Just let me pre-order already, EU PSN.
5-6 hours is great, assuming, obviously, that it's priced like a 5-6 hour game.
$19.99 on PC, $2.99 on iPad, ez.How would you expect a 5-6 hour game to be priced though? Journey was 2 hours max and I think I paid £12 for that. Everybody's Gone to the Rapture supposedly lasts 5-6 hours and I think that was £16 on launch. Both are lavish and unique experiences though, and IMO utterly worth the asking price.
Hopefully this mindset dies soon.
It's a MOBA.What is Firewatch?
Seriously, 5-6hrs is fine by me.
This mindset should not die at all. WAIT.... Are you implying that this game, estimated at five to six hours of completion time, is worthy of the full retail price? With that said, none of us understand the amount of time these developers commit to this project. It's easy to sit back and suggest they charge x amount but we need them to keep producing quality content so support them.
The mindset is a result of the time we live in. Whatever your perspective all of us agree that this game has better replay value than The Bouncer at launch. Game was full price and lasted a very short amount of time.
Basically this.Sounds good to me so long as the quality is as high as what we've seen so far.
What is this game.
Official website said:In Firewatch you play as a man named Henry who has retreated from his messy life to work as a fire lookout in the Wyoming wilderness. Perched high atop a mountain, its your job to look for smoke and keep the wilderness safe. An especially hot, dry summer has everyone on edge. Your supervisor, a woman named Delilah, is available to you at all times over a small, handheld radio and is your only contact with the world you've left behind.
But when something strange draws you out of your lookout tower and into the world, youll explore a wild and unknown environment, facing questions and making interpersonal choices that can build or destroy the only meaningful relationship you have.
It's a MOBA.
And yet 'hours' with a 's'. How can it be ?
It's so funny to me how a game like The Order 1886 gets absolutely slammed for being 6 hours long yet games like this get a pass. Yes, I'm aware about the price difference, but length shouldn't be used as a negative when determining the quality of an experience (as long as it does its purpose correctly).
This mindset should not die at all. WAIT.... Are you implying that this game, estimated at five to six hours of completion time, is worthy of the full retail price? With that said, none of us understand the amount of time these developers commit to this project. It's easy to sit back and suggest they charge x amount but we need them to keep producing quality content so support them.
The mindset is a result of the time we live in. Whatever your perspective all of us agree that this game has better replay value than The Bouncer at launch. Game was full price and lasted a very short amount of time.
It's so funny to me how a game like The Order 1886 gets absolutely slammed for being 6 hours long yet games like this get a pass. Yes, I'm aware about the price difference, but length shouldn't be used as a negative when determining the quality of an experience (as long as it does its purpose correctly).
Moving on, I am super excited for this game, the length is absolutely fine and not every game needs VR. I'm in for this day 1 as long as it gets good impressions.
It's so funny to me how a game like The Order 1886 gets absolutely slammed for being 6 hours long yet games like this get a pass. Yes, I'm aware about the price difference, but length shouldn't be used as a negative when determining the quality of an experience (as long as it does its purpose correctly).
Moving on, I am super excited for this game, the length is absolutely fine and not every game needs VR. I'm in for this day 1 as long as it gets good impressions.
It's so funny to me how a game like The Order 1886 gets absolutely slammed for being 6 hours long yet games like this get a pass. Yes, I'm aware about the price difference, but length shouldn't be used as a negative when determining the quality of an experience (as long as it does its purpose correctly).
I talked to one of the Firewatch devs at PSX about Rift Support, and I can't give you the exact quote, but this is what he told me:
The team had a prototype version up and running using a VR headset (I think it was the vive, might've been psvr) but all the scripted first person scenes caused horrible motion sickness.
The game isn't well-suited to VR at all. Yes it's first person, yes it's a neat atmosphere that would be cool to see in VR, but the game's scripted sequences make it a complete miss for VR.
The idea of VR has definitely come up on the team but trust me when I say there's just no obvious way to do it, haha. That doesn't mean there isn't any way to do it ever under any circumstances, just that all the specifics of our first-person exploration and animation and interactions were 100% built for normal-ass video game assumptions of "you're playing this on a monitor or TV with mouse/keyboard or controller" and it would require a LOT of rethinking and rejiggering to alter those core assumptions. Obviously any post-launch plans depend almost entirely on how the game is received and what there's demand for, etc.
Glad to see people in this thread are excited though!
It's so funny to me how a game like The Order 1886 gets absolutely slammed for being 6 hours long yet games like this get a pass. Yes, I'm aware about the price difference, but length shouldn't be used as a negative when determining the quality of an experience (as long as it does its purpose correctly).