ZFGC
General => Entertainment => Topic started by: a Hint of Lime on April 29, 2009, 10:22:53 pm
-
Recently games tend to be shorter, about 2-12 hours to complete main storylines, which is considerably shorter than some of the games of the past few decades (like looooong jrpgs).
How do people feel about this? I'm actually very pleased-- no game should require over 24 hours of my !@#$% time to complete, ever. The shorter game-time makes games more comparable to the length of a movie (or miniseries/tv show for episodic gaming), and I think leads to a much better experience for regular people-- people who don't want to spend 6 hours in front of a tv for a week straight.
Portal is the best example of a short game that was !@#$% amazing. I wish more games were like portal (short and sweet).
Of course replayability is even more important with a shorter game-- it better have alternate modes, maybe multiplayer, etc. for the more gamers with more devoted time could play.
Opinions?
-
Well, it depends on what kind of game it is. Games with a story I don't mind if the main story is short, as long as there is a lot of things to do next to the main story line. Games that aren't story driven can also be short, but need a big replay value. In overall the shorter the main gameplay time, the longer the replay and extras have to be.
So I don't mind a game having a short gameplay time, as long as the entertainment time is long.
I don't think that the games have become shorter over the years but actually easier. Games on the NES and SNES had often only 5 to 10 levels. The games these days have often over 40 much longer levels. and the levels can be run through several times in different ways. But it is often much easier to play those games, because when you die on one point it is often just a matter figuring out what to do. In the older games you know exactly what to do, but it is often a matter of having a really sharp timing. And this timing lets you get stuck on a single point more often, because you die about a hundred times instead of 5 (max) before succeeding.
-
What Niek said, except I believe that a game with an awesome but long plot should limit the game time and go with sequels/prequels, etc.
-
I don't think the length of a game should matter at all. Portal was short and sweet, but if it was longer I wouldn't mind because it'd still be great.
-
Recently games tend to be shorter, about 2-12 hours to complete main storylines, which is considerably shorter than some of the games of the past few decades (like looooong jrpgs).
How do people feel about this? I'm actually very pleased-- no game should require over 24 hours of my !@#$% time to complete, ever. The shorter game-time makes games more comparable to the length of a movie (or miniseries/tv show for episodic gaming), and I think leads to a much better experience for regular people-- people who don't want to spend 6 hours in front of a tv for a week straight.
Portal is the best example of a short game that was !@#$% amazing. I wish more games were like portal (short and sweet).
Of course replayability is even more important with a shorter game-- it better have alternate modes, maybe multiplayer, etc. for the more gamers with more devoted time could play.
Opinions?
Limey, in my opinion I'd say your point is valid only for a few genre's. For FPS games, having a long ass game would render the game "repetitive" in most cases. I barely find any FPS games that extend its gameplay beyond crawling around a map and shooting. Although, some do do tweaks to the gameplay and give you some extra such as a vehicle or something.
Although; I wouldn't agree with you if the game bases its plot around the gameplay and has all sorts of extras to the story and gameplay. The shorter the game, the less time you have to tell a story. It would fall into the issue with movies where you'd have a million of them coming out just to tell a damn story. I'd rather have a story told in a trilogy at most. Anything above that seems a little extensive, to me. Even though I say gameplay is a huge factor, sometimes memorable storylines keeps the players attracted and replaying the game. Final Fantasy VII is a reasonably long game. Look at how many times people have gone back to replay it. I'm not saying its story is "LOOLOLOL GOOD", I'm just using it as an example. Some people actually liked its story.
I could go into movies, but that'll be going off topic. The case is pretty much the same with movies except you have no gameplay factor. Instead, gameplay gets replaced with action/comedy/etc(this is existent in games, too, I just never mentioned it). It's really a balance between the story, additions to it, and how well its executed.
-
The rest of the topic was tl;dr.
It all depends on the genre of game. If it's an FPS, it should be as long as Half-Life 1 or Half-Life 2 was. If it's an RPG/JRPG I don't mind it even going to 2 discs though nowadays it can all fit on one. Boy do I miss those 4 disc games :(
If it's an RTS, LOL.
-
The rest of the topic was tl;dr.
It all depends on the genre of game. If it's an FPS, it should be as long as Half-Life 1 or Half-Life 2 was. If it's an RPG/JRPG I don't mind it even going to 2 discs though nowadays it can all fit on one. Boy do I miss those 4 disc games :(
If it's an RTS, LOL.
Summary of topic: For story, make a trilogy or small series. For a regular game, make something like Portal.
Tales of Symphonia was a perfect 2-disc game, IMO. The story was interesting enough and they made it fit well with Show content
Tethe'alla
and all.
-
I prefer longer games.
I'd rather compare a game to a book in stead of a film. (I mean a long book, like The Lord of the Rings. >_>)
I remember taking 50 hours to complete the main story of FFTA and more 50 to nearly complete all the missions (I had completed 293 out of 300 I guess)
-
10 hours is a good length. If a game goes for longer than that I stop playing.
-
10 hours is a good length. If a game goes for longer than that I stop playing.
I think it all depends on the story and the replay value, for example a good rpg tends to have a good story so you don't mind of the time you play on it, but if the game has a really amazing way to play or orignal mechanics then it is worth it, for example, people play tetris more than 10 hours >_> and you can't beat tetris.
-
Somewhere in between long and short would be my preference in how long i would like a game to be.
-
for example, people play tetris more than 10 hours >_> and you can't beat tetris.
It depends on the version of Tetris you're playing. Some versions can be finished. And sometimes all there is to finish is to max out the highscore.
-
I like short games, because at least they give me time to do things in real life. Seeing "over 100 hours of gameplay" next to Fallout3 or Oblivion has actually come to intimidate me rather than intrigue me.
-
Short games mainly, because I don't have the time nor patience to sit in front of the same game for 50 hours. Unless it's a really good game. Like dark chronicle (racked up over 100 hours on that) but I didn't even complete that in the end.
-
Gee, I really love those 4 disc RPG's on the PS1 :/
FPS's should be about 7-14 hours in length, but RPG's (if the story is good and exciting) should span to about 15- hours. IMO.
-
This is how I look at it:
If the game I am playing has been hyped up to be the best thing since peanut butter and jelly, it better be around 8 hours long, in the minimum.
Eaxmples of games that did it wrong: Gears of War 1, Halo 2, Resistance 1, Bio-Shock, etc.
Now GoW 2 was longer( I have yet to play Resistance 2 so I couldn't tell ya) and is better.
Nothing pisses me the !@#$% off more than spending $60+ on the "Game of the Year" candidate and the game is over in 2 hours (I'm looking at you !@#$% Resident Evil 5 >:( ).
Now, if the game has extra quests, stat crunching, stat building, etc., I have no problem with it and enjoy it.
Oblivion was a game I never got bored with (still have it from the day it came out).
Cool story, but finding items and power leveling your character all different ways and what not made it fun.
You cannot really do that with today's games. That's why I like rpgs because i like to try that one thing that I hope the developers never thought of and try to reach level 100 (pr whatever) in record time. * wish I still had my mem card with FF7 on it with everyone at level 99 in about 18 hours :( *
But I love FPS too, and I would love to sit down with a FPS that had a compelling story and just rock on for 30 hours straight. As long as stories keep flowing good, time is of no concern.
*rereads own reply and realizes why he is still a virgin* u_u
-
I can't really stand short games because you get it done and over with and that really sucks. I prefer longer games because you could spend hours playing them and never get bored but I guess some people can't stand it because they'd rather play hopscotch or play hide and seek.
The only way you can really enjoy a long game is if the gameplay is good, story is good, etc. Twilight Princess in my opinion felt like a long game but everything was too stale after replaying it but if I were to play slightly shorter games in the franchise like Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker, they just keep me going because of the story and the gameplay. I like the story in TP even though it's conveniently generic of sorts but the gameplay wasn't too exciting even if you hyped it up to be.
I could spend hours playing Fallout 3 because it's a big game and there's a lot of stuff to do and I like the style of RPG it is. Getting the DLC's for the game adds even more to the experience even though Operation: Ancourage's gameplay was different and was a bit pointless since you can't go back into the sim. Anyway, if you like short games or long games or both, that's stellar.
-
The only way you can really enjoy a long game is if the gameplay is good, story is good, etc. Twilight Princess in my opinion felt like a long game but everything was too stale after replaying it but if I were to play slightly shorter games in the franchise like Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker, they just keep me going because of the story and the gameplay. I like the story in TP even though it's conveniently generic of sorts but the gameplay wasn't too exciting even if you hyped it up to be.
I think your post just made me realize why I don't like TP. It's quite empty, dontcha think? I felt the same way about the game GUN, but I still loved GUN for some reason.
-
The only way you can really enjoy a long game is if the gameplay is good, story is good, etc. Twilight Princess in my opinion felt like a long game but everything was too stale after replaying it but if I were to play slightly shorter games in the franchise like Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker, they just keep me going because of the story and the gameplay. I like the story in TP even though it's conveniently generic of sorts but the gameplay wasn't too exciting even if you hyped it up to be.
I think your post just made me realize why I don't like TP. It's quite empty, dontcha think? I felt the same way about the game GUN, but I still loved GUN for some reason.
That's exactly how it was. There was nice scenery and all but there was nothing to do at all in most areas. Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker had a lot to do in pretty much every area in the game.