Cerebralbore101 said:
The original DMC took me 14ish hours to 100% complete, not counting replaying the game on harder difficulties. I think I got about 22 hours of fun out of DMC1. Keep in mind that it launched all the way back in 2001, and was absolutely groundbreaking. I can't think of a single hack n' slash before it that does even 30% of what DMC did. Crackdown 3 on the other hand looks to be a simple clone stamp of the first game, in a genre that regularly hits 80 hours of content. I kind of expect 20 to 40 hours for an open world game. IMO Spiderman was the perfect length at 40 hours to Platinum it. If a game costs $60, and takes me 15 hours or less to 100% complete, with no replay value, then that just isn't enough for me. At the same time though, I don't really like padding in games. There are some games out there that will be 60 hour experiences, stretched out to 80 or 100 hours. I'm not a fan of that. The length and replay value of games could be a huge long thread by itself. Anyway 6 hours to beat the main game is not defendable. Especially not for an open world game. |
I agree and understand everything you are saying.
The only part I don't agree with is the end.
It's absolutely defendable because you never know when you will encounter that one game that changes your perspective on things.
I personally do think that most open world games should have a decent amount of content. Doesn't mean that the game won't come along where it's open world and six hours yet feels justified in it's length.