Paddington Game Lengths

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, it's not like ticket prices are in direct correlation with film length.
It can get really pricey with films like the new Hobbit movies, though. Mark-ups for length, 3d and framerate all get stacked on top of each other in a case like that. And on top of all that you still have to suffer through 40 minutes worth of shitty commercials you've most likely all seen multiple times before if you are at least a semi-regular movie goer.
 
MrFox said:
Isn't that kind of site victim of ballot stuffing?
Click to expand...
How so? The results are tied to individual users and you can see the full list of results. Unless people are using fake accounts en masse, it should be representative. You can also click users to see their history. Although some submissions are unnamed.

At least it's 42,000 times more representative than a single YT video of a game. ;)
 
You're trusting people to accurately record times. A video has the benefit of being second-for -second, outside of editing shenanigans.

Edit: a specific category for "first-run" would be interesting, along with an indication of how they tried to play it (e.g. straight through, or completionist etc). Stats for replay would be good too!
 
Shifty Geezer said:
I'm trying to address your use of the word 'padding' as if it's something people should/do avoid. Lots of gamers will indulge in all the gameplay facets of a game, meaning they all contribute to the play time. If one person skips them, that doesn't make the game shorter. Like skipping desert in a fixed 3-course meal. One person skipping the desert doesn't mean it's not there for everyone else to enjoy.

If he wanted to be the first person on the world to get a TO playthrough on YouTube, and he set it to easy mode to enable this where he'd otherwise play it on a harder mode and savour the game more, then yes, it's rushing.
Click to expand...
It's more like ordering an extra salad in addition to the 3 course meal. This guy didn't skip the ending, he followed the game's path through and through. Did he ever confirmed what difficulty was he playing the game on? If he did play it on easy, is rushing the only possible justification? Maybe he wanted the cinematic experience to be as intended, without redoing the same sections over and over again?

Shifty Geezer said:
It's subjective. Personally, I find the collectibles annoying. I find it stupid to be trapped in a burning building and yet, instead of running for the exit, loitering around looking for trinkets. It's a story breaker, but one I tend to participate in because it's there! However, my views don't represent everyone's. It'd be wrong of me to say collectibles like that are padding. They may be redundant for me, but not for others. So in determining a game's length, we can only describe what it is for ourselves given our play styles and preferences. That's why play lengths have a range.
Click to expand...
Under that logic nothing can ever be considered padding -_-.
 
To be fair, the main story of Skyrim could be completed in 40 mins.

Basically 99% of that game would be "padding" by L.Schofield's definition.

I took more than 350hrs of gametime to get nearly 70%(maybe) complete on that game. And I still never finshed the main story.

The vast majority of gamers just aren't going to finish TO in 5hrs. So it's a little silly to claim that is the "standard" or "average" game length.
 
Prophecy2k said:
To be fair, the main story of Skyrim could be completed in 40 mins.

Basically 99% of that game would be "padding" by L.Schofield's definition.
Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't. Completing Skyrim in 40 minutes is proper speed running. Even if you ignore the call of the open world, you're still looking at a solid 15-20 hours worth of stuff if it's your first time. That comparison is about as nonsensical as the Resident Evil one. Sure, you can finish RE in a little over an hour, but you'll have to put in some 20+ hours at least before you can even hope to pull off a feat like that. (at which point you still haven't touched the second playable character)
Also, Skyrim's side quests in general aren't of the throwaway kind. Comparing the Thieve's Guild to a useless coin someone hid behind a rock a mere 6 feet off of the critical path is a little insulting to the work Bethesda put into the game.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
No, it's subjective. What's padding for one person isn't for another.
Click to expand...
You're mixing two different ideas: whether something is padding or not AND whether padding can be enjoyed by some or not.

A distraction that simply stretches the length of the game without adding anything of significance is padding. Random collectibles are padding.
 
Is a LBP doll significant? Does it add to the gameplay? No. Does it add to the story? No. Is it a distraction to stretch the game? Yes.
 
L. Scofield said:
You're mixing two different ideas: whether something is padding or not AND whether padding can be enjoyed by some or not.

A distraction that simply stretches the length of the game without adding anything of significance is padding. Random collectibles are padding.
Click to expand...
You're abritrarily assigning gameplay as padding or not. Collectibles is a gameplay feature. So is shooting everyone. So is sneaking around without killing anyone. So is exploring the scenery (Infamous comes to light with its photo mode). Fundamentally, something someone enjoys can't be padding. Padding is by definition unnecessary and unwanted filler, which can't include enjoyable gameplay elements. What definition of 'padding' are you referring to to decide an enjoyable feature shouldn't count towards the time one spends playing a game?
 
Shifty Geezer said:
You're abritrarily assigning gameplay as padding or not. Collectibles is a gameplay feature. So is shooting everyone. So is sneaking around without killing anyone. So is exploring the scenery (Infamous comes to light with its photo mode). Fundamentally, something someone enjoys can't be padding. Padding is by definition unnecessary and unwanted filler, which can't include enjoyable gameplay elements. What definition of 'padding' are you referring to to decide an enjoyable feature shouldn't count towards the time one spends playing a game?
Click to expand...
Let's check a few definitions to see if you're right:

First, Google's:
"superfluous material in a book, speech, etc., introduced in order to make it reach a desired length."

Merriam Webster's:
"unnecessary words used to make a speech or a piece of writing longer"

Oxford's:
"Superfluous or inferior material introduced into or included in a book, speech, etc., in order to make up a required or expected length."

Dictionary.com's:
"something added unnecessarily or dishonestly, as verbiage to a speech or a false charge on an expense account."

Mhh, nothing there about enjoyment. You're attempt at mixing the two ideas as presented above has been refuted. Without the random collectibles the game loses pretty much nothing. They're just there to stretch the game.
 
You know, easter eggs are supposed to be a surprise, they're not supposed to be plastered all over the internet a week before the game is released.
 
L. Scofield said:
Mhh, nothing there about enjoyment.
Click to expand...
Precisely! If someone enjoys it, it's not padding! All the definitions say it's superfluous, unwanted, can do without.

Without the random collectibles the game loses pretty much nothing. They're just there to stretch the game.
Click to expand...
In. Your. OPINION! For others, they are there as a metagame/gameplay feature. See here - the collectibles in Uncharted were the game for MrFox's friend. If some enjoy finding collectibles, the collectibles being added for those persons' enjoyment, they are a gameplay feature and not padding. It is only padding if it serves no purpose and the game can do without. Removing collectibles may not devalue the game for you, but it will others. You may want to skip finding collectibles, but for others they represent part of the value and fun of the game. The website I linked to even had times for different play styles showing this is clearly a matter of personal preference.
 
AlNets said:
There is padding within the doll.

It's just an easter egg.
Click to expand...
I don't remember from the youtube playthrough whether the player had to go out of his way to find it or if it was just lying there in the main path.

MrFox said:
You know, easter eggs are supposed to be a surprise, they're not supposed to be plastered all over the internet a week before the game is released.
Click to expand...
It's like you're new to the internet :LOL:

Shifty Geezer said:
Precisely! If someone enjoys it, it's not padding! All the definitions say it's superfluous, unwanted, can do without.

In. Your. OPINION! For others, they are there as a metagame/gameplay feature. See here - the collectibles in Uncharted were the game for MrFox's friend. If some enjoy finding collectibles, the collectibles being added for those persons' enjoyment, they are a gameplay feature and not padding. It is only padding if it serves no purpose and the game can do without. Removing collectibles may not devalue the game for you, but it will others. You may want to skip finding collectibles, but for others they represent part of the value and fun of the game. The website I linked to even had times for different play styles showing this is clearly a matter of personal preference.
Click to expand...
Since when does superfluous equate unwanted? You're twisting the meaning of words to maintain your denial. Repeating yourself over and over again will not make your argument stronger.

Padding doesn't need to be unenjoyable to be padding therefore something being enjoyable is not proof that it's not padding. Also, you forget the intermediate state between enjoyable and unwanted: irrelevant.

I'm sure you can do better than this.
 
Not sure why anyone is arguing over the semantics of "padding." All that really matters is how much playtime there is, if that's a concern for you. If you don't like to search around for collectibles, or admire the scenery, or listen to every single piece of dialog, then you'll be somewhere close the the minimum. If you like to do all that stuff, you'll be close to the maximum. All you really need to know is the range, it it seems like 5.5 - 12 is the range, including cut scenes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top