Poll: Ideal Game Length
- Thread starter PedroSteckecilo
- Start date
Recommended Videos
A good average for me would be between 20-30 hours. Anything that's above 50+ hours better keep me interested instead of trying to paint a new color on the skin to trick me into thinking that i didn't do this exact same mission before 15 hours ago, of which i'm talking about GTA4. Basically gave up around the 43% mark and considering how the missions i did didn't actually progress the story. There were usually 2 or 3 missions that showed a bit of story, and the rest were just fillers to get some extra cash.
I'm going to go for a really cheesy line and say that a game should go on as long as it's good. Portal was really short, but it was still awesome. Morrowind and Fallout could take weeks to explore but still didn't lose their appeal until after the storyline was played out. As long as the story and/or challenge feels fresh the game should go on, but no longer. Freelancer was also one of those games, it went on and on, but as long as you had the story to follow it was good.
Examples where that happens are the UFO:After series. The story is the only reason I continued playing, but the games got boring long before it ended, the same thing over, and over, and over again. At the moment I can't think of a game that was too short, but I know they exist, and in numbers.
In conclusion I say that a game should be as long as it's story, but not longer than the gameplay holds. A story can take you far, but Dungeon siege is a good example of where it doesn't really reach all the way because of repetitive gameplay.
Examples where that happens are the UFO:After series. The story is the only reason I continued playing, but the games got boring long before it ended, the same thing over, and over, and over again. At the moment I can't think of a game that was too short, but I know they exist, and in numbers.
In conclusion I say that a game should be as long as it's story, but not longer than the gameplay holds. A story can take you far, but Dungeon siege is a good example of where it doesn't really reach all the way because of repetitive gameplay.
I like lengthy games, but reasonable. 20 to 30 hours of single player is a good length (you can't really put a number on multiplayer), I think you need at least 10 to really establish a decent world and at least another 20 for it to reach potential. However, too long and you chance stretching out a story to be so long that the player doesn't care anymore. There is one exception of course, and that's when you've got a story that works in episodes, something that is becoming easier and easier for publishers with downloadable content.
But yea, Silvertounge is right, too many games stretch out the narrative with repetitive gameplay, which is just plain irritating.
But yea, Silvertounge is right, too many games stretch out the narrative with repetitive gameplay, which is just plain irritating.
5-10 hours is good enough for me, if it's for the main storyline.
Endgame content, however, can come in very handy. Quite a lot of games simply put in multiplayer for that, others do unlockables. That's all fine with me, at least it's a choice you're picking, instead of being forced through 30 extra hours of boredom.
For example: I played through TWEWY storyline in about 8-12 (never really checked since I didn't know how back then). Right now, my playtime is clocked at over 60 hours. And I'm still not finished with it.
Or, a more obvious example: Pokémon.
Of course, there are exceptions, mainly the free-roaming/sandbox and MMO games.
There's a few exceptions for each genre, of course. First thing that pops up is The Settlers II. Really satisfactory to see an entire town work like clockwork. It just doesn't get boring that quickly (though in the long run...)
Endgame content, however, can come in very handy. Quite a lot of games simply put in multiplayer for that, others do unlockables. That's all fine with me, at least it's a choice you're picking, instead of being forced through 30 extra hours of boredom.
For example: I played through TWEWY storyline in about 8-12 (never really checked since I didn't know how back then). Right now, my playtime is clocked at over 60 hours. And I'm still not finished with it.
Or, a more obvious example: Pokémon.
Of course, there are exceptions, mainly the free-roaming/sandbox and MMO games.
There's a few exceptions for each genre, of course. First thing that pops up is The Settlers II. Really satisfactory to see an entire town work like clockwork. It just doesn't get boring that quickly (though in the long run...)
In my opinion it depends on the game.
if i get tired of the game in the first hour or so i don't want to have to play another 10 or 20 to beat it, but there are some games where i really did not want the story to end. i just wanted it to keep going, and when i finished it, i felt a little sad knowing that the game is over.
if i get tired of the game in the first hour or so i don't want to have to play another 10 or 20 to beat it, but there are some games where i really did not want the story to end. i just wanted it to keep going, and when i finished it, i felt a little sad knowing that the game is over.
I agree with others who are simply saying a game's length should simply not outlast it's fun. I'm not even close to halfway done with Persona 3 and I've been playing for about 45 hours, but it's always offering something new to experience, so I'm hoping it lasts 100 more
It does indeed depend on the genre:
Games like The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, should be a nice, long game. I have over 40 hours on it, doing a lot of exploring and side-quests like the Cave of Ordeals, cause, well, they're just so fun!
Games like COD4, should be long-ish, provided they have good writing, and the scenery is dynamic.
Games like Medal of Honor need to get as much shooting in as possible, make it satisfying, and end fairly quickly, requiring a liposuction EA refuses to pay for.
Games like The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, should be a nice, long game. I have over 40 hours on it, doing a lot of exploring and side-quests like the Cave of Ordeals, cause, well, they're just so fun!
Games like COD4, should be long-ish, provided they have good writing, and the scenery is dynamic.
Games like Medal of Honor need to get as much shooting in as possible, make it satisfying, and end fairly quickly, requiring a liposuction EA refuses to pay for.
I think long games are boring. The only way I can tolerate a long game is if it has a really good storyline, or if there is a constant stream of inventive set pieces. If either of those aren't met I will get sick of the repetition.
Well, I generally prefer games to be as long as possible but it's mostly about price for me. Nothing pisses me off more than paying full price for something that lasts half a day at best, when I know that there are developers making games that last ten times that and are just as much fun for the same money.
However, if it is well done and reasonably priced (such as Portal) I will probably play it.
However, if it is well done and reasonably priced (such as Portal) I will probably play it.
I voted 5-10 hours. For me it's to do with the quality of the experience, not the quantity of experiences. GTA 4's main story was great, but in terms of time-consumption it was truly the upper limit. Now, call me softcore, but I'm not willing to spend the same 25-odd hours hunting pigeons.
What annoyed me about Mass Effects length was that it wasn't 10-15 hours of Balls to the Walls action, it was about 5 hours of meandering meh before you got to the balls to the walls action. That screams cop-out to me, you shouldn't make a Short Action Game with RPG style pacing, that's just cheating.
It depends mainly on the Genre, an example would be on an RPG such as oblivion you want 50+ hours of gameplay whilst an FPS you would expect 7-15 hours at most RTS for 10-20
(this is assuming a lack of online play which many developers tend to focus primarily on to have an excuse to make a crap single player game)
My personal choice would be the 20-30, a good length, but not dragging on too long.
(this is assuming a lack of online play which many developers tend to focus primarily on to have an excuse to make a crap single player game)
My personal choice would be the 20-30, a good length, but not dragging on too long.
50+ provided there's a solid story to go with it. Something that is going to take, maybe a week to finish would be even better, and that long not because you'll take long breaks, but because there's that much content, alternatively, especially if it's an RPG, provide the content in such a way that it encompasses maximum re-playability. Or at least very good re-playability ^^'
For FPS'es...depends, obviously with an online affair like TF2 you will maybe play 5 or 6 matches a day, ranging from 20-30 minutes each, or longer/shorter depending. But for single player, again, provided a good storyline, 30 or 40 hours sounds pretty good to me.
MMO's are...different, and, if they hold your interest, go well over 50+ hours, many into the months, and years if you -really- like it...been playing WoW the past 2 years now I guess.
For FPS'es...depends, obviously with an online affair like TF2 you will maybe play 5 or 6 matches a day, ranging from 20-30 minutes each, or longer/shorter depending. But for single player, again, provided a good storyline, 30 or 40 hours sounds pretty good to me.
MMO's are...different, and, if they hold your interest, go well over 50+ hours, many into the months, and years if you -really- like it...been playing WoW the past 2 years now I guess.