Anybody else thinks modern games are too long?

[Ike-Mike]

You'd really like Sin and Punishment: Star Successor. Four hours of awesomeness, nothing more, nothing less.

I played that game before.

What about it?

[peener weener]

I don't think you can say "games are getting shorter" or "games are getting longer" with any certainty. There's loads more games being released than there's ever been. All the way from your tedious 80-hour rpg grindfests to your fast, short and fun 2d platformers. You can find all sorts of stuff.

[Sentacotus]

I think a big part of it for me is that I've just gotten older so my concept of time has changed so spending an hour playing now versus and hour when I was 5 felt like forever. Also I think that since I've just gotten better at speeding through games and beating them as I got older is a big thing too. I mean if I was able to beat a game's main story alone back then it was a big deal.

[NICKT™]

Too much emphasis is being put on arbitrary things like how long a game is, the amount of things in it whereas instead we should be focusing on the quality of the content and whether we enjoyed it, or felt that it was worth the money we've paid.

It's why I hate Skyrim, fuck that game.

[Superbus]

Too much emphasis is being put on arbitrary things like how long a game is, the amount of things in it whereas instead we should be focusing on the quality of the content and whether we enjoyed it, or felt that it was worth the money we've paid.

It's why I hate Skyrim, fuck that game.

One of my favourite games of the year is Luftrausers, which is usually played in 40-60 second bursts.

[Zera]

Too much emphasis is being put on arbitrary things like how long a game is, the amount of things in it whereas instead we should be focusing on the quality of the content and whether we enjoyed it, or felt that it was worth the money we've paid.

There are high-quality, low-length games, and low-quality, high-length games, but the truly standout games are those with high-quality AND high-length. Surely, you've played something like that. Games that I think of include The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Okami, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and F-Zero GX. These games are excellent because they provide a lot of content AND the content itself is stellar.

Edited November 25, 2014 by Zera

[peener weener]

There are high-quality, low-length games, and low-quality, high-length games, but the truly standout games are those with high-quality AND high-length. Surely, you've played something like that. Games that I think of include The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Okami, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and F-Zero GX. These games are excellent because they provide a lot of content AND the content itself is stellar.

That's just like, your opinion, man. I think some games that I've played for a couple hours were more worth the money than some I've played for a couple tens of hours, even if thw "quality" of the games was roughly similar imo.

My point is length doesn't really matter at all unless you make it matter, but that's a personal opinion

[Esau of Isaac]

I think the answer is yes. It's also no.

It's important to remember that right now, we're in a bit of a golden age. We have games coming out for every genre, and all of those games are the best that genre has ever seen. That's *every* genre. Point-and-click games are back! For the first time since LucasArts was alive and well, we can play good Point and Click? They're not my genre, but 4X games are, and there's a ton of those outside of the most well known ones. Don't like the new Civilization? OK, there's Endless Space, Endless Legend, Galactic Civilizations II, hell, the classic Spaceward Ho! is available for cheap on Android. Visual novels! VNs are coming back into force, with the Hate series being particularly good. Even the erotic ones don't suck anymore, if early thoughts on Littlewitch Romanesque are an indication.

The point of all of this is that if there's a game that's too long - like a JRPG - then there are tons of alternatives that aren't. I'm in my mid-30s and have full-time jobs, so I can't spend 100 hours on a JRPG, but I'll pump a few hours into a game of Civ V. Or an hour into a good indie game. Hell, I can dump a few minutes into a game of pinball, on a table I grew up playing, on my cell phone while taking a shit. If anything makes me want to break out into song and sing about a whole new world, this is it.

Games are whatever you want them to be in 2014, and it is glorious.

Don't forget Galactic Civilizations III man. I've been wanting to try it out, but I'm not a fan of the early access bit so I'm leery.

Anyways, to the question I disagree, but I do feel many games are much too long for me to finish comfortably. When I was younger I had much more time to pour into them, but these days the idea of sitting still for six hours and playing a game is not enticing at all. If I play a game for longer than an hour I tend to turn it off. So many of these RPGs that people no-life are impossible for me to ever get around to knowing the ins and outs like I do titles from childhood.

[Zera]

Anyways, to the question I disagree, but I do feel many games are much too long for me to finish comfortably. When I was younger I had much more time to pour into them, but these days the idea of sitting still for six hours and playing a game is not enticing at all. If I play a game for longer than an hour I tend to turn it off. So many of these RPGs that people no-life are impossible for me to ever get around to knowing the ins and outs like I do titles from childhood.

The longest RPGs usually use Skinner box techniques and are actually very boring. People who play no-life RPGs are ultimately no better off than slot-machine addicts - victims of the Skinner box. Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door is my go-to RPG since it is a genuinely fun game. It's different from most RPGs because I actually wanted it to be longer, which is something I've never felt after playing an RPG.

[NICKT™]

There are high-quality, low-length games, and low-quality, high-length games, but the truly standout games are those with high-quality AND high-length. Surely, you've played something like that. Games that I think of include The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Okami, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and F-Zero GX. These games are excellent because they provide a lot of content AND the content itself is stellar.

I don't think I've ever played a "high-length" game that was good, though I think that boils down more to our differing interpretations of game lengths.

After spending several months in an MMO, your perception of game-time and how much is enough gets majorly fucked up, so for me games like the Zelda and Metroid series aren't that long. Maybe they aren't the ones where you finish them in a single sitting, but they're definitely not long-winded and shallow like most MMOs and open-world games where they have to artificially increase your game-time with the video game equivalent of filler.

At the end of the day, I still believe that what matters is if you're compelled to play, if the game pulls you in. If it catches your interest and maintains it throughout the experience, then it's good.

If it's for 1 hour or 10, if you've enjoyed the experience you'll be happy either way.

[Alertcircuit]

People are having shorter attention spans, so I guess it makes sense that shorter games are gonna follow.

[Superbus]

Don't forget Galactic Civilizations III man. I've been wanting to try it out, but I'm not a fan of the early access bit so I'm leery.

Just learning GalCiv II made me want to crawl into the fetal position and cry like a bitch. Not sure I'm ready for GalCiv III yet. Especially with Endless Legend being in my queue.

[Esau of Isaac]

My friend has only good things to say about Endless Legend. I played Endless Space some time ago, it was pretty good if a bit monotonous. It felt like GalCiv II lite, so I was wary to buy in to Legend.

I'm glad to see the genre's making its comeback even if I have been a bit disappointed with some of the newer titles.

[Erik Twice]

But there's no consensus on how long a game should be.

Why should there be? A good game can come in many forms, like any other form of art and there's no proper lenght all games should fit into just like there's no page count that fits all books.

This is not to say a particular game can't be too short or too long for its own good, there are many poorly-paced games out there. But there's no secret pattern of perfection in art that all works of a medium should strive for.

And while I can understand that the price of entertainment is always a factor, I can't help but notice that most gamers not only have huge backlogs but that most games are not played to their completition. With the magnanimous offers of retailers and the quick depreciation of games just a few months after release price it's difficult for me not to think that game lenght is overrated as a factor in a purcharse.

A couple days ago I saw the three Commandos games, which are strategy masterpieces for less than 70 cents each. I can buy indie games like FTL or Fez for a few dollars or even a single cent thanks to Indie Bundle and not even open them because I'm too busy playing the incredible Thief or checking the classics found in Taito compilations.

Even if you are on a shoestring budget, you can buy four or five games per month and still have money to spare.

[Zera]

A good game can come in many forms, like any other form of art and there's no proper length all games should fit into just like there's no page count that fits all books.

I've got one for ya. There's a book - the best book in the world, I promise - but it's only one page long and costs as much as an average book. Will you buy it?

[sirmola]

I've got one for ya. There's a book - the best book in the world, I promise - but it's only one page long and costs as much as an average book. Will you buy it?

obviously, one person saying that tends to trip my BS-o-meter, but if there was near universal agreement that it really was that transcendentally awesome, i would totally pay for it, because i pay more for experience than length.

As for game length, my ideal game is either excellent enough that i never get bored, or short enough that it ends before i get bored, or modular enough that i can come back months latter after the boredom wares off and pick up exactly where i left off.

[peener weener]

I've got one for ya. There's a book - the best book in the world, I promise - but it's only one page long and costs as much as an average book. Will you buy it?

this is a perfect non-argument. good job.

[Kiseki]

I get the feeling that games today are shorter simply because of convenience. It's obviously much faster to beat FE13 than FE1, even when done side by side.

As for game length, my ideal game is either excellent enough that i never get bored, or short enough that it ends before i get bored, or modular enough that i can come back months latter after the boredom wares off and pick up exactly where i left off.

Seconding this, it also applies to me.

[Erik Twice]

I've got one for ya. There's a book - the best book in the world, I promise - but it's only one page long and costs as much as an average book. Will you buy it?

I don't see how the question relates to the quote, sorry.

[sirmola]

I don't see how the question relates to the quote, sorry.

He's trying to make an extreme but invalid version of the argument to disprove the original argument. There are two problems with this.

1. Taking a valid argument to it's "logical" conclusion does not always produce an equally valid argument, especially when subjective things like human taste are involved. (for example "The more cake i have for desert, the better" does not mean "i want 100 tons of cake for desert") Therefore, the validity of an extreme argument says nothing about the validity of the original.

2. His extreme version of the argument is not actually invalid for everyone, as i mentioned above.

Edited December 4, 2014 by sirmola

[Zera]

The point of my argument was that there has to be a cutoff point for the quality/length/cost ratio that you would pay for. It was an interesting question though, right?

[Ike-Mike]

No, it wasn't.

[Integrity]

The point of my argument was that there has to be a cutoff point for the quality/length/cost ratio that you would pay for. It was an interesting question though, right?

by definition, no.

a book that only lasts one page that maintains the same quality/length/cost ratio by definition has to be orgasmically good

that's why it's called a

ratio

EDIT: or i guess be really cheap but you already defined cost as constant

Edited December 5, 2014 by Integrity

[Erik Twice]

The point of my argument was that there has to be a cutoff point for the quality/length/cost ratio that you would pay for. It was an interesting question though, right?

Of course, there's a point in which money enters into play but what I'm saying is that most people won't ever reach it because games are cheap and chances are that long, poddling 80 hours game with inmense replay value will sit on a shelf with a hundred other unplayed games.

There's a point which the limitation is not the monetary expensive but interest and time. Most gamers have enough money and enough games that comparing the lenght/cost ratio of a game makes as much sense to them as valuing their food on its caloric intake. It's simply not the main limitation and probably not even an important one.

After all, if Commandos costs 60 cents, Thief II costs 2 euros and Railroad Tycoon three, does their lenght really matter that much?

[solrocknroll]

Really, length is so unimportant.

I mean, some things are long, some aren't. Some things don't drag out too long, some do. Most I feel have the right length unless it's one of those PLAY FOR ETERNITY games (thnx animal crossing <3).

Let's compare two Project Rainfall games: The Last Story and Xenoblade Chronicles.

The Last Story's length is utterly dwarfed by Xenoblade, but that isn't a bad thing. Xenoblade does what it needs to, and so does The Last Story. Although

[spoiler=spoilers for The Last Story, sort of for Xenoblade.]I really wish Bionis' Left Shoulder had been in in 'Blade. I mean, it wasn't that redundant. In TLS, it'd be nice to get some more Dagran development, and I guess Zael too, since the BEST CHARACTERS (syrenne, lowell, mirania), take the cake.