Game length is overrated

'Extremely long and repetitive', games used to be about 4 times longer. Maybe you just prefer a different type of game TC.

We're in different times now where there is something for everyone.

Although it's interesting you say you prefer indie games for that reason, as they tend to hold on to retro principles more so.

I magine if the Speed Run Levels of Rayman where just 30 Seconds longer....

I would have gladly shaved 15 hours off the GTAV single player campaign.

Most of my favorite games, I can beat within 1-2 hours, so I somewhat agree. I'm not a fan of filler, and games that drag on, I'll play over the course of several months, assuming that I even care about finishing them. Also, the longer a game is, the less of a chance I'll replay it, because it's just too much work to go through it again.

But why do people have the need to complete everything. I'd be happy to play a game for as long as I felt like knowing that when I decided to pick it back up again, there would still be a ton of stuff to do or a load left of a game. I'd rather not pay £40 for a game that is going to only last me a few weeks.

@ HalcyonScarlet

Alot of games are becoming like Skinner Boxes.... So Stopping when you like isn't an Option.... i.e. Darksouls.

With a price drop its overrated. If its fun it's too somewhat, but it is definitely a deterrence for me depending on the game.

Yeah pretty much.

Well it Depends.

But overall, I'd say yup.

Game length is irrelevant; what matters are pacing and core gameplay mechanics. I agree the tagline "our game has ___ hours of content" has been abused to justify games that are paced poorly and have shitty gameplay, like the Assassin's Creed series.