Author Topic: Some people want their games shorter... (Read 4398 times)

KDR_11k · « **on:** October 23, 2003, 08:51:36 AM »

Article

Abstract: Games take too long to complete, combined with the amount of games you buy vs. the amount of your free time chances that you ever complete a 20+ hours game is very likely to end up unfinished on your "I'll play that later" stack. Concludes with proposal of pay-per-episode system as discussed in numerous articles before.

I completely disagree with the author. Almost all games nowadays are too short (i.e. less than 35-40 hours) for my liking. When I abandon a game it's most likely because I couldn't get past a certain frustrating sequence or the game bored the hell out of me. Both are signs of flawed gameplay instead of overlength.

To explain my oppinion I'll go through all of my GC games (leaving out infinite games and VJ, which I just got today so I cannot comment on it) and comment on their length and state of completion:

Wind Waker: Finished once, now in second quest (no real motivation to continue, though). The game should have been twice as long. Or at least have twice as many dungeons.
P.N.03: Through on Easy, going on Hard. The game is definitely too short. Why they made the first level longer than the subsequent levels is beyond me, especially because it frustrates to not pass the first level on Medium...
Sonic Mega Collection: I came VERY close to the end of Sonic 1 last time I played. I'm playing it a bit now and then. Length: Well, a game without saving obiously shouldn't be longer than 2-3 hours. Feels short, nonetheless.
Super Mario Sunshine: Finished. Means won against Bowser and was damn happy the game was over. Once the events stop happening the game gets repetitive and boring, this might be a case where I agree they should have made it shorter (or simply have added more events!)
Phantasy Star Online: Act 3, first set of missions (~13 hours into the game). Due to repetitive gameplay and nearly nonexistant plot I'm not really motivated to finish it. The fault lies at the strength of the bosses (i.e. the required levelling), not the physical length of the game.
Skies of Arcadia: Finished. It felt like just the right length.
Mystic Heroes: Half through. It became too frustrating. However, I feel this game could use a bit of lengthening.
Lost Kingdoms: Finished. Definitely WAY too short.
Eternal Darkness: At Edward's chapter, stuck at the vampire. Got too frustrating because you have to repeat a LONG sequence every time you fail and I couldn't figure out how to destroy that stone (know by now, low motivation). Some chapters seemed too short, some too long. Can't say much on the overall length, but feels about right.
Metroid Prime: All finished but Prime. Prime is too frustrating. The game feels too short, should have been approximately twice as long.
Lost Kingdoms II: Have to fight the God of Harmony. Too frustrating. If that's really the last level, the game is too short. Even if there are four or five levels after that, it's still too short.

The author wants games to be shorter, but I hate paying 60 bucks just to find out the game is over after less than ten hours. Hell, a few years ago 40 hours were standard and anything less than that was declared too short, nowadays the average is 20 or less.
Even if games get shorter, the price will always stay the same, so you're just screwing yourself over by demanding shorter games.

I hate the idea of pay-per-episode. That just demotivates or makes you limit the number of levels you play on purpose (because playing the next one costs you). Hell, if I wanted to pay to continue playing I'd subscribe to some MMO game!

I've seen pay-per-episode in action, it's called Golden Sun. Well, that game was effectively split in two parts and both are sold at full price. There's no way I'll support that behaviour! (i.e. I boycott GS: The Lost Age) When GS ended, I first thought it was a joke like that effect in ED after Act 3, but it turned out real and left me really angry, wishing death to whatever genius came up with that idea.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #1 on:** October 23, 2003, 08:55:43 AM »

Ad both Golden Sun games were 30+ hours, full, entire games in their own right. It's not a pay per episode as you would think of it- you could play Golden Sun and be perfectly content, not feeling incomplete. You could play Lost Age and feel the same way. Hell, you could easily say movie projects like Lord of the Rings and Kill Bill are pay per episode- why isn't anyone ranting and raving about that?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #2 on:** October 23, 2003, 09:34:11 AM »

Yes, they should have grouped the LotR movies a bit more, after all the "Ring der Nibelungen" is split into multiple sessions as well but they're sold in one big packet. I've already heard of people complaining about Kill Bill.
Golden Sun's story comes to no real conclusion and you don't even get a HINT that the game is over after you enter the ship (that's why I saved there). Usually games don't end like that. When a game is over I want to know I did my job, not that "our journey has just begun". (BTW, for me GS was something like 20 hours, about half of what I expect from an RPG)

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #3 on:** October 23, 2003, 09:37:22 AM »

My point was that Golden Sun was a complete game regardless of story- yes the story dropped off, but the game was well worth it's price.

And you can't consider 20 hours normal- the first took me 29 hours and I finished ahead of most of my friends, and Lost Age was much longer.

Plugabugz · « **Reply #4 on:** October 23, 2003, 09:54:03 AM »

Remember the thread about least polished game?

I voted Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex.Same game applies here. Intensely linear, no variation to story in comparison to previous 4 games. I completed it 100% in 4 hours.

Nightfire was also a short game, that can be completed in about 6 hours. Everything or Nothing having non-linear gameplay will extend the game and add replay value.

Most good games are be about 30 hours (The Sims and Animal Crossing excepted) to completion.

MysticGohan24 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 23, 2003, 09:59:44 AM »

Indeed it was, I have both Golden Sun and Golden Sun: Lost Age and both are damn well worth the price. ( Especially on the GBP ) I also have a GBA which made it easier to transfer all that data from GS to LA ( No not lost angeles )

Although I agree, games do seem shorter.

If a game was more entertaning, this wouldn't be an issue. I for one have played through quite abit of games from Nes to Present and I find it that if a game is horrible it's the damn game's fault for being lousy.

I want my games longer but at the same time, I want them to be good.

it's like reading a book, if the book entices you, you are going to read more to find out what happens next. If it sucks, you will just tossed it aside.

Same Logic applies to games.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #6 on:** October 23, 2003, 10:08:33 AM »

I think the ideal length for a game is that you can reach the end of the game after about two weeks of solid playing (say maybe 3 hours a day). That's a 42 hour game which is an acceptable length. The game should then have enough replay value or side quests that if I want to I can get several more hours out of the game. Check out the Pokemon games for a good idea on how to do this. Those who just want to beat the game can do so in a reasonable amount of time but those that want to do everything can spend over 100 hours playing. It's like how a DVD will come with the movie and then commentaries and hours of special features. Does everyone need to watch all the special features to enjoy the movie? No but those that want to take it further can get more out of it.

Super Mario 64 is an example of a perfect game length. One can beat the game within a few weeks yet if they want to continue on and collect all the stars they can and will get several more hours out of it as a result. Another good example is Super Mario World as you can beat the game without beating, or even accessing, many levels. The Rogue Squadron games are also good examples with all of the medals and secrets.

Some games are too long and force you to play for like 80 hours just to beat the game without all the secrets. I consider that too long. Some games take the opposite approach and can be beaten in a weekend with virtually no replay value. That's no good either. You need a middle ground and the ideal choice is to make a 30-40 hour game with tons of replay value.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #7 on:** October 23, 2003, 10:12:14 AM »

There shouldn't be a set limit for how long games should be- different games have different ideal play times. Ico is one of my favorite games ever, and I've always thought it's only downside was it's longevity, or rather lack thereof (took me 8 hoursmy first time through), but now I've come to realise that was how long the game SHOULD have been. I would've gotten bored of the same thing over and over again for 20 hours. Some games beg for longer play times, too, and developers should experiment to find what's the best length for their game rather than cutting out parts or addings parts so that it's X number of hours.

thecubedcanuck · « **Reply #8 on:** October 23, 2003, 10:26:40 AM »

5 - 10 hours games would suit me just fine, I really have trouble finding the time to play a 20-30 hour game. The problem is the amount of time that passes between when I can play, if 2 weeks go by betwwen runs I almost always have to start over, thus never getting done.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #9 on:** October 23, 2003, 10:50:30 AM »

I like short games with lots of replay value. Though Wind Waker was a shorter game, overall, than OoT, I've played it through more times than OoT...

And though 99.9% of gamers disagree, I thought Luigi's Mansion was a perfect length ^_^

The Omen · « **Reply #10 on:** October 23, 2003, 10:52:04 AM »

Quote
5 - 10 hours games would suit me just fine, I really have trouble finding the time to play a 20-30 hour game. The problem is the amount of time that passes between when I can play, if 2 weeks go by betwwen runs I almost always have to start over, thus never getting done.

I agree with that. I still have to finish prime and WW, but i havent played in so long, i might have to start over. Generally, i dont mind if action games are around 10 hours. But an adventure game, or RPG, i would like at least 30 hours. Depends on the game for me.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #11 on:** October 23, 2003, 11:00:44 AM »

"And though 99.9% of gamers disagree, I thought Luigi's Mansion was a perfect length"

My problem with that game isn't just because it has a short length but it also has no replay value. You can realistically beat both mansions and collect every boo (thus doing EVERYTHING) within a weekly rental.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #12 on:** October 23, 2003, 11:33:03 AM »

Just must be different tastes then. I play through Luigi's Mansion at least once every 3 months, and it never drops in entertainment value

Koopa Troopa · « **Reply #13 on:** October 23, 2003, 11:59:31 AM »

Some games need to be longer than others. However if a Game is going to have fewer than five hours of playtime, there better be a damn good reason to play it two or three times.

I HATE the idea of pay-per-episode games, I'll NEVER buy the .hack series. I think it is a really crappy thing for them to do. If they were reasonably priced I might not mind, but I won't more than $19.99 for it. Especially in this case since the games are ridiculously boring.

Bottom line, though, is I won't support pay-per-episode games. Period. I think it is just a really crappy way for companies to squeeze more money out of you (for the exact same story, characters and gameplay)

Nintendo Gamecube · « **Reply #14 on:** October 23, 2003, 12:55:36 PM »

I think the longer the game the better, just don't get reptitive. I mean...who wouldn't want 1000 level Super Mario RPG in 2D on the next console?

The main turn-off for me is a game that ends, even with tons of secrets, I usually end it. I guess it has ot be with the taste of games I like.

Before, I used to be a perfecitonist...I wouldn't buy a new game until the game I bought was 100% complete...this included Goldeneye and all the cheats you had to unlock...you guys could imagine how hard that is, specially within some of the time frames they give it to you in...And yes, I did unlock every cheat...a bit crazy fanatic though...

Games I owned and utterly owned on N64, Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong, Resident Evil 2 (firs tbeat the game in one rental), Mario 64, Top Gear Rally, Rogue Squadron, etc.

On gamecube now, I could hardly think aobut replaying WW...or Eternal Darkness...or Super Smash Bros. Melee (my friends don't play it...) The only thing that compells me to keep on playing F-Zero is to unlock AX-Cup, which involves beating all cups on master....that is just crazy.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #15 on:** October 23, 2003, 01:01:42 PM »

*Spoils of Ers*

You can get to the ending of Rebel Strike PRETTY DAMN QUICKLY. But just because you got the end of the game doest mean you've played through the heart of the game.

eldiablo · « **Reply #16 on:** October 23, 2003, 01:11:07 PM »

IMO the multiplayer part is the part of a game that should add the replay value, I don't like singleplayer and I have only completed a few singeplayer games alone.

Syl · « **Reply #17 on:** October 23, 2003, 01:19:06 PM »

I also disagree heavily with that article, he complains that games are too long, and that he never finishes them. He then goes onto saying how he BUYS SO MANY GAMES, perhaps thats why he never finishes them. If he thought ahead and actually FINISHED a game before buying a new one, He wouldn't be having that angle on things.

Out of every single gamecube game I own (30 even right now) the only games I haven't beat (not 100%, but close usually) are SW: Bounty Hunter, and THPS4, I stopped both because of a lack of interest, not a lack of gameplay. I played through viewtiful joe in 2 days, (Lucky for me, i got in on a break) I don't feel dissapointed at all, I enjoyed the hell out of the game. I'd still be playing it if I didn't end up finding Earthbound on a whim and started playing that game quite a bit. (Earthbound = LONG game, for those who didn't know, im betting its at least 40-50 hours, I don't think it has a timer till you beat it.)

I really think the length of the game depends on what type of game it is.
Metroid Prime = Perfect length, much longer than all the other metroid games (at around 20 hours first time, can get down to 2-3 if perfect) and it just felt perfectly executed for me.
WindWaker was a tad bit too short on gameplay, the ocean made the game much longer, but that actually is the sole reason I haven't gone back to playing it.
Lost Kingdoms was far too short, just started getting very interesting... then a hard ass fight, and stopped, I never grabbed the sequel (Will do.)
Cubivore is also very close to a near perfect length, and I still go back to try and find more transformations, i never got them all.
Mario Sunshine, i played the HELL out of this game when it first came out, I enjoyed quite a bit of it. I'm not quite sure what to say length wise though, unlike Mario 64, i was never compelled to go back and get ALL the Shines (I got all the stars on SM64 multiple times)
Skies of Arcadia: nearly perfect length for a truly amazing game, I don't think they could have done this any better, about the time your getting tired of the world map/way the game is, something major happens and your at the final dungeon. I can complain that some of the later dungeons were too short, but I love the game to death.

I really don't own any incredibly short games, Luigi's Mansion was short, but it was a great length. Pikmin is something that NEEDED to be longer, it was absolutely amazing, but by the time you could see what the game COULD pull off (distant spring) it just. stopped. I would be amazed to seee some levels after that, i hope the sequel manages to pull it off well.

Anyway, games are whatever length they need to be. Beating them mainly matters on the gameplay that it offers, not how long it is.

Yuji Miyamoto · « **Reply #18 on:** October 23, 2003, 02:48:06 PM »

I'd like to see some of the posts become shorter. Who reads all this?

The only game that I have played recently that could have been shorter is the ULTRA HORRIBLE Star War: Knights of the Old Republic! The most over-reated RPG in HISTORY!! I can't belive I actually played it to the end. What a peice of overblown crap!

rpglover · « **Reply #19 on:** October 23, 2003, 04:33:23 PM »

personally i like that some games are now becoming shorter- if games are short but they are also fun, then i would like to replay them- case in point one of my favorite rpgs on the ps2- breath of fire dragon quarter- a game that was bashed for its length- but i loved it- it maybe took about 10-12 hours to get through the first time, but it was such a fun game that replay was a must- and they added some incentives for replay as well
mouse is right with ico- arguably the best game on the ps2 bar none- it is so much fun to play and as mouse said- the length was perfect- if it were longer, it may have been too much
i also love viewtiful joe- and that game is pretty short as well- maybe 7-10 hours at the most in length- and it is one of the best gamecube games period
i know some people enjoy long games (i do too- i love rpgs) but some games are good as they are in length- i would rather have a short game which is great through out the whole experience than a long game which is very repetative and dull

Bloodworth · « **Reply #20 on:** October 23, 2003, 05:12:31 PM »

It's all about where you are in life really. I used to be really picky about game length, since I didn't get a lot of games and wanted to get the most "bang for the buck". Now, although I wouldn't really agree with his point, I definitely relate. Great games are constantly coming out, and there are plenty of games that I haven't beaten and some that I've barely touched (like Tactics Ogre and Mega Man Network Transmission). Holding two jobs and a girlfriend makes it tough, especially when one job requires you to play specific games, and the girlfriend spends hours every weekend shooting Nazis in Medal of Honor. Oh well...

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #21 on:** October 23, 2003, 05:41:03 PM »

Right now, I don't have too much time to play videogames (i'm spending too much time on this damned forum!

) so "short" games like ED and MP seem to last forever (especially MP, becasue the thing freaks me out more than ED).

I always say to myself, "I want an extremely long game that I can play for months on end and not finish." But when I get a game like that, I get bored and put the game to the side and play more f-zero.

So I prefer long games as long as it's varied and is fresh throughout. If it's boring the whole time, it's most likely worse than any 5 hour game out there on the market.

GoldShadow1 · « **Reply #22 on:** October 23, 2003, 08:06:39 PM »

"Almost all games nowadays are too short (i.e. less than 35-40 hours) for my liking"

Wow, a 30 hour game is too short? That seems a tad picky to me... I agree that I would prefer longer games (that is, if there is more content - I don't want the game to stick in 300 random collectables in order to say it takes five hours longer to beat), but that's a bit extreme. Usually, if a game lasts me around 20 hours or so, I'm satisfied.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #23 on:** October 23, 2003, 08:33:09 PM »

Nope, I'm serious about that number. Experience tells me that I feel a 20-30 hour game is too short. Of course, one doesn't want repetitive games to be even longer, but isn't it more a flaw in the game itself when it becomes too repetitive?

Urkel · « **Reply #24 on:** October 24, 2003, 12:00:39 AM »

I'd have to agree with Bloodworth. When I was younger and only had a weekly allowance to go on, I couldn't buy a lot of the games I wanted. Replay value was a HUGE factor into what games I bought, since they needed to last me until I could save up enough money for the next game. Now that I'm older and have a job, I can more or less buy whatever games I want. But having a job gives me less time to play all these games. Now, that doesn't mean that I want short games, but I'm really not all that bothered if a game is short, as long as the game is good.

News:

Author Topic: Some people want their games shorter... (Read 4398 times)