Originally posted by Superboy PrimeI heard King Kong was pretty short.
If you want to see a perfect example of a game lasting longer than it should and how it affects the overall fun package play King Kong. The game had fun ideas, but they it stretched it thin and in the end it got boring.
Anata Wa Wakarimasu Ka.....
Originally posted by SmasandianAre you trying to say that if a game is longer than 20hrs that it will cost more than if it was less than 20hrs? Because that's not true.
Half Life 2 is roughly 15-20 hours. It took 5 years to make. See how I see it unreasonable for a developer to create memorable gameplay for a shooter over 40 hours. How long are you willing to wait for a game?Why wont developers make the game longer? Because it costs alot of money and time to create another 20 hours of gameplay that still as memorable as the first 20 hours? Are you willing to pay for that extra 20 hours of gameplay?
Gameplay length has nothing to do with innovation. Next generation nowadays has nothing to do with innovation unless its tied down to the techinical aspects of the console. What' soo different about FPS today that wasnt around in 98?
Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
If it was an FPS, it might be.
Just think... an AAA FPS game like Half Life, FEAR and Doom 3 take upwards of 4-5 years to make. That's just for 20 hours of gameplay at the most. What makes those Half Life 2 and FEAR so good is because at all times the action is memorable. Gamers then think that game is really good.
But if somebody wants an FPS shooter to be that memorable and 40 hours of gameplay, wouldnt the game take almost twice as long as the 20 hour, thus costing alot more money to make.? So if a developer had to do that, wouldnt the cost of the game increase signficantly. This is just for FPS, not RPG's or RTS's that increase the gameplay by repetitive tasks
They can easily expand the development team if needed to make the game longer and better.
Look at say, BF 2142 being released now. It hasnt changed much, probably lasts the same amount of game time, just has different models and levels etc, but they are charging $120AU for it. Now that is an unreasonable price for a game so short and not very advanced, however if it was a true next gen game, then the money would be worth it, look at PS3 games, they are costing what, about $150AU or so last I read? If the content was good and the gameplay lasted longer than 10 hours, then I'd say yes, it would be a reasonable asking price. But theres no way in hell I'd pay that much for a game I can finish in a day.
Woooo, 1 week guys, 1 f'ing week. FFXII came out at a perfect time, that will last probably just long enough to hold me over until Gears comes out.
Also, for those who care, the Players Guide comes out today, I believe (November 1st). So you can get the guide and study the online maps to get the edge on your opopnents, and look at all the nifty screenshots.
Originally posted by Mišt
They can easily expand the development team if needed to make the game longer and better.Look at say, BF 2142 being released now. It hasnt changed much, probably lasts the same amount of game time, just has different models and levels etc, but they are charging $120AU for it. Now that is an unreasonable price for a game so short and not very advanced, however if it was a true next gen game, then the money would be worth it, look at PS3 games, they are costing what, about $150AU or so last I read? If the content was good and the gameplay lasted longer than 10 hours, then I'd say yes, it would be a reasonable asking price. But theres no way in hell I'd pay that much for a game I can finish in a day.
They could easily add more people but you would have to pay those extra 50-100 guys to make the game thus costing more to produce the game. See? There is no way around it. It will cost alot more money to make the game longer.
Bad example. Battlefield games are always multiplayer focused and anybody who picks up those games for the singleplayer are retarded. Those games are not short at all because its multiplayer. So bad example. Also, BF 2142 is not considered next gen because its for the PC and it uses the old BF2 engine. It's not considered next gen.
Then rent the game. Nonbody is telling you to buy it. The way I see it is that some games that are short but very good, I will play again in 5 months or so, plus they usually have multiplayer. If they dont, then its your fault for buying it without reading about it. All people have to do is read an review of the game and it usually says how long it takes to play through, if its 10 hours, and you buy it knowing how long it is, then dont complain about the playtime. You knew before you bought it.
Originally posted by J-Beowulf
Gears of War is coming out to stores that specifically sell video games (Gamestop, EBGames, etc.) on the 7th. Bigger retailers such as Wal-Mart and others like it by the 12th. The 7th is the earliest stores will have it, the 12th is the day that every retailer will have it in stock.
Ah...
Thanks. I'll have to check again then.
Originally posted by J-BeowulfWell he said the store that told him that was Gamestop so..............
Gears of War is coming out to stores that specifically sell video games (Gamestop, EBGames, etc.) on the 7th. Bigger retailers such as Wal-Mart and others like it by the 12th. The 7th is the earliest stores will have it, the 12th is the day that every retailer will have it in stock.
anata wa wakarimasu ka.....