flower and journey were great games.  portal >>> portal 2.  

don't like these kinds of games?..well the review gave you all you need to know that this game isn't for you.  there are genres i don't like too, doesn't mean the games are bad.  just not my bag.

It's not that I did'nt like it. But it was to short. Just like the original portal and Unfinished Swan. For me, 3hour games are not worth 9/10. But yes, you are right, this is my opinion, but IMO these games are nothing more than tech demos of what games they could have been if the developers had either the ambition or toke the time to make something truly great.

Take Pushmo for example, it was something new (no where near as artistic), but did the fact that it was new and unique made the game last 1hour? No, that game have tons of content. Unfinished Swan is also (sort of) a Puzzle game, how hard would it be for them to give that game more content? Portal was awsome and critics loved that game, but fact is that it lasted 4 to 5 hours and that their was only 9lvls (if I remember correctly).

IMO, 3hour games should cost 1.99$ not 14.99$ But I'm one of these ppl who are having a hard time purchasing Metroid on the virtual console for 5$ only because I know it lasts 1h30. :P

@kitler53 Like I said above, its not that I dont like these kind of game, but I think its a shame that they are only a fraction of what they should be, making it no worth my purchase, and a 9/10 should be reserved to really special game, not 2hour games. 

@Sal.Paradise True. But it is was easier to make 2hours worth of content to the perfection than making 40hours worth.

Looks neat, i might get it

@Metrium Flower and Journey would not work as 20 hour games, they would just get boring, drawn out and the story would be lost. It's nice to have games that leave you wanting more instead of turning them off after getting bored out of your mind from hour upon hour of the same stuff.
Btw I did play Journey for over 20 hours, it had great replay value with different people.

Price and length should not effect reviews, it's mentioned anyway so what's the problem?
It's a 9/10 for a $14 2hr game.
If you want longer, play Tokyo Jungle, very addictive, original and it will take you 30 hours at least to unlock everything.

I just don't understand why people think that the price should directly reflect the number of playthrough hours, regardless of game type and replay value. Throughout the entire history of gaming, this complaint magnet has never existed until this generation. So many games, like this one, are better off with shorter play times. The price should reflect how effective the game is as an experience. It sounds like The Unfinished Swan is worth more than its price tag says.

14 bucks for 2 hours is ludicrous.

Damn...I predicted a metascore of around 70 in the metascore prediction league

I loved Journey... I loved Flower...

Unique. Magical. Amazing.

Day one buy again even if it is $50.

This is what I am talking about when I talk about Sony investing in variety in their games. I will be getting this. I love how Sony endorses devs to experiment. I will also be buying this for my god son, it would be a great game for his dad to play with him and get replay value out of it. He loved Journey, as did I when I played it with him. So what if its two hours? If it has replay value its well worth it. Sony is really setting a standard for downloadable games.

For those acting like this is a rip-off due to its length...this is the equivalent of a typical $60 game with an 8 hr campaign. That's just about the average, no? Cheaper game, shorter length.

I personally like having these options. There's just so little time, that a game that takes forever to play through can become a burden. A lot of times I'd prefer something short like Unfinished Swan, especially when it also offers something beautiful and unique. I'm in.