The dialogue is sharp throughout, and I like that the focus is primarily on new characters. The missions where you take on the roles of familiar characters are mostly good, even if a couple of the soundalikes are miles off-plus, hitting a hundred bugs as Luke Skywalker while another guy slowly activates a door doesn't feel very Star Wars to me. I enjoyed almost all of the spaceship sequences, even if they're largely simple shooting galleries. Sprinting across the top of an Endor base as your squad escapes in separate TIE Fighters is exhilarating, and one world occupied by giant aliens is weird in the best possible way. There's still a lot to enjoy in those few hours, though. If I was a Star Wars fan, buying this game mainly for the promise of EA's first big budget story with the licence (TOR aside)-and those people are bound to exist, given the wide audience that loves these movies-I'd be a little disappointed.
Star Wars Battlefront 2 (opens in new tab)'s campaign took me around five or six hours to finish, and the people on How Long To Beat say they've done it in 4.5.
If singleplayer is still a big part of why you enjoy playing FPS games, then it's hard to justify spending £50/$60 for six hours. The campaigns in shooters like the original Homefront, Battlefield 1 and Titanfall 2 range from 4.5 to six hours in length. For the most part, other developers followed its lead.
Deliver us the moon game length series#
Modern Warfare 2 took 6.5, and the series has lingered there ever since. According to one of my favourite utility sites, How Long To Beat, COD 2 took an average of 8.5 hours to beat. When did five or six hours become the target length for a shooter campaign? I think it was during the journey from Call of Duty 2 to Modern Warfare and then Modern Warfare 2.