Hey guys,

I'm on my third Character at the moment. I've probably clocked up near enough on 500hrs spread over all of them, and I've been thinking lately. Where is the 300hrs+ of game play they spruked?

Now, don't get me wrong. Yes I've clocked up allot. But its largely from repeating the same actions over and over. Allot were spent in the hope I may find some substance under the surface of Skyrim, in the guise of lore/history which really ended in disappointment.

I've done all the guild's with a character, the main quest and civil war. I've done the Daedric quests and run through a more ruins then I care to remember done as many random side quests as I could find and I don't think I cracked 200hrs with that character. Now I didn't run EVERYWHERE, but nor did I fast travel to every location (usually just fast travelled if I knew there was nothing to encounter between me and my location) frankly thats beside the point. Time spent running from one side of the map to the other isn't quality game time...

Now, I'm not one to faff about during quests. I set off to do them and I complete them. I don't run through as fast as I can, I often spent a good amount of time trying to find rare items/books or other various possibly interesting stuff. That in its self is turning out to be a wasted effort yet again. (Skyrim seems to suffer the same loot issue that Oblivion did...)

What am I missing?
Because a genuine 300hrs+ of content is really starting seem like a giant stretch at this point.

Does it matter? 500 hours is about 470 more hours than even the most content packed titles will give you today. Also....how are people already reaching these absurd amounts of playtime?!!?! I've played on 360 and PC using 3 different characters and I still am only around 120-130 hours. On my longest playthrough, would have to say the 70+ hours on 360, I have only really stuck with the MQ and am only at the point where you begin to encounter the other guilds. I have gone through about 40 dungeons or so, but I would say that 300 hours of genuine content is probably pretty close to the truth.

I totally agree with you, OP, and I'm not sure where or how Bethesda got its numbers.

300hrs is almost assuming that we're walking (not jogging, or running) to every location and stopping at every little cave in between, or something.

I wouldn't.
500hrs over three characters. The main quests lines (MQ, Civil war, Companions and College) barely knock on the 100hr mark. If at all.

I'm not complaining don't take it the wrong way. I'm just wondering if they counted standing still watching the sky animations for a week as game content?

I'm at 160+ right now with my dunmer, he's already beaten the MQ, Mage's college, and the companions, plus I have plenty of quests and misc quests not even completed. (Not to mention the civil war quest) It really boils down to what one does with their time in-game. When I first started I had a daily schedule of chopping 120 wood for 600+ septums and would usually run to where ever I needed to go, now I just use my horse, I would fast travel when I wanted to get somewhere quick (Like when I needed to sell off my stuff, or to bypass a redundant trip) so I've yet to reach 300 myself, but I consider this game well advertised with the 300 hour gameplay.

But you're only at 160hrs after doing unnecessary tasks?
What would it be if you had simply "played the game", as such as I mean the quests and designed story's within the game.

I mean, If I made a game set in a medieval period where you could chop wood all day and sell food for a living. But had no actual story or point, could I then too say it has a possible 300hrs+ of game content?

I really do not understand your argument....you say you have played for 500 hours and yet you wonder where 300 hours of content comes from. Perhaps that number includes multiple characters? RPGs are meant to be played multiple times so that one can make a new character build and see how the game unfolds differently so it would make sense a number make include the time it takes you to play with a different character. I don't know why anyone put much emphasis on the estimated hour count( especially people who have met or surpassed that amount) everyone will play the game a different way, if you get the most out of the time you put in then it should not matter.

Making multiple characters can't be counted to the over all game content!

That's like saying a movie goes for 14hrs if you watch it seven times.

Now this is outlandish! Clearly you do not understand Bethesda's style of game developement. Give me a single game or developer today that could fill a 300 hour game without any "filler" or "uneccesary" tasks? Most can't even reach the 15-30 hour mark while still offering pointless side objectives. I would say 100 hours for quests, maybe another 60-70 hours worth of dungeon crawling and a indistinguishable amount of time doing pretty much whatever would equal up to a pretty accurate estimate.

Not if the movie focused on a different character each time! Also, how many games have you played that count changing the difficulty level as content? I have played shooters where easy,medium and hard mode give way to a "new" game that is slightly more difficult than the other 3. Stop [censored]ing and accept that you got your monies worth.

I've reached over 350+ hours of gameplay too and i agree with you. I am pretty sure they were talking about one playthrough and not multiple like some people say and that is a little dissapointing. I feel like Oblivion lasted longer on one playthrough than Skyrim did. I'll have to agree with the fact that Skyrim has a lot more hours of gameplay than many other games that are sold at the same price ofc

It IS playing the game, that's the point of Bethesda's games to immerse yourself into it, what I do is to roleplay in the game, but it doesn't matter because that's how I play, if you want to only play it like a typical action RPG like diablo, then no, you won't get 300 hours.

Besides, the tasks aren't unnecessary, because you gain something from it, you could go to the first mine you encounter and loot it for all it's worth, or you could chop wood for 600 septums the choice is yours, and that's the point of Bethesda's games, it's all about choice.

The general fanbase cried out for a higher quality and slightly less quantity. I think that is what Skyrim has given us. The quests are shorter, but I feel they are more unique and interesting. There are fewer dungeons, but with each dungeon I feel a sense of adventure because they are more unique, both in level design and some that contain dungeon specific stories and adventures. I would have to say that although you may have spent 40-50 less hours in Skyrim that in Oblivion ( personally I feel I havent) the hours you did have were of a higher quality.

No one can develop a true 300hrs of game content. But then I don't know of anyone else to make that very same claim - do you?


This is a nonsense reply.
If the movie followed a different character each time, then it would have to have more content. But with TES games the different characters all go through the same plot and questline.


Oblivion did last longer and the MQ was better - which is a horrible admission to make.

The dificulty level you set (both via the difficulty slider and in terms of how optimal or specialized your build is) has a big impact on how long the gameplay takes. As an extreme example if you played on master with a swordsman who only wears clothes and doesn't use sneak, companions or any magic then many dungeons would take 30 times longer than using an optimal build on adept. I'm not saying you need to play like that but if you did it would probably be thousands of hours of gameplay just because you would never reach a point of being godlike and even in the late game each fight would need strategy, tactical withdrawals etc. It seems fair to say that on a first playthrough without knowing what skills synergize etc then 300 is pretty reasonable.

I agree, the content IS better quality then Oblivion with out a doubt.

I was simply musing at the claim of 300hrs of content - there isn't. Not unless you make it up in your head. Which a Developer can't claim as game content.





But that isn't more content, that's just going through the same content really slowly.
Back to my movie anology - lets put the movie on slow mo - now one viewing lasts 14hrs.

You have said that you have 3 characters, you have said that you have played for 500 hundred hours. Using the pidgeonhold principle that means that at least one of your single playthroughs lasted 175 hours, it could also mean that 1 lasted greater than 175 hours and then subsequent playthroughs failed to meet that number. So for you ( and a few like you) the game didnt last as long as you thought it did, but it did last pretty freacking long. It seems that you feel you deserve an exact figure and that is why Bethesda tried to give you one. How about this? Don't believe everything that someone who is trying to sell to you says...

As to your comment about putting a movie on slow-mo....You dont realize that a 4 hour movie like Avatar could have told its story in under and hour? Its not complex, it doesnt require a 4 hour explanation. Filler. Filler is used in everything because we as consumers will never be satisfied with what we are given. Comparing movies and games is never a fair battle because your comparing something that you would pay 10-20 bucks for with a 50-60 dollar purchase. Also they have very different aspects of developement and allocation of resources.

I think you've taken this the wrong way completely mate. I enjoy the game I really do. I just highly doubt that there is a legitimate 300hrs of content as was stated on a few occasions. I don't mind this, the whole thread was more just me musing over the fact. Also 175hrs is a LONG way from 300hrs and as I said - I didn't rush it.

Avatar is probably a really good comparison to Skyrim, in the context we're discussing. As you say filler/padding is whats going on and Skyrim is packed full of it or at least needs to be to meet the claims made by the developers.

I guess the phrase "All fluff and no balls" could be used to describe both Avatar and Skyrim.

I think 300 hours is reasonable, especially if you don't fast travel.
My initial character completed the MQ at about 150 hours. With that character, I never touched Thieves' Guild, Dark Brotherhood, Civil War, most Daedric Quests and several other common filler Quests like Oghma Infinium, Atronach Forge et al.
Didn't complete Mages College so no Mzfult (or whatever it's called) and Labyrinthan. Also didn't track down all the Dragon Priest Masks which I assume would happen naturally if one completed all quests
Throw those extra questlines in, as well as eliminating a lot of fast travel and exploring to fill out the rest of the map and we're probably pushing another 30 - 50 hours.
Now I know that's not 300, but it's still over 200 without repeating any quests. Sure there a lot of sameness to walking through the same areas, fighting the same enemies and possible endless fetch quests, but a lot of unique action happens in there as well.
Like OP said, they've put in 500+ hours. Personally Ive just gone over 300 with 4 characters total and not a lot of overlap in playstyle.
I was amazed in my second run through (started when I was at about 100 hours into my first) that I was finding whole new landscapes that my first cgaracter never saw.
After 100 hours, there was still newness in the game. I can easily see still finding things at this point after 300
Perhaps they overstated it, depending on playstyle, but even if there is not "actually" 300 hours of content, I feel I more than got my money's worth.

the reality of the situation: you're [censored]ing about a technicality. get over it.

Yeah, I don't feel ripped off at all. Heck, at least its not Oblivion...

That game was longer, but only because they sent you from one side of the map to the other in just about every quest. Which is even worse then what Skyrim does

But Skyrim does have the balls. I for one, would have bought the game without some arbitrary digit that told me how many hours the game had. That is due to the fact that I know how Bethesda games work and I know how I would play them. However, If I was new to Bethesda games and did not understand the scope, an arbitrary number may help put it into perspective. Ultimately, as with anything, the game will last as long as one makes it. If I add mods, I am getting more hours than if I quit once I had finished the vanilla content. If I buy DLC, then I get more. If I take my time and roleplay, then I get even more. If you want to use your movie anology look at it like this.

A film buff could watch the same movie 3 times and say, for that entirety of the 12 hours, that he found something new each time he watch the movie. Where another movie goer will only enjoy and watch the movie once. Another fan may purchase the DVD and get the movie and a couple of deleted scenes, hence the "more content". And yet even another may purchase the special edition box set and get the whole movie dubbed over by director commentary. One may argue it is the same movie in any of the situations, but to each of the movie watchers, "content" means something different. Sure, its the same movie, but its the way you watch it that matters.

Yeah, I see your point. But I think that comes back to making things happen in your head rather then there actually being anything there. Which is fine - I do that too.
But the thing is, I've played RPG's since I was about 8 or 9. I'm 24 now.
I grew up playing games like Final Fantasy six, Tales of phantasia, Chrono trigger, The later Final fantasies. The first TES I play was Morrowind.

Now in comparison to these titles, do you think Skyrim really stacks up in terms of depth and content?
I'm not saying its a bad game - far from it. But IMO it doesn't really have the same substance.

I played a mage with NO fast travel and without abusing the crafting skills (100000 level ups making daggers) and I can honestly say I reached 300 hours and still had places I never went to....

now its almost 3 months since the game came out and I'm on my 13th playthrough, and the only game that grabbed me this long was MW...

No wonder, I can now see where you're coming from!

I remember putting in 89 hours into FF3 (FF6 in Japan) but most of that was leveling my characters (All of em' even beast-boy) so they had 9999 hps! But the game WAS $89 so I thought I got a great deal. JRPGs are outstanding for character development and you can also relate to them somewhat more than most western RPGs BGII Feargus Urquhart' s games being the exception (Feargus Urquhart who himself was heavily influenced by JRPGs!)

Most western RPGs are more focused on the storyline and game mechanics rather than Character's personality and personal stories. Have you tried Emma's mod http://lovkullen.net/Emma/Vilja.htmyet? This would be an excellent mod for skyrim!


I must reiterate that most WRPGs aren't as focused on characters but not all.