starcraft said:
outlawauron said:
starcraft said:
I always wonder why people use this argument.
Its like people that buy good, short games think the rest of us are exclusively purchasing shitty long games, instead of...good long games.
|
The point is that lengthening the game for the sake of doing so isn't always a good idea. Bravely Default comes to mind as it extends itself by a very unwelcome 15-20 hours.
|
That point I get, and agree with, its the inference that somehow there are two options alone - when clearly a good, long game is preferrable.
Also thanks for the tip, I have been eyeing off Bravely Default at my local store after it got its first price drop...might wait for another!
|
I was not inferring there are only two options... I was just saying that duration shoukd no be a factor when judging the quality of a game.
There are good short games, bad short games, mediocre short games, as well as long games of the same nature... I was just guving a preference of two extremes.
For example, I really disliked TLOU, as it dragged on forever, it took me two versions and 9 months to finish it. I am certain I would have enjoyed it more had they cut out three hours of plank moving and reduced the number of copy pasted buildings from the middle.
I do understand people not wanting to pay $60 for a short game... I actually shy away from overly long games as I don't play that much to spend three months on it. Dying Light and Far Cry are of ideal length, GTA V was great, but after a while I started skipping all missions except the mandatory ones, I had other games waiting...