Jimquisition: The Old 'How Long Should Games Be?' Debate

[sundin13]

Normchacho said:

sundin13 said:

To a point, yes. I don't buy a ton of games, because I am a broke grad student, so when I do, I want that game to last. I'm not going to buy a game like The Order, because it will only last me a few hours and I'll be done with it and I'll be left staring at my wallet thinking "can i really afford to buy another game?". On the other hand, I see a game like Monster Hunter 4. Monster Hunter tri got me almost 200 hours and 4 is much bigger. So for 40$, I am looking at a game I will likely play for over 200 hours and love every second of, vs a $60 game I will get maybe 10 hours out of. I think it would be silly of me to ignore the differential values of the two games.

However, thats not to say I am willing to miss a great experience due to length. If a game is truly great, I will play it, I just wont buy it at full price. I will wait for a  sale or I will wait a few years until the price is low before playing the game.

I understand that there is always a value side to buying a product, but I'm talking about the hard ratios that people are throwing around in this thread. Does anybody really sit down and do the math on what they will be getting as far as hr/$? That just seems odd to me...

...its not like its hard math. You should be able to figure out the ratio in less that 5seconds in your head if you know the length and the price