What is your perfect length for singleplayer games?

Depends on the game, but if a game isn't about 20-30 hours long at least, I want it to be cheap. I love it when a game I like lasts for over 200 hours. Breath of the Wild and Monster Hunter World are two fine examples of this. Although World is way shorter than I wanted it to be.

Some people buy a CoD for full price to play its' shitty 4-6 hour long SP campaign. This, to me, is insane.

Bought and played Metro: Last Light recently. Completed it in 7 hours, I think. I bought it for 5 bucks. Had I payed full price for it I would've been really dissapointed with it. But for 5 bucks it was a fun little ride.

try ranger mode. you might rushed and played it on easy. it took me atleast 10 hours that incredibly perfect length for FPS.

where as do you think far cry games consist of 50 hours can worth any kind of money?? absolutely not.

COD campaign suck thats why they didnot worth it. Max payne 1 was just 6 hour long but one of the best game ever made.

Thought about trying out Ranger mode, but didn't feel like replaying after I finished it. Might go back to it later. I didn't rush and I never play games on easy, dude. Only time I felt I might have rushed a bit was when riding some rails, and you could make several stops on the way and go into rooms on the sides. Those were filled with spiders which I found annoying and I didn't need any ammo or anything, so I just drove past them.

Far Cry series is complete shit. If you can play it for over 50 hours, it's because you've been doing the same checklist they have for 45 of those. Far Cry series isn't worth any price, they're not worth my time at all. To play a Far Cry game I'd like to be paid for doing it.

And no matter how good the game is, if the game is only 6 hours long it's gonna sting a lot to pay full price for it.

no game worth 60 bucks no matter how good game is. thats why we wait for price drop.

but the point is. longevity doesnot mean quality. far cry and assassins creed are perfect example. insanely long games with zero quality.

most RPGs of 100 hours like skyrim or witcher 3 can get boring very fast and thus not worth a money.

That is just an opinion though. I put 100's of hours into Skyrim and BOTW and didn't find they got boring fast. Will probably put 100's of hours into RDR2 as well as the first was so great.

if it was not for unique western setting. RDR would be generic boring open world game. setting save that game.

Got 200+ hours in Skyrim and 400+ hours in BotW miself. And I still find these games fun, although I'm pretty fed up with Skyrim.

Lol, come on now, MGSV was not finished at all, this is no secret or conspiracy.

It depends. One game can be 10h and feel a couple of hours longer than it should be, other can last 100 and you feel like it's just right.

I would say 15-20 hours is creditable.

10-12 hours

And why do you consider that unfinished ? only because it has some cutscenes removed to make the room open for a sequel ?

MGS 2 also had some deleted cutscenes that the game would have made more sense with them but they were removed from the game and no one considers it unfinished.

I like to play my games on hard, take my time exploring, learn the lore, pay atention to the story and dialogs, etc.

More often than not, singleplayer games last me hundreds of hours.

60 hours for campaign!

I've never seen a Far Cry SP campaign last over 50 hours. But, then, I rarely replay them. However, I find it fun to drop into the game worlds of 3 and 4 in Reset Outpost mode. No checklist. No cutscenes. No objectives except what you set, if any. It's purely mindless exploration and mayhem.

so for a lot of you guys playing 200+ hours on one game is completely unheard of.

how many hours a week do play on average you think?

I put 200 hours into BotW but it took nearly a year. I have a daughter and live with my partner so I get about an hour in the evening after my daughter goes to bed and the gf is watching her TV shows. The Switch being portable help with that no end. I also have hobbies that are not gaming based like playing football, swimming and running plus socialising and friend time. Sometimes it's difficult to get any gaming time in at all.

so 7 hours a week would be the answer to my question?

let me try my question this way

how many hours a week do play on average you think?

On average yeah it say that's about right. More during the autumn\winter but less in the spring/summer.

I think we just assumed you maybe wanted a conversation or discussion about it and not just a number.

7

Depends largely on the genre!!!

Can't expect a side scrolling shooter to last 200hrs and a RPG to last 10hrs!!!

That said The more the better, and that tense argument is useless, what may be tense to you can bore me to death.

conversation is fine, answer first then conversation is nice. that way I dont have to deciever and entire paragaph just to get my answer.

mostly it was just exactly what was written, a question, just curious, not really wanting a conversation, just honestly simply curious.

sometimes the most obvious possiblity is the correct one, often times you dont have to read between the lines with what I say

@Bread_or_Decide: lmao 10 hours is like 2 to 3 days of gameplay at best. Wouldn't get $60 out of me for that.

Depends on the game, Dark Souls 3 I have played for over 100 hours and still play.

However Alien Isolation, despite being a good game was stale after 10+ hours

I think I shall just avoid conversing with you in future as everything you post is utter drivel.

oh my god that would be incredibly awesome!

every time you interact with me its becomes a cluster **** of insanity anyway.

like 'Money Laundering'

please...do stop replying to me

I average about 10-20 hours myself.

I ask becasue expected gaming length being around 10-20 hours that would mean a new game about once every 2-3 weeks.

not that its a bad thing, I was just wanting to get a point of reference is all

3-5. I have a big life. Barely can play games, perhaps 1 hour every day, if I'm lucky I can only play a Saturday 2-3 horus.

so that is a new game every 3 weeks.

which is fine I was just curious

I would rather have quality content over length. Like the new Asscreed game which is full of useless time wasting stuff. On the other hand Skyrim does it right. It has a lot of content but it's quality content. It depends on the type of game really. Resident Evil 4 was 15 to 20 which I think is about right for an action game. 10 hours is a little short for any game in my opinion. But I'd rather have a short game then a game full of stuff that is a waste of time.

Yup, that's why long games are just too much for me, plus I get bored easily after 20 hours. The only long rpg I've been able to finish this gen is The Witcher 3.

so you need a good pool of games you consider quality in order to basically keep that going.

does the AAA market provide that for you ok? My impression is that it would not but I dont know for sure to be honest.

I mean for comparison Steam released more than 7000 games in 2015, that was not a special year of any kind, that is very likely the same number every year since about 2013. If you even figure that only 10% of those games are interesting that is still 70 games a year. I dont think AAA market does that do they? I honestly do not know

Yeah it does, it's just frankly I don't have time to play that much hence finishing games takes me way to long. Most likely two weeks one average. I have way too big of a backlog of games. Plus then I have the more multipayer focused games that I casually play like ESO online, which are longer experiences.

I get that you would not have time. I am just saying by the math to maintain your current gaming habit you would need about 17 games a year. I would think that would be pretty much 100% of the AAA titles released in a year.

see what I mean?

it really depends on the content, if it allows more hours so be it, just don't inflate it with draging story and bleh quests.

when in games like dark souls, were you are enchanted by the world you can spend hours and hours with minimal story, in more linear, cinematic games like max payne and uncharted 100+ hours will feel diluted.

but who knows i'm up to try something like uncharted but 100+, where it can be like a tv series experience, but it will be way to expensive to make in the time it takes right now.

Humm, not really. I mean that's assuming I have that much time during that week. There are weeks I can't play at all. Again, took me a month and half to finish witcher 3, to give you another example 3 weeks to finish GOW. Plus there's like so many backlog games since I got a ps4 last year that I haven't played. In my case. I wish I had more time to play AAA games, because so many i haven't played and keep coming out.

so to be fair its likely less than 7 hours per week.

Understand I am not aruging but I have a better understanding of what you are saying now.

So when I say I play 15-20 hours a week. that means some weeks I play more than others but over all it likely comes out to 15-20 hours per every week of the year.

Yeah this.

Although I have to admit as I get older, I do appreciate shorter more focused experiences. I'm really starting to despise games that don't respect your time and are filled with boring filler.

well I can get that but it is different games for different people.

For me my gaming projects are just that, projects. I see them as a hobby so I actually like the projects to be long, I like to have a feeling as if I built something, and I live there and its my home

@tryit: Yeah, I get that... that's how I felt about Witcher 3. But games like that, that require 100+ hours, have to be extremely well done nowadays for me to enjoy them. Luckily W3 was that.

well I beg to differ on that last point.

I havent played the game but from what I have seen it doesnt appeal to me at all.

more over, you cant even build anything in the game can you? yeah that is not going to work for me

I get different strokes for different folks when I see assertions about W3 I just feel like posting my view

The perfect length of a game isn't a blanket preference for me, it's how that length evolves throughout the experience. Eventually, the novelty of game mechanics falters under the weight of tedium and monotony that length brings. Game play is typically what keeps me engaged, and if I'm playing essentially the same game at hour 50 as I am at hour 5, I quickly get bored. This is why many of the games I play, usually starting out with incredible first impressions, inevitably end up unfinished. And unless a game provides me some impetus to continue (such as an outstanding narrative or new mechanics, weapons, etc, introduced throughout the experience that open up new possibilities and/or building upon previous ones) I find myself eventually losing interest. This is why many of Nintendo games are so phenomenally well executed; this company, for all its faults, fundamentally understands this about game design and keeps many of their works fresh from start to finish (especially Mario). The Galaxy games, for instance, always had some new, cool feature or gameplay tweak that granted it an immense feeling of novelty and wonder pretty much the whole way through.

So a game's "proper" or "preferred" length to me is completely contingent upon how the game incorporates it into its design. I've paid far too much (and often far too little) for games that fall on either side of the spectrum. Some give me more length to their detriment, while others give me shorter length to their benefit. It all depends.

@tryit: Hmmm ok. Your loss, because it's an epic game :)

that is how I feel when I tell people about 7 days to die, Space Engineers, Elite Dangerous and many others.

I have enough gaming experience (I have been gaming for 36 years or so) to know what W3 is like by watching videos and I have experience in those types of games and they are just not something that appeals to me anymore

No its not. its mediocre game that happen to be most overrated game this generation.

with zero building...zero

sorry I had to interject on that point as well. no building is a not a requirement for me but an RPG without building leaves me with not much to do that I care about

@ghosts4ever: Lol... was wondering when you'd show up. You can sense anytime someone is praising a game you don't like.