So 20 hours for a game is short now...?

I just spend 23 hours on Ys Seven on my PSP and thought that was plenty long. 100 to 200 hours is too damn long. I prefer wanting to beat the game, not feeling like I'm obligated to halfway through.

lolGameFAQs
20 hours isn't short, it's meh. 50 hours is enough for me for an RPG (that being the main story). Under that criteria, today's games are not short, they are barely anything. You get around 6 hours if you're really lucky.


And two days? Someone who plays one game for ten hours daily needs to go out more.

20 hours is pretty short in my opinion.

The most I've ever spent on a game was 60 hours from what I remember. That's how long it took me to beat it.

I don't think 20 hours is too short, I've beaten mother 3 two times and it took me about 24 hours each time.

I'd say 15-20 hours is the sweet spot for me. Otherwise the game starts to get boring. Unless its online, etc.

20 hours is actually pretty long.

2 days worth? Sure, if you play the game 10 hours a day, but if you do that, you're an idiot who actually does need to get outside.
20 - 40 hours = long.
50 and up = too long.

[quote name='Vulpes Abnocto' post='3581135' date='Apr 9 2011, 07:50 PM']20 hours is pretty short in my opinion.[/quote]

I think of it this way:

20 hours is 5/6 of a day. That is basically a day gone. I look at my Pokemon Pearl game and cringe knowing over 200 hours have been put into that game. That is about a week of my life sunk into one single game. That amount of time put into a single game is freaking ridiculous, especially as most games that long tend to hit dry points too often to attempt to extend the game. I just spent about a week playing Ys Seven for a total of 23 or 24 hours. One full day out of my past week has been devoted to that game.

Now, consider that I'm at school for about 8 hours. I sleep about 9 hours a night. I hang out with my friend after school for about 2 hours. I then have to set aside about an hour or so for eating, work, and other things. That leaves me about four hours of free time each weekday. Weekends I'm only motivated enough to play for a couple hours anyways. That means that about 20 of my 28 hours of free time this past school week were devoted to one game. That's already bordering too much time gone.

Maybe I just think too much about where my time is going.

20 hours to me is pretty short, my optimal game length 30/35-100+ hours.

I guess the times depend on the game being played. For example 20 hours can be alot for an action game but very short can an epic RPG.

I bet some of the people playing pilotwings are probably just rushing trough the game, not doing the free flight mode, not caring about their scores, just doing each level once, etc. So they probably beat the game in a few hours and calling it short.

[quote name='ShadowSoldier' post='3581144' date='Apr 9 2011, 10:54 PM']20 hours is actually pretty long.

2 days worth? Sure, if you play the game 10 hours a day, but if you do that, you're an idiot who actually does need to get outside.
20 - 40 hours = long.
50 and up = too long.[/quote]
i agree the last game i played that was over 50 hours was star ocean 3. i completed the story and am at 150 hours but the side crap aint done and it was getting repetitive so i gave up on it i decided completed story was good enough for that otherwise i usually complete all side quests.

I like a $ an hour of quality gaming.
If i'm to pay for a game, that's basically a requirement.

Most every game i've ever bought has fulfilled this, and then some games go above and beyond.

As long as a game isn't drawn out and repetitive, there's no such thing as a game being "too long". That's just a stupid thing to say.
Tales of Vesperia took me a hundred hours on my first playthrough, and it felt short because it was so awesome all the way through you just never wanted it to end. Then of course, going back through to get other epic crap I missed consumed even more time. In total, maybe 300 hours on the game...and not once did I feel it was "too long".

20 hours IS short. If it's 20 hours of FUN, then it's a $20 game, at most.

Games nowadays are really, really short. I remember spending 65 hours to complete my FFIX copy, and the 100 hours I spent completing FFX. So 20 hours it's like going to the bathroom in real gamer terms. Ah, and I don't complete those 100+ hours in a couple of days, I take my time to enjoy the moment, read and understand the story (so that's why I'm not so interested in many new games)

I like my games to be around 8 - 10 hours.
I had a blast with games like PoP forgotten sands, Tomb Rider legends, Golden Eye, Black Ops, Bionic Commando, Bioshock 2,Star Wars FU and the likes, and to think that most of those games had decent reviews but low longevity scores.
On the other hand, epic games like Skyes of Arcadia, Scarface, GTO were just seemingly endless and lost my interest at some point or another.
The only games that I felt putting like 40+ hours are Zeldas ( of course ), Mario & Luigi, Metroid Primes and recently Assassin Creed II.
They are just too interesting and have great storys along with great gameplay, that are hard to put down.
But all in all, 8 - 10 hours is pretty good for me, before I loose my interest.

Honestly though that has something to do with me " acquiring " games.
I have so many and I could get so many more, that devoting too much time to a single game almost makes me feel guilty about not finishing the others.
I must admit, that ' maybe " if I had to spend my hard earned cash on a six hours game , I would probably give up, but as it is, the shorter the game, the sooner I finish it, the sooner I can play something else !

20 hours is a little short for 100%, but yeah...I like games that have at least 30 - 40 hours of gameplay to completing it 100%. Over 50 hours is just insane, because games that are too long just get boring after a while.

20hrs hell yeah it's too short, unless it has a really good multiplayer. I would like my games to be atleast 50hrs. I would never buy a game that has less than 20hrs of gameplay.

[quote name='Arm73' post='3581239' date='Apr 10 2011, 05:47 AM']The only games that I felt putting like 40+ hours are Zeldas ( of course ), Mario & Luigi, Metroid Primes and recently Assassin Creed II.
They are just too interesting and have great storys along with great gameplay, that are hard to put down.[/quote]


I...had to comment on this.
When you said great stories, you were NOT including Zelda games in that, right?

[quote name='Hells Malice' post='3581297' date='Apr 9 2011, 11:24 PM'][quote name='Arm73' post='3581239' date='Apr 10 2011, 05:47 AM']The only games that I felt putting like 40+ hours are Zeldas ( of course ), Mario & Luigi, Metroid Primes and recently Assassin Creed II.
They are just too interesting and have great storys along with great gameplay, that are hard to put down.[/quote]


I...had to comment on this.
When you said great stories, you were NOT including Zelda games in that, right?
[/quote]
Why not? Specially if you try to follow the Zeldas like a timeline.

Paid $12 for Minecraft.

Worst game ever. The story only took like 13 minutes.

It really depends on the game.
RPGs tend to be 40+ hours, going into the 100s sometimes.
How much of that is spent actually playing?
How much time can be deducted running back and forth on a map?
How much time can be deducted from random encounters? Waiting for your turn?
How much time can be deducted from all the text you read?

The same applies to SRPGs like Fire Emblem and Advance Wars.
A lot of time is spent reading, waiting for turns, watching animations if you don't turn them off.

Meanwhile more action-y games tend to be much shorter.
Platformers, hack n' slash, FPS', etc.
These are all much shorter, but there are fewer gaps between times where you're actually playing.

Both types are fun, but calling a 20 hour action game short compared to a 100+ hour RPG is a silly comparison.