Should Length of a Game Matter?

John says, "The length of a game as become a very controversial topic this last week. It all started when a speed run of the highly anticipated Sony exclusive (The Order:1886) was leaked last Sunday. The speed run was done in just over 5 hours. People were saying how 5 hours isn’t worth $60, while others were saying how it isn’t the length that matters, but the experience. I have pondered this question all week and have even gotten into a few arguments about it. Does the length of a game determine its worth? It all comes down to how the player values their time, money, and what they actually want out of a game."

Read Full Story >>
dead_pixels3284d ago

Of course it matters. Would you not be irate if you bought a game as long as a chapter from a Telltale Games' title for 60 bucks? There's a reason those bite-sized experiences are priced accordingly. While I don't think there's a definitive sweet spot when it comes to the acceptable length of a game, I'd certainly argue 60 bucks for a game you can plow through in less time than it takes to power through a Lord of the Rings marathon is unacceptable.

Our $60 should have more legs than a lazy afternoon gaming session.

ShugaCane3284d ago (Edited 3284d ago )

I agree with everything that you said, but then it depends.

I'd rather pay 60$ for a 8-hour intense, thrilling and well written experience than for a super big empty open world game.

At the end, it comes down to quality over quantity, in my honest opinion. (You pay your theater ticket the same price whether the movie is 90min long or 180min long. And the longer movie is not necessarily the most interesing)

I remember completing Zone of the Enders 2 and Ico in 6 or 7 hours and damn, I would pay 120$ for these games ANYTIME.

mattdillahunty3283d ago

"(You pay your theater ticket the same price whether the movie is 90min long or 180min long. And the longer movie is not necessarily the most interesing)"

that's not a very accurate comparison to gaming, because in either situation it's something you spend an afternoon or evening doing, nothing more. the difference isn't that big.

in gaming, the difference in length can be huge. for example, i spent $60 on the first Uncharted and $60 on Oblivion. the former took me about 8 hours to beat, give or take. the latter gave me hundreds of hours of play time. that is an absolute massive difference. one took me a couple days, the other took me many months. the differences in game lengths are night and day compared to the differences in movie lengths.

but then another point can be raised, and one i honestly think is fair, even though i'm in the consumer role--should we pay more than $60 for games that have hundreds of hours of content? i mean, the more content that's in a game, the more time that needs to be spent to make it. let's say that when The Elders Scrolls VI comes out, it costs $80 for the standard edition. but since they know they'll sell 10m+ across all platforms (maybe a lot more, i don't keep track of sales), they know that the extra $20 per copy will really add up. maybe they could take that extra money and make more unique dungeons (instead of copy/pasting most of them), and hire more unique voice actors, and have artists spend more time creating unique character models so every third character doesn't look exactly the same. yeah, we would spend more buying the game, but we would not only get more content, but more quality content.

as far as how good something is for the price, i don't like to go down that road. for example, A Link to the Past is probably my favorite game ever. i'd say i like it at least 100x more than most other games i've played. does that mean that it's a good idea for me to pay 100x more for the game? is it worth $600 to me? that's silly. it's a game just like any other, except i happen to enjoy it a lot more and i think it's one of the best ever. but that doesn't mean it should be priced based on that.

freshslicepizza3283d ago

if people are worried about length and spending $60 then why not wait and buy it used? the order will have tons of used copies out very soon, that is a given. since it is single player only there is no rush to go out and buy it either because it's not like games with multiplayer that the community moves on and the amount of players decreases over time.

Utalkin2me3283d ago

Just depends on if it is priced accordingly.

Thatguy-3103283d ago (Edited 3283d ago )

Length doesn't matter but the price point has to justify it. For example, look at a game like journey(15$) where you pass it in one sitting. The experience one gets in that game is amazing and towered a lot of last gen games for me and it only was around 2-3 hrs long.

BABY-JEDI3283d ago

It really should matter. There is many means to achieve replay value. Collectables, alternative routes, different characters with different abilities & gameplay approaches, time/combat trials. Competent to aggressive AI. Unlockables ect. I haven't mentioned MP intentionally as this isn't the be all & end all of extending a games life.

Aceman183283d ago

for me length doesnt matter as long as the game brings me enjoyment. it should as hell didnt matter to me when i bought ICO for $50 back in the day for just 4-6hrs.

i beat the order in about 12-14 hrs on hard, my friend beat it in about 11 hrs on normal.

eferreira3283d ago

should you pay more for a longer game then?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3283d ago
Big_Game_Hunters3284d ago (Edited 3284d ago )

Only quality matters, the game responsible for this recent popular length topic lacks both.

WelkinCole3284d ago

I completely agree with the author.

I would also add that a lot of these vocal gamers are being stupid.

There is a reason why we have different types of games. The reason is we are all different and some of us like to play different types of games from time to time.

If I want a long grind game then I would pick a RPG. If a want a short fix game I would normally play a round of GT or Tekken. If a want to replay a short but amazing story driven game then I would pick games like The Order and replay it for another 2-3 days then put in back in my collection until I want to replay it again.

People need to get it in their thick skulls that not all games are the same or should be the same. So should all games last as long as Dragon Age?. It is utterly stupid.

No all devs I am sure are no looking at artificially increasing the playtime of their games which could have a negative effect on the quality.

slappy5083284d ago

Quality matters more, and in the Order 1886 it lacks quality as well. And yes, I've played it, go look at my PSN profile. If this game didn't have good graphics no one would be defending this turd.

3283d ago
BABY-JEDI3283d ago

I wouldn't call the Order a turd. That is way too harsh a point of view.if you didn't like it then fair enough. But let people know what it lacks qualitative in your opinion.

ltachiUchiha3283d ago

The AI in alot of games are horrible yet they still get rated high, a good example is Titanfall. Alot of the AI just get in your way but people still enjoyed the game. I think if u go into a game looking for flaws instead of enjoying the game for what it is obviously your going to find flaws in every game.

Wonderful1013283d ago

Why is a tech demo being used as an example of a game?

MasterCornholio3283d ago (Edited 3283d ago )

Because it is a game.

This is a tech demo.

The Dark Sorcerer


Edit: Woot I gained a bubble. :)

Utalkin2me3283d ago (Edited 3283d ago )


Is that all you do is troll PS4 articles and their game articles. If you don't like anything the PS4 has to offer then that's great. But to truly show you do not like the PS4, you would have to stay out of the articles completely. So obviously you're jealous over something or you wouldn't be posting in every PS4 article. Or taking shots at the PS4 and it's games in every article.

You never see me in Xbox 1 articles, you know why? Cause i truly could care less what the Xbox1 has or does or going to do.