- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How long should a game be?
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:04 am to DieDaily
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:04 am to DieDaily
Some of those games have misleading times though. Mega Man X comes from a different time where you can beat it fast if you know what you are doing but no one beat it that fast when it came out. You used to play it 100 times before you figured it out so play times from classics like that are very skewed.
People do this all the time. I've seen a lot of Xbox fan boys on the internet doing anything they can do crush the order and PS fan boys spinning what they can to defend it. It happens with every exclusive out there. Certain things will always start shite. Exclusives, EA games, Ubisoft games, etc... Those get more attention than they deserve usually.
quote:
I used to think that was a pretty standard opinion around here, but we have a lot of diverse opinions on this topic this week. strange. honestly, it seems like a lot of the PS fans are dropping their expectations around here just to defend Order 1866 (because it's a PS exclusive). Which is puzzling because they aren't developers or investors. Seems like it would be to their advantage to not allow a developer to soo easily pull this off without receiving some grief to prevent this from becoming the norm. just calling it how i see it. sorry.
People do this all the time. I've seen a lot of Xbox fan boys on the internet doing anything they can do crush the order and PS fan boys spinning what they can to defend it. It happens with every exclusive out there. Certain things will always start shite. Exclusives, EA games, Ubisoft games, etc... Those get more attention than they deserve usually.
This post was edited on 2/18/15 at 10:06 am
1
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:08 am to Klark Kent
quote:Maybe you mean in the other thread, but I haven't seen much PS4 vs XBO talk in this thread. Also, my interest in Order 1886 has always been lukewarm. This topic is really just about games as a whole, from $5 to $60+.
it seems like a lot of the PS fans are dropping their expectations around here just to defend Order 1866 (because it's a PS exclusive). Which is puzzling because they aren't developers or investors.
quote:I don't think wool is being pulled over anyone's eyes or that the developer, Ready At Dawn, was going to get away with it if it weren't for that meddling kid with a Youtube channel.
Seems like it would be to their advantage to not allow a developer to soo easily pull this off without receiving some grief to prevent this from becoming the norm. just calling it how i see it. sorry.
People should make informed buying decisions for lots of reasons. If the game is really THAT short the news will get out and the market will correct for it. My real fear in regards to the grief Ready At Dawn, the developer of Order 1886, has received is that developers will pad their games in response to this for fear of backlash. Some developer might have an amazing 10 hour game that they feel forced to shove 5 hours of fetch quests into just to hit some arbitrary "running time."
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:12 am to DieDaily
Some of the grief over the Order is unjustified since the game isn't even out yet. I think it's an interesting topic but people are jumping to conclusions. The game looks cool but I don't know when I will buy it if I ever buy it.
The topic of game length is not new though. i do worry about games being padded. Bravely Default is a great example of a game that I wonder if they felt like wasn't long enough because it reaches a point where it should have just stopped.
The topic of game length is not new though. i do worry about games being padded. Bravely Default is a great example of a game that I wonder if they felt like wasn't long enough because it reaches a point where it should have just stopped.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:15 am to Mr Gardoki
quote:True. It's not a perfect metric by any means. I just grabbed them out of that thread since they might be fresh in people's minds. I also dropped MMX in the second average (one of my all time favorites) since it was the low outlier. I, of course, also dropped KOTOR as well but RPG's have always been long affairs. If more RPG's had been mentioned in the thread, the average would have been much higher.
Some of those games have misleading times though. Mega Man X comes from a different time where you can beat it fast if you know what you are doing but no one beat it that fast when it came out. You used to play it 100 times before you figured it out so play times from classics like that are very skewed.
Having said that, I would like to look at the game times for the top titles throughout the years to see where game lengths made their largest leaps.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:18 am to DieDaily
You almost have to divide it between games with saves and without saves. RPG's have boasted long play times for a long time now.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:20 am to DieDaily
Game that have gotten more than 80 hours out of me off the top of my head:
Metro 2033
All Three Mass Effects
Skyrim
Oblivion
Supreme Commander 2
Dragon age O and I
Metro 2033
All Three Mass Effects
Skyrim
Oblivion
Supreme Commander 2
Dragon age O and I
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:24 am to DieDaily
fair enough.
agreed dok. you can include Titanfall in that mix. All us Xboxer's were defending it left and right, saying it was a console seller, saying it was a game changer.....a month later, no one was playing it.
12 total players on the cap max & no single player campaign? lol, good luck with TitanFall 2 EA
agreed dok. you can include Titanfall in that mix. All us Xboxer's were defending it left and right, saying it was a console seller, saying it was a game changer.....a month later, no one was playing it.
12 total players on the cap max & no single player campaign? lol, good luck with TitanFall 2 EA
This post was edited on 2/18/15 at 10:29 am
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:24 am to Mr Gardoki
Games have been padded for years now. Collectibles, unnecessary multiplayer, and some achievements are all used to stretch playtime.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:26 am to Klark Kent
quote:
agreed dok. you can include Titanfall in that mix. All us Xboxer's were defending it left and right, saying it was a console seller, saying it was a game changer.....a month later, no one was playing it.
It's to the point where you can't have an honest discussion about exclusives anymore
quote:
Games have been padded for years now. Collectibles, unnecessary multiplayer, and some achievements are all used to stretch playtime.
For sure. I'm not against collectibles but I can't stand useless collectibles. Let me collect all these items to get a piece of a heart, not just to check off 100%. I like trophies/achievements because they are out of the way enough to be completely ignored if you don't care. If you really like the game then you can use them to do more things in a game.
This post was edited on 2/18/15 at 10:28 am
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:31 am to Mr Gardoki
what's the point of even putting collectibles in games anymore that you actually have to spend hours attempting to collect. with all the micro-transactions in games now you can unlock it at the start of a playthru. so why spend time getting creative with the difficulty of unlockables and achievements?
think about it. if i'm a maze developer. i can spend 20 hours creating a maze that will challenge players for hours, but if my producer is just going to allow playes to micro-transaction their way thru the maze.....i kind of lose motivation don't i? i think that's a major problem with games going forward. the die hard developers who eat, sleep, breathe these games know no matter how much effort, time, and heart they dump into a aspect of a game.....the player can just pay for it.
that'd ruin it for me.
sorry, steering the conversation away from the op's topic here. just venting i suppose.
think about it. if i'm a maze developer. i can spend 20 hours creating a maze that will challenge players for hours, but if my producer is just going to allow playes to micro-transaction their way thru the maze.....i kind of lose motivation don't i? i think that's a major problem with games going forward. the die hard developers who eat, sleep, breathe these games know no matter how much effort, time, and heart they dump into a aspect of a game.....the player can just pay for it.
that'd ruin it for me.
sorry, steering the conversation away from the op's topic here. just venting i suppose.
This post was edited on 2/18/15 at 10:37 am
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:33 am to Klark Kent
I don't think I've played any games recently with microtransactions that allow you to do that but maybe I just avoid those games.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:46 am to Mr Gardoki
quote:That could be one distinction that might make this type of data more accurate, at least for earlier years.
You almost have to divide it between games with saves and without saves.
quote:Very true, though I think RPG's, specifically JRPG's, tend to have a lot of bloat in them and have for years. That's a genre that's pretty hit or miss with me, though.
RPG's have boasted long play times for a long time now.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 10:58 am to Mr Gardoki
quote:My criteria for a good collectible is the actual getting of the collectible is fun / interesting and there is a good reward for getting it. Zelda gets this half right because you typically have to solve a fun little puzzle to get a heart piece, but most Zelda games these days are so easy that I don't need any additional heart pieces.
I'm not against collectibles but I can't stand useless collectibles. Let me collect all these items to get a piece of a heart, not just to check off 100%.
The Last of Us gets it half right in the other direction. The reward is typically a new piece of story info or a bonus conversation (which I like) but getting the collectible is uninteresting.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 11:18 am to DieDaily
Kinda sorta relevant to the topic at hand.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 11:38 am to Mr Gardoki
You said Child of Light can get away with being 10-15 hours because it's $15. The Order is $60. Do you think it should be $10-15?
Posted on 2/18/15 at 11:45 am to oauron
quote:That is perfect, especially for me. "The Witness" probably is my most anticipated game of 2015 and I absolutely love "Braid" (and still occasionally play through it). People may not remember, but "Braid" was criticized back when it was released for it's length relative to it's price of $15. I bought it for that and feel like it was totally worth it.
Kinda sorta relevant to the topic at hand.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 12:03 pm to DieDaily
Length of a game really doesn't bother me. As long as it's entertaining, I'm happy.
Things that are not entertaining: packing your game with a ridiculous amount of pointless collectibles and calling that entertaining gameplay. If you're a game designer and your map looks like this, you're doing it wrong...
AC: Unity can be beaten in a matter of hours. You can spend more than triple the time hunting collectibles than actually playing the game. Ubisoft isn't alone; it's become The Thing to do in a lot of games. Games like that are not remotely worth $60 (and that's if AC:U wasn't buggy to begin with).
Hell, I still fire up MGSV: Ground Zeroes and the main short-story can be beaten in a matter of minutes. If it's fun, it's fun. Sure, it was $30, but people lost their minds at how short this prologue game was...it was a blast to me and well worth it.
Things that are not entertaining: packing your game with a ridiculous amount of pointless collectibles and calling that entertaining gameplay. If you're a game designer and your map looks like this, you're doing it wrong...
AC: Unity can be beaten in a matter of hours. You can spend more than triple the time hunting collectibles than actually playing the game. Ubisoft isn't alone; it's become The Thing to do in a lot of games. Games like that are not remotely worth $60 (and that's if AC:U wasn't buggy to begin with).
Hell, I still fire up MGSV: Ground Zeroes and the main short-story can be beaten in a matter of minutes. If it's fun, it's fun. Sure, it was $30, but people lost their minds at how short this prologue game was...it was a blast to me and well worth it.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 12:14 pm to DieDaily
quote:
You said Child of Light can get away with being 10-15 hours because it's $15. The Order is $60. Do you think it should be $10-15?
This is a great question. We don't have all the facts yet about game length of course nor quality. In the end we as consumers get to decide if we are happy or not with what they offer. History tells me that people will bitch but still buy it. It would be interesting to see if they could boost sales enough to make the difference if they offered it for only $50 or maybe even $40.
quote:
"The Witness" probably is my most anticipated game of 2015
Did they ever delay it or just not release it?
quote:
AC: Unity can be beaten in a matter of hours. You can spend more than triple the time hunting collectibles than actually playing the game. Ubisoft isn't alone; it's become The Thing to do in a lot of games. Games like that are not remotely worth $60 (and that's if AC:U wasn't buggy to begin with).
Ubisoft is on the forefront of many bad game trends right now
shite like that is what drove me away from Far Cry 3. This post was edited on 2/18/15 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 2/18/15 at 1:15 pm to Mr Gardoki
quote:It was slated for 2014 but now it seems 2015 will be the release year. However, I've been going to their site for the last 2 years and have never seen any hard release date other than "when it's done."
Did they ever delay it or just not release it?
FWIW, Blow says the game will take 20 - 30 hours to complete and is 10 times larger than Braid. However, Blow also said he can complete The Witness in roughly 6 hours. He's the lead designer, so that doesn't surprise me.
Regardless, I don't care if it's longer than Braid as long as it's good.
Posted on 2/18/15 at 1:18 pm to gamemc
quote:
You said Child of Light can get away with being 10-15 hours because it's $15. The Order is $60. Do you think it should be $10-15?
A lot of perceived value of games takes into consideration the amount spent on the game. Child of Light was a small budget RPG inspired by older JRPGs.
I think it's fair to see the production values of Child of Light and think it's a budget or digital only title (which it is and was released for). If Order 1886 didn't have such large production values, you wouldn't expect the full price tag otherwise.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News