Time sinks! 200+ hours? 100% and keep coming back? caught 'em all? Do we want more of them?
- Thread starter DBLT4P
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The Total War series (Rome, and Medieval II), Fallout (3 and New Vegas), Mass Effect, Halo (3, ODST, Wars, Reach, and, most of all, PC Custom Edition), KotOR (both, but mainly II), Battlefield (whole series, outside of the F2P games), Star Wars: Battlefront (I and II), Age of Empires (I, II, III), and Civilization (IV, with a bit of V) have all taken up simply massive amounts of time for me. And, to this day, I can't help but keep coming back to them.
We really need more games like this. Even if I have so little free time, we need more games like this.
We really need more games like this. Even if I have so little free time, we need more games like this.
My point was more that kids generally have more free time, and thus have more use for 200+ hour games. A 200+ hour game would take me months to finish, and I just don't want a game to drag out like that. There's too much else I want to play. I can definitely get into a 15 hour game because even that'll still probably take me a couple weeks tops.DBLT4P said:
Your example of "why buy MW2 or BO when you would be just as happy playing COD4 for the same amount of time" fails because I WOULDN'T be happy playing that for the "same amount of time". For me, games aren't a way to kill time in the most cost-effective way possible.
That said, I can still pour 100 hours into a Fallout or Elder Scrolls game, but I'm gonna need lengthy breaks and I have to play other things as well. Right now I'm in the middle of my second New Vegas run, but I'm also juggling Rage and Yakuza 3 because I'll lose my mind if I play nothing but New Vegas for 100 hours.
Ergh...Ive lost a lot of my gems. Not physically I'm just not interested any more. I still love Homeworld. I think its a stunning piece of work in the 3D combat system, the story telling, the music...God the MUSIC.
Other than that...
I guess I could class wow. But thats more something I sub up to whenever my brother does. Ive never actually had a sub to that game when he hasnt. I like doing pvp with him. Otherwise its very meh.
In the past I would have said CoD:4 or medieval total war 2 but they just arnt any more and havent been for some time :/
I had a few console ones like Bloody Raw 3, Tekken 3, Phantasy Star Online (Game cube) and smash bros. But because of the nature of consoles they went by the by some time ago as well :/
I played Dynasty Warrior 3 and Dynasty Tactics to death as well. I had every unlockable on Dynasty Warrior 3
Inc all toons and all secret weapons.
Other than that...
I guess I could class wow. But thats more something I sub up to whenever my brother does. Ive never actually had a sub to that game when he hasnt. I like doing pvp with him. Otherwise its very meh.
In the past I would have said CoD:4 or medieval total war 2 but they just arnt any more and havent been for some time :/
I had a few console ones like Bloody Raw 3, Tekken 3, Phantasy Star Online (Game cube) and smash bros. But because of the nature of consoles they went by the by some time ago as well :/
I played Dynasty Warrior 3 and Dynasty Tactics to death as well. I had every unlockable on Dynasty Warrior 3
Inc all toons and all secret weapons.
Baldur's Gate 2 is crack for me. Probably at the 1200 hour mark by now with my yearly run through.
Mass Effect 1 ate up about 300 hours, as did Dragon Age Origins. Oblivion and Morrowind collectively ate over 600, and Fallout 3/New Vegas about 250+.
CoD 4 is at 300 and counting since MW2 and Blops are duds.
Sometimes I think I have no life outside of work lol.
Mass Effect 1 ate up about 300 hours, as did Dragon Age Origins. Oblivion and Morrowind collectively ate over 600, and Fallout 3/New Vegas about 250+.
CoD 4 is at 300 and counting since MW2 and Blops are duds.
Sometimes I think I have no life outside of work lol.
Dragon Quest 9 took me about 100 hours. Never again.
Team Fortress 2 has eat up about 312 hours, and I've only been playing since summer.
Oblivion is almost there, with 286 hours. Hell, I haven't even completed the Main Quest, Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, etc. Plus, the hours were over about 4 play throughs. I didn't accomplish much./ Once i get a better computer, which should be around March, I'll go in for a final play through.
I've played Resident Evil 4 about 18 times. That game is so addicting. Everytime I get the urge to play it I always pave through to the ending.
Star ocean 3 took me a good 150+ hours.
Team Fortress 2 has eat up about 312 hours, and I've only been playing since summer.
Oblivion is almost there, with 286 hours. Hell, I haven't even completed the Main Quest, Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, etc. Plus, the hours were over about 4 play throughs. I didn't accomplish much./ Once i get a better computer, which should be around March, I'll go in for a final play through.
I've played Resident Evil 4 about 18 times. That game is so addicting. Everytime I get the urge to play it I always pave through to the ending.
Star ocean 3 took me a good 150+ hours.
Fair Point, I actually misinterpreted what you ment.everythingbeeps said:
Just to be clear, I in no way support a 200 hour grind just to fluff up a game without any gain or payoff, thats just bad game design, the witcher is a possible example of this. A 200 hour game that doesn't have any content for hour 201, doesn't fit what I am trying describe. I ment games that you can play whenever you want to play it, and over any span of time accumulates a lot of playtime.
Games not having enough content is when you buy a game, play it, finish it, and WANT to play more but there is no more to play, like right after you finish half-life ep.2 you want to play more half-life, but there isnt anymore and it was only 5 hours. I used Cod as a specific example because it could fit in either category depending on your perspective, and in hindsight i should have expanded further.
With CoD you can either want to play the single player which just isn't that long, so you have to buy 2 more in order to get one games worth of satisfying campaign, or you want to play the multi player in which case you can play online until the end of time, but you just bought the same game 3 times.
I guess the bottom line is that i like having lots of replay-ability. Sometimes its impossible tho, portal just isnt very replay-able and sadly nothing is going to change that, but there should be enough content that you feel you got your money's worth.
bottom line- if I could "finish" a game in less time that it took me to make the money to buy the game, I would feel rather cheated.
I've dumped an unseemly amount of time into Tales of Vesperia and Record of Agarest War.
Final Fantasy 10 was another plus 200 hour game.
I must have played Oblivion for about 1000 hours.
L4D and L4D2 probably took up more than 500 hours between them.
I probably put 100 hours each into Mirror's Edge and Portal but those games are so short that's worth mentioning.
Dragon Age Origins 500 hours
Mass Effect 250
Mass Effect 2 200
Some other games too I'm sure.
Final Fantasy 10 was another plus 200 hour game.
I must have played Oblivion for about 1000 hours.
L4D and L4D2 probably took up more than 500 hours between them.
I probably put 100 hours each into Mirror's Edge and Portal but those games are so short that's worth mentioning.
Dragon Age Origins 500 hours
Mass Effect 250
Mass Effect 2 200
Some other games too I'm sure.
I've been spending less and less time on games, in what my parents would probably call "growing out of" them. Nope. I'm just getting less satisfied with the average CoD. I'm becoming an elitist--the very creature I've dreaded for my entire mediocre life.
The last game I spent an obscene amount of time on was Pokemon Gold, back in my elementary school days. Even now, I still look back and think that was the most fun I'd ever had with a game.
Earlier today, Just Cause 2 passed the 30 hour mark. I play that because it's mindless fun and doesn't really try to have a great story. Better than trying too hard, in my opinion. Yes, I'm one of those guys who agreed with Jim Sterling's Dynasty Warriors = Citizen Kane episode.
That said, I still like really deep, philosophical, artsy games.
The last game I spent an obscene amount of time on was Pokemon Gold, back in my elementary school days. Even now, I still look back and think that was the most fun I'd ever had with a game.
Earlier today, Just Cause 2 passed the 30 hour mark. I play that because it's mindless fun and doesn't really try to have a great story. Better than trying too hard, in my opinion. Yes, I'm one of those guys who agreed with Jim Sterling's Dynasty Warriors = Citizen Kane episode.
That said, I still like really deep, philosophical, artsy games.
I suppose I understand, but I don't place a flat dollar value on each hour of a game. One hour spent playing a game like Katamari Damacy is worth much more to me than an hour spent playing something like Call of Duty. To take those examples even further: I've spent over 100 hours playing Black Ops, and maybe 30 playing Katamari Forever. But you ask me which game is better, which purchase I'm more satisfied, and I'll tell you Katamari.DBLT4P said:
That's because for me, the value doesn't come down to how long I spent playing it, but rather how much I enjoyed the time spent playing it. Black Ops is decent. It's fun for short periods of time. If I admitted to having a video game that I considered a "time waster", it would be that. It's fun enough while I'm playing, but when I'm done I often feel like I could have used that time better. On the other hand, every minute playing Katamari is a treat, and while I certainly WANT to play more when it's over, I wouldn't think of saying it "didn't have enough content". That would be absurd. We should all be left wanting more. Nothing worse than a game that overstays its welcome. I'd rather have too little of a good thing than too much of a mediocre thing.
The game you're describing is largely mythical. The games today that people can play for 200+ hours....a LOT of that time is just dicking around. I love New Vegas, but come on, so much of that game is just wandering or doing unimportant crap. You'll just never see a game that provides 200 hours of consistently engaging content. People have to invent reasons to play a game that long.
So in the end it just comes down to a complicated formula that involves time spent playing the game times some undefinable value of the fun factor of that game. People say they want longer games, and all I can think is "why?" Not so much "why do you want games to be longer", but "why do you think they should be longer?" Games overall are as long as they've ever been, and if they aren't always longer, they have at least as much engaging content. Dead Space 2 was short, but it was fucking nonstop action. Games are not getting shorter, despite what people claim. Arguing that there are too many five hour games now is like suggesting that this is the first era that had five hour games.
Thank you, finally another working person. I don't have the luxury of hours and hours of free time and even if I did, I like playing games for the story just as much as the gameplay. I want games to get where they're going story-wise in a reasonable amount of time, not just distract you with dozens and dozens of sidequests. That said, Deus Ex: Human Revolution was a pretty good length for me, and I hope more games come out like that.everythingbeeps said: