discussion: Can games be to long?

[Critex]

Hi, i really love Prey but for some weird reason i still havent completed it since buying it 3 years ago. Iam a very big fan of immersive sim games, i love sience and dreamed of visiting space since i was 4 years old, yet i always played the game in an on of manner. I allways played it for long sessions and then lost interest for a few months or even years.

Here´s my question: People always demand longer games but i always felt like a very well paced and tightly constructed 5-12 hour game can be miles better than the average 50h game. I know prey isnt that big but i feel like its a bit to long for its own good. Of cause thats just my oppinion, thats why iam interested what other people think.

[ZumZoom]

I consider 40 hours a perfect length for Prey. It's different for me depending on genre and quality (!) of the game. 5-12 hours I would say I'm okay with when it's an indie game, or an fps game (which I don't play anyway).
Games certainly can be too long, but it's not the case with Prey.

[Joe Kundlak]

Yeah, Prey was the perfect length for me, maybe even a bit short - given the immersion factor...

[Lar Dass]

Yes games can be too long. Witcher being a perfect example
But i think what counts is replayability factor. So sure long games with 300 side missions and 60 main missions is good but even after that there should always be hundreds of extra things to do
This makes the game long but only long to what after the main story says so if you found it too long just rush the story and move on but if you are inmersed then 100%

[TazmanianD]

I tend to think of 40 hours as about the sweet spot for games. It's satisfying for a really good game; not overly long for games that are less than great. I've played a lot of games both longer and shorter. It takes a particularly great game to go much longer and still remain interesting and fresh.

I tend to feel like any game shorter than 30 hours is generally too short although I've played a few indie games in the 15-20 hour range that I thought were just right.

I guess it depends on how much of a life you have and how much time you spend playing games :-).

[Supervisor de abeja]

Well, Titanfall 2 has the best campaign in any FPS and it's only about 6 hs long, so I guess I have to agree with you on that regard, but there are longer games that can hold up your interest (RDR2 for me, i spend 90hs on single player only). Maybe you are not that into this game.

[Krispy]

Originally posted by Summoning:

Well, Titanfall 2 has the best campaign in any FPS and it's only about 6 hs long, so I guess I have to agree with you on that regard, but there are longer games that can hold up your interest (RDR2 for me, i spend 90hs on single player only). Maybe you are not that into this game.

thats debatable, its an OK campaign at best

[dorkenstein]

Prey is a good example of a game that's too long. The issue lies in all the mechanics that only exist to artificially inflate the time. Things like monotonous backtracking, annoying inventory limitations, and impossible to access areas early game artificially inflate the amount of time you actually spend engaging with the game and it's mechanics. Prey's story is also nearly non-existent early on which means you have no real immersion in the world itself. Even dishonored at least had a tiny bit of exposition early on so you knew your role in the universe.

The worst part is that they hit you with all these limitations VERY early on and it kills the vibe. I didn't even clear the talos 1 lobby before I was worried about when I would get enough neuromods to actually upgrade something meaningful. Eventually I got bored of waiting and trying to sneak around enemies that detect you from impossible distances, or areas that I can't access and things I can't open because I don't have all these different neuromod upgrades. Forced backtracking is a waste of time that I'm not interested in.

Games that do it better:

Dead Space resource and inventory management were fantastic. You don't start hitting major limitations until a decent way into the game, but by then you should have a good idea of how you want to streamline your upgrade priorities. You're rewarded for smart resource management and loot is lifesaving, rather than punishing. There's also an actual story, a reason to keep going.

Surge 1 & 2. Opening up shortcuts felt so good. It was a great reward for all the effort you put into going the long way around. It feels bad to be gated by resource grinds (neuromods), but it feels good when you're only gated by your own ability to succeed.

I will say one thing good about Prey. It's really well optimized. I expected to have issues especially with the items not despawning. Instead, I'm able to play with all graphics turned up while using 2016 hardware.

[Vangerdahast]

Originally posted by Critex:

Hi, i really love Prey but for some weird reason i still havent completed it since buying it 3 years ago. Iam a very big fan of immersive sim games, i love sience and dreamed of visiting space since i was 4 years old, yet i always played the game in an on of manner. I allways played it for long sessions and then lost interest for a few months or even years.

Here´s my question: People always demand longer games but i always felt like a very well paced and tightly constructed 5-12 hour game can be miles better than the average 50h game. I know prey isnt that big but i feel like its a bit to long for its own good. Of cause thats just my oppinion, thats why iam interested what other people think.

Games can be long.

The question you/any game designer must make instead is:

"Can the three pillars of a game project - its mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics - keep the player in the flow (zone) for a long period of time and for many days?"

This question must be answered during the pre-production and production phases. You can have a game with a length of 500 hours of content to do, but if the player is consistently kept in the flow, he/she will have fun and won't bother about its length.

To me, Prey has flaws (the enemy variety is one of those), but its length isn't.

[Vangerdahast]

Originally posted by Summoning:

Well, Titanfall 2 has the best campaign in any FPS and it's only about 6 hs long, so I guess I have to agree with you on that regard, but there are longer games that can hold up your interest (RDR2 for me, i spend 90hs on single player only). Maybe you are not that into this game.

??? Is Titanfall 2 the best FPS campaign ever? I don't think so. In a narrative perspective or gameplay perspective?

There are so many FPS out there, so we can't say that TF2 has the best campaign ever.

To me, the winner is Doom. You see? As Krispylorian said, its debatable.

[Tesityr]

3k hours in Fallout 4 here, multiple characters to try different Builds, multiple paths of story to try, multiple NPCs that I haven't even seen yet (some are random)...

Building up towns/settlements is my favourite thing to do. I will spend a lot more time in the game again soon.

I love long games, even if the story ends - let us play 'past' the story. Games should be longer, IMO

[Aegix Drakan]

Prey 2017 really isn't that long, honestly. I have two playthroughs AND mooncrash done, and all that was about 70 hours. So, each one of those was in the 20 hour-ish mark.

It just FEELS very long because of frequent detour syndrome, specifically you get an early objective, but keep finding roadblocks that require an hours long detour through/to another part of the station to get there.

[SunfireKnight86]

The game is way too long. Several of the areas are flat out bigger and dumber than they need to be, several look very much alike, and you end up backtracking through almost every area a bunch for the story alone, let alone if you do all the side stuff.

Mooncrash has a similar problem. Long after I've seen everything I'm running around doing silly side missions for characters and finishing orders just to finish orders and see the ending.

It overstays its welcome. It doesn't add anything new or exciting enough in the last quarter to justify its length, and the addition of the big bad monster eating the space station turned the game more into a chore than anything else.

[Anyplayer01]

To me, Prey's length is a bit short for me for a game of its own merit. However, I still thoroughly enjoy it. I like exploring the nooks and cranny of the game. Everything in the game kept me interested except the few silly bugs like fire spewing out from mid air.

Overall, it has the fun gameplay xp and interesting narrative from the likes of Deus Ex, Half-Life and Dead Space.

Generally, game's length should really depend on how it engages its gamer and what type of game it is. If it's a bloody 10 minutes walking from A to B of nothing in a linear FPS, that is a pointless waste of time.

[Bazazooka]

I wouldn't consider Prey too be too long, but yes, games can indeed be too long. I still haven't finished Witcher 3 because of how long it drags on.
And yes, sometimes, a tightly constructed linear experience, can be better than a 100 hour game.

[RACHMANOVSKI]

I think it depends on how you like it, if it possible I'd want Bioshock Infinite to be.... infinite hours-long game, or something close to it. (I play like 3 playthrough, from normal to 1999 difficulties so that I can savor all the story and vibes from the game)

Prey is a great game but somehow I just not feeling 100% engaged with the story and the little bits of information in emails or books that are scattered around Talos which could possibly prolonged my gameplay just... not fun to find somehow (if only the written information can be reduced and more transcribed scattered around, I'd probably be more engaged with the story). But the main story and choices you made itself feels greatly organic and I love it. however, I'm not feeling like to start another playthrough after I finished it.