Do you have a preference for game length?

[J T]

Some people feel like they aren't getting their money's worth if the game is over in under 50 hours. Others prefer a game they can actually complete in one sitting.

Do you more prefer short games, long games, or something in-between?


I used to feel like I was getting a bargain by buying huge RPGs that take 80 hours to finish. Then I realized I never finish them. However, short games that are fun to play from start to finish will often get more of my time because I play them repeatedly and enjoy the repetition of the game. I think I enjoy a short, quality experience with something that requires dexterity and challenge. With story-based games, I usually want something mid length, say 20-30 hours playtime. I almost never want the game to go over 50 hours; however, my favorite RPG series are the Shin Megami Tensei games which are notoriously long (though I've never finished one).

[Flake]

Games that take between 40 minutes and 6 hours to beat are what I prefer. I also like games that allow you to finish the main content quickly but offer optional side quests / junk to do for those that really want to get the most out of it.

[Frizz.Meister]

that is entirely genre dependent.

RPGs should be long in my eyes as usually they have 0 replay value and are not skill based, ie you cant really get better.

Shmups should be no longer than 20-30mins as they are incredibly skill based and also so intense that a long session can actually leave you tired.

FPS are somewhere inthe middle. However recent ones have tended to be <10hours long which i think is criminal. For example Halo Reach on highest difficulty took me 4:30 to complete. The first level actually took me 9 minutes...

[irixith]

My younger self would have said long games, equating length with value. My new older self prefers short games that can actually be consumed and enjoyed in their entirety. How many times have I started some epic length RPG, only to be detained by real life? By the time I get back to it, I've forgotten where I am, what I'm doing .. bah.

The only game in recent memory that has defied that has been Borderlands. I've happily managed to sink over 100 hours in to it. Mostly though, I prefer shorter games that manage to fit into my life.

[FerretGamer]

I definitely prefer shorter games that are usually less than 10 hours long. At this point, it doesn't matter if I get 100+ hours out of one game, since I can afford and will most definitely buy more than one game in a long span of time. Of course, I almost hardly ever buy new release games, therefore I don't mind a 10 hour game that I spent less than $20 on. I can understand why some people may be upset when they spend $60 on a game that is short. To that end, I simply do not have the time to delve into games like I used to. I am far too busy with school, work, married life, and about to have a child.

I also have always suffered from gaming adhd, since I tend to get bored quickly with games. I think my sweet point is no more than 20-30 hours for a game that has a compelling story. I'll never forget spending 50+ hours on Tales of Symphonia to never actually finish it.

I enjoy and buy RPGs except the problem is that I hardly ever finish them.

To sum up, short and sweet is the way I usually like to roll.

[Croooow!]

I do prefer short games but I really like games that take over an hour to beat to have a save feature or stage select code. For me the Virtual Console has made a number of these games more accessible now as it saves my spot between sessions. I have no problem with a game being 5-10 hours and sometimes prefer it as it doesn't become something I have to finish.

I do like RPGs but can't put the hours into them like I used to (I put 80 hours I put into FFVIII a number of years getting every character to level 100). Length isn't the big issue with me, its being able to save often and not have to devote an hour to a game between save points. That's why I like gaming on the PSP, I can break down the large PS1 RPGs into more digestible chunks now.

[AmishSamurai]

Depends on the game. I'd say the golden time would be 10-50 hours for RPGs, 3-15 for everything else.

[Curlypaul]

I also used to think the same about RPGs being good value, but lately I do prefer shorter games. My backlog is huge so I prefer to get games that I can conceivably finish.

If we are talking about modern games then 10hrs is enough, Retro games that I cant save or dont have a password then 90mins is plenty long enough

[MidnightRider]

I used to feel like I was getting a bargain by buying huge RPGs that take 80 hours to finish. Then I realized I never finish them.

Not to mention, do you really get your moneys worth on something that, if you could finish it, you'll most likely never play a 2nd time?

Games that take between 40 minutes and 6 hours to beat are what I prefer.

Lower that to 4 hours, and I agree. On top of that, that 4 hour title better be a platformer with a save feature.

[sevin0seven]

all i know is that i don't have time for RPG's anymore. i do miss the days when i played Chrono Trigger or FF3(6)to the end, and would just start all over again.