, I posted this article in another Zelda link but nobody seemed to care dammit!

Guess you didn't have "the touch" that I had

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: kabob983
Read a little bit of IGN's writeup on their test of the new Twilight Princess game and they're saying that to beat the game for the first time is expected to take 70 hours! That's one heck of a long game (which excites me because I think that most games nowadays are way too short). Heck, guy said he was on his 2nd time through and with 2/3 of the game completed he's already up to 27 hours.

I hope this game lives up to the hype. I was planning on just buying the Gamecube version but after reading the first page or so of this I think I'm gonna have to go with a Wii...

So now I've gotta decide if I wanna invest in a Wii or a X360...oh the decisions!

so? Oblivion is 200+ hours.. and another expasnion coming..

 

[Kabob]

Different type of game though. Technically I could say that WoW is an infinite hour game. But for the genre a 70 hour Zelda game is pretty durn long.

 

[warcrow]

Oblivion is not a MMO, so compairing it to WoW play time is a moot point.

CVSin is right, Oblivion was a long game with a ton of content (personally, it took me 113 hours to complete the game which included all the guild quest lines), but I would sya to him -the difference between the two games is that this is Zelda and it's on the Wii (can't wait to try the controls). I'm a huge huge fan of the Zelda franchise.

 

[Kabob]

True, but Oblivion is a bit of a more open ended game (if it's at all like Morrowind). There's really not a set order you have to do things in the game. Zelda games tend to be more linear (you need one particular item to access one area). The games are a good bit different (in my warped mind at least).

Still, I see the point, there are longer games out there.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

hmm, it took me 100 hours to beat windwaker. then again, I found every single item there is in that game w/ very minimal use of gameFAQs.


anyways, I CAN'T FLIPPIN WAIT FOR THIS GAME!!!

 

[IEC]

More games should have long single-player campaigns/quests. 7-12 hour games for $50? No thanks.

 

[tk149]

How is the Wii going to store Downloadable levels?