Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Importance of Game Length

Posted by Zonk on from the waiting-for-the-1000-hour-game dept.

Gamasutra's regular 'Question of the Week' feature touches, this week, on the ideal length of games, and the importance of game length. While the overwhelming opinion was 'quality is better than quantity', there were a range of opinions along that scale. From the article: "I would say as a gamer on the more casual side (30+ years) the game length is fine around 20-25 hours. If you are having fun while playing. I never have time to finish anything longer. It makes me more satisfied to have played through the game in 20-25 game hours than never even reach half way. - Joachim Carlsson, Massive Entertainment"

2 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Genre by Mark+Programmer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The funny thing is that this is exactly why I don't play RPGs on a regular basis.

    For me, most game mechanics get stale after twenty hours of play. RPGs in particular tend to have relatively simple game mechanics that rarely get changed-up---they pad the game out with level-grinding and plot. Once I've mastered the game mechanics, I want to move faster; I've found very few RPGs that allow me to do so, since the artificial wall of gaining levels still exists.

    --

    Take care,
    Mark

    There is a solution...

  2. Re:They forgot... by wuie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As funny as the parent comment sounds, I agree with it.

    When I play through a game, I like to know that it's more than just A-B-C plot progression. I love sideplots. I love side missions. I love small quirky things that happen in the game that can either distract me from the main plot, or join up with it eventually and make it a broader gaming experience.