http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/03/news_6126957.html



I don't know about you, but the Zelda games do take awhile for me to beat. Also GTA is only as long as you make it if you want to do all the little missions. Regardless, longer (good) games are better most of the time because you get out of what you pay for.

yeah really wtf? "I want games that are short and cost me $50 so that I can have fun for 2 hours and have to go buy another game"

Its a marketing ploy I bet...stupid man

Think back to all the great console games of past.

Greats such as Streets of Rage, Mario, Sonic etc. The games kept you coming back for more but were only a couple of hours long.

If a game is going to be long it has to be long for the right reasons (such as rpgs like BG2, PS:T, Fallout etc).

Think back to a time where the thought of anything computerized generated heaps of interest from everyone. And when video games were ORIGINAL and something never seen before.

Think back to the time of the television, how incredibly popular and prestigeous it was to own one in the 1950's, no matter how expensive.

not really, half a dozen snes games i own still get the majority of gameplay time out of me, compared to dozens of PC, PSX and PS2 games I also own.

I agree with Detty. And I think what a long game specifically needs to justify its length is a good story which is well-integrated into the gameplay.

Interestingly, Ron Gilbert (creator of Monkey Island), who complains about many aspects of games and the gaming industry on his blog, is apparently creating some inexpensive games that can be completed quickly.

the point a lot of people seem to be missing is this:

does it matter if the game is short if you're gonna come back to it 50 times?

Indeed, it seems like too many times the games that are trying to be long are losing steam about halfway through.

A long game is good if it can excite the consumer for the entire time, and not get a stale feeling or a "When will it end?" *Doom 3*

Would you rather have a 50 hour adventure that is relatively unexciting and repetitive, or a 15 hour adventure that is all fresh and never becomes stale.

I would want that 15 hour game

I think that's what he's arguging (and he has said this many times). Lots of gamers *think outside are more core gaming group we have here* don't want to spend 50-60 hours playing a game just to beat it. I know one guy who only buys the games for MP only because he doesn't want to spend hours playing SP. He just doesn't see the point.

I still want long epic games, but if they can deliver shorter more fun games, I'm all for it. I want a mix. A game that I have to work on, and games that I can pick up - play - have fun - and move on in life.

exactly, but the thing that i'm getting at, these really exciting short games usually have enough fun in them to allow you to derive the same amount of gaming time through repeat plays as you would get from the 70 hour epics you complete once every so often.

I guess it depends on the type of game you're talking about. Fighting games usually take about an hour to finish on the harder difficulties, maybe slightly more if they have something like "story mode".

The story is what makes most games for me nowadays. The only enjoyable games that I've played lately are the Xbox versions of the KotOR games. As far as other new games, I've either rented, downloaded the demos, or just haven't bothered. In a lot of cases now, they do just seem to be re-using old ideas in an attempt to accrue more revenue.

Let's all go back to board games, trivia, and puzzles! er... I'm somewhat serious...

Reminds me of how the car industry things people want smaller cars, when infact they want bigger cars, or vice versa.

I just got a PSP. The only game I have for it is Twisted Metal, but it's more than enough for now. It doesn't even take an hour to play through the whole story mode, but each character has its own unique ending, so there's lots of replace value. Because the story is so short, it's perfect for gaming on the go.

A 3D GTA game is coming to the PSP in September. I'm most likely going to buy it, but I'm not so sure it's appropriate for handhelds. If it plays like a traditional GTA game, I suspect I'll only be able to complete 1 or 2 missions in one sitting.

When I'm home, I want to play longer games, but a lot of them fon't capture my attention for very long. I got about half way through Prince of Persia 2 before I got bored with the story. I'm currently playing through KotOR 2, and I'm having a great time. I can't put the controller down when I'm playing that.

Basically, when I'm at home, I want something long that will grab my attention. When traveling, I want something short, with lots of replay value. As long as it lasts a car ride, I'm happy.

I never finished HL2. I got bored with it after that zombie-town with the priest, can't remember the name of that part.

I think I played through SMB a good 50 times at least. I never get bored of killing Bowser. :p

KotoR had a great length I thought - the story filled it good.

I liked KotoR II at first, but then it got tiring. Was just as long as KotoR but I felt it should've been shorter because the story was not as strong.

I just HAD to. :p

That's got my vote for the dumbest thing anyone has ever said.

FARCRY. Goddamn those mutants were lame.

But uh, Doom 3 only lasted about 10 hours...dunno how long it took YOU :p. That's on normal mode, though.

I dunno, I think as far as portables go, the PSP has the best game out there atm. Lumines is the perfect portable game. It's tetris all over again, only if you have to stop playing, you pause, put the PSP in sleep, and put it away. Whenever you want to come back, you just turn the PSP back on, unpause, and keep on playing. Ingenious, it is.

That's one thing that makes the PSP so damn portable and easy to pick up and put down--a lot of games work really well with the sleep function in that you can pause, sleep, put it down, pick it up even two days later, turn it on, unpause, and keep on goin.

As far as videogames being too long now...well I think that's just stupid. There have been so many RPGs in the past, both for consoles and PCs, that have been so damn long it was nauseating. They were still fun though...just took years to complete. FPS', if anything, I find are getting shorter. Deus Ex, Thief, System Shock...these were all long, engaging games. Hell, even UT, Quake 1 & 2, and HL were pretty damn long, especially for that time. Compared to them, games like Doom 3 being 10 hours, HL2 being a few more, Halo 1 and 2 being about the same timespan, Call of Duty, etc. But I find it doesn't bother me too much anymore--I came back to Call of Duty how many times? And having recently purchased it, I'm going to go back to it again. I mean...uh... <_< >_>

Point is, games haven't really changed, and I hate Miyamoto. End.

I prefer my games that cost me 45+ to buy, at least 12 hours of gameplay on easy mode. I like long games, and ones that delve into the storyline instead of the typical "Girl got kidnapped. Fight baddies several times, a few bosses here and there, get some keys for some doors, save girl, then watch a 2 second cutscene for an ending"..

Would you pay the 10 dollars it is nowadays in theater's, to see a movie that was only half an hour long?...I sure as hell wouldn't.

Glad to see alot of you guys agree with me.

Doom 3 could've been 2 hours long, and it would've lost steam half way through.

So repetitive and linear - and the levels weren't distinct at all. I don't see how anyone could find the game scary or that fun really. All the creepiness was predictable - *HMM, MAYBE ONCE I ENTER THIS ROOM I'LL TURN AROUND AND THERE WILL BE A BAD GUY! OH MY! THERE HE IS!*.

And how many damn PDA's did you pick up with storage combinations.

That was my point. It seemed 20 hours longer then it actually was