Question Of The Week For September 7th
September 1st, 2009 by Dana
Do you enjoy games that offer 40+ hours of game play, or do you enjoy to play games that are shorter, or offer smaller chunks of content through DLC? What do you consider to be the perfect length for a game?
September 1st, 2009 at 9:44 am
I usually like short games, at least those are the only ones that I finish. Although I haven’t had much time to game lately, I’m considering tackling a couple of long, in depth games in the near future.
GTA IV is in the mail to my house. I tried it once and it didn’t grab me, but I decided to give it more of a chance, since it is the highest rated game on metacritic, and people seem to like it. I also want to get the game of the year edition of Fallout 3 next month. Dragon Age is also looking interesting to me, and is supposed to be 100 hours long with possible user made expansions on the ps3 version.
We’ll see how far I get in this epic quest. I may just end up playing the 10 hours of Uncharted 2 over and over, like I did with the first one.
September 1st, 2009 at 9:58 am
Being a parent I have limited gaming time so I value a competent save system more than the game’s overall length.
If you love a game you won’t care if it requires hundreds of hours to complete.
September 1st, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Shorter games with an open world ending. Less than 20 hours is nice.
September 1st, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Being a single male, I have unlimited gaming time, and disposable income. So, I could buy and play whatever game I wanted, no matter what the length. However, I prefer short games, say 8 to 10 hours because I just want to have a little fun. When I want something intellectual and immersive, I read a good book.
September 1st, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Long games like Fallout 3 are great, but Portal was perfect. I accept all games no matter their length, so long as I enjoy the time I have with them. Lame answer, I know. Deal with it.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:01 am
There are games that are 8-10 hours and make me feel like it’s dragging and I just can’t wait for it to be over. Then there are games like Fallout 3 where I’ve spent close to 80 hours in and it still made me feel like there’s more I want to do. So it all comes down to what game it is. Time of year is a factor for me because I like shorter games during the Fall so I could play as many as the new releases as I can. And then the longer games during the “drought” because I know that I have time with it and won’t have to be rushed by the next big release.
Length wise, 7-9 hours for a decent game that I’m enjoying but it’s nothing to call home about. And a good 12-15 hours for the gems that I’m going to want to keep when I’m done with it. Open world games 30+ hours is good enough for me to be satisfied. But like Oatmeal long as a game is giving me something to feel good about dropping $60 for it, I don’t complain about the length. Although, with the kid on the way I’m going to be wishing for 6 hours tops games.
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:57 am
Like so many other things, I think that the appropriate length of the game depends on the game itself. I don’t really have any preference on lengths of games, and I have played and enjoyed games of every length.
However, since a 4 hour long game and a 40 hour long game are often priced the same, the 40 hour long game obviously provides more value in terms of dollars spent to hours of use.
Heavenly Sword was an example of a game that was thankfully short. The game wssn’t bad, but at the end of it, I was ready for it to be over, and it’s perhaps 10 hours long if you take your time.
On the opposite end of the Spectrum, Dragon Quest 8 is perhaps 80 hours long which translates into about a month of real-time. When it was over, I wished that there was more to play.
So far as play-time goes, as long as a game has a save feature that allows me to pick up where I left off, it can be as long as it wants. A good, long game is like a good, long book. Even if you can’t do it in one sitting, the end is worth the wait.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:45 am
I’ve always been torn between quantity, or quality.
On one hand, if the game is short, I’m more likely to finish it. I might even play through it again to collect trophies, or acheivements.
The other side of it is, if the game is long, you can pour 40-100 hours into it, and get great value for the money.
I think the ideal situation is a game with a solid, but shorter campaign, and multiplayer with legs is really the best value for me.
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:04 am
It is rare that a game will hold my interest for 40 hours these days (single player that is). I tend to enjoy games that keep the flow tight and clean (insert Oatmeal’s comment here). That being said, I really enjoy when games like that will bring out some DLC that is equally as good.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:26 am
I normally like short games with some replay value, but it is nice to have 1 epic long story to play too, I loved Fable II and fallout 3. It would be nice if price of the games reflected how long they are. It is crazy that Ghostbusters cost the same as Fallout 3.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I like my games nice and short with a very good story, to me a short game is about 15-20 hours long. I’m married and I have two kids and my family requires a lot of attention. So a 20 hour game is perfect for me, I like the fact that if I go without playing Dead Space for a month I still know what’s going on in the story and I don’t have to back peddle to remember what the hell is going on.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Since I rent most of my games, I like them on the shorter side, so I can play through them and move on to the next one. I find that I hit a wall if its too long. Far Cry 2 comes to mind..
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pm
it depends on my mood and the aesthetic of the game. i played over 200 hours of oblivion because i was in the mood and mind set to enjoy every hour in the beautiful and colorful world. on the other side, i quit playing fallout 3 and returned it. the aesthetic wasn’t pleasing nor was i in the mood to play a dark, dull game for 50 hours. my mindset and the game’s aesthetic are the two deciding factors when choosing a 20+ hour game, let alone a 40+ hour game.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Strider NEEDS both.
September 7th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
I don’t mind RPG’s being that long, but there’s no way I could handle 40 hours of Castle of Dragon.
September 8th, 2009 at 9:06 am
I know very few stories that can survive 40 hours of game play.
That’s always been my main criticism of FF titles. So much of the story is great and then at around 40 or even 60 hours the world is destroyed and you have to play the entire map again in the post-apocalyptic wasteland. I’m always like, “Now they’re just pulling ideas out their ass to make me feel like I spent my money well.” So unnecessary.
Not saying long games don’t work sometimes. For me the first Kingdom Hearts was great from beginning to end. But I’m generally happy with 20 hours of game play. Then I’m ready to move on. Below 10 is when I feel a little cheated.
September 14th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Am happy with eighter, if the story and gameplay are good am guuud! Hi Yummy!