What is your preferred game length? Obviously, it’s hard to pin a uniform number on this question as it depends on the context; RPGs generally take longer to complete than your average character action game, but at what point do you feel like you’re getting value for money? Do you like your titles to clock in with 50 hour campaigns, or do you prefer more condensed experiences around the 15 hour mark?
Ex-PlayStation boss Shawn Layden has rekindled the conversation, suggesting that he’d prefer more 10 to 15 hour AAA titles. “Instead of spending five years making an 80 hour game, what does three years and a 15 hour game look like? What would be the cost around that? Is that a full-throated experience?” he pondered during a recent GameLab Live session.
“Personally, as an older gamer, I would welcome a return to the 12 to 15 hour [AAA] game,” he continued. “I would finish more games, first of all, and just like a well edited piece of literature or a movie, looking at the discipline around that could give us tighter, more compelling content. It's something I'd like to see a return to in this business.”
The PlayStation 4 generation has, in general, seen games getting longer. The Last of Us: Part II, for example, is a 30 hour experience where the running time for its predecessor was roughly half that. God of War, similarly, went from tight 10 hour campaigns to a sprawling 30 hour epic. These titles cost more money to make than ever before, something Layden believes is not sustainable.
But subtract the economics from the conversation and there’s a much more subjective discussion to be had: at what point are you willing to fork out $59.99 and feel fulfilled? Uncharted: The Lost Legacy proved there’s a market for a short-form swashbuckling adventure at a budget price point, but Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End was double the length at full-price.
And yet, there are some who would argue that Chloe and Nadine’s spin-off is the more compelling of the two titles, as while it reuses many of the assets and set-pieces from its predecessors, it’s condensed campaign ensures that it never outstays its welcome. Nathan Drake’s finale, by comparison, is often criticised for running a little too long.
It’s an interesting question, and one that will hinge on personal preference. Those of you with lots of spare time may prefer longer lengths, while those with larger responsibilities may prefer more manageable durations. What feels right for you? Share your thoughts in the comments section below, and be sure to vote in our poll.
Comments 96
Tough question, it depends for me. I adore 100 hour epics like The Witcher 3, and games like that just wouldn't be the same if they were crammed into 40 hours.
But on the other side of things, I think a very refined, very focused 10-20 hour adventure can be amazing. Something like God of War comes to mind.
While I do like long RPGs, I generally only have time for one or two of these at most a year. For the way I play, which is a bit of everything, I prefer manageable campaigns in the 15 hour mark for my AAA titles. I'm okay with longer games in this area, but they need to be good.
For budget games, I feel satisfied with a high quality 5 to 10 hours, and I actually prefer indie titles that can be completed in a couple of really high quality sessions.
Depends entirely on the game but generally I prefer shorter titles.
I don't really see the need to differentiate between whether it's a big budget game or a small indie title though so voted between 10 and 20 for them.
It's interesting to see the difference though (at least in very early poll results) between what people expect of a AAA game compared to an indie.
I prefer games that have around 10-20 hours of main story with real end and then I am free to play as I like.
God of War, Spider-Man, Diablo 3, Assassin's Creed Series, Fallout etc.
I don't care about length as much as I don't want fluff. Stuff that isn't fun just to increase the play time. I hate that.
10 hours is my sweet spot. So many games I want to play and if it's 10 hours or so, I might be able to get through it in a week.
I couldn't answer this. It depends on genre and story. Short Indie games like Thomas Was Alone, Journey and Inside etc... Are brilliant and short. However other Indie games like Invisible Inc and Salt and Sanctuary are much longer and also brilliant. The AAA/Indie status doesn't dictate how long I think a game should be, the game itself is the judge of that.
For me it completely depends on the game. Some games work great as a long experience, whereas others work better as a short and sweet adventure.
More than 40 hours for everything.i l💛ve games thats really long.you gets your moneyssssssss 💰 worth.word up son
I prefer games of the length similar to Spider Man GOW or Jedi Fallen Order which I consider AAA which I would say is around the 30 hour mark. For budget games probably about 10 hours is about right which I consider games like TWD or even Detroit Become Human, as for Indies I prefer these to be more like 5 hours similar to Inside and alike.
I do like the odd huge game much like GTA or Far Cry but my favourite is for a game to be around 20 - 30 hours and have some replay ability.
Generally, I prefer a game that doesn't waste my time. I'll take a concise game like God of War or Horizon that's a fulfilling 20-30 hours over a bloated time wasting slog like Assassin's Creed Odyssey any day.
Some non story driven games like Bloodborne and Diablo 3 Iv'e put significantly more time into, but that's mainly because the gameplay loop is so satisfying. There's a time and a place for everything I suppose.
Yeah, really depends on the game, and the content.
As others have said, I don't have a preferred length. It depends heavily on genre and game design. What's way too long for one genre of game would be quite short for another.
As a general rule I prefer games to come in under 20 hours but, as others have said, it depends.
It really does depend on the game and how consistently engaging it is.
@playstation1995 If they cut out the crap out AC i think i would the same or even more fun. 😆
For Triple AAA open world games 40hrs+ but for more story focused games like God Of War and Last of Us then 20-30hrs is enough.
Indies should be no longer than 10hrs whilst Budget games closer to 20hrs.
Just my preference anyway.
I enjoy games a lot lately that are around 5 to 10 hours no matter what the budget of the game is.
These days I rarely play games longer than 20 hours. Major exceptions atm are animal crossing and FF7R.
To me it also depends on genre.
While there is unscaled level system (final fantasy series till 13) I can spend 100 hours grinding and enjoying. While there is scaled level system (assassins greed origins and odyssey) it starts to be boring in 20 hours. If there is interresting story (the order 1886) I don't mind it is short. If there is weak story and you spot that fights are there just to add lenght (a LOT of games, but the most I remember Xmen origins: Wolverine) I'm bored even by 20 minute fighting location (especialy if developers makes idiot out of you, because environment suggest, that your character could go different way and completely avoid this meaningless fight.)
It generally depends upon the type of game, generally though I'd say the length of TLOU2 is at the upper bounds of that and being longer doesn't mean better or more valuable. RE2 for example took me about 7 hours to beat first time but my save file shows over 30 hours play with subsequent playthroughs. Whereas AC Odyssey I dropped it around the 30 hour mark, I still love the odd epic such as The Witcher 3 but in general I don't really have the time
25-30 hours feels like a sweet spot for me. Makes the adventure feel fulfilling without dragging on for too long. Of course, when I finished Persona 5 last winter after 120 hours, I wanted more. Had to tell myself to not do NG+ right away, especially with Royal around the corner.
On the flip side, I also like games that can be really fun ~15 hour experiences. Games like Crash or Zelda usually don't take hundreds of hours but they're still really fun games.
Guess it just depends on the game and what it contains.
When it's good it's best long tadaaaaa!
Depends very much on the game and genre but for where there is a campaign or story, I have played very few games this generation that truly justified going over the 20-30 hour mark. That isn't to say there aren't any but my sweet spot is about the 15-20 hour mark. This means I can normally enjoy the game fully and complete it in a couple of weeks maybe. Playing an 80 hour game means I don't play much else for potentially weeks and months and that is a big investment and has to really keep my interest.
@Flaming_Kaiser i want every game to be long but it aint hapening.sometimes a game is so short and really amazing you dont want it to end.thats a fact black.word up son
@ShogunRok to vote in this do you not need to add a logarithmic scale?!
there's a lot of games that pad for no reason. I love rd2 but the trip to guarm adds very little to the story or gameplay. Twenty to forty is the sweet spot for me, though I have dropped 200 in witcher 3! I almost feel guilty that I spent that long playing one game but it is legitimately epic.
The main problem with my gaming hobby is that my absolute favorite games don’t really fit my lifestyle. I play all kinds of games, but my favorites are sprawling RPGs-Witcher, AC Odyssey etc.
But I have a very demanding job, a family and not that much time to play. For example: I really wanted to continue TLOU 2 last night, but once I was done with what ended up being a 12 hour work day and got the kids to bed, all I could do was go to sleep. I had no energy for gaming or anything else. That happens way too often, and makes it hard to complete long games.
I still play big games, but slowly and sacrificing sleep to do it. But it is great that there are 5-15 hour experiences out there when I am short on time-that has been a fantastic development in gaming.
I want a game that is fun the whole time i know i bring up AC a lot they show me what i dont want. I want the game too be fun but dont want it too be stretched out with useless filler. I think if they put the story more in front of getting useless collectables. I like a game respect my time with usefull things. And man do i hate games with trophies that make me collect tons of useless stuff, grind monsters hundreds of monsters and especially unlockables that are locked of where you have too go through the entire game too get that one little thing i missed and tacked on online mode trophies.
Too make long story short it depends on the game.
Can’t answer this survey.... I don’t care about length based on it being indie, mid tier or aaa.
I care about genre.
This survey should be split in:
*Story focused action/adventure: 15 hours
*Open world sandbox and/or RPG: 60+ hours
*linear SP campaign For competitive game: ~8 hours
Anything under that better be priced as a budget game ($20 to $40 at launch, depending on length/quality.)
(Obviously rogue likes and puzzle games like tetris are on the “until your eyes bleed or you get bored” territory)
Depends on the game, setting, story and world building for me. I play a little bit of everything so I don't look at length of a campaign. Games could of be 5 minutes or 100 hours, so long as they are good in my eyes I'm not so fussed. ☺️
I never 100% a game, I do all the side quests and other activities that help me get my character up to godlike status i.e. fully skilled up, top of the range quality weapons/armor etc and then I complete all the the main missions (and secondary quests if I'm enjoying the game) so I don't need the game jam packed. I like a game to last me between 2-6 weeks after that I get bored. The most recent God of War was a perfect length and didn't overdo it on side quests and collectibles that assassins creed games can be guilty of at times but I still love them .
@ShogunRok I find they get tiresome if too long, Witcher 3 is a game that I personally know many people who didn't finish it, the same with RDR2. Wheras virtually everyone I know finished games like GOW, TLOU, etc... judging by the vote I'd say most people want a game to weigh in at around the 15 to 20 hour mark.
More important than overall game lenght are to me:
Replayability (do I generally love the world and return for more, do multiple playthroughs make things more interesting?) and Pickup-And-Play-Capability, mostly management sims like Two Point Hospital and turn based games like Fire Emblem fall into this category. Things like Breath of the Wild fall into both. Being an adult oftentimes doesn't leave enough time (or attention span) to delve into games for hours on end.
Also, what I absolutely don't like is FILLER content just to bolster the playtime. A game can be just as good at 20 hours played as others are with 60 hours played.
Depends on the game. I like my JRPGs to be around the 100 hour mark.
Depends really, if its a big open game like Assassin's Creed or The Witcher i expect anything from 50 hours to 100 hours or more. If its something smaller and more focused like Star Wars Fallen Order or God of War then happy with anything from 10 hours to 40 hours depending on how long it can keep it going and stay great, i'm 20 hours in now for TLoUP2 and i'm very happy and still gripped with it however if Fallen Order was of that same length story wise i think i would have started to get tired with it, it all depends on the game and type of game really as a FPS is very different to a big RPG and so require certain lengths.
I prefer the bigger games that last weeks or months to play but I've loved indie games that only last a few hours. I spent £40 on Resi 3 and even though you can finish the game in just over an hour, I still clocked up a good 28 hours on it due to replayability.
Hours spent don't really matter, it's how much you enjoy your time within a game.
I used to want all my games to be 40-60+ hours because I used to play 80 hour rpgs that were filled with adventure, story and things to do. I always imagine the adventure or cool things to do if they extended main stream AAA games but instead we get the same game that should be only 10-15 hours but packed with useless sidequests, collection list and some other ***** to extend the play time to 30-40+. Like I wanted you to add to the story/location or add some cool mechanic/elements not make me run around collecting ***** or running back and forth across the map to kill time.
Ultimately it depends on the games genre, now I work full time I hate games that have needless padding or filler, I always think the final fantasy series (for the most part) are longish games with the quantity to back it up. Unfortunately many developers smash pointless side quests into titles to make them feel worthwhile.
Edith Finch remains (imo) one of the best titles on the ps4 and it's barely 90 minutes long, ultimately it's the quality that counts for me, not the quantity.
I'm a one minute man.
Depend on the game, I didn't have problem with 50+ hours for rpg like persona 5 & dragon quest, but 15-20 hours for games like tlou2 and uncharted 4 seems about right, and for open world games 20-40 hours is enough for me.
I think the poll is flawed since not every game is the same in an RPG I expect more than 50 hours minimum but for games like God of War 30 is perfect then there are games like Monster Hunter World that I still play and I have played for more than 1600+ hours so it all depends on the kind of game it is
I prefer the longer types of games myself. Red Dead, Skyrim, Assassins Creed, GTA, those are some of my favourite games. Games you can lose yourself in without actually playing the main story.
@Westernwolf4 I can feel your pain i want to play way more RPG's thats why i dont buy any liveservice games.
The ideal length: long enough to be satisfied but not long enough to be bored. That ranges from 5h to 300h unless the game is a turd, in which case 5 minutes is already too long
Are these game lengths for the main campaign or all playable content?
For me main campaign around 15 is a sweet spot, but it wholy depends on the game. sometimes i like to do as much as possible, sometime i just run through the main campaign.
It all depend on how much the story grabs me.
@GKO900 Agreed i played MHW for 700 hours but i cant find the strenght too start up Iceborn. I loved the game but i takes so much time. And this may sound strange the liveservice part makes it feel like chore because i need too play that event so i cant play anything else.
I don't have a preferred game length as such. It really does depend on the game, its price, its genre and what other content may come with it. I don't mind a 10-20hr Single Player campaign in a AAA game if there is other aspects - like Online options (co-op, MP etc) or that 10-20hrs filled out with great side quests etc.
If I have just £60 to spend on a game that month, I don't really want to spend that on something that I can beat in a day or 2 and would go for something that would last the month or more. I would rather wait until that game drops significantly in cost and pick it up later. I don't care whether the longer game may well be a '7' and the shorter game a '10', I care more about getting 'value', and 'cost per hour' may well come into play. I can wait until that 10 rated game drops in price to offer a much better 'cost per hour' and if its only 10hrs for example, I doubt it matters if I play it at launch, at £60 or when it drops to £10 - except the value is better - £6 per hour instead of £1 per hour.
That isn't always the be all and end all. I sometimes do like a game I can 'blast' through to get to the next one, finish it so I can play what ever else is waiting or coming out. I sometimes buy games that I have no interest in Online, just for the campaign because I love the story, the characters etc. What I don't like feeling though is that I have spent a considerable amount - considering the amount of games that I could of bought - and then being left with a feeling of 'is that it?'. I could of bought several discounted or lower priced games that would of provided a LOT more hours of enjoyment. Got a lot more for my money...
Again, there isn't a 'perfect' length - I don't want repetitive filler to bulk a game out just to reach a certain length but I don't want to spend £60 on something that can be finished in a gaming session or two either when I could spend that much and spend a month or two playing it...
It really does not matter in time clocked for me.
That is like saying do you like 200 page books or 500. Well, I care about a good experience for the cash I payed. Sometimes it takes longer to "finish" a creative piece - sometimes not.
@playstation1995 I dont have so much time and i want too play a lot of different games. I still remember Heavenly Sword but AC Syndicate which i finished a little while ago and too be fair i just went trough it and care less and forget most of the stuff from the game.😆
So games stay with me and other games just are a thing i should finish because i payed for it.
I'm mainly an rpg gamer with most of my favourite series being jrpg's although I do find some of them ridiculously long like the xenoblade series and sometimes persona so it can roll over into tedium.
Overall I like 50-80 hour games, but I don't mind 20-30 hours as well, 100+ hours can really drag but it depends, for some games it does just work. If a game is less than 20 hours long then it better have a lot of replayability otherwise what am I paying 50 pounds for?
Ultimately there is no definitive answer across the board, it depends on the genre, Rpgs should be long, horror/action adventure should be on the shorter side, some games like monster hunter are essentially infinite etc
I always find the question of "how long should Games be?" kinda silly since there is no real answer, they should be as long as they should be to fit what the games about.
I don't get to buy games very often so I value playtime a lot. I don't want to spend too much on something that will be over in 10 hours.
Tough question.
I know a lot of people and I'm ashamed to admit it, myself - that base the price on length to a degree. One of the reasons a game is £50-£60 compared to £15 for a movie bluray is the length of the game and time it takes to develop. And more importantly the time you are engaged with the product.
This gen I am reluctant to part with the £50-£60 of a new game, I simply can't guarantee the time will be free to play mahoosive games with my life similar to @Westernwolf4 I still get games at release like Death Stranding, Spiderman, Dreams, God of War etc but they need to show me they have been in development a long time by keen and able developers. But then I probably wouldn't stump up more than £35 for a trimmed down experience. Its a tough one.
Here's a list of games which are far too long;
Dragon Age Inquisition
Alien Isolation
Final Fantasy 13
Horizon chase turbo
Yakuza Zero
MGS Phantom Pain
Odin Sphere
Pang adventures
Other than DAI, I enjoyed them all and in the case Yakuza Zero and MGSPP a whole lot. But they are all bloated and the campaigns go on too long for what you eventually achieve.
I love long games if they arent just a bunch of fluff. Too difficult to answer this question really.
I would like to see more titles like Infamous First Light. That game had a great price point and it didn't overstay its welcome. I do like RPGs and if the story is compelling enough the length of the game doesn't matter.
Time alone is not the single factor in a games worth. It's Quality, Time, and Subject. I like the fact that in the last few years I've seen more games come out at a lower price not just the standard $59.99 U.S price. It could be just more titles I wanted made me notice it more. Telling Dev's you want shorter games could cause a problem in what everyone feels is value.
So hard to say, but generally I like to think of value in terms of $/hour. I won't buy most games of average quality until they reach the $1/hour mark. Some games hit that at launch regardless of quality (DQ11, Witcher 3), some don't (Jedi: Fallen Order). Those average games that don't are rent or buy later games for me. If a game is high quality, by which I usually mean it has a killer story (The Last of Us), I'm happy to pay $4/hour (roughly 15ish hours for a $60 game). Once it hits the $5/hour mark (roughly 12 hours or less for a $60 game) I start to tip towards the value not being there for me no matter the quality and it's a rent or buy later game.
Edit: Assuming of course that the quality of the content is consistent throughout.
I love lenghty games but I find myself having less and less time to actually play them a lot...So yeah I didn't exactly finish Witcher 3, Dragon Age, Fallout 4 etc etc...
I prefer games like Tlou 2, straightforward, 20 or so hours. Seems like the perfect spot for me. But I do like 10 to 15 hour games too and HUGE games too...it's just that I mostly don't finish huge games
It really depends. Sometimes the game is so good I never want to say goodbye. But those are few and far between titles for me these days. I think the 10-20 hour mark is a good rule of thumb. But then there are shorter titles like Inside and Limbo. Heck, I don't know.
I really don't have a preferred length. Although I generally play long RPGs such as The Witcher and Elder Scrolls Online (been playing that since 2014). I'm a completionist so a good 30 hour game can usually take me months to 100% complete.
@Flaming_Kaiser Me too-games as a service titles are completely off the table for me. Some of them look really fun, but I just can’t spend a long time mostly devoted to one game. Maybe when I retire. 😃
Don't really have one tbh, if the game is still engaging me I will keep playing, within reason. Don't really go sites like how to beat either, as I don't really see the point. A game will take however long it take me to finish, I don't care what the average is,
We are paying top dollar for AAA games, they should be worth it.
If you expect me to pay £50 for a game then I expect more than 3 days gameplay from it.
I prefer the length to be whatever will deliver the developers vision, don’t pad a game to please people who desire a game to be long.
Ooh I voted with the majority in each question. Doesn’t mean anything but I’m satisfied anyway for some reason! 😂
Edit: also these days if I hear a game is 60+ hours it puts me off a little...
My time is far too valuable to be spending 20 hours plus on video games.
generally, the longer a game is the less likely i am to finish it to the end. the only single player campaign more than 40 hours that i managed to finish was horizon zero dawn. i played 60+ of skyrim and got bored of it.. too many side quests and sub-plots and map filled with more "to-do" icons than pixels.. couldn't remember what was happening in the main narrative and lost all interest. can't speak for the witcher 3, since after about 6 i'd had enough.. hated it. with a 15-20 hour campaign, i can plan to set aside 7-10 days a couple of hours a night and get it finished.. For a game 100+ hr, it'd start to feel more like a second job project...
I think 10-20 hours for a game with a lot of replay value is perfect. For a longer more story based game that you're likely only going to play once I'd vager 40-50 hours is the sweet spot, even Dragon Quest 11, as good as it was I was starting to wish it would end at around that point.
like many here this is not a single answer question. I love the witcher 3 and played beginning to end 3 time and had a "?" free map. At the same time Assassins Creed has become so blotted and Ezio was its best offering for me. Those all ran around the 15 hour mark. I'm not time rich, and I will not pay extra to skip the filler, again re Assassins Creed. I'm close to completing TLOU2 and it it a brilliant game but I would have been happy with a 15 hour and not 25 hour package. I also find that a 15 hour game often becomes a 25 anyway just because I'm getting old and slow so games are getting even longer for me. I don't want to total the time I've spent on Bloodbourne. I see a good middle road being a 10 -15 hour game with side challenges, rewarding enough for those that what to stretch their game play but not essential to the flow of the game, low cost to add and high skill to complete. I am looking forward to CP77 and I know it will be long but I'm equally looking forward to GOT and I'm hoping it will be under 20 hours
I think most games (Not you Capcom. RE3 - Not cool) could do with some pruning.
It really depends how replayable a game is. OutRun 2006 can be competed in about 6 minutes, but Ive played the game countless times as it has rewarding gameplay. A long story based game can have fairly stale gamplay which becomes tiresome before the end, so I dont go back to it. Its about balance I think, if a shorter game is replayable, you can spend more hours on it anyway.
For awhile now I've been feeling like most people who call themselves gamers aren't really gamers but 81%? Holy *****. If you didn't vote for the 40+ option(weird choices as games should be 60-180 hours in length, no less)you are not a gamer. You are a casual and your opinions don't matter, plain and simple. Shawn Layden apparently isn't even a gamer and he was in charge of playstation, that is rather concerning. Anyone who doesn't denounce this statement disserves the cinematic walking simulators that they get, just please quit calling yourselves "gamers" and these products "games".
@Flaming_Kaiser I know what you mean but Iceborne really adds a lot to the base game and Capcom has always released DLC to every MH game since MH3 and trust me if you love MHW you’re probably gonna love Iceborne and Alatreon it’s coming soon
40hrs+ AAA
40hrs+ Budget if it's good but less if it's average
10hrs+ Indie.
Games are expensive, I'm not spending full price on short games unless they're on sale!
There's no one size fits all. Some games have kept he hooked for hundreds of hours, whilst others grow stale in about ten.
It’s not the size it’s what you do with it. Still, 12.06 tho 😯
I really wasn't surprised that I went with the majority here. Indies are supposed to be fun little adventures because they don't have the money to keep doing crazy different things and loads of development time. Triple As for me need to have 40 hours or so but I'm kinda done with the whole "Collect x amount of random things we put in here" stuff. It's getting too frustrating and time consuming on top of all the other stuff, also I never play the hard modes or new game + because it's just either too much or I don't wanna play through the story again when I have tons of other games, so for me personally they could do away with New Game+, too. Budget games are another type that I don't want top put loads of time into because they have the same restrictions as the indies, to a lesser degree, so it's a comfortable middle spot.
This is highly dependant on the style of game and the quality of the narrative.
I think too many people make the mistake of equating game length with value for money.
Who cares if a game is 70 hours long if you’re experiencing boredom or fatigue? Many AAA open world titles suffer from this problem. As much as I loved HZD it was very bloated and filled with boring dialogue and fetch quests.
I would have paid 3 times the asking price for Gone Home or Edith Finch because they both show the AAA studios how to control narrative and emotional impact.
I was fine paying full price for RE3 because it is a quality product from a franchise I love.
I’m also fine paying for games which are not overly long but have end game content or addictive gameplay loops which extend their life in an interesting way. Like Nioh.
So basically I don’t care how long a game is I just want it to have an emotional or visceral impact on me - I want to have fun.
Not fussed as long as it is a good game with a story I enjoy.
Hard one this as i love the style of gsmeplay in massive JRPG,'s but im yet to ever complete one 😂
I lied. I actually completed FF remake although its not an entire game and only took me about 48 hours.
@GKO900 But its also the only game where i always need too get used too the controls somehow its quite some time ago that i played it. The game is great but its nothing thats wrong with the game its just that i like too play something else now and then. And with these events its like ah i want this armor i need too go for it and it feels like a commitment or chore.
@Arnna I really loved Gone Home especially if you take the time too find all the notes too fill in the story.
When it comes to triple-A games, for the money they ask, I expect between 20 and 40 hours, or a decent amount of replayability.
@Westernwolf4 For me somehow i like too finish a game and move on i dont want too go on and on and on. And in the end its like oh there is a special event i need to get this armor or weapon and it feels like a chore..
Absolutely depends on the game. I would prefer 5-10 hours of great content than 10-20 that has been padded with repetitive gameplay loops. Case in point: I really enjoyed Spider-man's story but platinuming that game and the DLC was tiresome, far too many boring and repetitive tasks. Open world games are often really guilty of this. But it doesn't have to be this way, never did I feel bored exploring Breath of the Wild, or Skyrim for example.
12 hours. 80 if it’s a JRPG
@Westernwolf4 Yeah even without kids i just dont have the time. I work shifts somehow its just weird i was proud too platinum HZD and i had 95% with Dragon Quest Heroes 2 i just gave up after 200 hours i could not take it anymore. That was my last long game now im going too try GOW. 😆
With rare exceptions, 50 hours or so would be my minimum to feel like the game was worthwhile. I like to buy a game, and then put all of my focus into it for about two hours a day for two months straight. 80-120 hours is a really solid experience. And if there's great DLC, then I'll wait until that all comes out, and then do it all again. Dragon Age Inquisition, The Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn and AC Odyssey were the all stars of the current generation. Games like The Outer World, Greedfall and Jedi Fallen Order were fun, but I see them as more bargain, $30-40 games than full fledged, buy it at day one experiences.
I don't think Uncharted TLL has proven there is a market for that sort of thing. Sony has been very cagey about the sales of that spinoff. Anecdotally I do not know anyone who has played it...
Being an explorer usually results in me taking longer than most to complete games. But I find the devil is in the detail. That feeling of finding something on your own that everyone else ran past to finish the game. I've done a few 100+ hour games so like to mix them up a bit with a smaller indie title before tackling another. Currently playing Last of Us Part 2 going after the platinum this time since there's no multiplayer at least for the time being.
Hi there fellow gamers. As many of you have already mentioned, it always depends on the game. For instance, games like The Witcher 3 can last for 100 hours plus even without the dlc and since both the main game and the side content is stellar, it is great value for money. And just like @ShogunRok as mentioned a game like that wouldn't be the same if it was just 40 hours long.
There is also games like Death Stranding and Ni-Oh wich can be done in 40 or less hours and have 142 hours on the first and 374 hours on the second. Again, great value for money. The issue that I have with certain very long games is that can they feel way to long and way to big just for the sake of being big long games.
Two examples that comes to mind are Red Dead Redemption 2 and Assassin´s Creed Odissey. The first have sections that I felt completely unnecessary long and kinda boring and dull. The second, unfortunately had these microtransactions in order to level up fast, otherwise it is a grind just to complete the story. Both are great games in their own way but both have problems that could be mitigated if the games weren´t that long.
Games don´t need to be that big to be great and entertaining. But they can be short and have good replay value or somewhat big but with engaging and fun things to do in those worlds. I mean, we all want our games to not end when we love playing them so much, right?
With that being said, I´m completely ok with some games being short and sweet(5 to 10 hours), some being medium size(10 to 30 hours) and big(40 hours plus) as long as they are made with that intent. Cheers, stay safe and happy gaming to us all
Tone, variety and intensity are important factors too.
For instance The Witcher 3 is long, but it has variety, a light hearted tone and is low intensity most of the time.
Games that are more intense or darker should be commensurately shorter...
The last of us part 2 is too long! I’m just past halfway and I need to take a week off because I no longer care what’s happening.
Instead of focusing on how long a game should be, studios should work on their gaming loop, if you couple that with a great story whether it's 5 hours long (11-11 memories retold for the sake of an example) or +100 hours (long live The Witcher), gamers will keep playing... this poll is absurd otherwise.
I mainly play live service games, so veeeeerrrrryyyy long would be my thing. Before that it was Skyrim, The Witcher 3 etc, so I guess I just like longer games
@Crowley22g I'm very similar. I play games in a slow, careful and methodical way, exploring and trying to find everything for myself. Because of that, and a desire to do most of the side quests, I find that my personal playthrough tends to be about 25% longer than what's listed as the expected one most of the time.
@RaZieLDaNtE I have a very different opinion on AC Odyssey. Its one of my favorite games of all time, in part BECAUSE of how much there is to do. I absolutely love that aspect of it.
@Unlucky13 Hi there friend. I´m glad you enjoyed the AC Odissey so much. I do like the game myself, but I still feel they could have gotten a different route with the game and make it less grindy. Other than that, it is a pretty good game. Cheers and have a good one
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...