People complain about short games.

[JLrep]

Game length is something that comes up a lot in reviews or reactions to a game. People tend to feel that less than ten or twelve hours of single-player in a big-budget, current-gen game is simply criminal (depending on the genre, twenty or forty hours is a more reasonable goal). It's very, VERY easy to find a game that is widely considered to be too short. How easy is it to find a game that's considered too long?

It's pretty easy to find a movie that's too long. Or a book. Easier than it is to find a movie or book that's too short (unless you really need to kill some time). Why is this?

The obvious answer is that new, current-gen games are much more expensive than new books or movies (unless you're taking your whole family out to see the movie). Is this the only reason? I have my own theories, but I'm more interested in hearing your thoughts than monologuing to you.

 

[TundraWolf]

Game length is something that comes up a lot in reviews or reactions to a game. People tend to feel that less than ten or twelve hours of single-player in a big-budget, current-gen game is simply criminal (depending on the genre, twenty or forty hours is a more reasonable goal). It's very, VERY easy to find a game that is widely considered to be too short. How easy is it to find a game that's considered too long?

It's pretty easy to find a movie that's too long. Or a book. Easier than it is to find a movie or book that's too short (unless you really need to kill some time). Why is this?

The obvious answer is that new, current-gen games are much more expensive than new books or movies (unless you're taking your whole family out to see the movie). Is this the only reason? I have my own theories, but I'm more interested in hearing your thoughts than monologuing to you.

I'm not entirely sure why this is. I'm fine with a game having a short gameplay time just so long as it's an enjoyable game. I mean, admittedly, there are things that are just unacceptable. (Terminator: Salvation being three hours long? For shame.) But, in the grand scheme of things, I'm alright if a game has only a ten-hour gameplay time, just so long as it delivers on what has been promised.

I think, as a collective, we've been spoiled by longer games, and now we expect more from developers. I mean, if you look back about ten years ago, the average length of a movie was an hour-and-a-half. Now if it's less than two hours long, we consider it short. Culture, in media and outside of it, evolves over time, and our expectations grow with them. Now, games like GTA IV and Fallout 3 are the average, with huge, world-spanning storylines, and anything less than that is branded "short".

That's my take on the subject, anyways.

 

[Bellvedere]

Well if it's cheap or it has alot of replayability I don't mind so much. But something like portal which was short and brilliant I would never have payed the same for that as a full price game. It was good but after you finish it once it's done. You know how to solve the puzzles and I'm not really a big fan getting record times.

I feel better about spending alot of money on longer titles then many shorter titles too though. Longer titles you get a much greater sense of accomplishment beating them, and you tend to play it over a couple of days, whereas shorter ones you knock off in a night and even if they're not puzzle style games you get less replay value simply because you can beat it in a shorter time and therefore memorize the levels better.

Terminator: Salvation being three hours long? For shame.

Was it really that long? No wonder I was bored out of my mind. I just thought it was because it was terrible.

Uh. My wasted life.

Sorry for the off topic.

 

[JLrep]

Well if it's cheap or it has alot of replayability I don't mind so much. But something like portal which was short and brilliant I would never have payed the same for that as a full price game. It was good but after you finish it once it's done. You know how to solve the puzzles and I'm not really a big fan getting record times.

Well that gets at my question. Why? For instance, I've played Portal; I think (like many people) that it is an absolutely fantastic game. I would trade a dozen full games for it. And not because I've found so much playtime in it; I've played through it once, and done a few of the challenge chambers, so my total time spent playing it probably amounts to six hours or so.

I might make the argument that I simply enjoyed those six hours much more than the, say, forty I spent pushing through FFVII, but the real point is that I feel like the numbers don't even matter.

 

[Fightbulb]

The only game that I found was too long, was Front Mission 3. Jesus Christ, I thought I reached the final stage at least 3 or 4 times.

 

[TwistedEllipses]

Games aren't normally called 'too long', the insult 'repetitive' is a common claim though...

 

[JanatUrlich]

Silent Hill: Origins pissed me off for game length. It just felt extremely short, especially for how much I paid for it.

I did enjoy playing through for the second time with the moon gloves though >=D and the different endings were ok. It's obviously a game that you're meant to play more than once so I can forgive it a little bit

 

[goatzilla8463]

Short games aren't bad. As long as they contain some good, different levels/environments, I'm happy.

Games that are too long kind of piss me off a bit. I love Oblivion but it's just too jam packed full of fun little side quests. I am too much of a completionist not to do them.

 

[Jumping_Over_Fences]

Any game that forces me to take time out of the main story in order to level my character/weapons up, so that I can advance is just trying to stretch game time. I should be able to get stronger naturally and not be forced to take extra time to level up. I see this mostly in JRPGs, and it needs to stop. It does happen else where, it is just more prominent there.

As for too short, I would rather have a few hours of awesome game experience than twenty hours of padded game play (read above paragraph).

 

[Owain Thomas Davies Ellis]

Quake 4 was way too long. All of the weapons where collected and the mandatory plot twist soon lost I's appeal. But that?s a linear FPS, which needs new thing to need our attention.
While fallout 3 however, the main storyline was way too short, and the ending comes out of the blue so you find that cannot play further.

 

[Bellvedere]

Well if it's cheap or it has alot of replayability I don't mind so much. But something like portal which was short and brilliant I would never have payed the same for that as a full price game. It was good but after you finish it once it's done. You know how to solve the puzzles and I'm not really a big fan getting record times.

Well that gets at my question. Why? For instance, I've played Portal; I think (like many people) that it is an absolutely fantastic game. I would trade a dozen full games for it. And not because I've found so much playtime in it; I've played through it once, and done a few of the challenge chambers, so my total time spent playing it probably amounts to six hours or so.

I might make the argument that I simply enjoyed those six hours much more than the, say, forty I spent pushing through FFVII, but the real point is that I feel like the numbers don't even matter.

Yeah it was fun for a couple of hours but you knock it off in an afternoon and then what. I play games for something to do. I don't want to spend a couple of hours of wages (I work casual cause I'm at uni) and only have a three hour game to show for it?

Games that are too long kind of piss me off a bit. I love Oblivion but it's just too jam packed full of fun little side quests. I am too much of a completionist not to do them.

I hated Oblivion. What a waste of money. I think completed the main quest I reached something like level 4 and have never touched it since. The worlds so big and generic, you hardly run into enemies unless you're doing a quest (or maybe that is because I never reached a high level?), once you finish the story (which is mediocore to put it nicely) everythings so open ended and you've got all the time in the world and it just all feels so pointless.

Maybe I never gave it a proper chance because the eyes freaked me out. Whatever.

 

[elemenetal150]

honestly, the only game I have ever felt was to long was bioshock.....at one point I was just like "am I still playing this game, wtf"

 

[Useful Dave]

honestly, the only game I have ever felt was to long was bioshock.....at one point I was just like "am I still playing this game, wtf"

Bioshock wasn't too long, I managed to near the end within a day of getting it, then gave up out of sheer frustration due to low supplys, mediocre gameplay, a ridiculous damage system (Splicers taking whole SMG magazines to kill) and a bloody escort level.

A game that was too short though was Call of Duty 4, considering that I completed a third of it in a single playthrough.

 

[IHaveNoCoolness]

That's because people are more likely to get more bored of the gameplay before they get bored of the storyline.

 

[GonzoGamer]

The obvious answer is that new, current-gen games are much more expensive than new books or movies (unless you're taking your whole family out to see the movie). Is this the only reason?

That's pretty much my only reason. Why wouldn't I only rent something that takes 10 hours to finish? If I'm paying full price for a game, I want to get my money's worth and I don't want to have to spend another $60 in a week or two.

 

[The_Deleted]

I don't mind short games as long as I haven't payed out full whack for a game.
It's good sometimes to be able to play a game that won't take too long. Short and sweet. Like Conan.

 

[Tharwen]

Quake 4 was way too long. All of the weapons where collected and the mandatory plot twist soon lost I's appeal. But that?s a linear FPS, which needs new thing to need our attention.
While fallout 3 however, the main storyline was way too short, and the ending comes out of the blue so you find that cannot play further.

I completed Quake 4 in 6 hours last week.

 

[clicklick]

I remember reading reviews of Max Payne saying it was short.

I mean cmon. I would pay for a stunning 5 hour gameplay/experience than 200 hours of no FUN.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Honestly, I'm that type of player now that doesnt mind a game's MAIN story line being short (3-6 hours) if it's an exciting game providing an amazing experience, and then can lengthen the game with multiplayer content or side-quests etc... Like God of War. It was short. And it's one of the greatest games ever made. MGS4 was kinda short in my opinion. Again a great game. Gears of War, again, somewhat short.. even COD4's story mode was on the shorter side.

I honestly get more annoyed by the 20 hour epics, where it just starts to feel boring. Too many games make the mistake of trying to extend gameplay with meaningless or contrived gameplay, like in GTA IV with all the "friends" calling for nonsense all the time, or by trying to play fast and loose with "day/night" cycles.

Give me a 6 hour game with the OPTION to extend it another 10 hours if I choose to.. or at LEAST extend your game with DLC, as long as the story and the game play was super awesomebadass, You wont hear me complain.

 

[Singularly Datarific]

Uh, why do people complain about portal being short? It was sold in a pack with 4 other games, and its individual price is about $10, so what is so sucky about that?