yeah i totally agree that this 10 hour game crap is dumb. when it comes to an action game (or a platformer like mario) if the game is supposed to be one of those epic games like halo or mario i expect at least 15-20 hours. and hopefully more like 20-25. over 25 for that type of game is getting a bit long, but under 15 is just ridiculous. i have no idea how long it took me to beat the first two halos but i feel like it was way longer than 10 hours. of course dying and trying to beat a level over and over again added a few hours so maybe halo 3 will be the same, hopefully. but anytime i hear an action game be reviewed at taking less than 15 hours I get pretty mad when its a really big title. I blame metal gear solid for starting this. I remember reading the reviews of it taking 8-12 hours and at the same time sony claiming it was the best game ever... i laughed. My friend said it took him 8 hours to beat it the first time and 4 hours to beat it the second time. If a game is that ridiculously short its not even close to an epic game and the developers really dropped the ball no matter how great the short game is.
that said i'm very much looking foward to getting halo 3 in a few weeks but if it takes me much less than 15 hours i'm gonna be very disappointed, at least i can vent my disappointment in the live multiplayer though.
so perfect length for action/platformers is 20-25 hours.
someone mentioned rpgs, which i think a good length is 45 to 70 hours... with some rpgs we have the opposite problem where the game is way too long, like some of these 100 hour rpgs.
end of '08 predictions: wii - 43 million, 360 - 25 million, ps3 - 20 million
Games I've beat recently: Super Mario Galaxy, Knights of the Old Republic, Shadow of the Collossus
Proud owner of wii, gamecube, xbox, ps2, dreamcast, n64, snes, genesis, 3DO, nes, atari, intellivision, unisonic tournament 2000, and gameboy
