Support NeoGAF

[ComputerBlue]

I think people are getting tired of 100 hour long games that are filled with repetition and bloat and mediocrity. Give me something high-quality and I can easily sync 100 or more hours into it. But if I gotta go liberate the 30th base, has the exact same loop as every 29 basis before it, yeah I’m tired of it. I just recently got around to playing God of War Ragnarok, finally. I loved it and I couldn’t get enough, but there was very little bloat in that game.

 

[hinch7]

Thats the kind of thing to say if your previous game is mid/lackluster. There's plenty of long games that resonate with people. Take Baldurs Gate 3 and Metaphor as a recent ones.

The problem with Bethesda is that they went quantity over quality for their design for Starfield.

 

[Trilobit]

I'm bored of 30 hour games being dragged out to twice their length. I'd prefer a tight 20 hour game I can replay vs. some bloated and boring slop. The best simile would be The Jackal show recently released vs the movie from the 70's. It's full of needless filler that does nothing to elevate the original concept and actually does less than the movie. The movie is incredibly satisfying and I'll probably rewatch it many times, but I'll never return to the show.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

No, we are sick of games like Starfield that have 100 hours of mainline quests that feel like Ubisoft slop filler

Focus on quality over hours, and if you can achieve both that’s great.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Translation: We have no idea how to keep players entertained for more than 10 or 15 hours.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

People who plays sports, shooters, MOBA, crafting games have no issue.

 

[Brakum]

100h of empty or copy pasted open worlds? Yes

Otherwise no.

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

This just sounds like another Dev blaming gamers for not liking or buying their shit product.

 

[dem]

You couldn't pay me to play a 100 hour game...

 

[meech]

Witcher 3, Original Mass Effect that i still replay occasionally to this day...
Nope, not tired.

 

[llLeonhart]

Nahhh… People are tired of padded out games. If it’s 300 hours of good content, nobody minds.

 

[Wolves hunt in packs]

I don't.

Still like em open world games to explore, and can't wait for games like AC Shadows.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

People who plays sports, shooters, MOBA, crafting games have no issue.

 

[saintjules]

The only game I played for what was 100 hours or so was Persona 5. I think I can only go that far with a game similar in vein. Maybe Persona 6.

I don't know. I guess it's my age talking. If I were 14 again, 100+ hour games would be great because trying to buy brsnd new games without a job at the time wasn't easy.

 

[FalconPunch]

Well there's a huge difference between those games and the other "long" games people don't want to play. These games have hours of hand crafted content. It's not 100hours of padding like assassins creed valhalla or most other open world games. BTW, I finally bought Elden Ring to see what the hype is about.... 7/10 game for sure. Very disappointed.

 

[analog_future]

I've never played a single player game longer than ~60 hours or so that didn't feel like it was padded, repetitive, full of grinding, full of backtracking, or just generally unnecessarily long.

I've never played a single player game that actually felt like it was better because it was 100 hours instead of 60 hours. It always reaches a point where I just want it to end.

 

[KXVXII9X]

I have had major fatigue of long games since Dragon Age: The Inquisition. It was really exciting and novel when I first got into these super long games, but over time they became over saturated.

Having long games isn't bad on its own. I personally see an issue with it when they greatly dominate shorter, more experiences. They are at their best when sprinkled alongside 8-20 hour experiences. I dislike that how other genres now have tacked on RPG, roguelike, and crafting elements.

The longer titles also have pacing issues and less focus. Gaming in general has been so standardized that you kind of know what to expect, especially in most open world games.

There has been a massive push towards $1 per hour of play time due to the popularity of the older open world games and the criticism of games like The Order 1886 for being too short and on rails (I can understand but like those kinds of games).

I don't think games all have to suddenly become 8 hour experiences but it would be nice to shave a bit of hours in exchange for more focus, consistent quality, and better pacing.

 

[Loope]

Hes absolutely correct, shorter, more detailed and higher quality is best.
Sometimes I have to check how long a game is to beat and some of them I instantly NOPE out of.
I think 10-15 hours is the sweet spot for single player linear games.

20-25 for action adventures with open worlds.
Anything hitting 25+ for the main campaign (no side stuff) is usually a bloated mess.

No it is not. Plenty games above those times are not bloated messes. You can prefer shorter linear games and that's fine.

Something like RDR2 or any RPG you easilly go above that. Even Dark Souls that doesn't have tons of sidequests etc. you can easily pass the 25 hour mark.

 

[MagnesD3]

I only get tired of 100 hour plus games that cant support that amount of hours with high quality. Beating a weaker game formula over and over again with no real new innovation doesn't cut it. Ill gladly play Elden Ring for a bajillion hours but that's the exception not the norm.

 

[Ristifer]

I only get tired of shite points of view, and this is one of them.

 

[Toots]

According to Google:

It takes 34 hours to beat FF6, and roughly 58 hours to do everything
It takes roughly 27 hours too beat Chrono Trigger with extras
It takes roughly 15 hours to beat Metroid Prime
It takes roughly 15 hours to 100% Castlevania SOTN
It takes roughly 35 hours to 100% Mario Galaxy
It takes roughly 22 hours to 100% Shadow of the Colossus
It takes roughly 18 hours to 100% Astro Bot
It takes roughly 29 hours to beat and 59 hours to 100% Wind Waker
It takes roughly 15 hours to beat and 23 hours to 100% The Last of Us
it takes roughly 9 hours to beat the OG God of War and 13 hours to 100%

These are just some of my favorite games of all time, and arguably pinnacles of certain genres. Good games don't waste the players time. Bloat can ruin an otherwise fantastic experience.

Well google is dumb then.
Remember we are talking about first playthrough not speedrunning...
22h to 100% shadow of the colossus with the lizards and fruits and the time attack mode with its rng component isn't realistic.
Half of the other time frames in your list seem bogus also, 15h to 100% SOTN or 13h to 100% God of war from scratch is plain stupid.

 

[Kurotri]

Not sure, man. 100+ hours in Witcher 3 or Persona 5 and Elden Ring and I still wanted more. 100 hours in Starfield sounds like a nightmare though.

 

[Cakeboxer]

For me it depends on the genre. 100 hours in a platformer or a cinematic? No thanks. 100 hours in Fallout, Hitman, Terraria or Starfield? Sure.

 

[chakadave]

I'd rather have a game 100 hours with depth and complexity and options than a short one.

 

[Varteras]

 

[Shadowstar39]

Maybe handcraft the content instead of doing procdural generated. Also maybe make compelling npcs. Oh and make the universe believable. The non important npcs in starfield are ugly boring nobodies, and there is no aliens.
They could of done different factions and alien races that take over areas of a planet. Make wars between them.
Let you join them. Have quests to join and go up ranks.

Expeditions to become a mining expert, upgrade ship and eventually form your own fleet, with fleet mechanics and trade requisitions, along with the pirate activity that goes along with that.
Thats just a few angles that could of been done.
Did starfield do that? No They had it human only and they couldn't even bother to model any remnant of old Earth. They don't even explain why Earth is a desert when you go to it by random travelling (apparently it is in the story, but i never got that far, I put the game down after a few hours as bg3 was calling).

They also didn't even have a damn local map in the game. All their games had this and it made it a chore in starfield to go anywhere. Apparently, this was added after the fact.

RPG fans are not asking for shorter games, they are asking for quality games. More handcrafted, less design by committee (which includes no woke influences) , more design by passion of a talented small group who has a vision. Then hire to support that vision using art and story and scripting, etc... Those people work for the small group with the vision and the passion for the project.

Bethesda is out of touch it seems. They lost the plot when they strarted doing fallout 76 and youngblood.
Fallout 4 was their last good game, imo.

 

[Euler007]

Insomniac length games are perfect for me.

 

[ssringo]

I have 35 hours in Starfield. Another same bland ass Bethesda game on the same old ass load screen filled engine.

I have 157 hours in Astlibra. A 15+ year long passion project started by 1 dude.

"Fans" are tired of big devs resting on their laurels and shoveling out the same recycled shit every game while asking for more and more money.

 

[cireza]

I definitely cannot play anything longer than 50 hours. It will necessarily be long for the wrong reasons. It is an absolute challenge to make an entertaining and varied game that lasts for tenths of hours. It happens vary rarely.

 

[Nickolaidas]

He's not ENTIRELY wrong. With so many open-world RPGs being time sinkers, and me reaching my fifties, I would appreciate it more if the majority of said games were fat-trimmed roller coasters as well.

That said, open world games of epic scale shouldn't outright disappear.

 

[laynelane]

Thats the kind of thing to say if your previous game is mid/lackluster. There's plenty of long games that resonate with people. Take Baldurs Gate 3 and Metaphor as a recent ones.

The problem with Bethesda is that they went quantity over quality for their design for Starfield.

I still remember the sinking feeling I had when Todd announced there would be a thousand+ planets. The whole "bigger is better" mentality is such a detriment to many studios, including Bethesda.

 

[proandrad]

I like long games I’m just sick of every game being a 100hr open world game. Bring back the 15-20hr linear cinematic action game. I’m more likely to buy and play a mid 15 hr game than I am a mid 100hr one.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Depends on the game. If its something like Assassins creed, then even 30 hours is too much for me. There's not many games that even go over 100 hours to begin with. My longest playtime on a game is hitman woa. I have over 300 hours and that shit just never gets boring to me.

 

[WhamBamThankYouMaam]

Dear developer. That depends entirely on whether the game is good enough or not.

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

Make a better game dumb dumb

 

[NewYork]

I will gladly play 100+ hour games that are really good, full of real content. I have Starfield on my wishlist, but I strongly suspect it's a 50 hour game that got the Bilbo treatment.

 

[mayham2199]

Not if they are really good, e.g., Elden Ring, Baldur's Gate 3, Persona, Metaphor ReFantazio, RDR 2.

Gamers are tired of boring games without any substance.

I've played all those games minus Metaphor and I hated RDR2.

I wish all those games were shorter though. They don't need to be that long. I would have been fine with half the run time and being left on a cliff hanger and waiting for part 2. Whenever I replay the Mass Effect games it's just perfect reminder of what all devs need to be doing. Those games are like 25-30 hours doing almost everything and they all pretty much end on a cliff hanger except for the second game, and I loved that series. More games need to start doing this. You have a long story to tell? Fine, find a good stopping point cut it off and then leave the rest for the sequel.

 

[Jakk]

Not really. I'm tired of games that are wide as an ocean and deep as a puddle.

 

[Dacvak]

Ideal game length is like 6-8 hours for me, personally. I’m old and have a job and shit…

 

[Sooner]

95% of games overstay thier welcome.

There is still a place for the occasional 100 hour game, but it needs to be something really special.

 

[EverydayBeast]

9-20 hour games are great, I got no interest in going back to AC Vallaha’s 200+ hours

 

[manfestival]

It is weird. Many years ago I loved every game that was like 50-80 hours long for a single player experience. Now the only game I could be bothered with in recent times that was 100+ hours for me was Baldurs Gate 3. Even then, once I got to act 3 the game was starting to wear me out with how long it was dragging on. The only reason I went through with completion was my desire to see it through to find out the outcomes. Also the quality of the game really helped fuel my desire to continue playing the game.

These days? 6-20 hour games sit perfectly fine with me.

 

[Crayon]

I loooooove when I find a game that I'm willing to put a hundred hours into. It happens here and there.here and there.

 

[MALpractice311]

As many others have said, you can't make blanket statements like that. If a game is filled with 100 hours of unique, interesting content, then I'm there for it. If it's the same copy/paste content over and over, then no, I'm not.

Best example I can think of recently is Elden Ring. I enjoyed my 200 hours with it, but even it had stretches of nothing and repeated content. And if Fromsoft has trouble filling an open world, then many, many, many other less talented studios will as well.

 

[Kagoshima_Luke]

I remember when I first played RE4 I was amazed that the game just kept going and going, and I was loving every minute of it. The problem nowadays is games are just full of open world bloat and checklists, so you get fatigue after hour 10.

 

[hemo memo]

30 to 100 is a big difference.

 

[hemo memo]

More like fans are tired of Bethesda games.

Ftfy

 

[BlackTron]

Imagine 100 hours of OOT grade dungeon gameplay.

 

[DragoonKain]

I am sick of 100 hour long games. Respecting our time is one of the most underrated qualities of a game. No matter what the game is and no matter how much I've loved it, once I cross a certain threshold of time, I start to get tired of it and just want it to be over. A lot fewer 100+ hour long games would please me greatly. Allows for more games to be played and new experiences to be enjoyed.

 

[TropicanaTwista]

He's not wrong. 100+ hours are very unappealing to me. Too many great games to play, to have that type of time sink. Metaphor is a game that comes to mind for me. I'm nearly 80 hours in and just dropped it. Game is awesome but it's too fucking long. Shorter and more compacted experiences please.