Poll: What Killed The 30+ Hour Single-Player Campaign?

what did it? did gamers interests change, or is it something else?

Lazy devs, and a complacent new generation of gamers who either weren't around to see the good times, or don't remember.

When was 30+ hours the norm again? Maybe in your dreams, or you think repeating the same levels because you die is new content. Really, unless you played a lot of RPG's 30 hours was never the norm. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6f6P5Ceuc4&

Games are easier, more streamlined and more accessible not really longer. Gaming devs no longer have to resort to players memorizing levels and cheap tactics to keep the player engaged. Looking back on it now, RPGs are the only ones that have stood out to me as long. Some of the most celebrated games of past gens are short.

PC shooter franchise. Why make campaign when you can create an online deathmatch game.

Because a lot of those 30 hour games just were padded filler. Making a good solid 8-10 campaign that you'll want to beat 2-3 times is way more fun that a 30 hour padded campaign.chaotzu

I agree with that. If there was a game that felt like new every time I sat down to play it, I would undoubtedly support it with all my cash. But as it is, the novelty wears off long before the second act for most games. The third act is about putting your skills to use and tying it up.

In this day and age I constantly feel like I have places to be and other things to do, so I do like a game that feels like I'm getting somewhere instead of having felt that I wasted hours grinding away. It's the same reason I think I've stopped watching Babylon 5. I hear the series arc is friggin' amazing by the end, but after I watch a filler episode, I question why I just sat down for 40 mins to watch shoddy CGI, hokey writing, and subpar acting.

When was 30+ hours the norm again? Maybe in your dreams, or you think repeating the same levels because you die is new content. Really, unless you played a lot of RPG's 30 hours was never the norm. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6f6P5Ceuc4&

SaltyMeatballs

Pretty much this, shooters might have been 10 hours instead of 6 before, but that was due to repetition and difficulty a lot more then anything else, and it's nowhere near 30 hours. It's also discounting games like Skyrim and Grand Theft Auto, with more content and things to do then ever before.

But whatever.

All of them is the correct answer.

Streamlining has a lot to do with it. Much of the increased gameplay time in old games (which isn't that much longer than some games today, if at all) were because they either added a lot of padding or used high difficulty to artificially increase the length. Compare games like Doom to Call of Duty. CoD games generally last much shorter than some old-school FPS', but that's because the older games often forced the player to backtrack through levels and search for keys or solve puzzles with rather vague solutions. There's none of that in CoD; the player is constantly being pushed forward, so it will naturally mean that the game is over quicker. Not to mention quite a few old games would knock you back a good distance if you died in them in either levels or gear, further extending game time.

Also, I'd hardly say that the long single-player experience is dead. We're still seeing games like Xenoblade, Skyrim, Grand Theft Auto, and the like on a regular basis, which have dozens or even hundreds of hours of content to exhaust. Heck, even long-running franchises like Final Fantasy and Zelda have new installments that last much longer than their predecessors (Skyward Sword takes about 30 hours to clear the main story compared to 10-12 hours for Ocarina of Time). Then there are new games like LittleBigPlanet and Arma 2 that offer players the ability to create their own content, potentially making a never-ending amount of play time. If anything, games have more variety and content in them now than ever before (Mainstream multiplayer-focused titles notwithstanding).

Gamers killed it by buying and hyping more games that didn't have long campaigns anymore. All the CoDs and Uncharteds

what 30+ hour campiagne are you on about the only games i remember with that long of gameplay was zelda or final fantasy type games ,

the shooting games have always fell very short in fact my longest one taking away all the failed attempts would be goldeneye-20 missions long , each with 3 difficulty levels , plus going back for cheats , thats close to 15 hours if your rather good , for a bloke like me it t ook me years of frustration

lol wut? most single player games were never 30 hours mems_1224

Maybe not but I remember throwing 40+ hours into DK64 (and enjoying every moment of it).

Not to mention all the turn-based strategies and open-world RPGs which can last you days upon days (if can also become repetitive).

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]lol wut? most single player games were never 30 hours nameless12345

Maybe not but I remember throwing 40+ hours into DK64 (and enjoying every moment of it).

Not to mention all the turn-based strategies and open-world RPGs which can last you days upon days (if can also become repetitive).

The standards nowadays have gone down and stupid people demand more multiplayer experience and crappy casualised games.

Sad.

The standards nowadays have gone down and stupid people demand more multiplayer experience and crappy casualised games.

Sad.

GamerwillzPS

Only games I ever played that were 30+ hours were RPG's, and yes, there are still games like that being released today.

MP, why play alone when you can play with friends?

Nostalgia is a hellava drug. Take all of the grinding out of most JRPGs and you'd probably have half that. any other type of game, you'd be lucky if it were 10 hours if the difficulty wasn't spiked by stupid boss battles.

when 30+ hour games sell 10 million then they will come back. problem is....mp games sell more with 6-10 hour campaigns

30+ hours of single player campaing, story mode or whatever was never an industry standard. Like some other people pointed out, some of the classic RPGs that boasted long single player campaigns were generally riddled by chores and repetitive tasks involving little to no meaningful progress on the story or the main quest.

Multiplayer and DLC.

I've been gaming for a LONG time and I never remember 30+ hr campaigns being the norm outside of RPG's.. What games did you play? :?

The standards nowadays have gone down and stupid people demand more multiplayer experience and crappy casualised games.

Sad.

GamerwillzPS

There's no single reason, only a myriad of reasons like 1-4.

There are a few reasons, but I do think this is one of the main.

............... What games had that long of a singleplayer in one playthrough outside of rpg's? (which are still very long).. sSubZerOo

Many platformers, some shooters, some action-adventure games, and RTS games as well.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]............... What games had that long of a singleplayer in one playthrough outside of rpg's? (which are still very long).. ChubbyGuy40

Many platformers, some shooters, some action-adventure games, and RTS games as well.

What killed it?

It was never the norm before, and what genres were 30+ hours (like RPGs) still exist with 30+ hour stories today.

Gamer entitlement.

Dunno why, but this seems to be the fad term now.

What shooters and action adventures had 30h campaigns? RTS I´ll give you that,but that´s still the case now,so it yhasn´t changed,and aside from maybe Mario games,I can´t think of a single platformer that was that long(heck,even SMW took me way less than that to beat). Unless you´re talking about 100% a game,wich in that case,even now you have plenty that pass the 30h mark if you do that,otherwise no,that never was the norm.MrYaotubo

It's hard to give a concrete answer, as not only do people complete things at different speeds, but are we counting 100% completion or just getting through the main story? The Arkham games take a lot of time to complete. Zelda games are also action-adventure. All the Super Mario 3D platformers took a long time to complete as well. It took me awhile to beat SS3 with a buddy, but I don't know the exact time it took. Definitely longer than today's 8 hour mark, if even that. RAGE had a lengthy campaign imo. Took me about 15 to clear it. Human Revolution also took awhile, and that's an FPS/RPG mix. I heard STALKER has a very good campaign that lasts a long time.

Dishonered took me 21 hours to beat.

Money, time, technology. As games get more advanced graphically, they got shorter because they are expensive to produce, especially games that rely on a story using cut screens and voice actors.

The focus on multi-player too, but that is really just an excuse now because they just shoehorn in some lackluster, under developed multi-player into every game just for potential sales, but really only a few select games actually succeed.

There are still games that do it, most are RPGs or action/adventures though. Shooters? Eh. I dunno any more. I put in over 20 hours in Rage, which was nice.