I would not agree at all that content-locking is the “only” way to handle this, you could also let everyone do the quests but hand out different rewards depending your mythic path. For sure, a character who picks the Angel mythic path might not be interested in becoming a lich, but one can easily imagine him her wanting to do the Lich quests so she can take lich-advancing items into her own custody or help whoever it is a developing lich would want to destroy along the way.
It just seems like a waste to content-lock significant chunks of the game when we know from Steam stats that hardly anybody makes it through RPGs twice, even games like Tyranny where the main virtue of the game is supposedly its replayability.
I didn’t find KM such a terrible bugged disaster at launch, though i started playing about 3 weeks after launch. I did however take a completionist approach so everything was patched by the time i reached the later chapters.
I find it part of the appeal to have the long epic stories and a generous amount of side quests. I really enjoy the journey, not just the ending! Excessive filler instead of quality content would be bad but I am pretty confident they will get it right for WotR as they did a good job with KM except for HATEOT (which they later improved).
But how you let everyone do the quests?
I mean if you in Aeon travel back in time to change things… …I really do not see how other options can do that?
Or if you as Lich gather information and do rituals to let’s say create an golems and make deals with Vampires and other undeads to get them to join as your army leaders.
Now how that would interest let’s say a Trickster? Or how Angel even want to do these things, or can travel back and forth in time?
Or how any other then Lich would try to “try out” how to sacrifice your fellow companion and then rise them as your minion? I honestly can not see how Angel would try that kind of trick or even start that kind of quest…
But in the start sure, you have naturally all options to try all quests and make your own decicions. Based on these you most likely get option to choose from possible open paths “I want to become Golden Dragon” or something like that. But it is not possible to do all of them, specially later versions because to get that far you would have to make active decicions what kind of prevent your “current” path.
Like if you are LG paladin who is in his/her path to Angel you most likely do not give in your inner rage, search for demon ways and during battles tear people up using your bare hands and teeth while eat they flesh in hunger and rage and maybe end up getting demon powers by eating up still pulsating heart of some demon general. Just because as a LG Paladin who is going for Angel path… …you do not even think of doing such a thing. That is abonation for you. It repels you.
What you’re suggesting is an interesting way to approach things, but I don’t think it’s viable given the number of mythic paths you can choose from. You mention Tyranny, which I replayed at least three times. I think that game does what you’re suggesting, giving you access to at least most of the missions but giving you different options for the outcome depending on which faction you’re backing. It worked there because the game was dealing with factions who were all after the same things and were actively in conflict with one another. The mythic paths don’t function like that. They’re journeys that your character takes to develop into wildly different types of creature with wildly different goals. I think you’d have to be the greatest writer in the world to create a satisfying story that justifies a string of missions where a character on the road to becoming an angel, a lich, a swarm-that-walks, a golden dragon, an aeon, a trickster, an azata, a legend or a demon have equally compelling reasons to get involved one way or another. You can certainly do that a couple times, but there comes a point where the missions have to diverge otherwise it would start to strain credibility. Like yes an angel could reasonably want to get to a Lich-advancing artefact and keep it out of the hands of evil, but why would a trickster want to get at such an artefact? Or a swarm-that-walks? Or a demon? The only way to approach that is to make it so that good-aligned paths are out to get one outcome from a quest and evil aligned paths are out for another, with maybe some of the more neutral paths allowing you to pick one or the other. But then you’re left with the problem of having to be locked out of some outcomes based on your alignment, which you’ve said you don’t want, because there are things that a path like an angel, who based on lore HAS to be good and unwilling to do certain things because someone who is willing to do those things wouldn’t be an angel.
Furthermore if they want the paths to feel meaningfully different, then they have to account for all the things that make the paths unique, providing options that one path can take that the others can’t. At that point the devs have a choice; they can make the possible soultions radically different so that the mythic paths feel unique and satisfying and like they each bring something new to the table, at which point that necessitates creating relatively extensive unique content for the paths that other paths can’t access, or the alternative is that the devs water down how divergent paths are so that the change in narrative is minor, at which point the mythic paths become about as impactful as background choice is in a lot of RPGs, giving you some extra options for how to complete a mission, extra dialogue options and that’s about it. And given the mythic paths are the central hook of the game, if they took the latter direction I think that would fall pretty flat.
What you’re suggesting reduces mythic paths importance to the way the story unfolds a lot. Locking players out of options based on alignment is one thing that can be argued about a lot, but mythic paths are basically alignment taken up to 11. Following a mythic path in the game isn’t just about power, it’s about becoming something else, and it’s an active choice by the player character and reflecting that well requires locking characters out of accessing certain content. Someone who becomes an angel becomes an angel because they’re actively choosing to walk that path, knowing what they’re doing. Someone who would choose to become an angel and is actually determined to do so would need to be prevented from making certain choices because those are choices that someone becoming an angel wouldn’t make, which would lead to the story not being internally consistent.
was it truly 120 hours content? or was it bloated due to the KM of traveling and random encounters? i have yet to finish the game but so far i find myself to be traveling around the map alot and not much content.
Took me about 115h in my first playthrough which felt too long. Espacially the last chapters weren’t nearly as good as the first ones it was pretty clear that OCG was rushing developmnet to get it out. That drop in quality wouldn’t be there if the game was smaller and they had more time to polish it befroe release.
if it’s much shorter for wrath, how many hours wil that be? i honestly love a hundred hour game. his answer was still vague? we will have to invest hundred of hours to see all the content? which means if the content were branch out due to mythic classes and progressions so let’s assume it’s total 180 hours and 6 mythic class. does that mean 1 playthrough will be 30 hours? i really hope that’s not the case.
i love a hundred hour game. that i mostly played twice. i wanted a DLC that is similar to BtSL though that skip all the story content and just focus on the builds and combat after i’m done with the story content.
this is where i’m afraid it’s alarming if they were to mean to see everything is 120 hours which means if you divided it with the mythic classes storyline… it will be like 20 hours if just doing the main storyline? that’s really bad execution there if they are implementing it that way.
i think you are mistaken. i’m not freaking out i’m just disappointed if the game is much shorter. i like longer games. they did said that 1 playthrough will be much shorter. just how long is it that is much shorter? 50 hours? 60 hours? but since they are going the direction of branching out (yes you still be playing hundreds of hours to see everything) it’s making sense if a playthrough is just 40 hours (just for main quest) as if each branching is based on mythic progression. i’m hopeful that 1 shorter playthrough will still be thoroughly enjoyable and not feel rushed.
You’re reading too much into mere lines and getting disappointed for nothing. The alpha was only 2 chapters (out of 5, I think), and was already 30+ hours when you dit it quickly. And a significant part of one of the chapters was missing. I cannot say more here, but don’t worry, the whole game won’t be 20h, far from it.
Edit : Anyway, there already was a discussion about this, 23 days ago, and I quoted an interview that said the game should be around 80h :
I am always mindful of the Baldur’s Gate 2 example where the devs content-locked significant chunks of the game based on character class for the exact reasons Owlcat is using: seeing unique content will make players feel more special and besides we can’t see any reason why characters with other outlooks would want to do those quests so we’re comfortable blocking them from trying.
The BG2 devs later said that way of thinking was among their biggest design mistakes and it is eerie to watch Owlcat make similar content-locking decisions for similar reasons. Then again BG2 turned out pretty well despite its devs seeing content-locking as a mistake.
Content locking is only a mistake from a developer perspective. Most people do one play through of a game (now a days that stat is falling due to players just not finishing them) so when you have content that’s locked behind player choice you’re shooting yourself in the foot. As a developer every ounce of work you want to make it worth money wise yah? Well if you have branching story that’s a lot more effort for what ultimately is going to be seen by a lot less players. Its a money in money out ratio that companies have to concern themselves with.
I’d argue with the internet that factor is largely negated by people posting videos of RPGs (xLetalis for example) showcasing multiple decisions. Then you factor into pop culture events like the first telltale game for the walking dead. That game had people talking about how their stories went and was a huge boon for its genre.
All in all its up to Owlcat on what they view as useful allocation of their money and man hours. Personally I think this will work out for them because there’s a huge hole in the cRPG market so its not like many of us will be looking elsewhere
I for one really only play through a game once, thus I do prefer 100+ hours. At the same time I don’t mind content locked by character choices, as in the real world, you don’t get to do everything, you have to make choices and live with them. A good well written story should make locked content irrelevant and not necessary to do and complete. Choices just makes the story more personal, with differences to other who embarked on the adventure. It is a real drag, when everyone does the story the same, and locked choice content does give the flavor of realism and partial uniqueness (as with any computer based RPG, one is limited by the content included, and not limited by your imagination).
I do not have endless time to play. Some very good games are so large that I finished them only once, like kingmaker, the witcher 3 and Fallout New Vegas, and even that took forever.
I do not mind that the new game is a bit shorter, but judging from the alpha its still a very large game.
As I don’t always remember how long it takes for me to finish a game, because I usually don’t play it in a short time, but in alternance with other games, and the stats provided by Gog don’t take into account the long, very long pauses I make by alt+tabbing and doing something else for hours at a time, I have gone there to estimate the time I took to finish some games, and also estimate the games I did not finish because either it was too long, and I wanted to do something else, or something went wrong and I had to start from scratch and I did not have the courage to do it. I mostly use the completionists times.
Games I never finished :
Baldur’s Gate I (104h). have begun it something like 6 or 7 times, arrived in BG itself twice only, but never actually finished the game.
Baldur’s Gate 2 (136h). Never even finished Chapter 1.
NWN 2 - Storm of Zehir (31h). Really boring.
Pillars of Eternity (101h). Bored quickly, never played more than 25h, probably less.
Divinity Original Sin 2 (145h). Same as PoE
The Witcher 3 (173h). I noticed a quest (Taht I did not want to fail) failed for some reason towards the end of Chapter 2 (Skellige), and all of my 20 something saves had already that quest failed. Couldn’t bring myself to begin again for 4 years. I only did that a couple of weeks ago
Pathfinder : Kingmaker. (186h). Too long. I was stuck for a long time in Vodokai’s tomb, and I could not go back to the game for long after that. My mind was salready elsewhere. Will probably try it once again some day, because I loved the game in general. Just like the Witcher 3.
Games I finished once :
NWN 1 - Official Campaign (80h). It was really a pain in the end. I loved the expansions and the mods you could download, and I played those for countless hours. But the campaign was sooo long, and so artificial in their many subquests (I liked the main story).
NWN 2 - Mask of the Betrayer (31h). I’m not sure. I think I may have finished once by cheating, but the mechanics of the curse really annoyed me a lot. Nothing to do with the length.
IWD (62h), IWD2 (83.5 h), ToEE (94h). I used cheats to finish them, so I could know the content, but I did not like them much.
The Witcher 1 EE (64h, but it seems to me it was much longer than that, maybe 80-90h ? Especially the first two chapters). Started 3 of 4 times, but never went beyond chapter 2 the other times.
Dragon Age Origins UE (106h). Too long to replay.
Dragon Age: Inquisition (127h). Too long and too repetitive to replay.
Mass Effect Andromeda (94h ? It took me at least 120h to complete). I wonder how I could manage to finish it. Only because I so loved the first three (see below). Soooo boring and repetitive, it played like a mindless MMO.
Games I finished more than once :
NWN 2 (114h). 11 years between the two attempts. I did not bother with the expansions the second time.
NWN 1 expansions - SoU and HofU (31.5h each). 3 or 4 times each.
The Witcher 2 (54h) - Finished it twice. Less mindless quests than the first one. Shorter and better quality.
Dragon Age 2 + expansions (58+13.5 = 71.5 h). Disliked it the first time, but gave it another chance, and in the end, I liked the story and characters, even though I still don’t like much of the gameplay.
Star Wars : Knights of the Old Republic (46h). Discovered it quite late, 3 yers ago, and loved it. Finished it twice, and a bug prevented the 3rd time two months ago.
Star Wars : Knights of the Old Republic 2 (51). Finished twice, loved it.
Mass Effect trilogy (96h Not sure if they include all DLCs. Each game was about 32-36h to finish). I finihsed the whole trilogy about 10 or 11 times. I loved it, despite many problems and little things that I disliked and found annoying. I cannot really explain why, especially because I usually don’t really like futuristic universes. This is the reason I gave KotOR a chance
So, there you have it. With the exception of NWN2, all of the games that I finished more than once are less than 60h (Mass Effect games were less than 40h individually). And the ones I never finished are mostly the long ones.
Even those games whose story I liked, like Dragon Age Origins, I could not replay Another time because they were too long and there were too much content that felt like filler-combat to me. Or filler-travelling.
Honestly, I think Dragon Age 1 had a great length around with 60h + 15h Addon. It’s why I replayed it at least 6 times. No other RPG, not even my all-time favourite F:NV offers a similar replay value in my opinion.
DAO does replay value really well because there really isn’t that much content that is locked behind Origins, but they offer so many unique dialogue options and even different quest solution (You can only marry the queen if you are human) that you want to play the different origins to see how they change the game.
The fact that your background is completely irrelevant in Kingmaker is probably the main reason I will never finish it again: For me, Kingmaker is a great dungeon crawler but a weak RPG.