Poll: How long should a game be?

[Kirosilence]

It does depend on the game, and the experience. I like to think I am a relatively good player, I pick up on things pretty well so I can usually blow through a game in 8-10 hours, some games (Like Gears of War or MW2) I manage to pull off in a single sitting (Taking breaks obviously). But games like that, that only last about 6-8 hours or so, never really leave me satisfied. I always feel like I have been denied something when a game ends so quickly.

Playing through Dragon Age Origins while I had H1N1 (I think) gave me a chance to really immerse in a game. I was off work for a full week so I had time to play through it almost seemlessly (Other then breaks to throw up or sleep). When I finished the game, I truly felt satisfied, that feeling you get when you finish a particularly difficult paper or assignment or landed a big sale at work. That feeling of victory that makes you think "Yeah, I worked hard I played hard and I saved the frakk'n world in the process I am victorious".

As much as I do often save the world in video games, when it's 6-10 hours I feel good, but I never truly feel like I have earned that victory, even more so when i manage to pull it off in one sitting. I kinda feel that it was just all in a day's work not some great victory that I could be proud of.

That's just my thoughts on it though, I believe a good game should last you a long time, more then one day, more then one play-through sometimes. And I believe a good game needs to make you feel like you have earned your victory when you finish it, not as though you were simply doing your job.

Maybe I am just an oldish bastard who grew up in the days of the 50+ hour JRPGs and Platformers.

 

[traceur_]

Ideally, 50+ hours, like final fantasy 10.

I think a good game should have a minimum of 30 hours of story, not gameplay, just the story.

 

[Dys]

I have 750 hours logged on WC3, that is probably the most ideal situation (naturally that doesn't include single player, so I suppose MP games are different). If I don't get 30+ hours playtime, I question whether it was worth my money (if I paid full price), though really most single player games I have (and enjoyed) have only between 20 and 30 hours gameplay, so I suppose it depends on whether the game has high replayability or not as well.

I picked crysis up cheap, and I've only logged 7 hours of playtime for my first playthrough and it was definately worth it (moreso after MW:LL is released). Basicially, if I'm willing to spend ~$50 for a night out (~8-12 hours, so average about $5 an hour) or spend $10 to see a two hour movie, I expect at least comparable time/money ratios from videogames, more if I have to deal with over the top DRM or broken game engines (DoW2 being a notable regretted purchase here).

 

[LongAndShort]

Depends on the game type. Shooters? I don't mind as long as they're solid. RPGs? I want to get as much from them as possible at least first time round.

 

[tragicdwarf]

I think for games like MW2 around 10-15 hours should be the aim. RPGs should obviously be epically longer

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

My opinion of a game is often derived from how many hours of entertainment I can derive from it.

With COD:WAW I received about a day of single player fun, and months of multilayer action amounting to uncalculated hours of fun. Every penny spent on the game was given value.

By the time I FINISH enjoying, and re-enjoying a game, I should not feel in any way cheated.

 

[Leyvin]

Games have recently been getting shorter on-the-whole, which to me is quite disappointing.
Not so much because of feeling ripped off but simply because they're not keeping me as entertained as long especially those titles that the multiplayer doesn't offer anything that keeps me more entertained.

I don't think it is particularly necessary to have a ridiculously long campaign, for example NecroVision a game while it is a good game the single player campaign is feels far too long yet it only took me 12-14 hours to complete. Mind there is no multiplayer the only sense of additional gameplay is completing the challenge rooms that offer enhancements for the single player game. Still as most of the story for the game is told via letters you find with minimal cut-scenes with hour or so jaunts between linear areas it feels quite pointless and a little unfulfilling to complete.

On the other hand I have Halo:ODST, which took me 4 hours to complete with a friend even taking the time to look for all of the intel. The story was cool, the gameplay was fun but frankly was just far too short and sweet. Within 3 days of release I think I'd clocked in a total of 15hours of gametime and got every single achievement. Without a multiplayer against other players, I felt absolutely no need or want to keep playing it.

If we use Modern Warfare 2 as an example though, this is where things kinda get interesting.
Yes the campaign is shorter than most were hoping... personally my first playthrough I did on Hardened and too around 8 hours. The actual time not redoing sections I'd just get raped by the AI on probably closer to 6 hours, but still I'm alright with that because the sheer pacing of the campaign and magnitude of different and well designed locations with a story that while I do wish was a little more intergrated throughout levels rather than mostly via briefings at the start; made the length really a secondary notion while I was playing it.
Didn't feel it was too long, or too short; just felt it was really just right because the story, gameplay and such. I was disappointed by the campaign not being co-operative, the addition of co-op via Special Ops which is a selection of quick missions you can do on your own or with a friend adds another good few hours on-top of that; and the multiplayer while currently really buggy connection wise to hosts, is still by far the best fps multiplayer on any platform. So that game for me has been quite balanced and probably will keep me quite entertained for no doubt months of multiplayer.

To me the length of a game isn't the main issue I have ever. Sure is a campaign is too short, I'll feel a little tweaked about it; but the same can be said for campaigns that never seem to end.

Final Fantasy games are a damn good example of this, yes they have good stories but frankly the story isn't integrated enough and doesn't feel woven deep enough to really bring the world alive. While often fairly open worlds are in those games, for the most part you're following a very strictly linear structure. Yeah, for some 50-60hours of gameplay is awesome and all; but for me about half way through the games I'll say screw it and never pick them up again.

Dragon Age oddly has defied the odds for me, given I'm only half-way through the game... and just hit 35hours of gameplay but the game still feels extremely fresh. The reason is that no matter what you do, main quest, side quest, or just exploring. You're never far from a cutscene where something new is discovered; every action taken feels like it has some weight or merit rather than the usual grind-fest that accompanies RPGs (particularly AD&D based ones like Baulders Gate)

The key isn't time you spend playing a game or how long the campaign is, but how entertained you are while playing it. Look at Dead Space, it isn't exactly a fantastically long game only 10hours (which yeah s'pose it makes it lengthy by current standards ) but the pacing, storyline, gameplay, level designs... all of this creates a game that you don't feel it was too short at the end of it. It is also one of those games that right after you finish you're like "well hell I'll play that again"

In all the games I've played over the years, and in the ridiculously extensive collection of games I have right now; they're not merited on the length but just how good I felt they were to play. Right now the shortest games I have are the "Tales of Monkey Island" Series which is only 4 Episodes (5th and final one is out soon) each a tale lasting about an hour to an hour and a half... yet they are by FAR the most awesome out of all of my games.

 

[ethaninja]

I reckon a game should be very long. But not so long that it begins to repeat on you. If the story line was about 15-30 hours of non stop game time, and then the ability to continue on if you still enjoyed it without starting the game over again.

(Except for Half Life of course =P)

 

[Beatrix]

Anything under 80 hours is a waste to get full price for me.
And the only games in which I passed said mark in this generation of consoles have been Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey.

 

[Glass_House]

For single player games, 30-50hrs (Minimum). For games you can also play online they need to be the sort of game you can sit down and play whenever you have a spare moment.

*Of course this depends on the type of game. I couldn't really be stuffed playing 30-50hrs of RTS :S

 

[NickIsCool]

for an action game(FPS, third person shooter, etc.) i like it making 10-15 hours

i dont want the game to get repetitive before i beat it
i want to hit the end of the game and be like 'finally! i won!'
not like 'finally, i can stop playing this game'

if its an rpg, i like it to make atleast 20 with an engaging story and no final fantasy grinding random encounters to have enough xp to beat the final boss crap, i want a bioware style rpg where im always doin something hat feels organic in the game world. i dont want to be the angsty spiky haired teen who killed a million little creatures to take down the giant evil corporation with my 3 equally angsty teen party members.

>.>
woot for mini rant

 

[alinos]

its all the new console gamers who dont game alot since there now the main purchasers of games they complain that games are to long and they cant complete them unless there <8 hours long

MW2 was horrendously short as was RE5 apparently they were short because of story except the story in both of them was a predictable B movie

MW2 just became a bunch of nice set pieces for us to run through which even on veteran only took 6 hours including deaths and theres no reason to replay for intel since they dont unlock anything since we cant have cool extras incase someone else hasnt unlocked them

Plus since theve all but removed HC mode from MP ive goten bored of that quickly

And MMO's need to stop killing the bloody RPG genre i want actual RPG's not this grind quest thankfully i have dragon age and risen but my guess is they have to keep be going for the next year since its doubtful theyll be many good ones in that time(im well aware of FF13)

 

[SpAc3man]

OVER 9000!!!!

and on a serious note i would say 15-30 although I have played shorter games that were awesome as they were. I get bored of overly long games easy. Unless its Pokemon

 

[wynnsora]

I say it depends on the game, the quality of the game, and the storyline. Outside of that, I'll go with 15-30 hours. 15 is a good minimum, but having had to play Neverwinter Nights because my boyfriend needed a companion, I can tell you no more than 30. Now some games fo course, have to break that rule. Sandbox games and mmorpgs have to break that mold. Some regular rpgs have to as well, but it's expected because it's a partially open, or completely open world.

 

[s001911]

As long as it *needs* to be. Keyword, NEEDS. Padding is gay. Portal is, arguably, One if the best games of all time, its official game time is 2hrs. It has no padding whatsoever.

There have been many games IMO that have been excellent story lines but they have been killed overall by needless padding.

 

[gim73]

A short game in this day and age is pretty pathetic. CoD 4 was great when it came out because you were only paying 40 bucks for a solid gameplay experience that lasted around 8 hours.

Then we have games that are supposed to be epic, but fail. Let's take the original Fable for the Xbox. Long on promise, short on return. I really don't see any reason why any rpg fan would pay full price for a game that only takes 8 hours to beat. Sure, there are some games you can speed through and beat in no time period, but we are not talking about suikoden 1 here. Lacking side content is a crying shame, and let's not get started about day 1 DLC and feeding that monkey.

Lots of folks critisized fallout 3 for the shortness of it's main story as well. The main story was NOT that short. Hell, I did it the tough way and just pushed through the main story without detouring for any side quests or anything like that. I chose not to go to GNR and proceed directly to rivet city (which in hindsight I could have skipped, but then I would not have been able to fast travel right there after the dream vault). I also couldn't get right into Little lamplight so I had to go free the kids from the slavers. I was constantly out of ammo and low on stimpaks. Completing the main quest like that got me up to lvl 12 and took about that many hours as well. It's not really short by any means.

But then again, some games let us drive ourselves to the extreme for how long we spend on them. Let's take disgaia, where we can enter item worlds and level up into the thousands. That is just crazy. The star ocean games usually have endgame dungeons that will bring us up to lvl 255 and set us up against gods. Not really nessesary, but can sometimes be a fun distraction. Then there is the option of higher difficulties and NOT leveling up most of your characters. Those battle trophies...

 

[lostclause]

Towards the far end of 15-30. That said, spinning it out is sometimes just annoying. It also depends on how much emphasis there is on multiplayer. Halo 3 and the two modern warfare got away with short ones and TF2 got away without having one at all whereas I'll be pissed if the length of Bioshock 2 drops because people expect the multiplayer to make up for it.

That said, when you're storytelling you can't help but be brief for maximum impact. Prey did this and was criticised for being short, and Bioshock failed to do this, resulting in a lot of sidequesting that confused the main objective. So there does need to be a balance if high impact narrative is a major consideration in the game.

 

[Adam]

My games usually have to be huge, they are mostly rpg's and can last me anywhere in the region of 30/50 hours, which is good. I play games so much that I go through most games instantly, I went through Modern Warfare, Prototype, Gears of War and Darkness the day I got them, whereas I am still playing my rpg's to this day.