I would like to see longer games. These days, I think developers are hyping multiplayer too much and single-player is suffering.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[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.
jettpack
except that balack ops wasnt good
Don't waste your time with this guy man. He's known for his joke fanboyish Call of Duty comments. I don't even believe he's serious usually.
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
This is the blatant example of the ADHD generation :lol:
get the F*** out of here with that. :|
the reason games feel so "long" is because
A: you are not enjoying it
B: you play too many crappy games.
It depends on the game.
Dead Space 2 was too long, especially with what the last parts put you through. Quake 4 was waaaay too long. MGS4 actually kind of inverted the problem because there was just so much filler in the cutscenes that there wasn't enough game.
[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.
KingsofQueens
This is the blatant example of the ADHD generation :lol:
True but sometimes games ARE too long.
I got tired of Quake 4, Dead Space 2, and a few others because they were just too long for what they were.
I disagree with the point on game length. Devs need to make games based on how they want the game to be. Just like films. And nobody likes to watch long movies? Who are those people? LOTR, Godfather, Prince of the City, Dances with Wolves and so many more are 3-4 hours or better and some of the highest regarded and biggest money earners in film history. However I do agree with the release of many quality titles a year and my inability to get to play them all. That's why a lack of exclusives by MS this year doesn't bother me. I have so many games I haven't played yet, that I am still not near 2011 anyway. cainetao11
Don't forget Lord of the Rings.
People don't like to watch a long movie, and the same applies to games. This is made worse by the fact that people have to excert lots of effort to get through a game. This isn't the old days when good games are a rarity, so when one came along hardcore gamers savored the hell out of it. Nowadays good games are released on weekly basis, and as a result the market are saturated with too many good games that even the most diehard gamers will barely get to 30% of them. And with so many on the market, gamers simply don't have much time to put into a single game before the need to move on to another game. Valve released some stats regarding their games a while ago. Only 38% of half-life 2 episode 1 owners finished it. And even super short 3 hrs AAA games like Portal only have around 30% completion. Other short AAA games like Halo and Call of Duty have abysmal completion rates as well. Bioware recently stated that majority of Dragon Age owners didn't even play beyond an hour. With these facts in mind, developers need to stop wasting their time in building contents beyond the 2 hrs gameplay time that majority of their customer won't ever get to. It's a waste for the customers as well since they've spent so much on contents they won't even get to play. Instead of dragging a game to 4-7 hr long, developers could be using that same amount of development time to make a better, shorter game.
runbleduck
I agree. I know that many gamers love their long games, and even then, they wish it would go on and on, but it has been my experience that I can't finish most games for the life of me. With the exception of Shadow of the Colossus, and GoW I and II, and a small handful of other games I thoroughly enjoyed, I would have been satisfied with 2 or 3 hours. Top games like Uncharted 2, GOW III, etc, I enjoyed up until the halfway point, then I was simply finished. The noveltly wears off quick. Call me hard to please, but I've only played a small handful of games that actually made me crave for more. If I could change that about me, I would.
[QUOTE="cainetao11"]I disagree with the point on game length. Devs need to make games based on how they want the game to be. Just like films. And nobody likes to watch long movies? Who are those people? LOTR, Godfather, Prince of the City, Dances with Wolves and so many more are 3-4 hours or better and some of the highest regarded and biggest money earners in film history. However I do agree with the release of many quality titles a year and my inability to get to play them all. That's why a lack of exclusives by MS this year doesn't bother me. I have so many games I haven't played yet, that I am still not near 2011 anyway. Demonjoe93
Don't forget Lord of the Rings.
LOTR= Lord of the RingsWell OT, most mainstream reviewers share your sentiments considering that most of them loved halo ODST
This is basiscally the new age of gamers/younger vs the old school style. I perfer the old school, though short games have their moments, I like long depth, journey, and creativity with my games.
you obviously need to play some better games.
if i like a game i'll always complete it, don't care how long it is.
but the longer, the better.
Hahahahahaha.
That has to be the most ridiculous opinion I have ever read about video games ever.
If anything games should be much longer, with a lot more extra content for the price we pay. And no, good games do not come out every week.
[QUOTE="KingsofQueens"]
[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.
-TheSecondSign-
This is the blatant example of the ADHD generation :lol:
True but sometimes games ARE too long.
I got tired of Quake 4, Dead Space 2, and a few others because they were just too long for what they were.
first off, your avatar is AWESOME! :P
On topic: I completely disagree, although it would be kind of interesting to have $10 - $20 games that were like 2 hours long or something. that said when a game is done right, I can't get enough of it, so i think that would be a bad idea.
RE2 was only 2 1/2 hours and its still one of the best console games ever made. Of course, there were 2 disks that were both just under 3 hours on speed runs but I agree that 3 hours is perfect if done correctly. That's not to say long games like Elder Scrolls aren't good, just that I like the feeling of beating a game in one session. If the game is good enough I'll beat it a bunch of times and get my money's worth that way...
I disagree with the point on game length. Devs need to make games based on how they want the game to be. Just like films. And nobody likes to watch long movies? Who are those people? LOTR, Godfather, Prince of the City, Dances with Wolves and so many more are 3-4 hours or better and some of the highest regarded and biggest money earners in film history. However I do agree with the release of many quality titles a year and my inability to get to play them all. That's why a lack of exclusives by MS this year doesn't bother me. I have so many games I haven't played yet, that I am still not near 2011 anyway. cainetao11LOTR? Fell asleep Godfather? Fell asleep Prince of the City? Never seen it Dances with Wolves? Fell asleep See a trend going on here? When I watch long movies I end up passing out
console game is noT an Arcade gamePeople don't like to watch a long movie, and the same applies to games. This is made worse by the fact that people have to excert lots of effort to get through a game. This isn't the old days when good games are a rarity, so when one came along hardcore gamers savored the hell out of it. Nowadays good games are released on weekly basis, and as a result the market are saturated with too many good games that even the most diehard gamers will barely get to 30% of them. And with so many on the market, gamers simply don't have much time to put into a single game before the need to move on to another game. Valve released some stats regarding their games a while ago. Only 38% of half-life 2 episode 1 owners finished it. And even super short 3 hrs AAA games like Portal only have around 30% completion. Other short AAA games like Halo and Call of Duty have abysmal completion rates as well. Bioware recently stated that majority of Dragon Age owners didn't even play beyond an hour. With these facts in mind, developers need to stop wasting their time in building contents beyond the 2 hrs gameplay time that majority of their customer won't ever get to. It's a waste for the customers as well since they've spent so much on contents they won't even get to play. Instead of dragging a game to 4-7 hr long, developers could be using that same amount of development time to make a better, shorter game.
runbleduck
There are already plenty of short games. But I don't think 3 hours would cut it. 60 bucks is too much to pay for a long, interactive movie. However, if you are looking for a good, but awfully short game, get Gunstar Super Heroes on GBA. I read great reviews, so I bought it, beat it within 2 hours. Good while it lasts, but there's nothing to do after you beat it. No unlockables, no alternate characters... nothing. Play that if you want.
[QUOTE="Demonjoe93"][QUOTE="cainetao11"]I disagree with the point on game length. Devs need to make games based on how they want the game to be. Just like films. And nobody likes to watch long movies? Who are those people? LOTR, Godfather, Prince of the City, Dances with Wolves and so many more are 3-4 hours or better and some of the highest regarded and biggest money earners in film history. However I do agree with the release of many quality titles a year and my inability to get to play them all. That's why a lack of exclusives by MS this year doesn't bother me. I have so many games I haven't played yet, that I am still not near 2011 anyway. cainetao11
Don't forget Lord of the Rings.
LOTR= Lord of the RingsMy mistake then.
[QUOTE="cainetao11"]I disagree with the point on game length. Devs need to make games based on how they want the game to be. Just like films. And nobody likes to watch long movies? Who are those people? LOTR, Godfather, Prince of the City, Dances with Wolves and so many more are 3-4 hours or better and some of the highest regarded and biggest money earners in film history. However I do agree with the release of many quality titles a year and my inability to get to play them all. That's why a lack of exclusives by MS this year doesn't bother me. I have so many games I haven't played yet, that I am still not near 2011 anyway. JJGT500LOTR? Fell asleep Godfather? Fell asleep Prince of the City? Never seen it Dances with Wolves? Fell asleep See a trend going on here? When I watch long movies I end up passing out Chronic ADHD?
who the hell has 3 hours these days?
better make them even shorter.
what i would like to do is just hand the guy at gamestop sixty bucks and have him dl some trophys and cheevos to your system shake your hand and tell you to get the hell out of the store.
Riverwolf007
OMG win comment!
Seriously, only three hours long? Good games are released daily? Has the OP been inhaling gasoline fumes all day?
[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]
who the hell has 3 hours these days?
better make them even shorter.
what i would like to do is just hand the guy at gamestop sixty bucks and have him dl some trophys and cheevos to your system shake your hand and tell you to get the hell out of the store.
RACiEP
OMG win comment!
Seriously, only three hours long? Good games are released daily? Has the OP been inhaling gasoline fumes all day?
Maybe he was. I'm thinking TC is actually a troll, but that's just me.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment