Short games are about to get shorter

Yeah, I haven't finished many games since I got an original Xbox, though admittedly I didn't own a hell of a lot of games before that anyway.

However if a game is good, gamers will want to play it for a longer time. They make the comment... "Instead of "Zelda"-like games that take longer to start and resume, they're more inclined to play stop-and-go titles in bite-size games."

But if a game came out that was actually as good as OOT, I'd play it for 30 or 40 hours. I felt unsatisfied with Darksiders when I finished it in 16 hours, I would have loved for it to have gone for another 10 hours.

Basically, QUALITY determines whether I'm gonna finish a game.

Game developers/publishers should be learning that if you actually want your game to sell at full price instead of in the bargain bin 6 months later for $5, they have to make both a quality experience AND and appropriate length experience. Hopefully with games like Bulletstorm and Homefront the powers that be realise that. Though then you also have people kneeling down to give Valve a $50 blowjob to play Portal 2 at release :p

If a game is boring and uninspired I couldn't care less if its less than 10 hours... but at the same time I'm sure as fuck not going to pay $50 for such a title.
 
The answer is in the article. They need to quit making so many goddamn games. If Steam backlogs are any indication, at least.
 
The only games I don't finish are the ones I think suck.

I've played Batman, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Dead Space 1 & 2 and Crysis thru 3 and 4 times. I only made it half way thru Sniper: Ghost Warrior.

Maybe instead of shorter games, how about better games.

If games get much shorter (Medal of Honor, Bad Company 2) Ill give up gaming. Wont be worth spending $40 or so for 4 hours of gameplay.
 
Make a great game and people will finish it and wished there was more. And that's what expansion packs are for.

Make a shitty repetitive game and of course most player will just give up half way through.

I recently bought Splinter Cell pack from the last Steam sale and I'm still playing it all the way though, despite its gameplay nature which takes longer time to clear each level.
 
I finish practically ALL the games I play. There is only one game I never finished, Prince of Persia: Sand of Time. I can take only so much wall crawling and flipping.

Most games, I even finish multiple times. ME1 & 2, Fallout 3 & NV, Borderlands. I've finished all the CoDs (and it NEVER took me anywhere near 67 hours to complete, more like 16 hours).

I've even finished the original Baldur's Gate and both Neverwinter Nights. Now those were long games.
 
I have finished every game except maybe a handful where they were just too annoying or boring... epic games are definitely most rewarding, but much more hit-and-miss nowadays. DS rpgs are still fun and feel worthwhile to me.

I don't do multiplayer, other then some Smash Bros. back in the gamecube era with some friends... which was fun I must say. But to "beat" those kind of games is hardly an easy or fun task for many.
 
Rofl-Mic-Lofl said:
SP is boring, that's why. Bring on more multiplayer games.
Click to expand...

Not to me. A good single player game like Batman is like a 15 hour, interactive movie that is very immersive and can be downright therapeutic. Multiplayer is just running around killing everything that moves and then you have to deal with way too many douhebags to make it worth it. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that cause everybody likes different things but I have virtually no interest in mutliplayer.

Apparently I'm in the minority though because game companies are making billions on multiplayer games and much less in single player campaigns.
 
Rofl-Mic-Lofl said:
SP is boring, that's why. Bring on more multiplayer games.
Click to expand...
There really are too many maps included with modern multiplayer games. We need to get it down to two maps with retail for maximum value! How can one person play more than two maps? It's simply doesn't make sense!
 
JustinCorrigible said:
The answer is in the article. They need to quit making so many goddamn games. If Steam backlogs are any indication, at least.
Click to expand...

More like they need to quit making so many goddamn bad games. Quantity before quality seems to be the norm whenever consoles take over the gaming scene.
 
I finish all the games I play... if they're fun. I haven't bought a game that I haven't finished lately thanks to proper reviews and the opinions of friends. If a game is even remotely fun, I'll play it through. If it's lots of fun, I'll play it through 2 or 3 times... maybe more.

If it has multiplayer, I'll play it until the cows come home... I played return to castle wolfenstein multiplayer for 7 freakin years. I played the single player easily over 20 times. Favorite game of all-time.
 
1) game devs - make shitty games
2) people dont like them, dont finish it
3) game devs - yay we can make shorter games now!

All the games I liked, I finished and often replay them.
If I didn't finish it, its because I didn't like it.
 
I've gotten a lot better at finishing games. I probably had 200 hours into Oblivion before I finished it, though I suppose that game isn't as much about the story. I was feeling the early late game blahs in TW2, but pushed through and finished it, which actually wasn't difficult once I got going because it was well done and interesting (and Chapter 3 was short as hell).

In general, I think a lot of devs are bad at pacing a game, throwing in new and interesting bits to the story mid/late game, and just paying half as much attention to late game as they did early game. There's usually a fairly obvious time in the game where the "new world feel" wears off. There's nothing worse than just going through the motions to finish a game when you can tell what's going to happen hours earlier. IMO they need a change of scenery, a change in story, and well timed ups and downs in the action at that crucial mid/late game time.

I will say, I still don't own Portal 2, as much as I'm interesting it in, because when the choice came down to 30-40 hours of TW2, and 8-10 hours of Portal 2, it was an easy decision.
 
I'll pay $10 for a 15 hour game if it's *worth* the money. I like some of these indie games on Steam for that reason. I don't get into it expecting to be WoW'd (as it were), I expect them to be short an sweet.
 
I'm one of the few people I know that actually plays a game to completion if its a full priced game ($60). Now on the other hand if the game is cheap (say a nice steam sale) than I'll much more likely to not finish it.

But I do make a point to finish the games I buy to get my money's worth out of them entirely. I try to avoid games that are full price that have short replay value and if I must play them I rent them through Gamefly.
 
I don't mind if a game is only 8 hours and is designed for everyone to beat it. Just don't charge $60 for it.
 
Rofl-Mic-Lofl said:
SP is boring, that's why. Bring on more multiplayer games.
Click to expand...

Uh. Huh. :confused:

MacLeod said:
Not to me. A good single player game like Batman is like a 15 hour, interactive movie that is very immersive and can be downright therapeutic. Multiplayer is just running around killing everything that moves and then you have to deal with way too many douhebags to make it worth it. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that cause everybody likes different things but I have virtually no interest in mutliplayer.

Apparently I'm in the minority though because game companies are making billions on multiplayer games and much less in single player campaigns.
Click to expand...

I'll join you in that minority. Make a quality, entertaining SP game that will take me a good while more than an afternoon, possibly an evening to beat that leaves me wanting to come back for more = shut up and take my money.
 
I tend to finish games that keep me interested and not get boring. All the games I finished: Portal 1/2, Batman AA, Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Metro 2033, Half-Life..and many others. Games I haven't: Bioshock 1/2, Fear, Crysis, Far Cry, and many others.
 
Wow, this just tells us how bad the gaming industry is then. It's because the games suck.

When are these gaming companies gonna realize they are really pissing us off.

Just develop a god dam decent game. Maye we'll finish it.

All I can say is, thank god for the internet and real gamer reviews.
 
MacLeod said:
The only games I don't finish are the ones I think suck.

I've played Batman, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Dead Space 1 & 2 and Crysis thru 3 and 4 times. I only made it half way thru Sniper: Ghost Warrior.

Maybe instead of shorter games, how about better games.

If games get much shorter (Medal of Honor, Bad Company 2) Ill give up gaming. Wont be worth spending $40 or so for 4 hours of gameplay.
Click to expand...

Exactly - I don't buy short games. There's a reason I didn't get Portal 2. Not worth the money. Portal 1 was good when it came with the OB...but Portal 2 is a rip off.

Rofl-Mic-Lofl said:
SP is boring, that's why. Bring on more multiplayer games.
Click to expand...

Errr....no.

MacLeod said:
Not to me. A good single player game like Batman is like a 15 hour, interactive movie that is very immersive and can be downright therapeutic. Multiplayer is just running around killing everything that moves and then you have to deal with way too many douhebags to make it worth it. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that cause everybody likes different things but I have virtually no interest in mutliplayer.

Apparently I'm in the minority though because game companies are making billions on multiplayer games and much less in single player campaigns.
Click to expand...

"LOL U HAKUR <screeching noise heard over VOIP> BAN HIM"

There's a reason I don't play multiplayer on the XBox. Or most other MP anymore. I mean, I like LoL sometimes, but most of the time it's "Dude, cover middle, wtf, they're getting the turret! <turret down> Damn you, do you even know how to play?!! Stop camping in spawn spamming surrender votes! Oh fuck this...where's my Makers 42 bottle?"

I literally only play LoL after I've had at least two glasses of Makers 42 (or 1792 Ridgemont works as well)...the only time I'm mellow enough to deal with the shitheads. ESPECIALLY at midnight PST when the general skill of players seems to just drop off.

Multiplayer games anymore just serve to piss me the hell off. In BC2 you either roflstomp teams, or you're on a shitty team of all snipers wondering why they keep dying to the UAV that's hovering 3 feet behind them. Same goes for LoL. You ALWAYS end up with some idiot who just feeds and insults your playing abilities despite their being 0-12-0 and you being 4-1-5 or something.

SP games don't piss me off like that. I'm left alone without any stupidity. Playing Halo with friends at someone's place or even in a conference room at work rocks, however...
 
It seems like most games I don't finish (that I start anyway, not counting my Steam sales backlog), I'm done with pretty quickly. I don't often play 6 or 10 hours through a game and then quit; so I kind of wonder how many people finish a mission say 1/3rd of the way through something like Red Dead and still don't finish the game.

if it's grabbed me well enough to get through a few good sittings, I'm going to finish unless the developer just does something aggravating or stupid. And that's probably pretty consistent weather it's a 6 hour Portal 2 or BioShock or a 30+ hour Dragon Age / Borderlands / Mass Effect.
Steam's daily deals means my pile of shame continues to grow steadily if I dedicate most of my time to a big long action/rpg.
 
FreiDOg said:
It seems like most games I don't finish (that I start anyway, not counting my Steam sales backlog), I'm done with pretty quickly. I don't often play 6 or 10 hours through a game and then quit; so I kind of wonder how many people finish a mission say 1/3rd of the way through something like Red Dead and still don't finish the game.

if it's grabbed me well enough to get through a few good sittings, I'm going to finish unless the developer just does something aggravating or stupid. And that's probably pretty consistent weather it's a 6 hour Portal 2 or BioShock or a 30+ hour Dragon Age / Borderlands / Mass Effect.
Steam's daily deals means my pile of shame continues to grow steadily if I dedicate most of my time to a big long action/rpg.
Click to expand...

I stopped buying from their deals. My backlog is too big, any new games are a waste of money until I can ctually get to them.

Games I got WELL into and quit: Fable 2, Oblivion, Force Unleashed, both Ass Creed games are a few. There's more. I sometimes get into it, get bored, and get done. Some I get into and finish. Arham Asylum. Mass Effect 1&2. Dragon Age O, OA, 2. KOTOR.
 
I finish games I buy most of the time. There are only a few I have unfinished right now. Probably because I'm superior to most people :monocle:
 
I love a good single player game and a good story. I have beat so many games and there are tons that I have beat twice.
Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout 3, Temple of Elemental Evil, Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, Arcanum, Starcraft, Starcraft Brood War, Star craft 2, Half Life, Half life 2 (and ep 1and ep 2), Batman, Halo, Halo 3, Bulletstorm, Far Cry, Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Doom 3, Warcraft 3, Morrowind, Modern Warfare 2, Assassins Creed, Assassin's Creed 2, MechWarrior 3, Mechwarrior 4 Mercenaries, Mechwarrior 4, KOTOR, KOTOR 2, Portal, Portal 2, Dragon age, Splinter Cell, the list goes on and on but I'm going to stop typing now as I keep thinking of more.
 
That statistic would dissappoint me for sure if I was a developer.


I have a few games I like enough to play more than once, and they're not the short ones thats for sure. ME1/2 I have almost 600 hours into if I combine the time of my save games, but I have an obsession with it. Batman AA I've played through 3 times on xbox. I still load up mechwarrior 4/BK/Mercs and play through even though I've beaten it about 50 times already. I play homeworld and homeworld 2 once in a while and I would say I've been through both of those at least 10 times. A lot of the more modern games just don't appeal to me at all, so I suffer through one playthrough and stick it on the shelf to collect dust.
 
The only games I tend to finish are co op games...then again I probably played baldurs gate 1/2 7 or 8 times over the years....same with fallout.
 
I've pretty much quit gaming due to the dumbing down of the industry. I want long epic experiences, not a memory and puzzle challenge...
 
Heh, games won't have chapters or acts anymore. They will probably have a prologue which leads straight into the epilogue. Game over!
 
Hmm, mustve been a multiplayer fan.

Ha. Get it? Multiplayer? Geez I crack myself up.
 
In my opinion the downfall to single player games, besides the time it takes to beat a lot of them, is the actual shitty bad BAD endings of most games.

A few months ago I played Red Dead Redemption for 20+ hours before getting to that craptastic ending...and I'm like...I just spend a whole day of my life playing this AWESOME game to get...this? My beloved main character gets shot down and now I have to finish the LAST level as his gay son? Not only that but the last level is the most uninspiring ending ever with no action/drama...siiiigh...still mad about this one it seems...

Same with Fable 3...LOVED the game through and through then the ending came around and it made me feel like I just wasted all that time.

So to me its not so much the LENGTH of the game itself but how it ends...I don't mind a 8 hour single player if the story and how its told is good with a good ending. Take Vanquish for example...I beat it in like 6-7 hours...one sitting...but it was totally epic the entire time and the ending though not excellent sure as hell didn't have the main character die or some crappy 5 second ending.

It just seems to me like developers are more focused on multi-player and shun the single player as just some kind of add-on...cough...BLACKOPS...cough...
 
Oh dear, 8 cool TF2 items for preordering Deus Ex HR... This wont help the %-who-didnt-complete-game statistics at all
 
rampantandroid said:
Exactly - I don't buy short games. There's a reason I didn't get Portal 2. Not worth the money. Portal 1 was good when it came with the OB...but Portal 2 is a rip off.
Click to expand...
No portal 2 is a bit longer more than twice... so a couple of hours.

I have played and beaten every FF game save for the MMO ones, Every Armored Core game, All of the legend of Mana series, Saga frontier 1/2, Monster hunter 1/2/3, Conkers bad fur day lol awesome game, The old Duke Nuk'em's, All three dooms, All of the Mario Series, All of the Metroid Series, All the Pokeman games up to silver and gold, Front mission 4, All of the Zelda series, Im not going to mention all of the arcade games like mortal combat or streetfighter games, Wont touch any of the sports games, Radiata stories, Shining force exa, The current Xenosaga Trilogy, Rygar... And so many others that i cant think of at this time and i wont even comment on the ones i haven't finished

/Random list of games that i have finished over years and rant/
 
MacLeod said:
Not to me. A good single player game like Batman is like a 15 hour, interactive movie that is very immersive and can be downright therapeutic. Multiplayer is just running around killing everything that moves and then you have to deal with way too many douhebags to make it worth it. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that cause everybody likes different things but I have virtually no interest in mutliplayer.

Apparently I'm in the minority though because game companies are making billions on multiplayer games and much less in single player campaigns.
Click to expand...

If you are in the minority, then I am also. I do enjoy coop multi with friends, but give me a great single player game and I am really happy. Too many idiots and griefers out there to enjoy a pubbie match anymore, plus I am retired and to get my friends in a game I'd have to wait til they get home from work. Too much free time on my hands... :D
 
So it looks like I will simply be buying less games. If a game is good, I finish it, like many others here have said. I've played plenty of long ones all the way through. Oblivion and Morrowind, of course, take the cake for number of hours Ive put in. Just within the past year I've finished ME (again) ME2, STALKER S.o.C. and Clear Sky, Fallout New Vegas, and probably a few others Im not thinking of right now.

I wont spend money on a game that takes 5 or 6 hours. Not worth it to me.
 
I don't buy many games and tend to look for something that will last a while. In the past 10 years, I've purchased three games without a multiplayer aspect (or much of one) for the PC (including two this year) and a few for my Game Boy Advance. That's about it.

It seems that they're talking about shrinking single player games. Good luck with that. Meanwhile I'll still be buying multiplayer online games so I can hang out with friends.
 
JoeUser said:
So to me its not so much the LENGTH of the game itself but how it ends...I don't mind a 8 hour single player if the story and how its told is good with a good ending. Take Vanquish for example...I beat it in like 6-7 hours...one sitting...but it was totally epic the entire time and the ending though not excellent sure as hell didn't have the main character die or some crappy 5 second ending.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the spoilers :( :rolleyes:

Anyway, I totally the opposite. I really couldn't care less how a game ends. After I finish playing a game I usually dont spend too much time dwelling on the experience.

The only time endings annoy me is when they come too soon. When I want to keep playing but the game has ended so I can't. That's unsatisfying.

But whether a game ends in a 1 second nuke that wipes everyone out or a 5 minute long cutscene that tries to tie up the loose ends... honestly I couldn't care either way. I dont play games for the endings, I play them for all the stuff in the middle. As long as the ending doesn't come early during what I consider the stuff in the middle I'm not phased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top