Game Length

[GhostofAnakin]

Does it say the actual game length on the box, or approximate?

 

If it's just approximate then I think that the gamer should play at their own risk and assume that the game might be around that length if they do every single sidequest, and converse with the majority of NPCs and whatnot.

 

I think game length is much like the Required and Recommended Specs. Take Bloodlines for example. I had the RECOMMENDED specs beat, but the game was still choppy and slow as crap on my machine. It shouldn't be the be-all-end-all of what the game will be, but a rather lenient gauge.

[Judge Hades]

Yet it shouldn't be too lenient.

[GhostofAnakin]

I agree. I was pretty upset with the fact that the explanation I was given to remedy my issues with Bloodlines by their tech support was "get more RAM" when I had enough according to the REQ and REC specs.

 

But I'm just saying that I think the game length on the box is an approximation just like the required and recommended stats are and that a gamer shouldn't necessarily think that their computer will be able to handle it 100%.

[Judge Hades]

Well, I never played Bloodlines. I learned my mistakes in buying a Troika game after ToEE. I still would like to see games be 50 to 60 hours long but those days are long gone, just like the traditional CRPG. 10 to 20 hour games are now the norm, unfortunately.

[Ellester]

I guess it comes down to what you preceive as value.

 

How does one compare the value of a short, excellent game, to a longer, poor game?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, that

[Foamhead]

Games like the Elder Scrolls series are HUGE and they are obviously quite profitable. Crpg gamers are also usually willing to spend more money on quality rpgs, (at least they were last time I read about the subject) so I have a hard time believing that cost is that prohibative to making huge rpgs. Since the average budget (and correct me I am wrong) to create a video game is around four million and most games reuse art and engines, I have to ask: Where is all this money going?

 

I think what people want is quality quantity, and game designers don't want to invest four years or more of their lives on one project. Not that I blame them of course.

[Reveilled]

Why not list the minimum length on the back?

 

Instead of listing something like "Approx. 40+ hours!" as the game length, you could list "15 hours minimum length; over 50 sidequests!" Thus, you'd get some appeciation of the length of the main plot, you could get a rough idea of the total length (which might actually be more useful, as you can guage the total length based on how long it takes you to complete an average sidequest, as opposed to some faceless statistic), and get a measure of the game's linearity.

 

You might find "Approx. 40+ hours!" on the back of BG2 or FFVII, but you'd get more information from "20 hours minimum; 30+ sidequests" and "30 hours minimum" on each respectively. Thus, you learn that both are long games, but BG2 is lengthened by its sidequests, while FFVII has a very long and very linear storyline.

 

The best way I think to determine the minimum length would be to have the developers play through it, skip all sidequests, but not skip dialogue and movie clips, which are things a first time player is more likely to watch and listen to, even if they ignore other things.

[Guest Fishboot]

No method of game timing will ever work or be useful. If you don't understand why, you aren't thinking about it hard enough.

[Weiser_Cain]

I liked the sim games timing where the game would end but let you play on.

[kalimeeri]

Some games brag of 30-40 hrs of gameplay but include an interminable number of inane sidequests with a tiny bit of storyline. Those games are way too long, and more of a rip-off than a story that is finished before you're ready for it to end. Measuring or classifying by game length alone is not the way to go; what I really want is a well-executed storyline that ends when the story is told. The longer the better, of course; I'd rather read a novel than a short story anytime.

 

Just a thought: relatively few game companies over the years have taken the 'novel' approach of character development and deep plotline like Black Isle did. Is it because the industry is hiring more 'short-story' writers than those capable of producing cohesive longer works?

[Guest Fishboot]

Another industry insight article in the Costikyan vein, with emphasis on Nintendo:

 

Lost Garden

 

Linked at Penny Arcade.

[SubBassman]

Hi guys

 

If you want to play a long HC game, play my NWN mod:

 

http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Modules.Detail&id=3799

 

 

And if it's not enough, you should wait for the sequel which will be even longer, around 100-150+ hours (after ten months of hard work I'm at about 80 percent)

 

The first one lacks henchman interaction, the sequel will feature it.

TH1 has 157,000+ words of convo, the sequel already has 200,000+ and is growing.

 

If you have problems while playing, just drop me a mail. Info on the vault page.

 

Have a good time.

[Yst]

When it comes to story focused RPGs, I'll take content over grinding, thank you very much.

 

I don't think that narrative duration and character development are getting shorter or more stilted, by any means. I think time spent on story telling and character development has increased greatly on the whole since the early 90s, among CRPGs. And what's more important, they're being increasingly tied directly into the underlying system of these games (e.g., through conversation skills) in a departure from Chosen One hero dialogue linearity (or in some older RPGs, total absence of protagonist dialogue).

 

I appreciate the quantity of time dedicated to roleplaying and story telling in Bloodlines or Jade Empire. If you threw a hundred more sequential rooms filled with Generic Mob #1, Generic Mob #2 and Generic Mob #3 into these games, they wouldn't feel beneficially longer to me. They'd feel like bigger time-wasters, not bigger games.

 

As long as story, quest and character content doesn't shrink, I'm happy. Consequently, I'm happy right now with the way RPGs are going. Most of the time these days, I can't justify sitting for 100 hours, 90 hours of which consists of killing nameless goon monsters who contribute nothing to story telling, when I could sit for 30 hours, 20 hours of which consists of meaningful story-driven roleplay content. I can still get a kick out of IWD1 (just played through it and both expansions last month), but justifying gigantic amounts of dungeon crawl gameplay as a scheduling choice is pretty hard when I could get so much more with a much less problematic time investment.

[alanschu]

Hmmm, I would tend to agree. Huge amounts of time in many of the older games could be spent effectively doing nothing, wandering aimlessly without even finding a generic mob.

 

To some though, this type of exploration is very popular, and even I don't mind it too much, as long as there's something to do at the end of my journey. A huge empty wilderness that is ultimately a dead end would definitely be a dud.

[EnderAndrew]

Morrowind certainly offers this as well, but the problem is that it doesn't do it well. NPC dialogue is bland, the main quest isn't all that great, and combat mechanics are sub-par. All together the game misses the point of being fun.

 

Now that fans have given unique dialogue to all the NPCs, and cleaned the game up quite a bit, I'm considering giving it another go with a healthy staple of mods.

[alanschu]

I believe they're planning on rectifying those faults for Oblivion, if I'm not mistaken.

[EnderAndrew]

It sure appears that way.

[Guest Fishboot]

...NPC dialogue is bland

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In defense of Morrowind's dialogue, I get the idea that the majority of it is meant to be an abstraction of conversation rather than a simulation of conversation the way your VTM:Bs and Fallouts would do it. I'm actually semi-disappointed that they're going with individualized "trash" NPCs in Oblivion, because they're moving away from the stuff that made Daggerfall such a "Beth doesn't know enough to be unoriginal" crazy-bomb and moving into production value racing.

[Meshugger]

I believe they're planning on rectifying those faults for Oblivion, if I'm not mistaken.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

On the other hand, will Oblivion be as big as Morrowind?

[EnderAndrew]

From what I understand, Oblivion will be slightly smaller than Morrowind in land-mass.

[Judge Hades]

I am looking forward to Oblivion. I am curious if Bethesda will learn from their mistakes.

[Ellester]

I am looking forward to Oblivion.  I am curious if Bethesda will learn from their mistakes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Same, Morrowind had so much potential, but it just fell short. If they can correct Morrowind

[Judge Hades]

Yep, I am going to get that X Box 360 and Oblvion will be my first game with it. I am also plan on getting a HDTV and 5.1 speaker system. :D

[BicycleOfDeath]

I want games to be shorter in length.  I don't enjoy many 3 hour movies, and I don't finish many games that take more than 40 hours. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Coming from someone who has his XFIRE logged with many many WoW hours; please explain. I'm confused.

[Judge Hades]

As for movies I am the type that can watch all three extended versions of LotR movies in one sitting. I can watch Star Trek 1 through 10 in one sitting. I plan on doing a Star Wars marathon of Ep 1 to Ep 6 with my friend and MST3k them all visciously.