This topic is locked from further discussion.
it depends on the genre. I personally want non RPG's to be around 20 to 30 hours in length and RPG's to be around 60 or more hours
Short Game with awesome replayabilty = great
Long game with a huge goal that makes you keep wanting more (Read : Good RPG) = great
Short game that you only play once for 60$ = ripoff.
Â
Guys, don't forget this is like Oblivion. Oblivion would suck if it only had 15-20 hours of gameplay.death1505921
Most of oblivion is not active. It's traveling or doing mundane things. Â
wow really i think the longer the better more bang for your buck... but hey alot of ppl have A.D.D. so whateversonofabear17More like if you can devote 100 hours to a single game then you got OCD. For shooters with a compelling story that 15 hour mark is a good sweet spot. When you start getting to long the story takes a backset and all you get is pointless fetch quests. Id always rather play a 15 hour shooter a couple of times then drag myself through a 30 hour shooter that just keeps going and going with a complete lack of story or reason. RPGs are a different story, but still the main story line should be able to be completed within 20 or so hours for anyone to possibly be able to follow it. The purpose of buying games is not to waste hours away, I buy them to enjoy them for all there aspects, story, action, gameplay and so on.
100hrs is too long but 20-25hrs is a sweet spot depending on the game. I hope Bioshock is at least 15hrs+.Thomasdeleo20-25 hours? why would you buy something you can only play for a day(in hours terms). well maby for a shooter... but for an RPG..O_O
Gamers want short games? I've been playing Oblivion for 170 hours+ now on one character and 80 hours on another. I want nothing else.
Â
But to be realistic :
 FPS 20 hours (Single player)
 RTS 30 hours (campaign)Â
 Action/Platformer 20 hours
 Adventure 20 hours
 RPG 40 hours+Â
[QUOTE="sonofabear17"]wow really i think the longer the better more bang for your buck... but hey alot of ppl have A.D.D. so whateverWillT12345More like if you can devote 100 hours to a single game then you got OCD. For shooters with a compelling story that 15 hour mark is a good sweet spot. When you start getting to long the story takes a backset and all you get is pointless fetch quests. Id always rather play a 15 hour shooter a couple of times then drag myself through a 30 hour shooter that just keeps going and going with a complete lack of story or reason. RPGs are a different story, but still the main story line should be able to be completed within 20 or so hours for anyone to possibly be able to follow it. hehe thats funny. but im thinking 100 hour rpgs=good 100 shooter=bad. i was thinking about rpgs when i posted this cause i got it off of the Mass effect site.
Well, it's true that I rather have a short and action packed game like Gears, then a long stretched game with allot of walking around, doing nothing. However, I mostly prefer just having both at the same time. Really, I wouldn't mind if Gears was 50 hours long and as action packed as it is now. Offcourse, that's not possible to create. That doesn't mean I don't want it. It would be the perfect game.
I have to say he is really wrong. They just need to keep things interesting in a game, fun and make it long at the same time.
So I take it Too Human will be a short game? Lame. I was just getting hyped up for it. I understood it was a 30 hour game from what they explained before. If I have to settle for allot less then that, then I'll certainly skip it. Shorter the better... it's like he's not a gamer saying that.
[QUOTE="WillT12345"][QUOTE="sonofabear17"]wow really i think the longer the better more bang for your buck... but hey alot of ppl have A.D.D. so whateversonofabear17More like if you can devote 100 hours to a single game then you got OCD. For shooters with a compelling story that 15 hour mark is a good sweet spot. When you start getting to long the story takes a backset and all you get is pointless fetch quests. Id always rather play a 15 hour shooter a couple of times then drag myself through a 30 hour shooter that just keeps going and going with a complete lack of story or reason. RPGs are a different story, but still the main story line should be able to be completed within 20 or so hours for anyone to possibly be able to follow it. hehe thats funny. but im thinking 100 hour rpgs=good 100 shooter=bad. i was thinking about rpgs when i posted this cause i got it off of the Mass effect site.If your saying strictly RPGs then yeah, or actually more like they should be developed so they could practically go on forever. But I think a general rule of thumb should be if the main story takes 30+ hours to tell expect it to take a backseat or get lost in the players minds. Which is why I said what I said cause I enjoy playing games for storylines and good gameplay rather then 100+ hours of headshots.
[QUOTE="sonofabear17"][QUOTE="WillT12345"][QUOTE="sonofabear17"]wow really i think the longer the better more bang for your buck... but hey alot of ppl have A.D.D. so whateverWillT12345More like if you can devote 100 hours to a single game then you got OCD. For shooters with a compelling story that 15 hour mark is a good sweet spot. When you start getting to long the story takes a backset and all you get is pointless fetch quests. Id always rather play a 15 hour shooter a couple of times then drag myself through a 30 hour shooter that just keeps going and going with a complete lack of story or reason. RPGs are a different story, but still the main story line should be able to be completed within 20 or so hours for anyone to possibly be able to follow it. hehe thats funny. but im thinking 100 hour rpgs=good 100 shooter=bad. i was thinking about rpgs when i posted this cause i got it off of the Mass effect site.If your saying strictly RPGs then yeah, or actually more like they should be developed so they could practically go on forever. But I think a general rule of thumb should be if the main story takes 30+ hours to tell expect it to take a backseat or get lost in the players minds. Which is why I said what I said cause I enjoy playing games for storylines and good gameplay rather then 100+ hours of headshots. yeah im talking pretty much just RPGs. so the the game is like Main story=30 to 60 hours(depending on how deep the story is)+side quests and such should be the rest
100 hours is for sp in a shooter is great as long as it stays fun and compelling. Look at hl2, if that game was originally released with all the episodes it would have been pretty long. But since hl2 is so damn good it would have been fun the whole time. It's only really hard for developers to make a long shooter that stays fun and ofcourse, 20 buks for each episode is good money for them...
[QUOTE="sonofabear17"]A Too Human developer says that "These days gamers dont want a 100 hour game. The shoter the better" I have just one thing to say WTF... Link: http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=4559[/QUOTE]
well...then he is retarded......i want 300 hr games....and games that dont end....and last i cheked...i game
I want quality. If you can make a shooter that lasts 100 hours and it doesn't get repetitive and boring, go ahead. If you want to make an RPG only 10 hours, you better make it one hell of a ride. It all depends on the quality of a project. God of War 1 was only 8 or so hours. Perfect length with the right amount of substance, if it was too get any longer, it probably would have fell into the repetitive category.Â
For example games like Dead to Rights, 6-8 hour game. And thank God. The game and story is awesome, it is just that it gets repetitive. If you can't make your game not be repetitive then don't make it long. If it changes and excites every hour up to 100 hours, then go right ahead.
Quality will win out over Quantity. Â
Guys, don't forget this is like Oblivion. Oblivion would suck if it only had 15-20 hours of gameplay.death1505921yes but oblivion is not that kinda game i prefer from 5-20 hours of gameplay
it depends on the genre. I personally want non RPG's to be around 20 to 30 hours in length and RPG's to be around 60 or more hours
suzukigsxr
Absolutely! 8 hours for an "Epic" (pun intended) campaign, no matter how good, is too short. 20 hours will take a couple of weeks top complete at a marginal speed. I hate getting absorbed into a game, playing through the night, only to find I beat it within a day. C'mon $60 should at least get me 20 hours ($3 an hour), as opposed to about $7.50Â
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment