Support NeoGAF

[Speevy]

To me, short games exist so I can tell in 2 hours rather than 20 whether the title is worth finishing.

However, if you don't feel a game is worth completing after a certain length of time (for example, it's pretty much the same stuff repeated over an extended stretch) the game's just not very good. Demanding short games lets lazy developers off the hook. Star Wars KOTOR is a 36 hour game with compelling content throughout. As is Resident Evil 4 at 26 hours. Heck, Morrowind can last hundreds of hours. Too long? Not for me it wasn't.

Just find video games that present the activities you enjoy, and hope those games are "too long". Because after playing over 100 games this generation, I definitely have a greater appreciation for those I was able to complete in more than 10 hours.

 

[Ranger X]

The thing is, if the game is well made it's not a problem for it to be long of course.
But devellopers tries so much in making their games long that sometimes it kills the quality. That's what i don't like. There's a shitload of games that could have been better shorter.
So it's not that we don't want long game. We just want quality.

 

[SuperPac]

I'm not able to spend the kind of hours I used to on games, so for me -- short is perfectly fine, if not preferable.

 

[Mr Nash]

It's not how long the game is, it's what you do with it.

 

[Crow]

Republic Commando proves that short games can be awesome.

 

[Oblivion]

Okie doke

http://www.counterfrag.com/screenshots/sonic heroes/2.jpg

http://cubemedia.gamespy.com/cube/image/article/539/539956/resident-evil-4-20040818025735767.jpg

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/games/coverg/34/623634.jpg

Ha! Joke's on you, buddy. Sonic Heroes sucked. =p

??? The more time advance, the more games are supposed to be long ??

A game should be good and have replay value. A movie that is good (then you watch it again) only last 2 hours and you buy it 20$. How about a good 10 hours game with nice replay value that you pay 40$ ?

1. Okay, fine you got a point.

2. Yes, that's what I want! I guess I've just been a little disappointed since not that many games have that much replay value nowadays. Compare SSBM to Mario Kart: DD. The former has a TON of unlockables and stuff that keeps you busy for a good while, and in a fun way. As opposed to MK: DD, which just didn't have too much to make you want to play again (this is not counting multiplayer)

 

[flarkminator]

Ha! Joke's on you, buddy. Sonic Heroes sucked. =p




1. Okay, fine you got a point.

2. Yes, that's what I want! I guess I've just been a little disappointed since not that many games have that much replay value nowadays. Compare SSBM to Mario Kart: DD. The former has a TON of unlockables and stuff that keeps you busy for a good while, and in a fun way. As opposed to MK: DD, which just didn't have too much to make you want to play again (this is not counting multiplayer)

Basically what your saying is that you want games with Replay value, not length.

 

[Belfast]

Action-adventures like MGS3, RE4, God of War, Shadow of Rome, Onimusha 3 are the PERFECT length for me. They all last a good 15-25 hours and have plenty of extras and incentive to go back and play them again. The good thing about most of these games is that on the second playthrough, once you know where everything is and can skip the cutscenes, it only takes the "short game" length of a few hours to beat them. Best of both worlds and I always feel like I've gotten my money's worth.

 

[Oblivion]

Basically what your saying is that you want games with Replay value, not length.

Replay value for certain genres like fighters, racers, etc.

Action/Adventure, Platformers should have a main mission that's a worthy enough length.

 

[Master]

I would rather play a 10 hour game that blows me away 90% of the time than a 30-80 hour game that entertains me 75% of the time.

I have a life outside of games. I want to play games without having to worry about spending all my leisure time in front of the TV just to finish something I started.

The higher quality the better, and 10-20 hours is perfect for my needs. Otherwise I get stuck playing the same game until I'm sick of it, and I never end up finishing it just because of its length.

PS: Many of the games that tout a HUGE play length of a million hours artificially lengthen the game with random battles, inane quests, boring time-wasters and other completely transparent techniques. I would rather pass that stuff up.

 

[Tarazet]

Replay value for certain genres like fighters, racers, etc.

Action/Adventure, Platformers should have a main mission that's a worthy enough length.

Most of my favorite games I can (and do) finish off in a single afternoon every 6 months or so. Lemmings (one thirty-level set at a time, obviously), Toejam & Earl, Rocket Knight Adventures, Panzer Dragoon, Metal Gear Solid, Ridge Racer Type 4. If I could have a dozen more games with that kind of endlessly gratifying replayability, I'd never have to bother with long and dreary games like Morrowind. I'd be entertained forever anyway.

 

[Ranger X]

1. Okay, fine you got a point.

2. Yes, that's what I want! I guess I've just been a little disappointed since not that many games have that much replay value nowadays. Compare SSBM to Mario Kart: DD. The former has a TON of unlockables and stuff that keeps you busy for a good while, and in a fun way. As opposed to MK: DD, which just didn't have too much to make you want to play again (this is not counting multiplayer)

Ok so by this post you're telling me that what you want is not lenght but quality.
Then we speak the same language my friend.

 

[Date of Lies]

It all depends on the genre. Why the fuck would i put the effort of building up my characters if it's only a 15 hour rpg?


Games should be made as to rock 100% of the time and not be padded with crap dungeons, high encounter rates, fetch quests (triforce peices), pointless crap (the bathhouse towards the end of PoP1) and collectatons. If the game's rocking atleast 90% of the time, then I'll play it till it ends, regardless of how much that is. Ninja Gaiden and RE4, for examples of long games that rocked all the way (and even after the end).

Katamari Damacy is a great example of a short game that fucking rocked. Ico too.

 

[G-Fex]

MGS3 and RE4 are prefect examples of games not too long or too short.

Just right.

question though, is SMT and DDS both short or long?

 

[Yusaku]

I hate people that hate short games. You're the reason 10 hour games have 40 hours of bullshit filler. I'll take a great short game like Ico than hours and hours of mediocrity.

 

[Oblivion]

Ok so by this post you're telling me that what you want is not lenght but quality.
Then we speak the same language my friend.

Yeah, I guess. Probably shoulda just said games the right size, WITH replayability and all that.

I hate people that hate short games. You're the reason 10 hour games have 40 hours of bullshit filler. I'll take a great short game like Ico than hours and hours of mediocrity.

What the hell? Do length and quality have to be mutually exclusive? It's totally possible to have a 20 hour game that's totally enjoyable without having to be tedious or whatever. See: Ocarina of Time.

 

[Robobandit]

Sure, it makes sense to want a good game to be longer, but I'll pay $50 for an 8 hr game and I'll pay $50 for a 100 hr game.

When we buy games, we're not just paying for the number of hours we'll spend playing, but for the experience, in addition to this, we are paying for the thousands of man hours that it took to create a game that could be classified as "short".

To use God of War as an example again, sure.. the game is over in 10 hrs or so, but it cost them $20 million to make, and 4 years of development time. Games are getting more and more complex and expensive to make (especially games that will sell well, since a lot of people no longer buy games that don't score at least 8.5 or 9.0). To expect long games for the same price, when costs and amounts of labor are increasing, is like trying to get blood out of a turnip.

Would you rather be charged more for a longer game or just continue to wait for short games to drop in price before you buy them? Not trying to flame or insult, just curious about your point of view.

 

[Yusaku]

What the hell? Do length and quality have to be mutually exclusive? It's totally possible to have a 20 hour game that's totally enjoyable without having to be tedious or whatever. See: Ocarina of Time.

Even good games have shitty filler. Just look at the Triforce piece quest in Wind Waker. With no FF12 any time soon I'm finally going back to beat FF7, and it's amazing how much of the game is just superflous. I'd say it's a 50/50 split.

And FWIW, the water temple in OOT was pretty motherfucking tedious.

 

[SpokkX]

there really is such a thing as too long games

besides, the 10 to 15-hour games are the only once I go through more than once. (examples Halo, Halo 2, God of War, Ninja Gaiden)

a 20+ hour game feels really like a chore the second time.. Most long games become a bit stale in the end.. there are of course exceptions; Resident Evil was great the first time.. the second time it really does drag on though..

 

[demi]

Republic Commando proves that short games can be awesome.

Only if they end GOOD. Republic Commando did not end good at all. Republic Commando is like sex, it's enjoyable, you're loving it, but then right when it starts finally getting good, it just pulls its dick out from yer tight ass right before you're about to cream and walks away.

Not that I would know, anyway.

Really.

 

[mrklaw]

I like short games, but I would prefer to spend less on them (duh!)

I have two kids and I'm getting way less time to play these days. Maybe a 1 hour session twice a week.

So I welcome short but sweet games. ICO, Zoe, Pikmin 1. Loved them all. If there is a game that is huge I probably leave it on the shelf because I just won't be able to finish it, or I'd need to sacrifice too many other games to play it.

 

[Endymion]

B No way in hell I'm gonna pay $50 for a game that I could beat in an afternoon.

Yall feel me?

No. The greatness of the experience is all that counts to me, and length is just a marginal part of the equation.

 

[Spencerr]

I read that as sports games. And I do. Well, actually, I like baseball games. Basketball can be alright. But screw football.

 

[ejdonk]

Seriously, how long is Another Code? Or Trace Memory, or whatever it's being called these days?

Finished it in about 7-8h, and it's not like I rushed through it.

 

[Tsubaki]

So what Oblivion is basically saying is that he's a mainstream gamer and doesn't play a game more than a one-time through, and if he has to, it's because of some lame pseudo replay value in the form of unlockables, not because the game is intrinsically fun to play.

As much as I'd love to continue to poke fun at you, the truth is many modern games aren't intrinsically fun to play :/