Games are too short nowadays

i think many have noticed that todays single player/story modes in games lack length. you can finish most of them in 6-10 hours. a couple of years ago games took at least 15-20 hours to complete. some may say that the implementation of online features/multiplayer and the production costs are the reasons and that online makes up for it, but there are surely many players (like myself) who are still enjoying playing alone from time to time.

i'm really complaining about that issue. i think game companies should concentrate more on the single player modes again.

what do you think?

 

If a game doesn't have a good multiplayer, it better damn well have a single player experience that'll last awhile. So far most games today like this don't deliver on that.

 

Game length is actually something I pondered a while back. It's great to have something that'll last a long time length-wise, but at the same time, you don't want something that drags on a overstays it's welcome.

 

I can finish VF5 in 10 minutes! It's crap! Game developers need to do better than this . . .

2 stars (only because the graphics are pretty good, and sarah bounces)

</ign reviewers>

 

Either that or....

Or nowadays...

WAAAHHHH! NO ONLINE PLAY!

But the game is single play only though.

WAAAHHHHH! STILL! NO EXCUSE! EVERY GAME HAS TO BE ONLINE NOW!

 

Long games were nice for me back in the day when I didn't have to go to bed early and wake up for work the next day.

The moment responsibility butt fucked its way into my existence I became one of those poor bastards that can never keep up with new games that are out.

I make the occasional exception to my capcom survival horror games (did not sleep when RE4 came out) and konami classics.

 

I use to think that a game could never be too long... that is until I picked up Oblivion... Cheese and fucking rice! I've had the game for like 3 or 4 months and I still haven't broken 3% (it prob doesn't help that I like to just walk around and do that talking thingie with every freaking person I see)

I'm kinda scared to get too immersed in that game... I might never come out /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif

 

You guys have to know whats going on.

Here is what the game vendors are doing:

They are putting all of the value in to online multiplayer mode.
Single player mode is just to get you to buy the game.

Once everybody has switched into multiplayer online mindset
they will then sell you the game as a service or subscription instead of a product.

Kind-a like cable tv. So instead of paying $49.99 once and enjoying a nice long single player mode with occasional multiplayer. You will only have multiplayer mode(alla war hawk) that you will pay $9.99 a month at first, and then $15.99 a month, then $24.99 a month and before you know it, we will get packaged deals that includes game subscriptions, cable subscriptions, and broadband access for the cell phone for $129 a month

you cats should have seen this comin, Its in the game maker's interest to hype up multiplayer over single player, because in the long run you won't be buying games, you'll be buying online subscriptions that you will pay monthly. Why sell it for $59.99
once when I can sell it for $9.99 20 or 30 times.

Don't you get it? Online Multiplayer is going to be the new arcade. Everytime you play you're going to have to put money in
the machine!

Everybody begged for online play now you're gonna get it.

Good by single player mode.

We are all going to get pimped in about 3-4 years.

 

I've come to realise that, except very few exceptions, games that you can "finish" (i.e. plot based, characters, cutscenses etc) are just plain evil.
They are made so that once you finish them they lose most of their entertainment value and you have to buy another one. It's that simple and it all started with the 32bit generation of consoles.

The only game with levels and a plot that came out "recently" and I liked was Ninja Gaiden, because the actual gameplay was just amazing. Can't freaking wait for the second one.

Oblivion does not fall in this category, but the entertainment is SO diluted that I find it unbearable. I really don't have that much time to spend on videogames and yes, Tony, don't get sucked by Oblivion (if anything, the name should tell you) we like your presence here...

 

Yeah, paying $19.95 for a 100 hour final fantasy game is an evil rip off.

(wait, how much did I spend at the movies this weekend?)

 

right...

But with 50 gig blu-rays, and 80 gig hard drives (which should support longer games with more content) , the single player mode is actually considerably shorter on virtually every next gen title with very little exception.

So for next gen the price went up to $59.99 single player went
down to about 10 or so hours and the focus has been shifted to
multiplayer online which will eventually become multiplayer subscriptions and then finally the new virtual arcade, where for every play you have to pay... (as long as you credit card can stand it).


The game makers have been trying to bring back the glory days of the arcade where pay everytime you play was the rule. Now with
multiplayer online they have a path back to those days.

 

another thing is that many games are so easy nowadays..

they should go back to "old school difficulty in games", or whatever u want to call it. its just that players today just want a game to walkthrough just like that.

while playing games like this you dont even feel like you have accomplished anything, in the old days you knew you were good at a game when u had finished it, just think about ninja gaiden for NES that game is hard as hell

I bet todays players who play mario galaxy wouldnt even be able/have the patience to finish the original super mario, not that the game is even particularly hard
It feels like the game developers want to hold your hand and make sure that you get through the game

a game should be hard, but not unfairly hard

At least we have ninja gaiden!!

EDIT: my post is maybe a little OT but my point is that if a game is challenging it makes you try the same level again and again until you get it perfect. and that of course takes more time than just runnig through a level at first try
you get kind of possessed to finish the game

If people in forums would talk about why games today are too easy, and not just about the graphics maybe game developers would do something about this shit..

but of course thet just want to get money, and thats why they make games for the masses, not for the real gamers
just think about wii, its a huge success and the whole console is only made for casual players..
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/thumbs_down.gif

 

Well, FF is not the case. I might even object that most of them can be finished in a shorter time, but I was of course referring to all those action/adventure games which can easily be finished in 20 or 30 hours at the first attempt, or even less. There have been cases of incredibly hyped games like that Heavenly Sword on PS3 which can be finished in less than 10 hours (not talking about speed run, your first go at it will last less than 10 hrs).

In general, I believe games used to provide longer lasting entertainment simply because they were FUN to play whilst nowadays they often tend to have some incredible, blockbuster plot with gameplay being not so important.

 

Wait... A couple years?
-----
I think games are getting shorter because there are no new ideas (or at least substantial ones), and everything is just a rehash. It's kinda like an essay with a maximum page limit: you can do it well for maybe half, but you run out of steam so you say, "Fuck it" and turn it in anyway. The difference is, Gamespot will still suck you off because they're lame.
-----
I think I've lost perspective on this though... most games suck anyway.
No RPG can every top Ultima 6-7 and Fallout.
No RTS can ever top Myth The Fallen Lords (Except Myth 2: Soulblighter).
No tactical shooter/sim can ever top Operation Flashpoint.
etc.

Time to backstab some fools now.

 

Only you have to realise it's not the game developers that want all of the stuff you are saying but the publishers. The people lending money to the developers.
Developer "I have this great orginal idea for a game!"
Publisher "Yeah well, but can you guarantee it will sell?"
Developer "Erhm well..."
Publisher "Okay, we want you to strike this part, modify this bit and add this. Put in a short singleplayer and multiplayer with downloadable content (not for free of course) Also change the title to Haro®©™ 4. The masses will love it and so will our treasure chest."
Developer "... well shit."

 

My opinion is that the medium is growing up with it's audience. Back when games were more likely to be 20-40 hours, we were probably all in high school, and could invest that much time. These days, gamers are, on average, over 20 years old, and developers are usually being told that with a 20-40 hour game, none of their customers actually end up completing it. Less free time due to work schedules and such.

Some of it might also be a conscious decision to cut out the more worthless content as game design gets more structured. Look at something like "Lost Odyssey" or "Shadow of the Colossus". That kind of maturity in plot and theme is I think, much more powerful than "stick in X more mini-games, so people think they got their money's worth" that you see in poorer quality titles.

 

Wow, an OF appreciation?? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/thumbs_up.gif That game was (is) great, and so fresh... It's only a shame it contains a "defend a convoy mission" which kept me from ever finishing it, maybe I'll try again in summer.

Long rant incoming.

I think Sebo has a point here. I prectically don't play anything these days, because frankly I believe these games aren't worth my time... It's all something I've done so many times before, and I'm tired of this whole grind. There are some good, even great exceptions - like Portal, VtM:Bloodlines, Grim Fandango (which kinda doesn't count for the sake of argument considering its age, but is GREAT nonetheless!) or even Warcraft 3 or HL2 (a known formula, but truly masterful execution) which actually get me to play from time to time.

Mostly SP only, though. I'm always big for a good story and seriously tired of grind, and have better things to do than run around the internet with a bunch of guys on the same map doing the same thing for the 1000th time, only *maybe* getting slightly better at it. A friend of mine keeps telling me that I have an old-fashioned taste, because now we have the internet and playing multi is THE way to play, though. To each their own, I guess... When I play a game, I want a story. When I want a challenge with another person, which mixes smart tactical competition and the need for wit and fast reflexes... I go to my judo club.

And "having the internet" really isn't an excuse for companies to deliver a crappy SP experience, it's just laziness and cowardice (playing safe 'cause maybe it won't sell... Sad, sad).

I passed half of the campaign in Soulstorm, stopped, and uninstalled it after few days of non-playing (even though I bought it right when it became available)... RE4 lies right next to it on a shelf, never taken out of its case since two months because I have better things to do, just examples. Never even blinked at COD4. I wouldn't say "games today are cr*p, because they might be interesting for other people... It's just they seem to be a bit stale, grinding and yes - maybe too short... But I would say it's better to have an absolute blast playing Portal for 2.5 h than to spend 18h plowing through some beautifully-rendered copy-and-paste-from-100-previous-games-levels no-storyline slashfests.

Rant over - for now /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sleep.gif

 

I wonder if games made you redo the same things over and over like they used to people would still complain about how short they are?

 

games(excluding rpgs) back on the genesis, snes, nes could easily be beaten within a few hours if not, less. If anything I think the games of today are too long.

 

i really dislike online play, because i dont want to and dont have the time to play a game for like 24/7 2 years straight to be half-decent. i wanna have different experiences in a variety of games, but paying 60 bucks for 6hrs long games makes me feel like game developers want to play me for a sucker.