Is A Short Singleplayer Game Automatically Lacking?

Quote: "Put simply, with regards to singleplayer elements and short but entertaining games, counting only content and not play time, what is lacking and what isn’t?

Allow me to elaborate.

A few months ago I was finally able to play and finish The Darkness II. Now while I thought it was an excellent offering that allowed for some good laughs and good action, it ultimately was a game you could complete in a matter of hours. I’d give the entire singleplayer story mode around five hours, maybe a sixth if you take your time.

Now keeping in mind that I thought this was a splendid offering that did lots of things right and left me so awe-struck that I went and acquired The Darkness comics so I could experience more of the universe (my knowledge of The Darkness wasn’t that bad in the first place but here I wanted everything), would it be fair for me to call this game a lacking offering? "

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
bubblebeam2122d ago

First was amazing, one of the best games this gen IMHO.
The second was still great, but waaaaay too short. Very entertaining, the replacement voice actor wasn't that bad, he was pretty darn good.

The vendettas was very short also. I wish it was more of a sequel to the first game rather than the comics (Comics were not as good as the first darkness, but still pretty sweet).

The first was more gritty, and realistic. While the second had a screwed up ending, and it became something I wish It hadn't. Overall, still a great game. It was lacking a bit though.

Journey was very short also, but priced appropriately and the feelings it evoked justified the purchase 1000x over.

NukaCola2122d ago

A game should only be long enough to tell the story in it's entirety and be complete. A game like Halo or Uncharted have shorter campaigns than Fallout or inFAMOUS but they all tell the story and each game requires a certain about of commitment in it's content. If you are playing an action adventure, it obviously won't last forever unlike an open world game where your character is growing as you travel the world and meet people. A game should be long enough to satisfy the gamer in it's content. Multiplayer, DLC, or any co-op mode isn't the fix or be all end all for longevity. Devs should know what the game represents and the content should reflect the experience they are trying to deliver. You get the same feeling of an epic finish at the end of Gears of War that you can get from Journey and they both are long enough to deliver. Neither one is too short or too long. They are just right, they tell their story and do right for the gamer.

bubblebeam2122d ago

Well, If the Darkness 2 was priced cheaper, it would fit. But the fact is, while still a good game, felt pretty rushed. I think the devs knew that too, that's why they delayed it and brought out Vendettas.

As I said, still a good game (I bought it day 1), but It isn't hard to see why it didn't sell well.

-GametimeUK-2122d ago

A short single player game is not automatically lacking, but it depends what it does to provide more than just a "short campaign". Heck, there are a bunch of short games on 360 Marketplace and PS Store, but they are priced much lower than full retail price.

I actually really enjoyed Uncharted1, but it gave me a reason to go back and collect all the treasures.

You just need to include a bunch of features to keep the player coming back. I would highly recommend adding online in to as many games as possible (despite people on the internet complaining about these features). Just make sure the Single player is a full experience then everyone is happy. Uncharted3 ticks all the boxes with its amazing campaign, coop and competitive.

telekineticmantis2122d ago

most of these 40 hour plus games are boring as staring a dog take a crap. I think a 13 hour great game with multiplayer is right on the money. But an extraordinary unforgettable experience can come in many different forms. I'd say if a game is that amazingly unforgettable... Make it atleat 8 hours and it would go in my top 5 games of all time.

lonesoul652122d ago

You can really price out the entertainment value if you so choose. I think it depends on what the focus of the game is. A game like The Darkness 2 where the single player should be the draw, you would expect a 10-12 hour single player. A movie for instance is on average 2 hours for 10 bucks. A game runs 60 so that = around 12 hours. I know that is a simple idea to base what your time is worth but I think its the happy point most people judge by.

I mostly play games now for the single player experience after years and years of multiplayer focus and if a game is over in 6 hours and doesn't have a major reason to replay the game again, I feel I did not get my moneys worth. Just my 2 cents...

Blues Cowboy2122d ago

Quality is a kind of value. I'd rather play an hour of something truly wonderful than an entire day of mediocre tripe.

That said, I'd prefer to have both - and it's hard not to think of games in terms of $/hr.

Show all comments (10)