Well, there are things to find, but that's neither here no there. You can blow through the game quickly and bypass many enemies just by running through them, particularly during the vehicle levels. And I said nothing about bumping the difficulty up to enhance the play time. Heroic is the recommended difficulty from the creator of the game, hence why I mentioned it.
My case isn't to defend the Halo series or anything like that, it's to discuss averages and the length most games last. As the discussion is about if the length of games has dropped on average over time.
I brought up Echoes because it's an example of how games can do both SP and MP without sacrificing the quality single player portion, which is often a claim made to condemn multiplayer without any reasoning or evidence to back it up.
Originally posted by BackFiregood point lots of new games today end soon. the old games on the old systems like super nintendo or genisis they went on for along time
Well, there are things to find, but that's neither here no there. You can blow through the game quickly and bypass many enemies just by running through them, particularly during the vehicle levels. And I said nothing about bumping the difficulty up to enhance the play time. Heroic is the recommended difficulty from the creator of the game, hence why I mentioned it.My case isn't to defend the Halo series or anything like that, it's to discuss averages and the length most games last. As the discussion is about if the length of games has dropped on average over time.
I brought up Echoes because it's an example of how games can do both SP and MP without sacrificing the quality single player portion, which is often a claim made to condemn multiplayer without any reasoning or evidence to back it up.
Originally posted by spidey-dudeThat's not what he's saying.
good point lots of new games today end soon. the old games on the old systems like super nintendo or genisis they went on for along time
He's saying that the average time a game last today is the same as it used to be and hasn't changed, meaning the average length of games today hasn't decreased as some misguided people are stating.
Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
Originally posted by InnerRisethen i disagree cause lots of games today are easier and arent as challenging as the old ones. the racing games yes there harder and take longer these days i admit cause the speed is more realistic and stuff
That's not what he's saying.He's saying that the average time a game last today is the same as it used to be and hasn't changed, meaning the average length of games today hasn't decreased as some misguided people are stating.
Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
and why again with the akka waka puka thingy ?
Originally posted by spidey-dude
then i disagree cause lots of games today are easier and arent as challenging as the old ones. the racing games yes there harder and take longer these days i admit cause the speed is more realistic and stuffand why again with the akka waka puka thingy ?
This keeps being said, but no one has given any examples.
Shooters on average are 10-15 hours long. This is the same length they've always been.
Console RPG's are 25-35 hours long on average, and this is the same, if not a little longer, than they've always been.
Platformers seem to be around 10 hours or so, which is again the same as they've always been since the saved game was introduced.
So what genres have decreased in length?
Originally posted by BackFireConsole RPG's are 25-35 hours long on average ? they put that to get your attention on buying the product of course. lots of games today have cheat codes and stuff and thats one way thats made gaming shorter these days. back then the only way to do that was with that game genie thing. not alot of games had codes to put in and stuff. like unlocking levels and things like that.
This keeps being said, but no one has given any examples.Shooters on average are 10-15 hours long. This is the same length they've always been.
Console RPG's are 25-35 hours long on average, and this is the same, if not a little longer, than they've always been.
Platformers seem to be around 10 hours or so, which is again the same as they've always been.
So what genres have decreased in length?
Originally posted by BackFirei brought up saying the past years theres been many cheats thats what makes the games shorter using them. all the shortcuts and crap. and there was no internet or anything like that when ninteno was 1st out i dont remember any cheat codes for the old mario games or anything on the system till game genie came out
Games have always had cheat codes.The topic is discussing the length of the game while playing legitimately. Cheat codes don't factor into this.
Originally posted by BackFirei still think lots of games today arent as challenging as they used to be thats why there shorter now except for racing games there harder these days but i like them
Again, cheat codes don't factor into the discussion. If someone uses a cheat code they're purposely diminishing the difficulty and the game length, through choice. The game can't be faulted for that. And the player who uses cheat codes loses the right to complain about difficulty and length.
Originally posted by BackFirei played pacman world 3 on xbox only took 1 week to beat it. the 1st 3D pacman was on dreamcast that took like almost a month to beat i remember. yes lots of the adventure games have dropped the length as well. i played street fighter anniversary on xbox its a hell alot easier playing the old street fighter on the xbox console than the old systems or at the arcade.
But...they aren't shorter. On average they're the same length or longer.
I'm going to pitch in my psychological oar again here.
Much as I could ramble on about game lengths all day- from the story of my brother's titanic struggle with the game 'Superman' on the VCS 20 in about 1981 through to Alpha Centauri which probably ate up more tiem than any game I can imagine... maybe Grand Prix Legends is close...
... I think that's not the point. At least, a straight playtime comparison is not the point.
Because it is not about how long the playtime is. It's about the same principle of what kind of game experience you like as I was talking about before, which is unsurprising as it spun off from the same argument.
To whit- take something like Final Fantasy, say either VII or X. Standard playthrough time- some 40 hours.
Playthrough time if you go into some detail, more like between sixty and eighty and that only counts the timr you actually live, not repeat tries.
If you go into the game inside out, the time is past 100. And that's not counting whenever you feel like playing it through again.
This play-stretching- a good portion of which is grinding- does not equal quality. But it is VERY suitable psotion for those people that like to get REALLY deep into a game, as I mentioned earlier as being very much the approach the modern RP uses.
So if that is what you like, you're always going to see ten hour blast fests as superficial, especially if multiplay holds no allure. It's more about being able to stay engaged with the game setting than it is about how literally long the game is.
KOTOR was too damn short though- the sequel doubly so.
Originally posted by Ushgaraki sitll think most games today are easier thats what makes them shorter
I'm going to pitch in my psychological oar again here.Much as I could ramble on about game lengths all day- from the story of my brother's titanic struggle with the game 'Superman' on the VCS 20 in about 1981 through to Alpha Centauri which probably ate up more tiem than any game I can imagine... maybe Grand Prix Legends is close...
... I think that's not the point. At least, a straight playtime comparison is not the point.
Because it is not about how long the playtime is. It's about the same principle of what kind of game experience you like as I was talking about before, which is unsurprising as it spun off from the same argument.
To whit- take something like Final Fantasy, say either VII or X. Standard playthrough time- some 40 hours.
Playthrough time if you go into some detail, more like between sixty and eighty and that only counts the timr you actually live, not repeat tries.
If you go into the game inside out, the time is past 100. And that's not counting whenever you feel like playing it through again.
This play-stretching- a good portion of which is grinding- does not equal quality. But it is VERY suitable psotion for those people that like to get REALLY deep into a game, as I mentioned earlier as being very much the approach the modern RP uses.
So if that is what you like, you're always going to see ten hour blast fests as superficial, especially if multiplay holds no allure. It's more about being able to stay engaged with the game setting than it is about how literally long the game is.
KOTOR was too damn short though- the sequel doubly so.
Then about 15ish.
Hmm. Maybe. I mean, that was the birth of modern gaming as we understand it, but as I say the argument is complex. A Link to the Past is probably harder than Twilight Princess but there was less content.
Final Fantasy, difficulty about evens, but significantly shorter back then.
Still plenty of games that were unreasonably hard just to stretch out playing time though.