Miyamoto Says Today's Games Too Long

CNN Money's Game On column has an interview with legendary designer Miyamoto in which the respected Mario-maker says that today's games are just too long to capture his interest. From the article: "There's not a lot I want to play now...A lot of the games out there are just too long. Of course, there are games, such as 'Halo' or 'Grand Theft Auto,' that are big and expansive. But if you're not interested in spending that time with them, you're not going to play." Commentary on the column at Press the Buttons.

Comments

Return on investment.

[mister_slim]

I think he means games are too padded. If I spend 40 hours playing a game it better offer more than repetitive gameplay and some poorly edited FMV. Look at Chronicles of Riddick or Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. No extra filler, just gameplay and the minimum necessary background and story.

Re:Return on investment.

[KDR_11k]

No, he was talking about how games take too long for each session. When I fire up RE4 I have to play for roughly half an hour until I reach the next savepoint. Quit any earlier and the progress is lost. Even worse are games with "preparation", e.g. you have to run twenty minutes to the place where you're going to continue with playing or have to gather a group to go into that dungeon.

Compare that to Tetris, for example. Starts within seconds and takes a few more seconds to get into the standard game situation. Completely unlike an RTs where you have to build a base and an army before the real meat of the game starts.

I think he refers to length of typical play.

[LordZardoz]

I dont think that he is so much against games that have 20 hours of linear play. I think he is against games that pretty much require you to dump two hours into a single play session.

With a game like Final Fantasy, if your going to play it, your probably going to try to clear at least an hour of your time to play it, probably more. Halo probably takes what, about 30 mins for each level?

Compare this to Wario Ware. You can pick it up, play for 15 mins, and walk away. Your not going to beat the entire game in 15 mins, but you are going to play a decent chunk of it. Animal Crossing is much the same way, you play it for short bursts of time, but you will likley pick it up more often in a given day.

I personally think the sweet spot is about 5 to 15 mins for a single level, and expect the player to play for 30 to 35 minutes. If you give a player the opportunity to safely put the game away every 15 minutes without losing progress, you will prevent a great deal of frustration from very casual gamers.

As for the overall duration of a game and playing it to the end, that is another debate, and is determined more by the kind of game and intended audience. Miyamoto is known for making games where 40% or so are secrets or optional. You dont strictly need every heard container in a Zelda game. You dont need every single star / shine in a Mario game. You can finish the game pretty quickly if you stick only to the essentials.

As for my prefrence, I think that a game should not outlast its enjoyability. If a new user gets bored without finishing the game, you need to cut down on the elements that are taking up the extra time and make them optional.

END COMMUNICATION

Real games don't ever end

[ArmorFiend]

Real video games don't have ends. They just keep on getting harder, and faster, and more brutal, until either you call it quits, or your score overflows 2^16 and wraps around.

Power-ups are for sissies. Health bars are for sissies. Just give me 3 lives and an extra at 10,000. A true test of skill is a game like Asteroids or Centipede or Ms Pac Man or Joust.

If a game has an end, then it is a rip-off.