I used to be concerned about a game being too short. Now I worry that it will be too long.

Title mostly describes how I’m feeling now.

When I was younger, my main worry when deciding what game to buy and play next was that the game wouldn’t be able to keep me entertained until I can buy another game.

Now I have a backlog of almost 100 games that I own and haven’t played yet (although some come from bundles, not all are worth playing). My new concern when I’m playing a game is whether or not the time I put into the game is well spent.

I used to really like the idea of games where it would take me 100s of hours to get to 100% completion, but now I tend to almost avoid playing them entirely even if I know I don’t care about completion anymore.

I don’t think I’m alone in this, but what I’m really wondering is if this is a result of getting older? Or is it because the gaming space itself has changed?

lorez,

Well, long games save you money. Plus I like living in a game.

Lowbird, (edited )

The money-saving depends on your ability to not buy more games, though. This doesn’t seem to be actually doable for most people. For me it isn’t because I find I need variety in my games or else I lose interest in the medium altogether.

There can definitely be a magic in living in a good game, though.

lorez,

I mean, I don’t know about you guys but I play one game at a time, so right now I’m spending no other money cos I’m in the middle of Zelda TotK.

ArtZuron,
@ArtZuron@beehaw.org avatar

Yeah, there’s a happy medium.

For example, Elden Ring is a great game, except for the fact that it just drags on for SOOO long. I’m convinced that both Faram Azula and Mountaintops of the Giant were meant to be completely separate from the main sequence, much like Haligtree or Moghwyn Dynasty is. Then they just shoved them onto the end to pad time.

JoeyMoo,

Yeah but that was really the point of Elden Ring IMO. They were showing what they were capable of with a few hundred employees and they showed that amazingly. Also I don’t think that they just shoved them onto the ending considering the whole point of the ending is to burn the tree down and going to those endgame places to finish what you started. Haligtree and Moghwyn Dynasty are secret areas that you have to figure out how to get to. I think they did an amazing job with the lore and the length of the game.

Also, I 100% it on steam and only had 100 hours.

ArtZuron,
@ArtZuron@beehaw.org avatar

It is a very good game for sure. That doesn’t mean I can’t criticize its flaws of course. The balance in latter sections was just not that good.

JoeyMoo,

That’s fair, I raged hard on some of the last bosses but got through it eventually. But yeah I agree with you, balance on latter sections isn’t great

rivingtondown,

I tend to lean the same way, with a kid and busy job I just don’t have enough time to finish long games. Hearing something like FF16 is not 80 hours makes me happy.

That being said, I also lean toward sandbox games as I get older with no definitive ending. Factory builders, city builders, colony management sims, etc… even though those games can last hundreds or even a thousand+ hours. The difference is sandbox style games typically always allow you to quick save or save anywhere, and I never have to worry about finishing some storyline to feel good about my playtime.

sculd,

Whenever I see a game needs 50 hours to finish now, I just hard pass. Most games simply do not deserve 50 hours of life. Especially Ubisoft games which just patch out the length with fetch quests. Unnecessarily long games is a big problem and its partly caused by people with “bang for the buck” mindset. Do these people don’t have other things to do? Like going out? Watching movies?

Kuroshi,

The honest answer is no we don’t

lowleveldata,

I just play whatever I want. If it’s long but fun then I’d play it over a few months period. No big deal.

variants_of_concern,

Yeah I don’t get the hate, if a game is great then you’d want it to be able to last

Lowbird,

I think it just depends on whether you feel like the game is respecting your time or not.

A long game that’s eating up time with boring random encounters, fetch quests, grinding that you don’t enjoy, and so on? Ain’t got time for that, I’ll play something else.

But a long game where I’m enjoying near every minute and every aspect, like an RPG that’s been crafted absurdly well and isn’t filled with bloat and has fun combat in every encounter? I’m all in for that.

I think the issue is mainly that for obvious reasons there are FAR more of the former than the latter, even before accounting for personal taste.

Kikkertje,

For me it’s more that I forget where I was and what I was up to, as well as having to reacquaint myself with the controls. Shorter games don’t have that problem.

HidingCat,

I'd say getting older and having more responsibilities is a bigger part of it. When you're young and have lots of free time to devote to a game, a 100 hour game is no big deal. When you have a fraction of that time, you just don't want to deal with that. I'm equally wary as well.

There's definitely some change to the gaming scene, like all the cheap sales and freebies. Very easy to build a backlog of games while barely trying.

marshadow,

Same. It seems like all games have gotten longer, and many want to be your one and only. Mostly I prefer VR games now, partly for that reason.

prole, (edited )

If you’re enjoying yourself while you play, then the time was well spent. Like you said, try to remember that nobody is making you play every game you start to 100% completion, that’s an entirely self-imposed rule.

That said, for me personally, the length of a game is generally irrelevant to whether or not I will enjoy that game. If I enjoy a game, I enjoy that game. If it’s long, it’s long. If not, cool.

MJBrune,

The big thing for me is that if I play narrative-focused games like immersive sims, I want to dive deep into those worlds, and that takes a certain amount of brain energy.

variants_of_concern,

Exactly don’t take that away

nac82,

As an older dude, I think it’s more about how people choose to live. I’m one of the DINK couples so the wife and I love gaming together.

Both working full time, go on camping trips, play tennis, and still manage to be a part of a destiny clan who we have cleared all the raids with.

We just beat Diablo 4 together (then dropped it due to the patch and garbage 1st season lol).

I get how some people need more contained experiences, but I can not stand games that are too contained or basic.

There are exceptions like party games (gang beasts, Mario party, etc), but for the most part I need my games to be engaging.

I did a little bit of game development in college and have played games all my life, so sometimes I feel like I’m somewhat sensitive to certain designs. It’s hard to put into words, but a bad animation/game mechanic that might bother a different person like 2/10 might bother me more like an 8/10.

Some mixture of the above information and my ADHD need for stimulation keeps me away from the smaller games.

comicallycluttered,

It’s funny, before they were everywhere, open world games were my jam. Now there are only a few where I actually pay attention to the world.

I typically treat open world games as linear in some way. Go from one story/side mission to the next without really bothering to explore. Especially for large games. Some exceptions, but not many. I’ve become a chronic fast traveler and I have no intention of changing that.

It’s not that I don’t appreciate the work put into a lot of these games, it’s more that I simply don’t have the energy or time to actually get into it all and it doesn’t bother me that I’m “missing out”.

In general, I just crave linear and relatively short games. If howlongtobeat lists something as more than like 12 - 15 hours for a non-RPG/immersim game, I’m usually out. I’d have to really be enjoying it to stick with something for more than like 20 hours total.

Titanfall 2 is one of the best examples of a fantastic game that doesn’t overstay its welcome. Everything’s tightly packed into a linear, but incredibly well-developed game. It doesn’t stop being fun, and throws new shit at you without being overwhelming, can be beaten in a few days (probably like two if you’re playing in long sessions).

I do sometimes go over that limit with stealth games, often because I play them very patiently and can spend a few hours on a level. But they’re really the exception.

FlashMobOfOne,
@FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org avatar

I have a system.

For every hour of play a game offers, I’m willing to pay $1.

specklespacle,

this is a really terrible system. there are a lot of fantastic games that are short and more than $2.

Almace,

I agree. A lot of it for me is the quality of the time spent. I'd rather pay $10 for high quality six hours of gameplay, then play $40 for 60 hours of gameplay but like 30 of those hours are very low quality.

FlashMobOfOne,
@FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org avatar

Oh, I know, but getting them on sale at the price I want is inevitable.

Ilflish,

I’m not sure why this became popular. I’ll easily spend £8 to watch a 1.5 hour film so why would I limit myself on a game I could enjoy if it’s short. I just play games I think I’ll like. I’m not picking up a 100 hour multiplayer because it’s better value

FlashMobOfOne,
@FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org avatar

Well, for me, that’s just how I define a good value, and thanks to Epic and Steam, sales happen all the time, so getting the game I want in the price range I want it is just a matter of waiting a little longer. No big deal.

Dankenstein,

Since getting married, I’ve been popping in and out of multiplayer games more often as well as more closely curating what single-player games I purchase.

I enjoy longer narrative-driven, single-player games; they’re like a good book and I aim to be just as bummed out when the game ends as I would be at the end of a work from my favorite novelist.

But I cook, I clean, I do the shopping, and so I end up with a lot of short periods of free time throughout the day. The newest (but not franchised) multiplayer game is usually what I’ll play if I can come and go at my leisure without provoking the ire of other players.

I’ve never really wanted to 100% a game, pretty sure that was just FOMO, but every now and again I will want to replay an old game.

Pantsofmagic,

I really enjoy long games but I'm very picky about which ones I choose to play. I usually don't have a lot of time to play all at once, but I play after work a few days and sometimes a couple of extra hours on the weekends.
Games with a really good story always interest me. I've had good recent experiences with things like final fantasies, tlou/2, horizon games, etc. I don't mind that it could take me a month or two to finish a game as long as it's enjoyable.

conciselyverbose,

I don't. There's nothing worse with finally getting immersed in a game then running out of stuff to do in 10 hours.

I don't finish games and have a huge backlog, but I'm looking for the small handful with mechanics that work, and when I find one running out sucks.

sludge,
@sludge@beehaw.org avatar

the gaming space has changed a lot! there is more money pumped into it than ever before and little room for experimention in AAA titles. but the indie scene is enormous now and there are still tons of older mainstream games to play. no need to play pointless time sinks.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • gaming@beehaw.org
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines
    •