Length matters when you're paying $60 for a game you can easily finish in one or two sittings. This wouldn't even be a discussion if shorter games were priced appropriately. It has nothing to do with the game being good or not. No one complains about Journey being a 2 hour master piece because it launched for like $15. Assassin's Creed 4 is like 40 hours of terrible, and that game was still priced appropriately at $60.
And replay value has nothing to do with it. Imagine if books started costing $60 as a standard just because you can read them more than once. That not a factor in value. Every game has "replay value." Longer games have longer bursts of replay value than short games. It all scales.
The only reason length is part of the discussion is because companies are still pushing a $60 baseline. There should be absolutely no reason why a games length is brought up in a review, but since games are so commonly priced poorly, it is a regular and needed part of the discussion. Few will be upset if a 6 hour game costs $25-$30. Legions will be pissed if that same game is $60, and rightfully so.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
