Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The length of games today, ey?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    DonkeyStyle \o/
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,145 ✭✭✭DonkeyStyle \o/


    Final Fantasy 7 ... 99+ hours :)


  • Options
    #33
    mp3guy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,969 ✭✭✭mp3guy


    DonkeyStyle \o/ wrote:
    Final Fantasy 7 ... 99+ hours :)

    Thats pretty bad, i finished it 44hours both times through


  • Options
    #34
    ObeyGiant
    Registered Users Posts: 1,982 ✭✭✭ObeyGiant


    DonkeyStyle \o/ wrote:
    Go to an arcade then.
    Is there such a thing as "quality gaming" in arcades any more? Or is that only for 14 year old girls on DDR?


  • Options
    #35
    Kiith
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 23,182 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kiith


    mp3guy wrote:
    Thats pretty bad, i finished it 44hours both times through


    ya, but that without getting all the cool stuff.


  • Options
    #36
    The Gnome
    Registered Users Posts: 1,403 ✭✭✭The Gnome


    I think donkeystyle brought up a good point, would people rather a long game with no replay value or a relatively short game with a high replay value?

    Personally I love a good long slog at a game but there's always the let down that once it's finished knowing that it won't be enjoyable second time around.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    JCDenton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 394 ✭✭JCDenton


    Is that 6 of one and half a dozen of the other?

    I mean, replaying a short game would possibly make up the same amount of overall time spent playing a longer game, and yet the entertainment value of both would be similar?

    I think the real point is that (for me personally anyway) length doesn't matter. It's how good the game is in the first place. Case and point being Max Payne 2, or to an extreme degree - something like Tetris, maybe.


  • Options
    #38
    i_am_dogboy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭i_am_dogboy


    I think the length of a game has no bearing on the final quality of the game, but maybe when I'm out in the real world I'll appreciate shorter games more. Fallout 2 was a very good length, 20+ hours, and I reckon I've played it 10 time or so since I got it. But I didn't really notice that it was longer than say, beyond good and evil, except for the extreme bloodshot eyes resulting from my crap old monitor. If a game is really good, you probably won't think that it's too long/short while playing it, a great example of this is baldurs gate 2, I couldn't count how many hours I played that game in the 2 times I played through but still I didn't think at any point that I was playing too much.

    The only real problem for me with short games, is when I buy a really good but short game, after I clear it I end up going on a game buying spree, which has resulted in a lot of not very great games being in my collection.


  • Options
    #39
    DonkeyStyle \o/
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,145 ✭✭✭DonkeyStyle \o/


    ObeyGiant wrote:
    Is there such a thing as "quality gaming" in arcades any more?
    Couldn't tell you... haven't been to an arcade in a good few years... but think of the money comparison... I mean, I bought a SNES and StreetFighter2 so I wouldn't have to spend €60 for 5 hours of gameplay.
    mp3guy wrote:
    Thats pretty bad, i finished it 44hours both times through
    As Kiith said, you probably won't have bred a golden chocobo in that time, or killed all the weapons... I took my time with it, chewing and tasting before I swallow ;)
    Actually the timer stops at 99 hours... so it's more than that... then add on the second time playing it through, which was a bit of a rush job, I faced sepheroth way before I was ready and lucked out by surviving his crazy 10-minute-long summon with like 10hp left!
    I've been thinking of playing it through again lately... so I'd say I'll break 200+ hours... that's some insane value for money... almost as good as what I got out of HalfLife and it's free mods.


  • Options
    #40
    Malafus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 262 ✭✭Malafus


    johnny_ultimate wrote:
    Length has never really concerned me before. But this was very short for my liking, especially after paying 60 smackaroons.


    This is a shocking development.... 38 replies without someone quoting this....


  • Options
    #41
    DonkeyStyle \o/
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,145 ✭✭✭DonkeyStyle \o/


    Malafus wrote:
    This is a shocking development.... 38 replies without someone quoting this....
    Hmm, you're going to have to spell this out for me, I'm a bit stupid.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    steviec
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭steviec


    I spent over 100 hours on all the Final Fantasy games, but I do find I have less and less time these days. I'm not sure I'd be able to do the same with FFXII.

    On the other hand I did clock up an ungodly number of hours on World of Warcraft over Summer, which partly contributes to my not wanting to spend too long on anything.

    One game that has it perfect is Civilization. You can tailor a single game to last from about 3-12 hours, and it's infinitely replayable. I think I'd like all games to be like that. Games that centre on a story simply can't be infinitely replayable though, and as much as I love Final Fantasy's I think more condensed games would suit me better these days. My most recent game complete was Fahrenheit, that was just about right, it wasn't too long and it was interesting the whole way through, and I was never stuck on a bit making no progress. There's also multiple endings so I'd consider playing through again when I get a chance. As story driven games go I think it got the balance right.


Advertisement