By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - When have people started to basically judge a game based on length alone?

platformmaster918 on 17 February 2015

When they started caring more about a laundry list of "musts" without looking at games as an experience based on quality not quantity of hours. Also only some do this I have gotten over 20 hours out of Journey because it's so damn fun to play through.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Around the Network
m0ney on 17 February 2015

I reckon since Heavenly Sword.



My Etsy store

My Ebay store

Deus Ex (2000) - a game that pushes the boundaries of what the video game medium is capable of to a degree unmatched to this very day.

KLAMarine on 17 February 2015

I think the length of this game is often scrutinized because there are other PS4 games on the market that offer not only a higher hour-to-dollar ratio but also more promising mechanics and a multiplayer mode. TO1886 is up against these games that beat it at least with regards to game length.



Barenziah on 17 February 2015

Length doesn't matter so much if you're really really good looking

i overheard that when i hid in the ladies toilets in a nightclub once



  

I smell like the dark forest of Dwemereth in the morning mist                                                   fanboy til i'm bankrupt

KLAMarine on 17 February 2015
Barenziah said:
Length doesn't matter so much if you're really really good looking

i overheard that when i hid in the ladies toilets in a nightclub once

Thank goodness! Not that I wanted to hear this or anything.



Around the Network
Kerotan on 17 February 2015
ExplodingBlock said:

Size doesn't matter guys, it's the features that matter the most


As the saying goes,  size doesn't matter it's how you use it 



NightDragon83 on 17 February 2015

People have always complained about the length of games... there are many 8 and 16 bit games that can literally be beaten within minutes, including several of the Mario titles. But that was the norm back then, where a game that provided a couple hours of entertainment was par for the course.

The difference is these days people expect more bang for their buck. I remember earlier last gen when installments of the big FPS franchises like Halo and COD caught flack for their relatively brief single player campaigns that basically served as appetizers to the multiplayer main course.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

Insidb on 17 February 2015
Barenziah said:
Length doesn't matter so much if you're really really good looking

i overheard that when i hid in the ladies toilets in a nightclub once

Is The Order a game for ants!?

I think people started complaining about the length of games when NFL tickets started to skyrocket. People began to hate football, because the game length was only about an hour, but prices were crazy high. Same thing with the NBA and the NHL; all of which never happened, because people do or don't like specific games for specific reasons. In summation, all of the hoopla surrounding The Order's length strikes me as infantile bitching. Why? Value is relative to the enjoyment of the experience. If E.T. was significantly longer on the Atari would people find it to be a better game? That question probably has the same answer as the question, "Would eating your favorite food until your intestines explode and kill you be more enjoyable than eating a smaller portion?" The phrase "dragging on" exists for a reason. Liking the experience will make you hope for its continuation Disliking the experience will have the opposite effect. Considering how nearly every person who has recently commented on the game's length has not played it (It's not launched, so that's a big shocker.), they really have no basis for their judgment. 



AZWification on 17 February 2015

It's nothing new though.. Gamers have complained a lot last gen about shooters having short campaigns ( * cough* CoD * cough*)



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

marley on 17 February 2015
tokilamockingbrd said:
onionberry said:

I don't judge a game based on the "length", I judge the game based on the experience I have with that length. Graphics can be amazing, but if the story or gameplay are not great then that will ruin the experience. Example, Smash bros and Mario , not story driven games but the gameplay is fantastic, so the experience is great. The Stanley Parable and The wolf among us, the gameplay is not great and the games are short, but the story-narrative is fantastic. Perfect balance? I would say games like Ninja Gaiden for xbox (the story is not that great, but it's great to experience the fantastic gameplay) or Spec Ops The Line (in this case the gameplay is not that great, but it's great enough to experience the fantastic story)

My problem with the order is that the gameplay looks not so good, you're experiencing the story watching a bunch of cinematics, the story doesn't look that interesting and... I saw the ending, spoilers: it's bad. The only good thing I see about that game are the fantastic graphics. I should not say it but this is just a personal opinion, so don't hate me :)


Well I dont know about the ending(and dont want to know), but on GAF most of the people who have played it say its pretty good. People have just run with the 5:45 playtime, maybe because that is the only negative coming out of anyone's impressions.


I have actually seen a lot of negative impressions of the game for everything except it's graphics.  I don't know how accurate they are because I haven't played it yet, but this article sums them up well: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/01/19/predicting-the-biggest-video-game-disappointments-of-2015-the-order-1886/.   I guess we'll know soon enough.