I would not have played through Luigi's Mansion so many times by now if it wasn't both a great time and short.

I do wish it was a little longer, but not much. 

Less can be more, but it's not so automatically. There's definitely a place for longer games as well, but so is for shorter games too. Ironically, one of the best-scoped games in the recent years, at least among the ones I've played, was Assassin's Creed: Mirage. It left me wanting for more, but at the same time, I know that if it was significantly longer, it would get boring. It's not the best in the series or even among the best games of the last few years, but it certainly had a sweet length for the kind of a game it is.

While I do love some longer, complex games like BOTW, TOTK, the Xenoblade games, etc, I do find that in general I prefer shorter games that execute one core idea very well.

I often find it hard to stick with games that are like 50+ hours long as after a while it often starts to feel like a job rather than fun.

I overall prefer long games since that can let my investment in it continually build up. Short games can also be amazing though of course, it's just harder for them to have a notable impact on me.

I’m still scarred by both Spore and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. !

This topic is too soon!

Yes....  open world games typically suffer from this.

Linear path games can be so much higher quality, and better crafted, by offering less to the user.
Instead your on the rails, the way the game devs planned, and wanted you to experience things.

Do games need to be able to be beat in 1 sitting? 

No.... generally I dislike that.
If it ends before it even really begins.... that is a problem for me.
I want character development and story telling.

You cant really do that well, in short games, or sittings of gameplay.
This is like, asking if you are the type of person that prefers "long ongoing book series" or "one off, stand alone books".
(I guess tv series that run multiple seasons, vs a shorter movie (if your not into books)).

There is a place for both.
Ei.people want different things from the games/books/tv entertainment.

^ this.

I sometimes have a "that was it? really? it ended just like that?" after beating a shorter game.
It can leave you "letdown" afterwards.  Especially if you didn't assume it would be ending so soon.
(ei. character development is actually going somewhere you feel (finally), and then it just ends)

I want a game world you can immerse yourself in, get lost in, and enjoy a well told story.

Some people don't care for that at all.... its just a difference of taste.

I consider something like Trails (series) to be a unicorn in gaming.
It's story and world building are next level, and they just keep building on it.

Story and characters are a huge factor yeah. My first playthrough of BG3 was super long cause of me trying to do everything which made it become something I got very invested in for months. For me you can't beat 10/10 experiences that become a big part of your life for that long.

Quality is more..

I do like games that are shorter, I don’t like too much bloat. If I play a game that is 50hours plus it takes me half a year to complete and I often lose interest. For me the sweet spot is below 20 hours.
I play donkey Kong bananza currently and enjoy the shorter sessions to complete a level. This fits perfectly in my vacation so that I can play in the morning and afternoon an hour each.


For Elden Ring these short play sessions don’t really fit and I don’t have the focus and lose interest

/thread