Game Value

[#686578]

Really?

I seriously thought 40 hours is standard for video games. This includes all the resets and retries, optional shit; but is less than going all out and completing every single thing and replaying it 50 times.

[BRP]

40 hours is nowhere near the standard really.

You'd only get that obscene amount if you isolate RPGs or do include every little detail for games like GTA or Yakuza.

I could be underestimating retries... but I don't consider myself all that talented and I can scarcely name games that eat more than an hour or two through retries. The games that did were are notorious for being difficult, at least among magazines/blogs.

[Kohan]

I also wouldn't want 40 hours or more to ever be considered the standard. If it were, the industry's products would be a lot less interesting. Every release doesn't need to be "Bejeweled," but we shouldn't be expecting a "Dragon Quest VIII" each time, either.

[Correction]

50 bucks will buy me, on average, about 6-7 lunches eating not at home.

6 lunches spent eating out is worth about one hour of eating + one hour of 'damn that was a good lunch' belly patting afterwards. Throw in a 20 minute food-induced coma for that once- a week lunch and I'd say buying lunch for a week gives me roughly 13 hours of enjoyment.

If a game does not provide that at minimum fuck it, I'm going to have a great fucking lunch, instead.

Sometimes math really does solve these questions.

[Chezo]

I love games that I get really into and put in 100+ hrs, but not all games do that to me, so I would say games w/ @least 20ish hrs+ of raw gameplay plus a lot of optional shit to do if i really enjoy the game is optimal to me.

[#686578]

Really? I can't believe the differing opinions of my own.

Just using some popular fairly recent games...
Assassin's Creed I got 40 hours out of easily.
Dead Space gave me 40 hours, before I started replaying it.
DMC4 I'm getting at least 40 hours of.
Fallout 3... well you know, but that's an RPG so it doesnt really count.
L4D I got 40 hours out of the demo, and then more when it was actually released. But I guess since that's multiplayer that doesn't count either.


I guess I haven't played much games recently.

[Ishido]

20 hours satisfies me, although on a lot of RPGs (and some other games) I get very completionist and sink far more into them.

In the past few years I've felt that PSP and DS games have given me far better value, with similar gameplay in most cases (in terms of enjoyability) at the cost of graphics, which honestly in many cases doesn't matter much to me. Although I'm sure I'd get more out of every game if I didn't play WoW as much.

On the other hand some games are 5-10 hours, but are very engaging/entertaining, I usually feel satisfied with those even though I know I shouldn't be.

[Kohan]

On the other hand some games are 5-10 hours, but are very engaging/entertaining, I usually feel satisfied with those even though I know I shouldn't be.

Why shouldn't you be? As long as you're satisfied, you did get your money's worth. If they're enjoyable, chances are you'll play them again, or at least discuss them fondly later (which is, arguably, making your money worth spending too). It's not wrong to be happy about that.

When I noted earlier that the industry's standard shouldn't be 40 hours, it's due to the fact that this "make the game as long as possible" mantra has damaged a lot of product. It's also unnecessarily padded completely medicore games, particularly license-based titles. When developers want to throw every last mini-game, multiplayer mode (normally not including especially good ones), and hard-to-find secret into a game, they could have spent that time and effort making the actual core game better. This would have resulted in a shorter experience, but a superior game. However, they are pressured by the demands to make the game as long as possible.

That's not to say that every long game is trash, because of course that is not true, but the amount of time and money invested into stretching out what should've been short and sweet titles -- that is a problem.

[recuperi]

30-40 seems like the average for my games, but there are the ones like Lost Odyssey that just have things outside the main story (the short stories) that make it longer. Overall I just feel like I need more than 5 hours of gameplay (including replays) for a 60 dollar game, mainly because I really hate selling games back after I'm finished with them.

One example is probably Assassin's Creed. I played that game almost constantly when I first got it, playing to the end. I hadn't really touched the game at all since, until just a few days ago. There's no multiplayer (although there were repetitive parts for achievements) but I just want to see the story again. Five hours means playing through it in one day, which generally brings about that urge to try to get another game in its place while you still have a chance to sell at full price.

edit: I will buy XBLA and PSN games that tend to be 3-15 hours though, it's not as much investment and I can't sell those back

[Kohan]

If a game is short and not well-made, it's just a bad game. "Assassin's Creed," despite having fans, definitely suffered from being excessively over-hyped.

[recuperi]

Ubisoft did a hell of a job marketing that game, but yeah there was too much hype for it. I'm just playing the main story this time though, so it's gonna end up in that 25-40 range (I think)

[#686578]

If a game is short and not well-made, it's just a bad game. "Assassin's Creed," despite having fans, definitely suffered from being excessively over-hyped.

True enough, but I got at least 40 hours out of it just from killing people alone. I guess sandboxing now has to be put in a separate category like multiplayer, MMOs, and RPGs?

[Kohan]

I didn't really intend to bash "Assassin's Creed," I think you can get a good amount of playtime out of that (as in your example). Should have put those statements on two separate lines. I could go back and fix it, but. Eh.

[#686578]

Ah well I know some people only did the straight quests and didn't bother with getting any of the other informational quests done, so that cut them down to like 10 hours or something really low.

And I'm not talking like the flags or anything, just like I went to every city and was like "It's awesome doing these quests I should continue doing them."

Something about walking up to a guard and low profile assassinating him then watch as people scattered. Stand on a near by rooftop and wait for the guards replacement to come. Then kill him with a ninja star. Do this until you run out of stars. After that jump down and just low profile assassinate them as they walk up to the other corpses. I made a line of dead corpses so long that they went out of the games sight.
That also added hours of entertainment.

[BRP]

Assassin's Creed had a whole lot of timesinks consider its genre. It's core game was still pretty short in comparison to the rest of it.