-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Darksiders 3 is about 15 hours long on average
- Thread starter Silky
- Start date
Some people really don't like open-world anything. Doesn't matter how well it's implemented. Some people really don't like loot systems either regardless of implementation. It's odd but people often fixate on nitpicks and ignore everything else. DS2 was basically just more of DS1, with a loot system and open-world added on top. It doesn't really make any sense that someone could love the first one but hate the second when they are fundamentally the same.
After finishing AC Odyssey and with Red Dead on the horizon, that's absolutely fine by me. I'm totally in the mood for some linear narratives. Holiday 2016 and Early 2017 just absolutely burned me out on big open world games, and I feel like I'm almost there again with the two I previously mentioned, the hype of RD2 being daunting enough.
Sounds good to me. Seems like it will be more similar to DS1 than 2. I liked both, so I'm totally ok with this. The less bloat, the better.
It does make sense. You've answered it yourself. Darksiders 1 wasn't open world like 2 and didn't have the loot system. Darksiders 2 open world was boring and the second half of the game was really really bloated. Darksiders 1 was much more focused. If it's true this is around 15 hours then at least it's more focused like the first one.
I unironically loved Darksider 2 Earth level. Those guns were cool and it wasn't as long as the other worlds.
Except the core gameplay loop was the same. It had the same quality of combat, traversal and dungeons which is what people liked about the first game. I understand liking DS2 less than DS1 but outright hating DS2 while loving DS1? Makes no sense.
I would absolutely prefer a fantastic 15 hours over an ok 80 hours.
Spider-Man was a great example of this. It was around 15 hours to complete the main story and every hour was great.
Spider-Man was a great example of this. It was around 15 hours to complete the main story and every hour was great.
I love open world stuff and loot games, but Darksiders 2 was a slog with nothing new to show you after the first third of the game. It's utterly unlike the crafted, Zelda-like first game and the notion that if you dislike it you dislike the entire genre of open world stuff is laughable. The loop wasn't the same, the combat wasn't the same (it was better in some ways, but that doesn't save it), the experience is very different and lacks direction much of the time. I guess if you really love rolling giant marbles into holes, it's a festival of joy, but overall it suffers from extreme repetition. I don't hate it, but trying to dismiss the very accurate and fair criticism of it is ridiculous in itself, let alone trying to hide it behind the first game like it's some kind of logical companion piece. It's not. Darksiders 2 went in a very different direction and it proved to be largely a mistake. It's good that 3 is reining it in and making a more focused game. Even though it's going to get buried due to its release date and this is likely the end of Darksiders.
I just don't see it. Maybe it's because I wasn't the biggest fan of the first game. I thought it was solid but otherwise forgettable. I actually enjoyed Darksiders 2 more in every respect. At no point did I feel lost or directionless. Combat was expanded over the first game, as were the puzzles and traversal. I didn't really care about the story or characters but the same was true of the first game.
Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a good open-world game? And which ones do you dislike (aside from DS2)?
Hey,
Just wanted to say the full interview is live now here: https://wccftech.com/darksiders-iii-souls-nvidia-dlss/
Just wanted to say the full interview is live now here: https://wccftech.com/darksiders-iii-souls-nvidia-dlss/
I wanted more of DS2, but as long as its at least DS1 length ill be fine. I loved DS2 though it was amazing.
Sad Joe Mad isnt completely working with development, but having his input for furys character design is acceptable... still im curious how itll feel without his designs throughout the game.
Sad Joe Mad isnt completely working with development, but having his input for furys character design is acceptable... still im curious how itll feel without his designs throughout the game.
Oh, I thought it was earlier. Well, maybe I'll pre-order it then, I'll see what my budget is.
I'll never understand the obsession with huge long games that most people have, I currently playing SotTR, Yakuza 0 and AC: Odyssey and I hate myself for doing that because I currently playing only these games almost all the time. 15-30 hours is a perfect length for me, enough to enjoy the game and not get overburned with it
I loved the 25 hours I spent on my first run in DS2 (except for earth). It had a ridiculous amount of dungeons though and I understand that the scope is tighter when theyre dealing with a lower budget. I do hope they focused alot on dungeons in this one as well.
I read the thread title and though "Shit, really?" at first but now that I think of it, that is totally fine. Can't say I necessarily want the overly long and bloated experience of Darksiders 2 again so that works for me. I imagine the first game was around the same length too. Though it's been awhile since I played it.
Playing 20 minutes at gamescom was enough for me.
I love Darksiders but the exploration and movement are so clunky and have this weird feeling that the traversing was more frustrating than enjoyable. Combat is fine, but the camera works really weird. This needed a bigger budget. At the same time I also played Biomutant - and I assume these 2 have similar budgets from THQ, but combat and movement in Bio feels much, much better somehow. Different engines I guess.
I love Darksiders but the exploration and movement are so clunky and have this weird feeling that the traversing was more frustrating than enjoyable. Combat is fine, but the camera works really weird. This needed a bigger budget. At the same time I also played Biomutant - and I assume these 2 have similar budgets from THQ, but combat and movement in Bio feels much, much better somehow. Different engines I guess.
Datksiders 2 was the embodiment of "get three things to get three things to open a thing to get a thing and repeat this 3 times to open another thing".
I don't mind if 3 is shorter but I really don't want it to be sewers only. I have not seen much of it because spoilers but the few things I've seen were always the same sewers that were ugly even in DS1.
I don't mind if 3 is shorter but I really don't want it to be sewers only. I have not seen much of it because spoilers but the few things I've seen were always the same sewers that were ugly even in DS1.
Sounds good to me, as long as the game is good. I really miss 8-20 hour long action games. I'll take a good, tight experience over the increasingly bloated games with inane busywork that release these days.
Thanks. Customization being closer aligned to DS1 than DS2 is good news to me. I liked it well enough, but it felt superfluous.
Hmm it's a little long for me but that target length certainly makes me more interested than if it were longer, so good
