Why does the length of a game matter?
- Thread starter CrankyStorming
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What matters most in games with respect to the time spent playing them is the pacing. Appropriate pacing varies due to genre and other factors.
I felt Portal was an extremely well paced game, especially playing it the first time through. I found myself wanting more of it only because I enjoyed it so freakin' much.
If a game is too slow people eventually lose interest and stop playing. If it's too fast exposition flies over the player's head and he just doesn't care about the plot. And even then pacing is not a constant thing either but properly done varies according to the in game situation, blah, blah, etc.
That said the phrase "time is money" comes into play here. So I too am not willing to spend $60 on a done 2-3 hour game. Possible exception to this are games that can only be completed in an hour when you're really good at the game. Examples being the Metroid series, and off the top of my head Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. First time through that one took me days, but eventually I could fly through that game in under three hours.
I felt Portal was an extremely well paced game, especially playing it the first time through. I found myself wanting more of it only because I enjoyed it so freakin' much.
If a game is too slow people eventually lose interest and stop playing. If it's too fast exposition flies over the player's head and he just doesn't care about the plot. And even then pacing is not a constant thing either but properly done varies according to the in game situation, blah, blah, etc.
That said the phrase "time is money" comes into play here. So I too am not willing to spend $60 on a done 2-3 hour game. Possible exception to this are games that can only be completed in an hour when you're really good at the game. Examples being the Metroid series, and off the top of my head Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. First time through that one took me days, but eventually I could fly through that game in under three hours.
thing about portal is it was never a stand alone release (well actually it could be...hell even retail it was) but anyway...my point it we were never expected to pay $80 AUS for itCrankyStorming said:
anyway just because the first portal was short doesnt mean this one has to be, no theres definetly room to expand here and I am really exited for a longer portal it has the potential to be epic...to feel more epic, and anyway if you think about the the first portal was really an experiment...a jumping off point
I mean what about half life 2? or Bioshock? examples of FPS that are a decent length
I think youve forgotton that multiplayer means nothing to some players, I mean how is 5 hours of entertainment worth $80? thing is its not, I would get better value out of buying a good movie
with the sucess of COD I think some devs are using multiplayer as an excuse to to skimp on he single player and think "oh just chuck some multiplayer in thatll keep'em happy" regardless of personal opinion WE SHOULD NOT have to put up with this crap....enough of them use the powers of DLC for evil we dont need an added problem
But a movie for ~$8 and it be a hour and a half to two hours long vs paying $50 for a game that is only three hours long? No. Games are longer because they are interactive (most of them at least), while movies and TV you just sit and watch.
Length doesn't matter for me at all. But then, I don't have a dozen hours a day I have to fill in my empty, meaningless life. I can make a short game last a while, because I have other shit to do besides play video games all day. All that matters to me is that a game is GOOD for whatever amount of time I spend playing it, whether it's five hours or fifty. I don't try to place a dollar value on each hour played like some people.
imo, 8-9 hours should be the minimum length of the campaign for any full-release title. im a little tired of finishing games in like 5 or 6 hours, some of them not havent much replayability after that.
and most RPGs should have a minimum of like 15 hours.
and most RPGs should have a minimum of like 15 hours.
Seriously OP, are your parents still paying for all your games? When you spend $60 on a game you expect to get a $60 value out of the experience. That means bells and whistles, fan service, and a decent length. A short ass game is a slap to the face of the consumer. I finished Metroid: Other M in under 4 hours. The game was very uneven but there were plenty of things done right that made me want to play through the game again as soon as I was done. When I got to the ending, and then the SECOND ENDING, I said "really? That's it?" I immediately sold the game, not based on length alone but based on content.
There is only so much content that can be squeezed into a short game.
There is only so much content that can be squeezed into a short game.
Thank you for summarizing my stance so succinctly.Trolldor said:
I don't get games that often; if I do, they're either used or I make sure that I'll get at least 30 hours of gameplay out of them, somehow. My parents can't afford to get games for me... nearly ever. The last full-price game I got? Sonic Unleashed, when I got my 360, 2 years ago. (I love Sonic games, minus the atrocious ones.) All the games I've played since then have been used or borrowed from friends who are in better situations than me.
...It really is bang for your buck. Unless a game is really cheap, having less than 10 hours of gameplay in single-player is unforgivable to me.
If I'm still paying $60 then I want $60 worth of entertainment time. At least give me a standard 8-10 hour single player campaign.CrankyStorming said:
Here's how I judge how good a game is: ||awesomesauce||=(quality)*(length/price). I rate the original Portal extremely high, because its quality was almost perfect (cool puzzles, humor, but it lied to me about a cake /terribleoldjoke), and I got it for free on a Steam special, so that's great. 'course, even if I hadn't gotten it for free, it would still have been acceptable. IIRC, Portal was never more than $20 on Steam, so that's still ok. Now Portal2 is $50 to preorder, which is way too much for a game that will only be about 5 hours long, no matter how great the quality is. Besides, games like Portal aren't exactly known for replayability, so that's another strike against it. I'll still buy it, of course, just not until its price has gotten below $25.
In this case it does matter, I never would have bought Portal on its own if it didn't already come with The Orange Box. There are short games, sure, but this takes less than 2 hours to complete. Since the sequel is promising at least 6 hour single and multiplayer campaigns then its definately worth the £40 purchase on its own, since I loved the first one and this is shaping up to longer, better, more innovative, more challanging and more fun.
Well some people feel cheated if they buy a game for £40/ $60 (or what ever, I'm british if you havn't guessed) and it takes them 2 hours to complete. I don't like games that take weeks (unless it's TES, that NEEDS to be epic and long), but I don't want a game that takes a day.
It matters if I'm enjoying the game and replay value. A short game can be good if I enjoy it enough to replay it several times. I borrowed Alan Wake from a friend, and though I felt it was short, I plan to buy the game myself so I can play it over and over again. Medal of Honor was really short but, to me the game had only a couple replays in it which makes me regret making it a day one buy. Oblivian, on the other hand is a long game and, while I didn't buy it at full price, is a game that's sitting on the shelf because I didn't enjoy it all that much. Personally, I like my games to have around 12 or so hours of play time to them because I usually have that many hours during the week to play. With everything else that clogs up my time, its easy to forget what happens in games before I pick them up again so I like games that present the story and wrap it up in a timely manner for me.
Just saying, portal 2 (if you didn't know already) has two stories, one co-op, other single. Each should be 6 hours or more, so at least 12 hours of gameplay there. I'd pay that for 12 hours.thethingthatlurks said: