You're right, when you look at games critically you are doing the same shit every time. The difference with other RPGs is that the context differs with every sidequest. Not with SoM. Look, if every sidequest was as "rich" and diverse in context as those golden icon quests, I wouldn't be complaining.

But 20+ hours of main/sidequests? That's not true, but that is because to me... Those quests you keep repeating albeit in different areas without different context I call fillers. Filling-quests if you will. To me, a sidequest is a quest that isn't part of the main story per se but has a tiny and UNIQUE story of its own. Not "assassinate Uruk chieftain", "kill 60 uruks in one streak" and "shoot 50 uruks in 5 minutes" times 300.

When there are no more stories to tell, a game is burnt out to me.

Well he seemed to be implying that he was only playing the Main story (gold icon) quests, which is why I said that he was skipping "fucktons" of content :p OK, fucktons was probably a bit of an exaggeration, but I understand your point and I think we are on the same page now.

go from point A to B and kill shit by bow (ranged), sword (melee) or dagger (stealth).

That basically describes... every RPG ever? Every game ever? It's not really a good practice to devolve your hobbies into their simplest form... lest you realize how poorly you have actually been entertaining yourself :p Most games are pretty piss-poor forms of entertainment if you look at it that critically.

I thought the weapon side-quests were fairly entertaining and varied enough that I didn't feel like I was doing the same thing over and over at all. Especially the stealth ones. Maybe it's just the order I was doing things in split it up better... who knows. The slave quests were definitely repetitive, and I doubt i'll finish all of them on my playthrough (I'm at about 70% right now).

Could it use more content? Probably. For a sandbox/open world type game it does fall a bit on the short side... but we are still talking about 20+ hours of main/side quest content here... so it's really hard for me to say that isn't "enough" when compared to most other $60 games.

descender wrote on Feb 25, 2015, 10:54:
SMH.... You can't possibly believe that rant applies to this discussion. SoM doesn't have as much content as Skyrim? That's your takeaway from my post? LOL... Not a single person is making an arguement otherwise.

It's called an example, react less and think more.

There is a difference between main quests, side quests... and just wandering around killing random things. What you seem to be considering "random killing" time in Skyrim is not really, they are simply side-quests yuo have stumbled upon without Fisher-Price quest markers. Would you feel better about the length of content in SoM if the Sword/Bow/Dagger quests didn't have map markers, and you had to find them in the game world on your own? Doubtful.

The main+side quests in SoM take ~15-20 hours to play through, not the 5 hours harlock claims. He is very obviously skipping over ALL of the side-quests in SoM if he really thinks it's that short.

Are there more side-quests to do in Sykrim? Yes, of course.
Is that relevant to this discussion of how much content is in SoM? Not really...

In your earlier comment you talk about fucktons of content some wilfully skip because it has no quest marker attached to it. That would work if you talk about Skyrim, but NOT SoM. Why not? Because there's NO content except for the places with markers attached to it. None at all. That:s why I jumped on you bringing Skyrim into the discussion with Harlock -- it obviously doesn't work.

Like Harlock I don't agree there was enough content, be it marked or not. Beside the amount of content, the amount of content was also always the same: go from point A to B and kill shit by bow (ranged), sword (melee) or dagger (stealth). *yawn* After 10 times.

This comment was edited on Feb 25, 2015, 12:39.

If you stick to the main in Skyrim, hell Mordor may have more content.

My oldest started playing Skyrim around noon day one, was done with the game by 3 am. Shelved.

I felt there was enough content in Mordor and what you want to see if it tightened up and expanded on in the next release, imo that is all they need to do.

SMH.... You can't possibly believe that rant applies to this discussion. SoM doesn't have as much content as Skyrim? That's your takeaway from my post? LOL... Not a single person is making an arguement otherwise.

It's called an example, react less and think more.

There is a difference between main quests, side quests... and just wandering around killing random things. What you seem to be considering "random killing" time in Skyrim is not really, they are simply side-quests yuo have stumbled upon without Fisher-Price quest markers. Would you feel better about the length of content in SoM if the Sword/Bow/Dagger quests didn't have map markers, and you had to find them in the game world on your own? Doubtful.

The main+side quests in SoM take ~15-20 hours to play through, not the 5 hours harlock claims. He is very obviously skipping over ALL of the side-quests in SoM if he really thinks it's that short.

Are there more side-quests to do in Sykrim? Yes, of course.
Is that relevant to this discussion of how much content is in SoM? Not really...

descender wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 19:12:
I think you simply don't understand how to play sandbox games.

Skyrim can be beaten in an hour. GTA5 can be beaten in 6 hours. The main goal of these games is to play and explore them though, not simply rush to the end with the least effort possible.

A normal person would spend dozens if not hundreds of hours playing and beating these games... even though there is merely "xyz hours worth of story content". Shadow of Mordor is basically no different. You are willfully and purposely skipping over fucktons of content simply because it doesn't have a quest marker attached to it.

You can't possibly bring Skyrim into your argument. "Fucktons of content"?! Have you played SoM?! Honestly, you cannot have if you say stuff like that.

Compared to Skyrim, I can say with utmost confidence that there's NO FUCKING SHIT to do in SoM outside of the quests. Outside of quests you can collect some shit. If you're a "skilled" player you maybe die 3 or 4 times in total, so you have your lukewarm army raised in 2 hours.

In Skyrim you run into a cave and meet a bunch of sect psychos you have to kill and stuff like that. You don't have that in SoM either. It's just dirst and grass and hills and an occasional ruin, and on all that, they've dropped Uruks.

Again: Outside of the quests there is NO. SHIT. TO. DO. UNLESS you like killing Uruks for 10s of hours and are into collecting collectibles.

PS: There's no gear to find either. Whoop! Whoop!

Cutter wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 21:25:
I pretty much did everything there was in the main game and I have 36 hours clocked on that alone so I'm not complaining for the $26 I paid for the CE.

Nearing the end myself at 35 hours, random destruction is just too tempting after a long day at work

I pretty much did everything there was in the main game and I have 36 hours clocked on that alone so I'm not complaining for the $26 I paid for the CE.

TangledThorns wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 19:27:
Very cool example of what DLC should look like.

???

Kotaku says this is just another copy and paste anti climatic DLC like Lord of the Hunt. From the trailers, Celebrimbor has the exact same animations as Talion. In fact, it's just a simple skin as far as I can tell. The areas used are just the old areas with a darker theme.

If you want to see DLC done right take a look at Tiny Tina for BL2. That campaign itself was longer than most full length retail games.

Very cool example of what DLC should look like.

I think you simply don't understand how to play sandbox games.

Skyrim can be beaten in an hour. GTA5 can be beaten in 6 hours. The main goal of these games is to play and explore them though, not simply rush to the end with the least effort possible.

A normal person would spend dozens if not hundreds of hours playing and beating these games... even though there is merely "xyz hours worth of story content". Shadow of Mordor is basically no different. You are willfully and purposely skipping over fucktons of content simply because it doesn't have a quest marker attached to it.

descender wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 18:38:
5 hours of straight up story, and an untold number of hours of sandbox play?

It's not short. It's you.

EDIT: In fact, the best reference I can find for a quick run through the story is approximately 9 hours. So... yeah. It's you.
http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=18006

whatever you say, it must be true

5 hours of straight up story, and an untold number of hours of sandbox play?

It's not short. It's you.

EDIT: In fact, the best reference I can find for a quick run through the story is approximately 9 hours. So... yeah. It's you.
http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=18006

This comment was edited on Feb 24, 2015, 18:45.

descender wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 15:20:
How do you find it short? Easy, yes... short? Really? Are you just running straight to the quest markers and fast-travelling everywhere without ever dying?

i played the whole game for a little over 20 hours before i finished it, but only about 4 or 5 of those hours involved the story/side missions.. because thats all the content there is for them

yes its fucking short, if you cant see that youre either blind or deliberately ignoring it

Shadow Of Mordor Players Have Killed 5.65 Billion Uruks

Yeah, but how many of 'em stayed killed?

harlock wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 14:43:

Creston wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 13:24:
I'm definitely going to wait for an All-In-One edition, but it's good to see them supporting it with story DLC rather than the usual "Here's anew skin lolz!" shit we get.

the main game was so short, this seems like the epitome of the pre-planned DLC bloat phenomena.. like they planned on making the full game only available through DLC..

so thats disappointing

i mean... the main game is ridiculously short dude

Now I'm going to wait twice as hard for the All-In-One version.

descender wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 15:20:
How do you find it short? Easy, yes... short? Really? Are you just running straight to the quest markers and fast-travelling everywhere without ever dying?

It's a sandbox game so... you are usually responsible for how much time and enjoyment you get out of it based on how you choose to play. If you skip over all of the collectibles and warp around the game world instantaneously... then complain about the length of the game, well... that's just a special brand of stupid.

I think I probably put ~15 hours into just the first map before moving on to the second.

Game difficulty was a major public complaint before I started playing so I have adjusted my play style accordingly. I refuse to fast travel unless I am advancing time (and I actually advance time more often than i need to bulk up the uruks). I haven't purchased a single health/focus or arrow upgrade and I skipped over a few of the more overpowered skill unlocks (Crit II, blade master, double charge, etc). I also haven't unlocked the "super move" for each weapon either, as they just seem ridiculously unnecessary. I also won't use any immunity runes (ex. poison).

I assume that's where my extra playtime is going but... it's not like I'm dying repeatedly or wasting a lot of time wandering into unneeded fights. I collect the white things in each area first, then do the weapon challenges, then clear the slave riots. Once I did all of that I pushed the story markers to get to the second map. Now I'm basically doing the same thing there... I think my total playtime is upwards of 40 hours total at this point.

This. I honestly don't know how much I've spent on the beginning map but I JUST got to the second map. I probably put a good 15 hours into the first map... That was me trying to get everything possible and I still haven't done that to 100%.

If you just rush you way through it and complain, there is no hope for your gaming life. lol

How do you find it short? Easy, yes... short? Really? Are you just running straight to the quest markers and fast-travelling everywhere without ever dying?

It's a sandbox game so... you are usually responsible for how much time and enjoyment you get out of it based on how you choose to play. If you skip over all of the collectibles and warp around the game world instantaneously... then complain about the length of the game, well... that's just a special brand of stupid.

I think I probably put ~15 hours into just the first map before moving on to the second.

Game difficulty was a major public complaint before I started playing so I have adjusted my play style accordingly. I refuse to fast travel unless I am advancing time (and I actually advance time more often than i need to bulk up the uruks). I haven't purchased a single health/focus or arrow upgrade and I skipped over a few of the more overpowered skill unlocks (Crit II, blade master, double charge, etc). I also haven't unlocked the "super move" for each weapon either, as they just seem ridiculously unnecessary. I also won't use any immunity runes (ex. poison).

I assume that's where my extra playtime is going but... it's not like I'm dying repeatedly or wasting a lot of time wandering into unneeded fights. I collect the white things in each area first, then do the weapon challenges, then clear the slave riots. Once I did all of that I pushed the story markers to get to the second map. Now I'm basically doing the same thing there... I think my total playtime is upwards of 40 hours total at this point.

Creston wrote on Feb 24, 2015, 13:24:
I'm definitely going to wait for an All-In-One edition, but it's good to see them supporting it with story DLC rather than the usual "Here's anew skin lolz!" shit we get.

the main game was so short, this seems like the epitome of the pre-planned DLC bloat phenomena.. like they planned on making the full game only available through DLC..

so thats disappointing

i mean... the main game is ridiculously short dude

Haven't checked out any o the DLC yet since I got the CE but I will soon.