Games are too damn long. Need to be reduced to 3 hours max.

oh god no :|

EDIT: if that ever happened, and btw, it never will, I'll quit gaming.

Dude, I feel you. Like totally. If I'm paying $60 for a game, I'm not paying $60 to say, "You know what, at hour five I'm bored numb out of my freaking mind. When's hour six coming along so we can beat the last boss and put this ridiculously long game away?"If anything, we can only pray that Activision sees this thread and makes the one thing we're all wishing for a reality: make Modern Warfare 3 EVEN SHORTER than Modern Warfare 2. It took me four hours to beat MW2, and let me tell you bro, I was exhausted after that torturous ordeal. I blame the game's length. The day we get 90 minute releases for $60 will be the day that gaming transcends all other forms of entertainment.

For serious.

That's a terrible idea, games these days need to be longer with better pacing.

Well that's just the worst thing I've read all day.

And most Dragon Age Players didn't play much because Dragon Age was horrible.

oh god no :|

EDIT: if that ever happened, and btw, it never will, I'll quit gaming.

theuncharted34

You just have to believe that it will happen bro.Believe and the truth will find you.Cliffhanger endings and all!

Well that's just the worst thing I've read all day.

And most Dragon Age Players didn't play much because Dragon Age was horrible.

scoots9

$60 for three hours of entertainment:S

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

oh god no :|

EDIT: if that ever happened, and btw, it never will, I'll quit gaming.

NeonNinja

You just have to believe that it will happen bro.Believe and the truth will find you.Cliffhanger endings and all!

did you turn into bobby kotick? :P

Games are far too expensive to have a 3 hour single player campaign.

deny it all you want but statistic do not lie: Majority of gamers simply do not play a game, single-player wise, beyond a few hours. People have short attention spans and with the next big game coming in around the corner, they simply don't have the time to focus on the game they bought the week before. runbleduck

1. Why should that matter to the developers? If you purchase their game, it doesn't matter how much or little time you spend. That's your choice and your right.

2. If you want shorter games, the casual/arcade style is probably going to work better for you. There will be a huge drop in picture quality, character development, etc., but it's simply not cost-effective to invest huge quantities of time and energy into games that are likely to last less than 5 hours and be played once. Your animation engines should never cost more than you're likely to receive from total sales of the game.

I agree TC we should have 2 -3 hour games with monthly DLC to extend the story.Sp4rtan_3

3. Pardon me for asking, but couldn't you simply spend 3 hours completing a quest or progressing in the storyline, then save and leave the game alone for a month? Personal time rationing would still allow you to enjoy longer games. Perhaps I'm missing something.

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]

Sounds like somebody has a backlog of games they cant get through.:P I dont think games should be reduced to that low amount of hours. Hell some people cry today about an 8 hour game being too "short". I think the value of games is fine today imo. Uncharted,Gow 3,Gears,etc... all have hit the sweet spot in the respectable length a game should be imo. And for the record I love long movies too.lol Inception was pretty long and its one of my fave movies.:P

SRTtoZ

How bout LOTR trilogy extended edition? I watched them all in a row once...lol.

i did it with the star wars original trilogy, but lotr? now theres a thought...

Some games do go on too long, but seriously? 3 hours?

People aren't going to pay $60+ for 3 hours of gameplay.

[QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

oh god no :|

EDIT: if that ever happened, and btw, it never will, I'll quit gaming.

theuncharted34

You just have to believe that it will happen bro.Believe and the truth will find you.Cliffhanger endings and all!

did you turn into bobby kotick? :P

I'm not just here to take the fun out of making games, I'm here to take the fun out of playing games.

If long you meant to short, then yes.

In some ways you have a point, but really, I will like to have as much enjoyment as I can with my 50-60 bucks, so I don't agree.

There's always DL games that are around 3-5 hours.

True dat, I hate games that are streched out and made repetitive for no reason other than to say "OMG ITS 12 HOURS LONG!!111111!!11"

This is one of the reasons why I loved Black Ops.

DerpyMcDerp

lol black ops

It's people like you that are ruining gaming. I really hope your joking, but for some reason you seem serious. Lets look at my favorite games from the past year or two.

Mass Effect - 30-40 hours average on a play through, I have spent 100+ hours overall

Mass Effect 2 - 40 hours average, Spent 80 hours so far

Final Fantasy XIII - 60 hours to beat the game, 80+ trying to finish it

Dragon Age - 60-80 per playthrough, have easily spent 150+ on multiple playthroughs

Resident Evil 5 - about 15-20 hours per playthrough

GTA 4 lasts quite a bit but I can't exactly remember how long, it was at least 20 hours if I can remember right.

I think this is one of the reasons RPG's are my favorite genre, they give you the best bang for your buck. Thing is all of these games can be beaten in half the time I took. It depends on how many of the missions/quests that you skip. I feel like completeting everything and seeing all there is so I get a lot more out of the game. Quality over qauntity my friend.

Now as for action games I loved that Resident Evil 4 lasted about 20 hours. Why on earth would you want to buy a $60 game and be done with it the same evening that you purchased it? I spend enough on games already, I don't need to blow through them any faster than I already am. This is what I have found to be a good time estimate depending on genre.

Rpgs needs to last at least 30 hours

Action Adventure needs at least 15-20

Shooters needs to be at least 10

Racing games are right up there with RPG's for length as well.

Maybe you TC and these "majority gamers" need to play crappy casual games on the Wii and Arcade games because these seem to be the type of games your looking for. Don't ruin real gamer games. You seem to not care about narrative at all, If a game doesn't have an interesting story, then I have no interest in the game. Unless its a multiplayer game, then story isn't really needed.

How would that work for an RPG? Can you catch 150 Pokemon in 3 hours?

How would that work for an RPG? Can you catch 150 Pokemon in 3 hours?

mitu123

If we apply today's thinking mentality, there would be 20 TOTALLY UNIQUE varieties of Pokemon. The remainder would be sold as $5 DLC packs for content locked on the disc. So technically you would have a three hour game and then you would be breathing fresh life into it with all of this exciting downloadable content that totally wasn't already on the disc. If that isn't more bang for your buck I don't know what is.

How would that work for an RPG? Can you catch 150 Pokemon in 3 hours?

mitu123

Yeah there would be a pokeball gun and you just run around chasing pokemon and hitting them with the balls, but the captured pokemon must distract them.

Is this even a serious thread ? Oh my.

telefanatic

i wonder how long it took for SW to realise this is a sarcastic post. this is a sarcastic post right? RIGHT?

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

How would that work for an RPG? Can you catch 150 Pokemon in 3 hours?

Luxen90

Yeah there would be a pokeball gun and you just run around chasing pokemon and hitting them with the balls, but the captured pokemon must distract them.

Awesome. Can we have a game with a pokeball gun anyway, even if it's still the same length?

*something rustles in the grass*

BAM! BAM! BAM!

The impact of the first two balls damages the pokemon enough that the third ball captures it instantly! Congratulations!

My reaction:

That has to be one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. I'm not paying $90 for something that will last 3 hours :?

I suddenly remember that one poll about no longer making single-player only games.

I suddenly remember that one poll about no longer making single-player only games.

789shadow

If nothing else these are great moments for system wars to unite against a common foe :P.

This thread should have had a poll.

This thread should have had a poll.

sandbox3d

Amen. I was sorely dissapointed.

3 hours? are you crazy?! they need to be only 1 hour! yeeaaaaah, i'd like to pay $60 for only an hour of gameplay. sick value right there!

3 hour max??? Seriously???

Well at the rate its going, expect that next gen. seriously though, i feel like N64 adventure games like OoT, MM, banjo, conker, rayman etc were all way longer than games are today, maybe its because i was younger when i beat them. Anyway, I usually dont take my game out of the system until I beat it unless its garbage. If anything games need to be longer so i dont need to spend money on a new game every month.

actually, games feel like they are too long, if they're not good enough.

if the games are fun to play, would you really wan't less fun opposed to more fun for the same money?

for example, i think Fallout 3 ended too early for me. i only finish games if i really like to play them. if it gets boring, then i don't finish it.

i mean, why buy multiple short games to pass time with, if you could only buy one game to reach the same duration?

hahahahhahahah.....no.

If nothing else these are great moments for system wars to unite against a common foe :P.

Vaasman

Good times.

Good times.

-

OT: If long games bother you, then just play a game for only 3 hours without caring if you complete it or not. In fact, you should just play a demo of a game if time is that crucial to you.

From your OP, you are trying to say that more people will be able to complete games if they are short.

Bioware recently stated that majority of Dragon Age owners didn't even play beyond an hour.

runbleduck

yet:

And even super short 3 hrs AAA games like Portal only have around 30% completion.

runbleduck

Apparently, it doesn't matter how long or short the game is. If it doesn't interest someone, they will stop playing it. If they really liked those games (if those statistics are true) they would have continued playing it.

This would mean that there is no excuse to try and make games last only 3 hours so that "everybody" will complete it. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a game that lasts 3 hours, but to have everyone of them last 3 hours would destroy the quality of a game and turn gaming into a disposable medium: play, then toss.

Bioware recently stated that majority of Dragon Age owners didn't even play beyond an hour.

runbleduck

if you play an RPG just for an hour, it just means you don't like it. you really saying RPGs should last around 1-3h? redicilousness.

you should just get a Wii. it's made for you. although it has games longers than 3 hours too...

True dat, I hate games that are streched out and made repetitive for no reason other than to say "OMG ITS 12 HOURS LONG!!111111!!11"

This is one of the reasons why I loved Black Ops.

DerpyMcDerp

Your Avatar is wrong.

It needs to be Derpy Hooves!

But on topic.

No, I think the time span of Games today are great, They sometimes tell great Stories and are pretty fun. and Heck I'm not saying Arcade games are not fun either, I love Street Fighter and Marvel vs Capcom 3.

5 - 9 Hours of Gameplay is just Great.

As you state in OP the shorter games have equal low completion stats.
So the length of the game has little to do with how many people finish it.
I think hype and peerpressure have bigger impacts.

[QUOTE="DerpyMcDerp"]

True dat, I hate games that are streched out and made repetitive for no reason other than to say "OMG ITS 12 HOURS LONG!!111111!!11"

This is one of the reasons why I loved Black Ops.

LegatoSkyheart

Your Avatar is wrong.

It needs to be Derpy Hooves!

But on topic.

No, I think the time span of Games today are great, They sometimes tell great Stories and are pretty fun. and Heck I'm not saying Arcade games are not fun either, I love Street Fighter and Marvel vs Capcom 3.

5 - 9 Hours of Gameplay is just Great.

On topic: This is also probably why I loved Half Life 1 as much as I did.

Please tell me this thread is joke. Games need to be longer, not shorter! If I'm paying £40 for a game I want a campaign of at least 10 hours for an FPS. If I'm buying an action adventure game with heavy emphasis on story, it should be at least 13 hours. Another thing I'd like is more replay value and I'm not talking about multiplayer.