The 120 Hour-Long Game is Born

I have a feeling 80% of the people who play wouldn't finish it. Including me.DireToad

I'd prefer longer games, but I also have a good understanding of the gaming market and gamers.  Hardcore gamers would love longers games, but the problem is they only make up a small percentage of the market (most of them being addicted to wow right now).  You're average gamer isn't going to want to spend that much time on a game.  Most average gamers will not spend much more than 20 hours on single player.  This is why more and more games are actually getting shorter (GeOW, FEAR, Kameno, Condemned, Lost Planet, ect).

Take the differences Bethesda made from Morrowind to Oblivion for example.  First off they changed quick travel which makes the game go much faster even though the "world" is larger.  Second the got rid of minimum levels for missions which lets you run through the game at your pace.  Third they focused on creating depth in the missions instead of just creating errands.  This ment Oblivion had less missions, but it's missions had deeper plots, and tightly strung together storylines.  As you can see Oblivion is much better for less serious gamers since you can finish the game at your own skill level and pace, unlike Morrowind where you pretty much need to dedicate 60+ hours just to do the main mission.
jrhawk42

Guys, guys, guys.  Listen.  What's so wrong about creating more value for hardcore gamers?  The biggest counterpoint I've been hearing is:

Developers wouldn't be interested in spending more time and resources to make longer games-

This argument assumes that by making longer, more involving games developers would end up spending more time and resources.  This is not the case.  I'm sure some of you are aware that development teams can sometimes include over 100 people.  Thi is, in part, due to the complex nature of today's games; we have lead programmers, programmers, testers, 3D artists, lead-3D artists, sound engineers, creative directors, which all work together on the complex phsysics, art, sound, and programming code for today's games. 

If a company decided, as I'm suggesting, to say "hey, to hell with all the fancy graphics, phsysics, and trying to get our hefty engine to work online.  Let's make a very good looking game in the vein of old 16-bit games, but beef it up with new age sound and special effects," it might be able to create games which provide more value to its end users.  I'd argue that this approach would take less time than the former...lower development costs and a greater customer value.  Win-win.

The thought has occurred to me that, with all of the extra storage capacity and special effects capabilities of today's game media, a developer could create one HELL of an amazing game without all of the glitz of 3D environments, physics, and the like.

Consider how long a game could be with graphics equivalent to an old 2D RPG like Chrono Trigger. I think developers could even go a step further and add in some really neat special effects, smoother animations, and such...call it a compromise, of sorts, between new and old.

Keep in mind that graphically impressive games are VERY integral to a system's success...that said, I think there is certainly a niche for a game of this sort among its library.

NOTE: "120 Hours" is strictly an arbitrary number used to illustrate my larger point--that reallocating resources that would go into developing sophisticated 3D graphics, physics, and models could be reallocated to making games with more length and depth.

I'd SO be in line for a game that's "120 hours" long. Thoughts?
CubeJL

[QUOTE="CubeJL"]The thought has occurred to me that, with all of the extra storage capacity and special effects capabilities of today's game media, a developer could create one HELL of an amazing game without all of the glitz of 3D environments, physics, and the like.

Consider how long a game could be with graphics equivalent to an old 2D RPG like Chrono Trigger. I think developers could even go a step further and add in some really neat special effects, smoother animations, and such...call it a compromise, of sorts, between new and old.

Keep in mind that graphically impressive games are VERY integral to a system's success...that said, I think there is certainly a niche for a game of this sort among its library.

NOTE: "120 Hours" is strictly an arbitrary number used to illustrate my larger point--that reallocating resources that would go into developing sophisticated 3D graphics, physics, and models could be reallocated to making games with more length and depth.

I'd SO be in line for a game that's "120 hours" long. Thoughts?
palaric8

See area in my message that reads "NOTE:..."

Oblivion has 120+ hours of gameplay.

Morrawind also does.

seriously, any game over 30 hours is a borefest.

i probably wouldnt be able to complete it due to my lack of interest and/or personal life.
shadow_lord_11

I'm actually starting to find this funny...here we are, spending money on games, and what we're basically saying is, "no, don't give us any more content for our $50-$60 investment.  Less is more.  Make games shorter as opposed to longer."

You guys are giving me the giggles. 

[QUOTE="palaric8"][QUOTE="CubeJL"]The thought has occurred to me that, with all of the extra storage capacity and special effects capabilities of today's game media, a developer could create one HELL of an amazing game without all of the glitz of 3D environments, physics, and the like.

Consider how long a game could be with graphics equivalent to an old 2D RPG like Chrono Trigger. I think developers could even go a step further and add in some really neat special effects, smoother animations, and such...call it a compromise, of sorts, between new and old.

Keep in mind that graphically impressive games are VERY integral to a system's success...that said, I think there is certainly a niche for a game of this sort among its library.

NOTE: "120 Hours" is strictly an arbitrary number used to illustrate my larger point--that reallocating resources that would go into developing sophisticated 3D graphics, physics, and models could be reallocated to making games with more length and depth.

I'd SO be in line for a game that's "120 hours" long. Thoughts?
CubeJL

See area in my message that reads "NOTE:..."

[QUOTE="shadow_lord_11"]seriously, any game over 30 hours is a borefest.

i probably wouldnt be able to complete it due to my lack of interest and/or personal life.
CubeJL

I'm actually starting to find this funny...here we are, spending money on games, and what we're basically saying is, "no, don't give us any more content for our $50-$60 investment. Less is more. Make games shorter as opposed to longer."

You guys are giving me the giggles.