Does this game really take 4 hours to beat?

[Rwibby]

Does this game really take 4 hours to beat? I've seen videos all over the place showing that is the case, but the game costs almost 20 bucks. Is 4 hours of this game really worth this much or are game devs completely delusional these days?

[DeLindsay]

If you aren't bad at some of the puzzles like I was then 4 hours is probably about right. It took me just under 6 hours (6 Episodes of Let's Play on YT). It also depends on your situation but a sub $20 game that is as amazing as Planet of Lana, however short, is totally worth it to me.

I loved it so much, I've also bought the Soundtrack as well.

[Matt-BBQ]

It took me slightly less than 5 hours to complete it. In my opinion is worth it.

[werewolf]

Its like playable pixar movie

[have u seen snufkin?]

god am i that slow with my eight hours

[commodoresammler]

I have finished the game in 5.2 hours. I took some smoke breaks and to eat something so my true game time is less than 5 hours.

A lot of people complain about the price for just 4..5 hours of gameplay. If you need a certain amount of action per minute, story per minute or want to grind for many hours, this is not a game for you!

It is very relaxing and the puzzles are fair. You’ll never need a perfect run to solve anything unlike in most other games. No need to read hints on the internet, you can’t really get stuck. You need to consider this more like an interactive movie you use for relaxing. And the price is not too high considering that a visit to the cinema or a high percentage of movies you buy are as expensive but only play less than half of this time.

If you take more than 5 hours, don’t feel bad, this just means that you took your time to stop and admire the graphics often.

[Moo]

It's a linear single player game with no progression systems, filler side quests etc. It's a throwback to classics and breathe of fresh air. You can sit down for one afternoon and get a good session without it being drawn out for days. So yeah to me it was worth it.

[MarioFanaticXV]

3.5 hours for me, but most seem to take a little longer. But I play too many games.

[LL Cheese Z]

The $:hours ratio to justify a game existing or being purchases is a tad outdated, considering the cost to make some games, even indies. And I used to be a stern supporter of it.

I realized what matters more is how long a game RESONATES with you. Not how long it takes for you to finish it.

[DeLindsay]

Originally posted by LL Cheese Z:

The $:hours ratio to justify a game existing or being purchases is a tad outdated, considering the cost to make some games, even indies. And I used to be a stern supporter of it.

I realized what matters more is how long a game RESONATES with you. Not how long it takes for you to finish it.

To be fair, we could use that old paradigm and still justify PoL. The cost to purchase on Steam is $17.99 (plus any local Taxes you have to pay). Tell me what entertainment you can have for ~$18 that lasts ~5 hours that you end up thinking about and/or talking about for some time afterwords.

You can't go to the Movies twice for that cost. Hell in some places in the World, you couldn't go to ONE Movie for that price.

Miniature Golf/Driving Range will cost you about that much but probably only net you with < 2 hours of fun.

Bowling/Billiards will also cost about that much and give maybe 1-3 hours of enjoyment.

Laser Tag/Paintball will cost roughly equal or more to get you 10-60 minutes.

Go Carts will likely cost MORE than $18, and only last 5-30 minutes.

Going to ANY Concert/Sports Game will cost WAAAAAY more for ~2-4 hours.

[MarioFanaticXV]

Originally posted by LL Cheese Z:

The $:hours ratio to justify a game existing or being purchases is a tad outdated, considering the cost to make some games, even indies. And I used to be a stern supporter of it.

It's also important to remember that hours spent in game doesn't necessarily equal content (open world games are notorious for artificially inflating playtime with very little actual content), and that content doesn't always mean quality.

[r1348]

Took me 5 hours, but I didn't hunt down every achievement.

[LL Cheese Z]

Originally posted by MarioFanaticXV:

Originally posted by LL Cheese Z:

The $:hours ratio to justify a game existing or being purchases is a tad outdated, considering the cost to make some games, even indies. And I used to be a stern supporter of it.

It's also important to remember that hours spent in game doesn't necessarily equal content (open world games are notorious for artificially inflating playtime with very little actual content), and that content doesn't always mean quality.

qft

Originally posted by DeLindsay:

Originally posted by LL Cheese Z:

The $:hours ratio to justify a game existing or being purchases is a tad outdated, considering the cost to make some games, even indies. And I used to be a stern supporter of it.

I realized what matters more is how long a game RESONATES with you. Not how long it takes for you to finish it.

To be fair, we could use that old paradigm and still justify PoL. The cost to purchase on Steam is $17.99 (plus any local Taxes you have to pay). Tell me what entertainment you can have for ~$18 that lasts ~5 hours that you end up thinking about and/or talking about for some time afterwords.

You can't go to the Movies twice for that cost. Hell in some places in the World, you couldn't go to ONE Movie for that price.

Miniature Golf/Driving Range will cost you about that much but probably only net you with < 2 hours of fun.

Bowling/Billiards will also cost about that much and give maybe 1-3 hours of enjoyment.

Laser Tag/Paintball will cost roughly equal or more to get you 10-60 minutes.

Go Carts will likely cost MORE than $18, and only last 5-30 minutes.

Going to ANY Concert/Sports Game will cost WAAAAAY more for ~2-4 hours.

I understand that. But,

1. All those experiences are temporary. You do not own anything you just did. You are essentially paying for an experience. In video games, you pay for ownership. Well, I know that's a debatable subject. A topic for another day, re: digital ownership. But either way, ownership entails repeatable use or experience. So you can technically re-play PoL 10000000 times and by that point, it's definitely earned its $20 price tag. Can't do that for those other activities.

2. Being paid single experiences or services, all of those things you listed are priced to still make a profit given a certain projected volume of consumers. It's why prices increase if less consumers consume those services/events. Similarly, indie games don't usually sell amazingly well, so they have to be priced accordingly. Particularly if they are being published by a bigger indie publisher like Raw Fury or Thunderful. Even though they have not shareholders to worry about (I'm pretty sure Devolver and Humble are the only publicly traded "indie" publishers?), its still their prerogative to make a profit. Sure this may not justify the price to the consumer, but it justifies the reason for the price.

3. The experience is different. Video games will always be different as they're just a different medium. Interactive stories, brain stimulators, etc. They can be so many things. All those other activities you listed are singular activities that will stimulate the same endorphins or brain areas every time. But not video games. Gone Home, Nier, and Hades all stimulate different parts of the mind very differently. Again, another point that may not justify PoL's price, but does point out a faulty comparison to those other activities.

[DeLindsay]

Originally posted by LL Cheese Z:

I understand that. But,

One or both of us are confused with what one or both of us stated. I'm agreeing with your post that $:hours is an outdated paradigm. I then say that even if those who want to tear down PoL's short gameplay decided to use the old paradigm, PoL would STILL be justified in it's cost:value comparison from the Consumer's pov, using those other activities as examples for justification. Entertainment is entertainment, some has a greater effect on one's mind than others but in the end, they all serve to entertain us for a time.

Whether the Studio will generate a profit from it's listed price wasn't part of my comment and hard to determine unless we had all the financials in front of us, and why would they even give us that as it's not in our purview.

Planet of Lana is absolutely, 100% worth the $18 cost for ~5 hours of gameplay to ME, which in the end is just my opinion.

[peter.degay]

8 hours here, and I was not too bad at solving puzzles or at the action parts... at least I thought it so far! :)
Totally worth it. It was a wonderful tale, and a memorable game for sure. I loved it.

[ThunderfulGemma | Community]

The game length varies from person-to-person depending on how fast you are at solving the puzzles, or if you are taking time to enjoy your surroundings.

We have seen < 4 hours and 6+ hours.