• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Battlefront 2's single player campaign will last 5-7 hours.

Markitron

Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
How long was tf2 campaign? 10 hours? That was just about perfect for an FPS campaign imo so I wish this was a bit longer but I’m ok with it.

Howlongtobeat.com clocks it at 6 hours, which sounds about right to me. It's a very eventful 6 hours though, and ended right where it needed to. I'm not worried about BF2 being the same length, can only hope it's anywhere near as good.
 

Voidwolf

Member
How long was tf2 campaign? 10 hours? That was just about perfect for an FPS campaign imo so I wish this was a bit longer but I'm ok with it.

The game's director stated it was about 8 hours depending on player skill. It's a 6 hour campaign for the average player according to howlongtobeat. This will probably be around the same.

^beaten
 

prag16

Banned
And people are surprised that every AAA game needs to have some kind of forced grindy RPG-lite crafting/leveling up checklist open-world trash.

Developers and publishers got the idea: the average gamer prefers quantity over quality.

But then they also complain about that! They just can't be contented.

Yep. Bingo. This cannot be stressed enough.

Then there was that other guy on the last page that seemingly wants an entire 8+ hour campaign to be as eventful throughout as a heavily scripted sequence from your standard CoD campaign gameplay reveal, else the game is "bland".

People largely just don't have realistic expectations.
 

Toxi

Banned
And people are surprised that every AAA game needs to have some kind of forced grindy RPG-lite crafting/leveling up checklist open-world trash.

Developers and publishers got the idea: the average gamer prefers quantity over quality.

But then they also complain about that! They just can't be contented. The final step is saying "I'm tired of videogames" on GAF after playing 3 hours of 3 different games they day one'd.
I mean... Does it have to be a dichotomy between grindy checklists and $60 4 hour campaigns?

Demon's Souls will take a good 20-40 hours on a first playthrough with little in the way of grindy checklist bullshit. And Demon's Souls was a fairly low budget game with zero marketing. Of course, Demon's Souls was also really graphically primitive.
 

Markitron

Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
I mean... Does it have to be a dichotomy between grindy checklists and $60 4 hour campaigns?

Demon's Souls will take a good 20-40 hours on a first playthrough with little in the way of grindy checklist bullshit. And Demon's Souls was a fairly low budget game with zero marketing.

Of course, Demon's Souls was also really graphically primitive.

It's also much slower paced than a shooter. You would move thru DeS's environments significantly faster in an FPS. To answer your question, no it doesn't, Doom is a great example. But BF2 is primarily a multiplayer game and that's where the meat of the package is.
 

Voidwolf

Member
I mean... Does it have to be like this?

Demon's Souls will take a good 20-40 hours on a first playthrough with little in the way of grindy checklist bullshit. And Demon's Souls was a fairly low budget game with zero marketing.

Of course, Demon's Souls was also really graphically primitive.

You're comparing apples to oranges. And Demon's Souls is literally an action RPG. 20-40 hours is about the average for the genre.
 

Toxi

Banned
It's also much slower paced than a shooter. You would move thru DeS's environments significantly faster in an FPS. To answer your question, no it doesn't, Doom is a great example. But BF2 is primarily a multiplayer game and that's where the meat of the package is.
True.
 

Voidwolf

Member
Did you forget BF1? This campaign isn't being made by DICE but I highly doubt they will be able to match what Respawn did.

I couldn't bring myself to play much of BF3's campaign and stopped playing BF4's when I came accross the glitch in the swimming section but was surprised at how much I enjoyed BF1's campaign. I'd never get a Battlefield game for singleplayer, but what it offered was pretty enjoyable for me.
 
It's not inherently the case that shorter campaigns are more efficient and contain less filler, but the odds tend to be greater, so I take this as being good news.
But I'm not buying this game until the campaign is moderately confirmed to be worth it, either through it seeming properly good, or through an eventual price drop.
 
This franchise has always been heavily predicated on multiplayer and by all accounts the SP portion we are getting is vastly superior to anything previously included in the series so at this juncture I'm not certain what it is the detractors are looking for.

The SP content combined with the ability to play modes offline is plenty for me, especially given that I'm a SW junkie.

If it's not for you then move on because this was never going to be a SP-driven game.
 

Fury451

Banned
TF2's campaign quality was almost certainly due to Respawn's talents, nothing to do with EA. Which is not to say this one won't be good, too, but I just don't really see how the two things are related beyond sharing a publisher. EA doesn't have much say over what Respawn does on a creative level.

Agreed, I wanted to make a dumb hope pun
 
...Because people that like single-player aren't willing to buy a primarily multiplayer title for scraps? Really?

I like how you've already decided that the BF2 single player is "scraps" even though it has 4 exclusive planets that aren't in any of the multiplayer modes *in addition* to the locations which cross over between modes, an entirely new, canon story with high quality voice acting and motion capture for the cutscenes and written by the guy who did Spec Ops, and an entire dev team dedicated to it.

Yeah sounds like table scraps, you're definitely entitled to more
 

Crossing Eden

Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
This franchise has always been heavily predicated on multiplayer and by all accounts the SP portion we are getting is vastly superior to anything previously included in the series so at this juncture I'm not certain what it is the detractors are looking for.

The SP content combined with the ability to play modes offline is plenty for me, especially given that I'm a SW junkie.

If it's not for you then move on because this was never going to be a SP-driven game.
Gamers:It's a myth that gamers keep asking for more, increased development costs is ALL on pubs and devs!

*Dev makes a sequel with three times the content of the original game in just the MP AND a 4-6 hour SP mode made by a different studio, with a competent writer because the story is canon, and production values that surpass literally every other game this year let alone any other game in the series*

Also Gamers:
tenor.gif
 

KORNdoggy

Member
So 4 hours then? About what I expected.

sounds about right. devs always over promise when it comes to game length. so i'm expecting 7 hours to be a "stare at every asset for 5 minutes" type playthrough, while 3-5 is probably a normal person playing normally on normal.
 

xrnzaaas

Member
That's not a lot. The devs are usually too optimistic about the amount of time needed to finish the campaign, 4 hours is probably more likely for a standard run or a normal difficulty level. For me twice that much is an okay deal if you're buying the game only or mostly for SP (I did that with Titanfall 2 and I'm satisfied by what I got).
 

prag16

Banned
I like how you've already decided that the BF2 single player is "scraps" even though it has 4 exclusive planets that aren't in any of the multiplayer modes *in addition* to the locations which cross over between modes, an entirely new, canon story with high quality voice acting and motion capture for the cutscenes and written by the guy who did Spec Ops, and an entire dev team dedicated to it.

Yeah sounds like table scraps, you're definitely entitled to more

Gamers:It's a myth that gamers keep asking for more, increased development costs is ALL on pubs and devs!

*Dev makes a sequel with three times the content of the original game in just the MP AND a 4-6 hour SP mode made by a different studio, with a competent writer because the story is canon, and production values that surpass literally every other game this year let alone any other game in the series*

Also Gamers: MOAR

No shit, huh. Some people need to fucking get a hold of themselves.
 

Some Nobody

Junior Member
Gamers:It's a myth that gamers keep asking for more, increased development costs is ALL on pubs and devs!

*Dev makes a sequel with three times the content of the original game in just the MP AND a 4-6 hour SP mode made by a different studio, with a competent writer because the story is canon, and production values that surpass literally every other game this year let alone any other game in the series*

Also Gamers:
tenor.gif

Well, it's absolutely not a myth that gamers keep asking for more. We do that all the time.

Having said that. You really shouldn't buy games like these if you only care about SP. That's not what this game exists for. SP is the cherry on top of the MP. Treat it like anything else and you'll be disappointed.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
This is why AAA developers fill in their games with so much garbage, because the gamers are looking just at numbers. 5 hours campaign? Unacceptable! Add at least 5 hours of useless shit to it to even think about buying it. /s
 

J_Viper

Member
When it comes to linear shooters, I think the leaner the experience, the better. Even TNO and Doom '16 outstayed their welcome after a while.

I hope this is great. I'll certainly check out the campaign whenever it hits the EA Vault, because the MP was straight trash
 

jacobeid

Banned
Titanfall 2's single player wasn't much longer, but was the best fps campaign I can think of in about a decade.

Yup, I don't see this inherently being an issue.

Are the 5-7 hours fun? Does it tell a good story?
Much more important than just the length of the game.
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Sounds like a slapped together short campaign to appease people.

Really hope the MP is good enough to warrant $60 but this doesn't really bode well for the game.

Well they Janina Gavankar hired to do the mocap and voice acting so atleast they put some effort into it cuz otherwise they could ahve just made some quick generic character and got voice actress 31 to do the acting.....that would have been "slapped together"

P.S She is really into gaming and tech in general.
She is one of my favorite personalities.
 
I'm in. Stuff like this and Uncharted Lost Legacy are the kind of lengths I prefer. I'm still chipping away at Persona 5 five months later.
 
Im glad I got this game for nearly 40% off during e3 but 5-8 hours seems appropriate for a fps campaign. Id rather a good and tight star wars campaign rather then a bloated grindy campaign.
 
D

Deleted member 471617

Unconfirmed Member
So basically, 10-14 hours. Nice. I always double what is reported simply because I play on the hard difficulty level, don't skip cut scenes and don't rush the game.
 
I dont mind, since i care more about the online.

However, this game is looking increasingly like a wait for sale sadly.
I bought the first one at launch, and I loved the gameplay, but the constant DLC splitting the player base up, making match making slower and slower really killed the game for me. Glad to hear all DLC will be free this time around, and I honestly dont mind that lootboxes are the payoff for this.

Reviews can still safe this game i feel like. If those 4-7 hours are well made, i prefer that rather than a elongated story mode that pads time.
 
Top Bottom