Do games have to be long to be good? A lot think so...

[PDorr3]

I was reading another forum and someone brought up a good point. Do games halfto be extensive in length, with forecefuly stretched story lines and useless mimi games and side quests tossed in just to extend the games length.

This reminded me of Ico. A game that can be beaten in about 5 hours, but somehow it seems just right. Games do not halfto be long to be good, which is how most game developers precieve gamers want them to be.

Now I'm not saying all long games are bad. Games like Final Fantasy need the long story, and it never feels forced. It just seems that all gamers (especialy high profile reviewers) think that game length is a higher priority than a quality story. A game should be as long as it needs to be. If you can get an impact out of the game, and its only 6 or 7 hours long, who cares? it did its job didnt it?

Anyway I was just wondering what you guys think of this matter.

[TheRedEye]

"Halfto" and "alot" are not words in the English language. But you like ICO, so I forgive you. The terms you're looking for are "have to" and "a lot."

And yes, I agree with you completely, some games are just too long for their own good. I've never completed a Grand Theft Auto because, although I love them, after a while I just want to move on to something else.

[Kilik Kurosawa]

I was thinking the samething last weekend. I played RE4 and it took 30+ for me too finish completely in two days, and I thought that it was balanced enough for the story and gameplay. I wasn't bored or annoyed, but at the end I was finished with the game. Games can be just like movies and be too long. As long as the game has the same elements of a movie (plots, sub-plots, character devlopment) it should feel like a movie without guiding the player too much.

[Emily]

Short games make for more entries on my "Games Iv beaten List" :evil:

[Kid Ice]

IMO they should satisfy you, but always leave you wanting more.

For me the first 3 Tony Hawk games were perfect. Enough levels and challenges to keep it interesting until the very end, but not so long that they burned me out of the game.

I'm really not liking GTA:SA at this point, and I think the length of the previous entry in the series has a lot to do with that. I can only take so much of the same gameplay.

On the other side of the fence we have the shooters. Yep, all of them. If you're good enough you can dispose of any shooter in two hours. So what do they do? Make them so incredibly difficult that it will take you forever to get through the 5-8 levels they're offering. I still haven't seen the final level of R-Type, people. I'd like to see a shooter that's 20 hours long with about 80 levels...that doesn't get too rough until about level 50.

[Cmosfm]

I work a lot, and I wont lie, I wish ALL games were 10 hours and under. I can't play a game longer cause I'll never beat it. I'm about 6 hours into RE4 and I doubt I'll ever finish it. :(

[WanganRunner]

This completely depends on the game.

Look at Wario Ware, technically, it's a bunch of games, each of which are like 30 seconds or whatever, but it's fucking brilliant.

Then look at Dragon Warrior VII, it's easily a 100+ hour experience if you do everything, and it's also brilliant.

Then look at Gran Turismo, it doesn't have a "length". I've been at 100% completion on that game since a month after it came out, yet I still play it for HOURS every week, tinkering with cars, improving lap times, etc... The only thing that's limiting the playtime of GT3 for me is GT4.

[spoon]

Wario Ware is where it's at.

I myself think game makers/developers should take a look at the "I don't have a lot of time, but I want a good game" market. Instead of the "MOFG it's life like 80+ hours of cut scenes Fantasy 9999999" market. A lot of "Gamers" have gotten older and don't have as much time for games as they used. Yeah, I'd love to sit around and complete a nice Adventure/RPG game. Heck, even spend all my time on Live. It's just not possible.

[grayejectbutton]

Every single review of "Beyond Good & Evil" I have read claimed that the game was too short. I think anyone who thinks this completely missed the point. The game is a masterpiece, IMHO, and like music, I'd rather listen to 2 minutes of perfection than 10 minutes of mediocrity.

[link1110]

I'm on the last dungeon of Breath of Fire 2, and according to the guy in TownShip, I've only been playing for 15:30. That's pretty short for an RPG, but it's still a great game, even with its questionable translation.

[PDorr3]

Every single review of "Beyond Good & Evil" I have read claimed that the game was too short. I think anyone who thinks this completely missed the point. The game is a masterpiece, IMHO, and like music, I'd rather listen to 2 minutes of perfection than 10 minutes of mediocrity.

BG&E is one of my fav games ever.

[howdoin]

Time is not the essence... fun is.

Certains games bore me after just a few minutes, others I can stand for a few hours and some I want to finish.

RE4 was well balanced and kept me entertained till the end (20 hours), so did POP Sands of Time or FF6 the first time around.
On the other hand DQ7 bored me after 15 hours, I gave up POP Warrior Within after trying to beat the Empress for the 20th time. Most games today bore me quite fast to be honest, I guess it is part of growing up.

Usually 20 hours is really the max for me, I've got other interests and if I do not see the end of a game after 2 weeks it usually ends up sitting on a shelf.

I care more about the gameplay and fun than the "longevity" of a game.

[Avenger]

the worst possible thing that can happen to a game is to have the player wishing it was over before it was, especially if they were previously enjoying it a lot. Each game is different, where one game's perfect length may be 15 hours, another game may be 60. I always get really pissed off when a game repeats itself or adds a bunch of boring levels just to fill in more time. I feel more cheated out of my money with a game like that, then from a short game I really enjoyed and left me wanting more.

[retroman]

i would say at least 10+hours....thats not a bad time for now days

[hezeuschrist]

All depends on the game. I got 43 hours out of Tales of Symphonia, and it was perfect. I was 100% entertained by the gameplay and the story throughout and to be honest it's been a very long time since I've been genuinely entertained by a videogame. RE4 is doin it for me right now though (currently just over 4 hours in).

I just played Ico for the first time last week, and I must say I wish I had played this game when it came out, because I feel I'm giving it far less credit than it deserves. For the past 3 years I've heard all about the amazing emotional impact of the game, and having had nothing spoiled for me I was sorely disappointed, not to mention overall disappointed by the look and feel of the game as well, it's intensely dated already. I actually found myself consulting a walkthrough from time to time for something as simple as "Climb the Ladder" simply because I couldn't see it in the washed out pallate. The camera was another issue :(

I'm glad Ico ended when it did, but I thought the ending was terrible (the part past the credits, it would have been fantastic if that piece wasn't in it) and the final bit of pacing in the game downright blew. You seriously mean to tell me I have to kill 50 of these freakin things that can't hurt me and just jump away from me? Talk about artificial extension.

But yeah, I tend to enjoy the short but sweet games far more, the ones that have a good 10-20 hours of meaty and fresh gameplay. No need to make an FPS game more than 15 hours long, it gets stale quick. Beyond Good and Evil is a perfect example of this, fantastic game and just the right length.

[drewbrim]

I never felt the length of the game directly related to the fun factor of it. I say directly cause if the game is too short I can feel like I was cheated out of my money no matter how fun it was. Which in turn makes the game less fun. It's not so much of a problem anymore since I never buy new games, hence, I never pay a lot for them, but I can remember saving my allowance money for weeks to be able to buy a copy of Splatterhouse for the Turbografx when it frist came out. Blood! Gore! all my friends couldn't wait to play it and the game turned out to have 5 F-ing levels :angry: and the shotgun was only on 1 of them. So basically I was pissed that I wasted my money even though the 5 levels on the game were "fun"

[zektor]

I too am part of the working class, and do so 45+ hours a week. I play games in 10-15 minute sessions 95% of the time. I have many games that require weeks to complete, but I will not end up completing them for a year because of my hectic schedule. So, I really do love the long games, but just don't have the time so I resort to the quickie game almost all of the time.

[Xantan the Foul]

Yeah... it all depends on the games. If it's an RPG, I like 30-50 hours out of it. 10-20 on deep action and adventure games.

[EnemyZero]

it depends on the game, certain games are meant to be short, especially classics like SoR or even newer games like max payne and stuff, adventure games and rpgs should be lengthy unless there craptacular .... like i really wish arc of the lad was longer

[RJ]

I too recently completed ICO & agree w/ heezuschrist for most of the same reasons. I went in w/ a completely open mind, & wasnt blown away. I thought it was average at best. The very ending was "well, that's nice."

I dont share most opinions on BG&E. It's a fine game, nothing inherently wrong w/ it, but I just couldnt get into it for some reason. I think I'm about halfway through (just arrived at the slaughterhouses) & dont care whether I finish.

Who said as we grow older we have less time for gaming hit it on the head. I'm lucky if I can find a 2-3 hr block to play at all, & usually have to plan it out ahead of time. I just began GTA: VC yesterday (got it for a steal last week) & dont plan on finishing it due to the fact it's so big. I'll just do as much as I can before I get bored or the game gets tedious.

I'm comfortable w/ (& now look for) games that arent so huge & I can finish in a given amount of time, (or dont NEED to be "finished") like Midway Arcade Treasures or similar collections, or "finite" games like DDR or Eyetoy: Groove.

[suppafly]

A game has to be GOOD to be worth it. If its long, thats better.....if its short (like river city ransom), you can always play it over again and again

[crazyjackcsa]

Leave them wanting more. That's the best thing to do. Length rarely bothers me, long or short, but what does drive me mad is the multiple playthrough thing. Sonic Adventure 2, SSX 3 Tony Hawk, WHY MAKE ME PLAY THROUGH WITH EVERY CHARACTER???? SSX 3 Drives me crazy beacuse even in two player, your stats are the same as the one player, so if you've beaten the game with one character, he rocks and the rest suck! I hate that! That's adding some unwanted length to a game.

[Untamed]

My view?

Doesn't matter, as long as you're having fun. Even better if you can have fun again.

[Melf]

I'm on the last dungeon of Breath of Fire 2, and according to the guy in TownShip, I've only been playing for 15:30. That's pretty short for an RPG, but it's still a great game, even with its questionable translation.

You should try BoF III. It took me 69 and 1/2 hours to beat that game. :D


It all depends on the game, I think. Panzer Dragoon Saga was like, 16 hours long and was incredible. I don't want to spend 40 hours with a game that isn't worth it. If it's ten hours, but ten awesome and intense hours, that's fine with me.

[Damon Plus]

A game has to be GOOD to be worth it. If its long, thats better.....if its short (like river city ransom), you can always play it over again and again

"agrees on the River City Ransom thing" :)

[hezeuschrist]

I'm on the last dungeon of Breath of Fire 2, and according to the guy in TownShip, I've only been playing for 15:30. That's pretty short for an RPG, but it's still a great game, even with its questionable translation.

You should try BoF III. It took me 69 and 1/2 hours to beat that game. :D


It all depends on the game, I think. Panzer Dragoon Saga was like, 16 hours long and was incredible. I don't want to spend 40 hours with a game that isn't worth it. If it's ten hours, but ten awesome and intense hours, that's fine with me.

Don't even get me started on BoF III... I got to the last dungeon and somehow deleted my saves. Man, that still doesn't sit well with me and it happened 5 years ago :/

[PDorr3]

Is panzer dragoon saga worth the money people pay for it? I mean if its truly that good I would pay $70 tops for it.