Bethesda claims you could play Fallout 4 for over 400 hours and still not see and do everything. Should we finally ask ourselves: How long is too long?
No, I can't play as many games as I want because many are just too long!
lol really ppl are complaining for having to much content on a disc now? wow...
If games can get trashed for being too short, then it's only fair game. Lots of people don't have time for those really long games and we appreciate the shorter ones.
Uth then you should only buy the shorter games then . I put 270 hours in the Witcher 3, I have a full time job and appreciate games like these because of value for money and giving a player free reign to do as he pleases.
Right? People that complain are not TRUE gamers!
I don't think you can just arbitrarily complain that a game is too long but length doesn't= quality. If its long just because theres a ton of trivial side content then 400hrs wont mean much, I mean whats the point if 8 out of 10 folks are too bored after 20, 40, 50hrs? Of course Im not saying this will happen with Fallout4, just pointing out theres a big difference between length and fun factor, whats more important is how good the overall game is. While it can be hard to knock a game for being too long, yeah its easy to tell that a game can definitely be too short, remember folks are paying $60 so you got to give them enough there to be enjoyed for a decent amount of time(somewhere in the norm of whats expected in the genre).
Well, there is such thing as "excess" and "bloat."
Depends Skyrim had around 2 to 300 hours of supposed gameplay. But 300 hrs of repetitive recycled missions over and over until you maxed out everything. And thats after you discovered all the map. I'm all for grinding but at least make the grind interesting in these games. Give us new locations of this 400+ hr games.
I'm more concerned about the quality of that content. The Witcher 3 totally changed this for the better, I expect new games to at least try to follow the trend. AC Unity and Far Cry 4 for example have countless hours of side content, but is mostly filler nonsense.
The only game I have ever played for 400+ hours is the original Dark Souls. I can't imagine I'll put that much time into Fallout 4 but you can't go wrong with having lots of content, it's there for people who want to put that time into it, this article is stupid.
Everyone is different. That is why there are many different types of games. So to shoot someone down cause they don't want to play a long game is as lame as the Xbox Ones vocal forum fanbase.
I think it's considering what kind of content is on offer....even a quality franchise like Fallout can't offer 400 absolutely essential hours, it's the padding that kills me. I stay away from games like these typically because they get old for me long before I'm all that close to finishing the story....as a story loving gamer, that bugs the holy hell out of me
Personally, I like SP to be between 12-15 hours. Then it doesn't suck up time that can go to other games. As a child I had all this time to play games, but little money to get them. Now, it's the extreme opposite. Some of my favorite games I'll explore open world until I get bored. GTA is always like that.
Well a long game should be a good unless your rich or above average pay. Dont see why a lengthy game is a bad thing in that regard or at all
too lengthy is a turn-off. If you have a full-time job and a family, you only get a couple hours of gaming a day at most, and you have no hope of finishing these long games.
Well for you maybe but I dont think you can make a blanket statement like that. I work full time and have a family that wants my time so generally speaking Im not looking for a 400hr game but I still cant argue its a negative when I know I'll put tons of hrs into Halo5's multiplayer....it just depends on our tastes and priorities. [email protected], agreed.
A lengthy game can be a bad thing if much of the content consist of pointless filler and a grindfest.
@uth11 Games like fallout may have hundreds of hours of content but they can normally be finished within 10-15 hours by normal gamers. Even faster by some, no one is saying you have to play for 400 hours to finish the game.Just that you could if you wanted to.How is that a problem in any way?
Fallout 4 is not "too long", the main story won't take you 400 hours to complete. If that's the only thing you want to do in this game, then you'll probably able to do so in like dozens of hours. If you feel like keep playing it afterwards, then you'll have more than 350 hours in front of you to discover. Play it until you're tired of it. But dude, please, don't freaking complain about that. The 400 hours is just a reflection of how huge the game is. How content it has for you to either discover or don't. 400 hours for a campaign of a game like CoD would be freaking ridiculous and would get boring after 5 hours, but an open-world like Fallout, where you go where you want and do what you want is perfect.
Bethesda make Bid-ass games. That's is what they are known for. Like someone already pointed out: many of us don't have as much time as we would like to play all these games, but that doesn't mean that we don't want deep immersive games to explore and get lost in. A game like this may take me a year to finish. But I will still find time to squeeze in less demanding games. It is just that the less demanding games would get as much attention. But I looks Bethesda games so...
Games like this need to exist to keep too short of games working harder.
then go play your short games. the rest of us actually like getting our money's worth. if you don't have time for gaming then find another hobby.
Are you 9? I love gaming but dont get much time these days due to work and family. Are you suggesting i stop gaming after 30 years?
^Yeah, stop it. You could simply choose to not buy it instead of ruining this industry for those of us who prefer these kind of games.
@bumnut if you don't have time to play games then thats not my problem. its just a selfish greedy attitude to have. "i don't have time to play long games so others don't deserve to as well." either find time or quit. not my problem you can't find time.
Agree with Space on this one, if its not worth your time, clearly the hobby is not for you. @Bumnut- I can put around 50 hours in a game a week, ie 200 hours a month if need be, soooooooo 2 months for $60 isn't a bad deal...I put at least 700 or more hours per Battlefield game... Mind you, I still work. Who said you have to play ALL of it? I'm sorry but if your not putting in that much in gaming, you might want to question why your still gaming. Its not a chore, if it becomes one, clearly you might need to evaluate how much you think you like gaming.
It's no more selfish than saying games like The Order or Journey shouldn't exist because they are too short. Some of is appreciate those short games.
Actually, this article makes no sense for 1 reason. It doesn't take 400 hrs to beat it. It offers 400 hours to completionists who love the game and don't want it to end. It won't take near that long to beat it. And as they said, the crafting aspects are optional. How could that ever be a bad thing? Its like saying, hey devs cam you please compromise your vision and instead of giving us everything most of us want, can you trim it way down b/c I have other things to do, and my completionist neurosis won't let me stop playing until I've seen and done everything? NO!!! F4 and TW3 are great for gaming, and exactly what we've been clamoring for for awhile now.
If you don't want to play 400hr, then stick to the main quest, you just won't see everything in the game. For people who want to see everything, they will have to play over 400hrs. No need to force people to play the same way, like most games out there.
So? You don't have to play every game on release you know? Take your time and play at your own pace. There is no rush.
It is too bad humans don't not have the ability to know when they have had enough of something and set it down to do other things. Something will and power. Opinions and facts are not mutually exclusive, one is objective the other subjective.
I see your point and personally want fallout 4 to be as long as possible but some games I want to finish even if the game play has become boring because it e.g. has a good story, is a movie tie-in game, is the final game in a francise.
I don't argue that some games can wear out their welcome, but if your playing a rpg in particular it is going to be a time sink. People can always rush through a game if it is not good or that appealing to them.
Then just buy games whose length you are comfortable with and leave the long ones to the rest of us who like such games. Earlier in the year people were complaining about 'The Order 1886' being too short and now 'Fallout 4' is too long - games come in all sizes and lengths and gamers should not expect standardization of length and amount of content for that really is a slippery slope downwards to poor games.
fallout 5 won't be coming till 2023 so by my calculations 400 hours of gameplay is too short by about 69,700hrs
@ uth11 Don't worry, you can marathon and hopefully finish the game in 399 hours and play as many games as you want /s
I assume that it an exaggeration (well sort of). I've played skyrim for over 1000 hours and still find small new things in the base game from time to time.
Idk why but the title made me crack up. It's like it's almost stressful that theres that much game.
I think the better question here is game worth, if I pay $60 for a game that takes 8 hours shouldn't I pay more for a game that gives me 400? or vice versa pay less for a game that only takes 8 hours? I find it hard to compare the worth of a game like Fallout 4 to that of a game like Dishonored. I don't know if I would clarify game length as a matter of quality or a matter of preference either.
Anyone complaining about this should be punched in the gut, especially the author. First off if you don't explore and just do main missions it could be a 30 hr game. Its open world exploration that puts the time in, damn people have no common sence anymore. Its like saying I don't go to the movies if its over an 1 hr and 30 minute movie. I get restless and my ass itches. I love movies that pull me in whether 90 min or 150 min, no problem. Relax and enjoy the ride.
Well it depends on the game. MMOs offer untold number of hrs of playtime, and people play them for years and years. It's definately not for me though. I played EveOnline for about 3 years and that was the last MMO I'm going to play. I woke up one morning and had a reality check in terms of cost and time spent. I do like long slow burners - games like The Witcher 3, Bloodbourne, The Souls series etc. The problem is, if I haven't completed the game within say a month or so, I just get jaded, and the game gets relegated to the backlog.
The other thing people here don't seem to realise is that the older you get, the less time you have due to family, work and other responsibilities... I used to play 16 hours in my teens and now i barely get couple hours in the evening... I just can't play certain games anymore as much as i wish to.
So what? Is THAT your argument for developers to comprome their vision of the game just so that you can spend time with your family? Shouldn't you be old enough to manage that by yourself? There's many reasons why people complain about games being too short but the opposite is just ridiculous.
@nX i wasn't complaining about anything, i'm just stating the fact that there are reasons some of us can't dedicate our time to certain games as much as we want to... not saying long games shouldn't exist.
I'm pretty sure you'll be able complete the story in faaaaar less time with the 400 hours being dedicated to crafting, exploration, base building, etc. If you don't want to spend that much time with the game you prolly don't have to, but I see more content for my money as a positive.
I played Star Ocean: Till the End of Time for 600 hours. I mean, I want to get my money's worth. So when all is said and done, I spent 10 cents for each hour. I think I got good deal.
The quality of the game is the most important part. 5 hours or 400 hours, a good game is worth buying. If a game can offer me what the Fallout or Elder Scrolls games offer me, then I'm more than happy to play them for as much time as I can. These aren't games you finish in a weekend. They're meant to be played for years. To explore every character and region.
No. I hate overly long games. Some of us have lives outside of gaming or we want to experience other titles. Plus most people get bored if a title is too long. To me a game is too long if it takes over 35 hours to beat the main campaign/story.
I wish I could say that for every game, doesnt mean the game has to be "long" just fun enough to where I'll play it that long.
Could not commit to a game that long single player.
Yes. Just yes Especially in a Bethesda game
Yea I didn't even finish the witcher 3... I'm still completely blown away by how much everyone loved that game. Don't get me wrong, its an achievement in it's own right, but in the end it's just a poorly designed rpg stretched across countless hollow hours of 'content'. I hate that word. Prioritize good art--not a measurement of audiovisual timespace I can mainline.
Just stick to the main quests and anywhere not the hardest difficulty and you'll be fine. Me, I'm a fan of exploring so I don't mind it.
Win win for the explorers out there!
I would have played Skyrim for 400 hours if they doubled it.
No, 400 hours is mostly side or misc quest and wandering around. The story of the game will be 10-20 hours after that you can play as long as you want or not at all. No where did they say you NEED to play 400 hours that's just the time they have clocked in their test character.
I know right? Its wonderful that the game gives you the option of spending that much time in its world, but you dont have to if you dont want to. As for me, I aint goin nowhere. I've waited wayyyy too long for this.
I can play any game for 400 hours too if its my job to play the game for long periods of time trying to find things. That statement is a pure fallacie. You can play any game you want for whatever amount of time you want and still not "see" everything. Why doesn't Jeff talk about how fun the content he's played is? I don't want 400 hours of "Infinite quests" and thats typically a bad sign if he's promoting how much content their game has versus how enjoyable it is.
Most I ever put into a game is probably 250 hours. That is over the course of a year and a half or two though.
No Man's Sky is infinite hours.
True. Different beast altogether though
Depends on the game & person honestly. Love The Elder Scrolls & Fallout & can go over 100+ hours playing them yet I just bought The Witcher 3 recently( of course, another content filled game) & couldn't really get into it. All in all I guess this is a open world vs more linear approach on games. There's liner games better than open world games & vice versa, all depend on the person at the end of the day.
It's only long if you try to do everything.
These claims are always exaggeration. You can usually complete the main content like all quests and getting the best gear in Bethesda games within 50 - 90 hours. The rest is usually doing miscellaneous things or just messing around in the game world.
I think it's a great thing. It means I won't be done with it for atleast a year. I don't have alot of gaming time and usually have 5-6 on the go at one time. Games last me ages. I hate buying a game, playing it a couple of days and then shelving it. It's so much better to have a large selection to dive into whenever you want without worrying about it ending too soon.
Definitely yes because there will always be those gamers that religiously collect and play games/ game franchises. You can imagine what it's like to be sucked into a game and freely spend countless hours on it...It's wonderful and I'm sure many know what I mean! No ifs or buts about it. Content matters and I love it that we're still seeing the occasional title pop up with dozens or even hundreds of hours worth of playtime - The Witcher 3 for instance (also cannot wait for Fallout 4 omfg!). New game devs should take note IMO. Not sure why one would complain about more playtime, that's only +value in my eyes.
No they dont, too long and might not finish. But 400 hours is optional, depends on the player and what you do in the game.
Only time a game is too long is when they add in a bunch of crappy sections just to make it longer.