Reviews are out!

Length has quite a lot to do with quality or potential. Journey is beloved because it is only about 2 hours long. It is not a game with enough to it that could sustain itself for 10 hours of play. Other games, such as Persona 4, are beloved because it reaches near triple digit hour figures. The relationships forged with characters in that game are also dear to the player as they come to be because of the shear amount of time one spends interacting with them. Nanako is Nanako because you spend near 200 nights hearing her say "Welcome home, big bro!", and when she is suddenly absent, the wrongness is all the more significant.

@jazz_bcaz: Length and execution are intertwined. They are not mutually exclusive.

Okay, what I was trying to say is, things that deserve to be short, should be short.

That doesn't negate their quality, unlike something that should have been short, being 60 hours long.

Now we're just arguing the same point. May I remind you.

@jazz_bcaz: I'm perfectly within my right to choose not to play a game because I personally find it too short. I'm not forcing or expecting others to agree. Child of Light is not what I personally want out of RPGs. You're free to play and enjoy it, if that's what you wish, but not everyone need feel the same way.

Give me a 10 hour "J"RPG with a gorgeous, unique visual style, solid gameplay and a good story any day over a 70 hour RPG with cut-and-paste characters from every other JRPG and a story that's been told dozens of times.

Persona 4 is among my favorite games of all time because it isn't The universe is exploding and you (an amnesiac) and the princess must return the crystals to the crystal...machine before CLEARLY EVIL GUY NO ONE SUSPECTED dooms us all with his army of demons! It has a pretty small-scale story compared to a lot of the FF games but it manages to keep it interesting enough to go on for 90+ hours. If the writers decided that Child of Light, a $15 game, would be better served with a shorter storyline rather than one that needlessly stretches an extra 40 hours, way to go them.

You baffle me. I'm not even suggesting that.

@jazz_bcaz: Then what were you suggesting with that quote?

You don't need to write somethings ability to provide depth and meaningful exploration based purely on it's length. Eclectic taste is a good thing.

@jazz_bcaz: But I can say I'd rather play games that are longer and provide just as eclectic of a range.

Cool. I haven't really sought out any information about this game, but it wouldn't take much for me to try it out at $15.

@hailinel: Quick question: Is length the only reason you won't get this? That's pretty shallow, dude. Ten hours is more than enough time for story.

Ubisoft developed. The Creative Director was behind Far Cry 3.

Being cynical and over-analysing games is what all the cool kids are doing though!

@steadyingmeat: The Rayman games were at a reduced price from the start. About $40 I think.

Not the only reason, really. But this thread was the first time I had heard about its length, which is why I reacted as I did. Frankly I'm so overloaded on my backlog right now that as a game that's even bordering on my interest, I have no real inclination to buy it at the price that it is. Between Final Fantasy X, Bravely Default (which I have been meaning to get back to for a while now), the possibility of at least trying to play X-2 again (I didn't like it back in the day, but I might as well give it a second shot now), Last Mission, and Drakengard 3 which releases next month, I am RPGed up for the time being. Child of Light doesn't fit into that, even at the length that it is, primarily because the game never caught my interest enough to enter my list of desired games. I didn't even realize that the game comes out this week until until about a week ago. If I want something shorter to play, I'd rather play a game of a different genre at this point if only to give myself a breather from all of the RPGs that are sitting on top of me at the moment. (Games like Ground Zeroes and DW8 Complete were perfect for that before I started in on FFX.)

Basically, Child of Light came out at the worst possible time of the year for me to have any inclination to play it. Maybe later this year after I've gotten through other games on my must play list, I'll sit down and give it the weekend that it takes to beat, but until then, I have plenty of other games that I have more desire to play.

It says it comes out the 30th everywhere, but it's already available on PSN. Anyone know anything about that day-1 DLC? Another quest and character for $3?

I'm installing the demo now.

Yo, show me a 10-hour RPG that manages to reach a level of mechanical depth on par with FFXIII or FFT or Bravely Default.

Then come back to me and tell me game length doesn't matter.

EDIT: That said, I might actually pick up the game now that I know Aegies was the Polygon reviewer.

Not to dwell on this, but the 10-hour mark being an issue is still so weird to me. I've beaten many RPGs and their length didn't make their mechanics anymore nuanced then, say, an action game that is 8-10 hours long. It's what you do in the time you have that matters. And most of the reviews suggest they do enough in the time given. So why would people want to stick to an arbitrary rule for a genre? Stubbornness like that often leads to genres becoming stale.

hehe, Polygon is always off. Don't worry they will change that any second now.

I was really interested in the game until I saw that it isn't really turn based, it is another one of these weird pseudo real time systems. I really have been sick of those for years now. I don't want to press A again after I picked my attack at "just the right time" so I "hit harder". Save that for Pokemon red and blue.

At least it is decent looking? I guess?

The closest I can really think of in terms of an RPG of this length is, again, Costume Quest. It's a cute game with a silly premise, but it's dull as hell. It has a very rote turn-based RPG combat system that is introduced at the start and then doesn't really make for anything meaningful. The gam is basically just going door to door and fighting monsters. It's such a drab experience that I couldn't be bothered to play more than the first area. The fact that a Costume Quest 2 is being made is actually kind of baffling, because the first game is a lot of nothing. It's a short, simplistic game that offers a dull, simplistic narrative that relies exclusively on the premise of trick-or-treating kids in the guises of their costumes fighting monsters. And that's it. If there's anything more to that game, it does a piss-poor job of introducing before tedium sets in.

The best RPGs that I've played are games that take dozens of hours to complete. That give you time to experience the characters and worlds while growing their abilities over time and mastering the nuances of the combat system. Child of Light may offer a narrative that's fit to its length and its gameplay may be tailored for that length as well, but in the time that it takes to complete that game, I've just barely escaped Midgar in Final Fantasy VII, met some fantastic characters, had plenty of interesting encounters and adventures, and yet have the vast majority of the game left to explore and get even more out of as the game's battles grow more difficult, the party grows more powerful, and the plot becomes more involved. Chrono Trigger is relatively short as RPGs go; the endgame can be accessed before thirty hours have elapsed, but that game is structured in such a way that to get the most out of it, players can play it over and over again. On the other hand, The Last Story can be beaten in about twenty or so hours, and that game feels like it should have been substantially longer. The characters demanded more time, the the world they establish is largely unexplored, and the endgame is a very rushed conclusion. There are some optional things here and there that can pad the time played out a little bit, but the actual bulk of the game, the primary story, needed more time. It has the makings of a forty hour RPG crammed into twenty. That being said, the game's characters, story, and mechanics kept me hooked for a good twenty-five hours despite the flaws.

Child of Light sounds like a one-and-done ten hours, which, while it might be a fun ten hours, honestly doesn't sound like that much of an experience, as good as it may be. It might have good pacing, writing, and gameplay, but as RPGs go, it's a length that feels like a blip compared to the absolute best that the genre has produced.

Unfortunate that this thread was hijacked by some random gripes about length regardless of people having not played it. It's not like they pulled a Ground Zeroes and the game is only a hour or two for $30. It's 10+ hours for half that price.

If people play and feel its worth it, as most of these reviewers seem to have, then it may indeed be an appropriate length for the content. Depending on the type of story, a shorter length may actually be optimal. Not every movie needs to be three hours, and not every book needs to be a few hundred pages.

That aside, I do look forward to eventually playing it. It still hasn't really grabbed me, but it sounds like it's solid. And in a time with a lot of bigger games to get through, having a shorter, more concentrated experience might be a nice change of pace.

@believer258: you mean you keep thonging?

I think it looks great, for 15 bucks it's a safe deal.

Cheers!

@amikron: Not sure what system you are describing. I've been playing for about an hour or two now and just reached the second area I guess you could say.

Combat has some interesting nuances to it. I haven't seen anything quite like what you are describing in terms of hitting a button at a certain time to hit harder? But they do have a clever system where attacking a target at the right time can interrupt/delay their action. And by "at the right time" I mean you want use a certain action and try to predict and manipulate the timing in certain ways so that your action is performed before the target's action is but still while the target is casting.

Tricky to explain but obvious when you see it in action. Provides an interesting twist to the standard RPG battle system as you're juggling your thoughts as whether to attack something that is perhaps weak to your attack element thus maximizing damage, attack a different target because you might be able to interrupt it thus delaying damage taken and possibly killing them, defend because a target might get their action off before you can interrupt them etc.

Yea it's like a active time battle system or whatever its called from FF7 or something. Except being able to interrupt changes things up a bit.

Again, sounds complicated or dumb but in action it has made every fight pretty interesting for me so far.

@seikenfreak: The stuff about interrupting enemy actions sounds nice. That was one of the coolest thing about the Grandia games, and I've always wondered why more semi real-time RPGs, like certain Final Fantasies, haven't incorporated something similar.

Every RPG should be like Grandia.

One of the best looking games I have ever seen.

This doesn't seem very good, but I can't figure out why. It should be right up my alley since I like both fairy tales and rpgs. I think maybe its because they seem to have made an RPG designed for people who don't like RPGs. I should probably play this to back up my accusations I suppose.

Those of you on the fence, there is a demo. I just played it before buying just to be sure. It seems fun. 10 hours of that seems worth it to me. Sucks to see a discussion about the game be so focused on it's length and nothing else. It's $15. If you don't think 10 hours of entertainment (assuming you like it) is worth $15, then I can't help you. I try to enjoy things without breaking down the cost per minute. Play the demo and you'll immediately know if it's something you'll enjoy, regardless of length.

I like a long game, but I don't personally care for an extra 30+ hours of fluff, travel, and grinding that doesn't add anything to the core experience. Most JRPGs don't need to be as long as they are.

I generally prefer 40+ hour RPGs but shorter RPGs can be just fine too.

Thats where people always lose me - how can you argue that the length of a game doesn't matter and then turn around and say "well at least it wasn't as short as that other game you know, the one that was way too short where we didn't apply this logic!"

If fair-is-fair then we shouldn't be making any sort of criticisms about length ever right? Ground Zeros could be 1 hour long and cost $60 but according to this logic of complete subjectivity that's freed from the shackles of gamelength and such it should be irrelevant, because everyone's enjoyment will vary right?

Sorry for the derail - just dunno how come only certain games are ok to be short where others aren't. Gone Home was even shorter than Ground Zeros and arguably wasn't much of a game, and it only cost $10 less - yet it was the crowning achievement of video gaming. Yet MGS is ham fisted, short and too expensive. Despite being told by game critics that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and there is no right or wrong, it's somehow this specific status quo that became accepted in the industry. But now I've completely gone off the rails so if you want to continue this discussion reply to me in PM instead of taking up space here.

@seikenfreak: Yeah that kind of ATB stuff is exactly what I've been tired of since the SNES era. I play turn based games for the turn based part. If I wanted action rpgs I'd play an action rpg. Oh well.

So apparently there's already Dragon Age style party member DLC. What makes it even more funny is that it literally involves a golem. This is the worst type of DLC, man. I can't find it on Steam, though, only on PSN.

EDIT: Holy crap, the game has a skip battle intros option. Best JRPG ever. Still not digging the whole rhyming thing, though.

From what I understand the gameplay is inspired by Final Fantasy and Grandia. The look of the game was inspired by Ghibli and Amano. I'm not sure where you got the idea that the look was inspired by Final Fantasy VI.

Surprised to see such positive reception, because the first review I read is from Kill Screen and it was a 57% review. It's not a negative review, but it made me think that the game would be more divisive.

The Final Fantasy VI influence is literally the first thing they said, when they started showing off the game.

Well that's probably the stupidest spam message I've seen in a while.

Whatcha got against dog poo?

Child of Light does look really good though and I will eventually end up buying it. I just want to support the type of game it represents and I want Ubisoft to continue to use that engine because so far the results are amazing. Valiant Hearts is next isn't it?

Good one. Thank you, sir (or madam!)

@humanity: I can understand the confusion. I think Ground Zeroes could be considered worth it, and that doesn't necessarily reflect on the game's inherent quality. People's time is their time. I just mean that $15 for a game like Child of Light is pretty palatable in the cost vs content weighing people often do; though, as I said, that isn't really something that has to do with its real quality, as someone making that judgment call likely hasn't played it yet.

I went on to note that you'd need to play the game and then decide for yourself whether it was "worth it". When discussing reviews as we are here, though, it's unfortunate that we're talking about the value proposition vs quality and assumptions made regarding how long a certain genre needs to be. Maybe it is indeed too short for what it sets out to be, but I can't say that without playing it. Like a movie, it may sound short for the concept, but we don't really know until we see it.

Everybody should listen to this guy.

Someone should just make another proper Grandia.

Did they say gameplay or look?

This man speaks the truth!

They didn't specify. When they first showed the game, they said they drew inspiration from FFVI. I guess they meant they had FFVI's lead character designer come up with something cool for them to riff off. And it's JRPGish - so that's that.

I honestly can't say I've seen anything regarding this game that I find reminiscent of Final Fantasy VI save for the involvement of Yoshitaka Amano. But I did find this link that does reference the comparison that Ubisoft made, specifically calling out the Final Fantasy VI-style battling. Now, when I think of Final Fantasy VI's combat, I think of the Active Time Battle system, sure, but I also think of how many player characters that the game had, the depth of options that were made available, and the number of ways that the player could manipulate elements like character stats and magic through the way character growth was handled. From what I understand of Child of Light, the game has none of that. There's an ATB-style combat system that has some superficial elements in common with FFVI's approach, but it sounds more or less like Final Fantasy VI was name-dropped to draw interest without paying heed to what actually makes that particular game so special to so many people.

You're still judging the depth of a games mechanics based off it's length and not experience. I thought we went over this but you still seem to cling on to the notion that loads and loads of content = loads and loads of depth, which isn't exactly what we're all looking for.

Super Meat Boy is a deep game with simple mechanics that do not change throughout. Divekick is a deep game based on the dumbest premise ever and fighting game in jokes. Both of these games are successful. Why does an RPG have to be any different? Why do they have to be arbitrarily complex?

If you can't think of many short RPGs that you enjoy, why aren't you excited at the possibility this game, that is clearly heavily influenced by your primary genre, might be something new to you?

I'm sorry to keep prodding but just *throws arms up in the air*.

PS: PS Store should be updating in Europe tomorrow. Plan on giving it a go ASAP. Hope it's excellent.

That particular sentence you quoted was in reference to Final Fantasy VI as a whole, not just its combat. I never equated the notion that loads of content is indicative of loads of depth. I've played deep games that last a short while and shallow games that are of significant length, and I prefer deep games that are of a significant length. There doesn't need to be an arbitrary complexity, but all the same, Child of Light is not a game that I am looking at, certainly not at the moment, anyway.

And I've already stated why I'm not excited by Child of Light. I have other RPGs that I have far more interest in playing at this point in time, and I've already named them. You ask me why the length is such a determining factor in my not playing it, and it's really not. It's a factor, sure, but it's not the sole defining one.

Why does it matter to you so much whether I choose to play Child of Light or not? Ever since you posted your disagreement with my assessment of Lightning Returns, you seem to have this oddly combative attitude toward me.