What's up with FPS, RPG, Beat'em Ups, and other Genres having like a 4 hour single player...
- Thread starter RexoftheFord
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Because apparently multiplayer is where it's at. So they spend more time on that than the singleplayer mode they should be working on because they want to have mutliplayer which will make them sell more games.
Ratchet: Deadlocked, anyone?
Hey, remember when gaming was a hobby that went uninterrupted by loud, obnoxious douchebags in college who act like they're twelve? Yeah, those were the days.[/elitist]
Hey, remember when gaming was a hobby that went uninterrupted by loud, obnoxious douchebags in college who act like they're twelve? Yeah, those were the days.[/elitist]
That said, it also takes ages longer to make games than it did back then. The models have to be amazingly high quality for every new area you go to while not looking the same, animations have to be done almost perfectly, everything needs to be done in voice overs, etc etc. and people have less patience these days.ww666 said:
Rising development costs and everyone having a semi for cutting edge graphics. When you play now everything needs to be voice acted, a lot more time consuming and more expensive than paying some clown minimum wage to type text.RexoftheFord said:
The man hours that go into creating a single charecter model, (my pet hate) cut scene, level or location is now huge, limiting the amount you can get done in your developement time and also fit on a disc.
I also think you are looking through rose tinted specs a bit. Early games had no save points, you had to beat it in one sitting. Longevity came from restarting whenever you died. How long did it take you to beat streets of rage 2?
Four hour RPG? I can't think of any RPGs with only four hours of play time. I mean there's half-a-minute hero, but that's not even four hours worth. Everything else as far as RPGs go is around ten hours at minimum, usually in the thirty-fifty range.
Most games (outside of FPS and fighting games) have at least a 10 hour investment in them nowadays. Perhaps games that are mainly about competition fall into this catagory. Which makes sense to me. Who wants to play a competative game in single player?infinity_turtles said:
Because half the time, they try and make the Multiplayer experience much more effective, more appealing, as it were.
Most games these days are all about Online Play. The Campaign of a game is, as hard as it is to believe, mostly for the purpose of selling the game, in most cases. For example, Halo: Combat Evolved was NOT made for multiplayer, on the Origional Xbox, it was more of a line-up for the rest of the trilogy. But an amazing game, nonetheless. Then once bought out on the PC, it was specifically for Multiplayer.
Though, games like Gears of War II are both Campaign and Multiplayer specified. The same goes for the up-coming Halo: Reach and Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Most games these days are all about Online Play. The Campaign of a game is, as hard as it is to believe, mostly for the purpose of selling the game, in most cases. For example, Halo: Combat Evolved was NOT made for multiplayer, on the Origional Xbox, it was more of a line-up for the rest of the trilogy. But an amazing game, nonetheless. Then once bought out on the PC, it was specifically for Multiplayer.
Though, games like Gears of War II are both Campaign and Multiplayer specified. The same goes for the up-coming Halo: Reach and Call of Duty: Black Ops.
Reviewers no longer take length or difficulty curve into account, so you have pay attention to what they actually say if you want to save your $60 (assuming you believe, as I do, that spending $60 on a game you crush in one night without breaking a sweat is a complete fucking waste). Watch out for "a little on the easy side" and "difficulty is inconsistent". These are code phrases for "hilariously short" and "unforgivably easy".
I think most action-adventure games tend to clock for six to eight, but you're right that the four hours worth of singleplayer gameplay is really a competitive gaming trait.Savagezion said:
What do you expect from a fighting game? 4 hours sounds about right for arcade mode.
Plus, the online mode doesn't always suck! Case in point: Super Street Fighter 4 and BlazBlue.
Plus, the online mode doesn't always suck! Case in point: Super Street Fighter 4 and BlazBlue.
In case of FPSs it's all about graphics and multi, that's why we get games like CoD:MW2 which isn't a bad game mind you, but it's so multiplayer focused there is no point in buying it if you only want to play the 5hr long illogical campaign. Also nowadays if a game has subpar graphics it will immediately get marked down for it, and you can't even imagine how long it takes to create superior graphics.