Menu Close

Watch Dogs Length: “Doing Everything Is Over 100 Hours”

About how long will it take you to complete Watch Dogs ?

Well, as is typically the case, it'll depend on how much of the game you wish to experience. According to creative director Jonathan Morin, the final gameplay tally will vary widely.

Here's his Twitter reply to the question:

"I would say the average player which does free roam a bit tend to reach the end within 35-40h. But doing everything is close 100h. And these don't really consider online stuff in the mix…"

Morin also confirmed that the anticipated game will boast an 8-player free-roam online mode, which lets players wander about and do as they please. There's a head-to-head multiplayer mode as well, which will test a player's hacking skills to the max. As for the length, doesn't it seem like every open-world game takes "30-40 hours" with "over 100 hours" possible if you tackle everything? I mean, I'm not saying it's an inaccurate estimate; it just feels like the default answer these days.

Watch Dogs is slated to arrive on May 27 for the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and PC. A Wii U version will drop later.

Related Game(s): Watch Dogs

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
10 years ago

That's a lot of stuff, that city better be bigger than they intimated.

10 years ago

well it will certainly find out won't we how long this thing is in gameplay hours.

happy gaming =)

10 years ago

If this is true, I really hope the game is littered with lots of actual missions and not just stuffed full of collectibles and arbitrary challenges. Too many open worlds are wasted, or at least greatly underused, that way.

10 years ago

really hope they have managed to weave life into the city, make it feel alive, and make sure it feels like a true world, like everyone around you is out living their own lives, and believable relatable lives, dont have them just as cardboard cutouts to fill a blank space.
cough infamous!
far too many games feel like there open world just because GTA is open world, and its the best selling franchise out there, so our game needs to be open world too.
its one mentality that is destroying this industry, people look to what a game is and discern its popularity to that, rather than how well it does what it does.
after all GTAV was not GOTY last year because it was a open world crime game, it was GOTY because it really was the best most balanced equal quality in every measurement game released last year, and its one of the best games ever released because to make it better than what it was would be one hell of a task!
most games do 100 things, but poorly.
some games do 2 things, and ok.
very few do 2 things, and do them amazingly.
what made GTAV so amazing was it did 1000000000000000 things, and did them ALL amazingly!

another thing i really want to see from watch dogs, no, all open world games from now on, is fun meaningful side missions.
so many open world games these days have side missions which really do fill like filler, like you have created the best dish out there but its too small, so you pull out some garbage and pop it on the plate to make it look like theres more there.
less really is more, so if your going to bother stuffing your game with side missions they really do need to stand up to the rest of the game.
if they dont, well, seriously, why are they there?
id much rather have a 10 hour game with amazing story and missions, than a 20 hour game with a 10 hours worth of amazing story campaign, and 10 hours worth of crapola!
one thing that really let down the dead island series, there so much fun, but all the missions just feel like filler, even though their main missions they feel all like side missions, and that really spoils the game.
one thing im really worried about with dying light, and playing it last year and speaking to the devs im struggling to see whats different about this.

10 years ago

The fact of the matter is that it's next to impossible to estimate the length of open-world games. For example, it often depends on what order you do stuff in. Early in the game you may not have as awesome skills or equipment as later, and some stuff can take considerably longer time. Or if you do things in an order that requires a lot of travel, or if there are random events in the game that may or may not happen, etc.

So it's almost meaningless to come with an hour count on these games. But of course, the public craves it, so you gotta say *something*.

10 years ago

I don't see how it's next to impossible. There's always a way to estimate an open world. In most cases, they're estimated while doing everything straightforward, in other words the minimum possible.

The estimation here is 5 hour gap, and that's most likely to cover all the variables you are talking about. It should always be longer for those that take their time, and shorter for those that mastered it. Nothing wrong with estimating.

10 years ago

There's nothing *wrong* with estimating, but compared to a game where everything is laid out in a fixed order it really is not the same to do an estimation on these kind of games. How much time you spend from the beginning to the end will by the very nature of these games vary a LOT, even from each individual play-through.

In open world games there typically are a lot of random factors that come into play, everything from other mobs who just happen to help you in unexpected (and totally random) ways, or cars who happened to spawn on the road and thus hinder the car you are supposed to catch up with or whatever.

Point is, when not everything is pre-scripted but random events do come into play, and the order of which you do things is to a degree up to the player, in addition to the sheer volume of content in these games, you can't really do any precise estimation. Theoretically the very same player could spend a different length of time each time he plays it.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x