<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>Gábor's blog</title>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.nekomancer.net/blog/archives/short-games"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.nekomancer.net/node/149/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://www.nekomancer.net/node/149/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2008-03-28T18:46:28-05:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>short games in a busy age</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.nekomancer.net/blog/archives/short-games" />
    <id>http://www.nekomancer.net/blog/archives/short-games</id>
    <published>2007-11-13T17:52:34-06:00</published>
    <updated>2008-03-28T18:46:28-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>gabor</name>
    </author>
    <category term="games" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[<p>In september, a new game was released for the Playstation 3: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_sword">Heavenly Sword</a>. The reviews noted that it takes roughly 6 hours to finish this game. What a bad game, i thought, and moved on. I thought that everyone thinks so.</p>

<p>But apparently not. Last week i&#8217;ve read a meta-review (a summary of other reviews) of the game <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_duty_4">Call of Duty 4</a> on <a href="http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/06/nega-review-call-of-duty-4/">www.joystiq.com</a>, where the review mentions that</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>while everyone agreed that the game was short, many saw this a a positive in this busy day and age.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>the final drop in the glass was the video-review of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_creed">Assassin&#8217;s Creed</a> on <a href="http://www.gametrailers.com/player/27754.html">www.gametrailers.com</a>, where they mention (around at 4:10):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>&#8230; Assassin&#8217;s Creed will last you a good 12 to 15 hours depending on your skill level, which is pretty beefy by today&#8217;s standards&#8230;</p>
</blockquote>

<p>(let&#8217;s stop for a second. i&#8217;m not a native speaker of english. the following of the post depends on the assumption that &#8220;beefy&#8221; means something positive here. it&#8217;s possible that i got this incorrectly, if that&#8217;s the case, feel free to correct me in the comments).</p>

<p>so, why is it GOOD that a game only takes 12-15 hours to complete?</p>

<p>i remember playing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_2">baldur&#8217;s gate 2</a>, and it was a long game. i do not remember anymore how long it took, but various review sites said things like <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate2shadowsofamn/player_review.html?id=496179">&#8220;the story is absolutely epic in length and you can expect several 10&#8217;s of hours just to complete the main quest, not to mention the literally hundreds of side-quests.&#8221;</a> or <a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/163/163437p1.html">&#8220;The number I keep hearing from PR people and Bioware/Black Isle designers is 200 hours, but I&#8217;ve got a feeling it will be much more than that for your average player.&#8221;</a>.</p>

<p>from some of the games i played more recently,  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_fantasy_7">Final Fantasy 7</a> took around 35 hours to complete, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_fantasy_12">Final Fantasy 12</a> around 65 hours (and i did do all the optional quests).</p>

<p>yes, there were also shorter games, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirge_of_Cerberus:_Final_Fantasy_VII] (lately i&#8217;m trying to catch up with the not-yet-played Final Fantasy games ..), which took around 15 hours to complete, but i would never say that it&#8217;s length was adequate. it&#8217;s story was great, but the length was absolutely too short.</p>

<p>i await from a game at least 25-30 hours of gameplay. otherwise how could i enjoy playing it for weeks? otherwise how could it fill my free time, and make me submerged in an other world every evening?</p>

<p>or such things are not needed anymore?</p>
    ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>In september, a new game was released for the Playstation 3: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_sword">Heavenly Sword</a>. The reviews noted that it takes roughly 6 hours to finish this game. What a bad game, i thought, and moved on. I thought that everyone thinks so.</p>

<p>But apparently not. Last week i&#8217;ve read a meta-review (a summary of other reviews) of the game <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_duty_4">Call of Duty 4</a> on <a href="http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/06/nega-review-call-of-duty-4/">www.joystiq.com</a>, where the review mentions that</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>while everyone agreed that the game was short, many saw this a a positive in this busy day and age.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>the final drop in the glass was the video-review of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_creed">Assassin&#8217;s Creed</a> on <a href="http://www.gametrailers.com/player/27754.html">www.gametrailers.com</a>, where they mention (around at 4:10):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>&#8230; Assassin&#8217;s Creed will last you a good 12 to 15 hours depending on your skill level, which is pretty beefy by today&#8217;s standards&#8230;</p>
</blockquote>

<p>(let&#8217;s stop for a second. i&#8217;m not a native speaker of english. the following of the post depends on the assumption that &#8220;beefy&#8221; means something positive here. it&#8217;s possible that i got this incorrectly, if that&#8217;s the case, feel free to correct me in the comments).</p>

<p>so, why is it GOOD that a game only takes 12-15 hours to complete?</p>

<p>i remember playing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_2">baldur&#8217;s gate 2</a>, and it was a long game. i do not remember anymore how long it took, but various review sites said things like <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate2shadowsofamn/player_review.html?id=496179">&#8220;the story is absolutely epic in length and you can expect several 10&#8217;s of hours just to complete the main quest, not to mention the literally hundreds of side-quests.&#8221;</a> or <a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/163/163437p1.html">&#8220;The number I keep hearing from PR people and Bioware/Black Isle designers is 200 hours, but I&#8217;ve got a feeling it will be much more than that for your average player.&#8221;</a>.</p>

<p>from some of the games i played more recently,  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_fantasy_7">Final Fantasy 7</a> took around 35 hours to complete, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_fantasy_12">Final Fantasy 12</a> around 65 hours (and i did do all the optional quests).</p>

<p>yes, there were also shorter games, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirge_of_Cerberus:_Final_Fantasy_VII] (lately i&#8217;m trying to catch up with the not-yet-played Final Fantasy games ..), which took around 15 hours to complete, but i would never say that it&#8217;s length was adequate. it&#8217;s story was great, but the length was absolutely too short.</p>

<p>i await from a game at least 25-30 hours of gameplay. otherwise how could i enjoy playing it for weeks? otherwise how could it fill my free time, and make me submerged in an other world every evening?</p>

<p>or such things are not needed anymore?</p>
    ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
