How many hours ¨should¨ a game have for the price.

[CallmeNezo]

When i'm looking at games, i dont really look for graphics as much, i have played alot of games (Mostly rpgs) where the graphics has been utterly crap, but enjoyable. But as the title says i'm mostly looking for games that have alot of hours in them, but with a fair pricetag. I have alot of free time, so looking at games and a poor wallet and have to buy the games with most hours, which is actually tough. I like a game (mostly rpgs fall into this) which has replay value, decent story, doesn't hurt to throw turnbased in there or a form of hack'slash type of combat. Mostly what triggers me is that AAA games that almost always cost 59,99 euros. Has 10-20 hours in them and has zero replay value. (Have alot of AAA games i have played for that amounth and they are just collecting dust now) where a indie game studio can make a game for 15-20 euros and have 50-100 hours in them, with less money and man power. And now now, i know graphics cost money and man power does too. But shouldn't their games have more playtime for the money they put in them? Shouldn't they beat indie games/developers in that form? Or is it just lazyness? a matter of pumping ♥♥♥♥ games out and scoring money? Where is the oldfancy way of making games, with a heart and a burning passion for the game. Which i believe only very few big time game companys still have and also most indie game companys. I have bought games with 50+ 100+ hours, good story and enjoying gameplay for less than 20 euros. Yet i'm almost only playing AAA games with 20 hours for 59,99 euros. I would love to give 1 euros pr. hour. Which means that right now i'm playing Divinity and i have 40 hours in it and counting. I would have loved to pay 40 euros for it, and yet it still counting hours. Which also means that a 59,99 pricetag, should have 60 hours in it. But thats just my opinion. Whats yours take in this, i would love to hear it.

[AdahnGorion]

How many hours should a (insert x thing you like) for y cash?

It is not about the hours, it is about the fun

[Knee]

it should be whatever the seller wishes it should be

[erratic_gamer]

howlongtobeat.com can give you an estimate of how long it takes to beat a game though it is about fun

one dude put 10000hrs into Batman Arkham City for e.g

[Alpha_pro]

I like to say a dollar an hour. But most of the time even if it has that I usually dont play them for that long.

[EvilPinata]

Even without replay value there's a lot of games worth the $60 price tag. The one that comes to mind for me is Marvel's Spider-Man. There's really nothing about it that can be changed upon replay, but I had a hell of a lot of fun with it so it was well worth the price tag despite the shorter campaign.

If games were priced by replay value, wouldn't multiplayer games be worth a lot more than the basic AAA title price of around $60?

[RRW359]

Here's the thing about hours: It isn't about how long the game is, but how many hours it takes to complete, it's about how many hours you are willing to play it. The example I always think of is the order 1886 vs. FTL. 1886 has a really long campaign, but most people can't make it through the first hour without stopping and never coming back, while FTL can also be completed in an hour or so, but it is INCREDIBLY fun to replay and I don't thing ANY game advertises having the ammount of playtime I've put into FTL and other games.

The idea also ignores genras like City builders where there isn't really an exact playtime.

[HypersleepyNaputunia]

basically 25 cents an hour for me

[Mikasa Ackerman]

if you ask me, it depends on the genre , for indie games , it doesnt need to be much but for a triple A game it should be atleast 20-30 hours for 60€ , if its more hours thats a big plus

for indie games , stuff like replay value and more also play a factor , like celeste , the game itself isnt that long but it has lots of replay value , and speedrunning potential , same with binding of isaac , one playthrough might not be long ,but the fact you could play for thousands of hours and it still being fun makes up for that

but triple A games most of the time dont have that , many of those dont give you any freedom with how you do stuff

[sage2001]

Here's how I think:

1 movie ticket: $6-$12 for around 2 hours of entertainment.

1 [AAA] game :$60 for 10-20 hours of single player. Multiplayer should also be considered.

[CallmeNezo]

Something that bugs me sometimes, are very potentiale EA (Early access) games which usually not that many hours in them because yeah, they are EA, but can sometimes also be long depending on how long there is for it to be done. But what i'm trying to say is, that i love them and hate them, because when i can see they have potentiale and high amounth of hours (When they are finished) i like to support them by buying it, not always necessary playing off the bat, because they might not have much to do in them by the time. But still having supported them, making them able to proceed. What i hate is when the project fail because it means a potentiale good and long houred game gets not finished, which really saddens me, not that i have thrown money at it (That ofc depends by how much i have thrown at it) I have some EA games on my wishlist which idk if gonna survive or not, depending on release date and popularity. That saddens my by thinking that a good game might not become what it should have becomed. But i also hate to see a EA game become not played because they have misread their games value (Setting to high a price for their game) I have 1 game on my wishlist that isn't being played because of it, and more and more staying away from it because they see people staying away from it. And yet i'm the same because i haven't bought it.

[BanOphobia My Struggle]

Well I am cheap, tight and patient so I don't pay much for games in general. However I tend to pay more for a game if it is a big budget flashy ARPG and/or open world experience.

Short SP game with little to no replay value I won't pay that much for. Even though I have had many an amazing experience in those types of games.

I just like more bang for my bucks I suppose?

[CallmeNezo]

Originally posted by Tongue in Cheek Way of the Wang:

Well I am cheap, tight and patient so I don't pay much for games in general. However I tend to pay more for a game if it is a big budget flashy ARPG and/or open world experience.

Short SP game with little to no replay value I won't pay that much for. Even though I have had many an amazing experience in those types of games.

I just like more bang for my bucks I suppose?

I feel you somewhat about not paying that much for games that generaly have either that much replay value or hours in them. Seeing it being a good game either way. I just simply need the hours in my game. I dont have that much cash to spend on games a month, so i have to be picky about what i choose, and i have alot of free time too, so i rather choose abit badder game with long hours and replay value than a better game with shorter hours. But thats why i also sometimes buy humblebundle monthly if it has some good shown games, so i can get the shorter good games for cheap. (They ofc sometimes have high amonth of hours games too, but not that often)

[Washell]

I rather pay $60 for 20 hours of solid content than $30 for 200 hours of traveling and fetch quests.

[Xautos]

£1=1h, typically.

[The Maddog]

There is no right answer.

If I buy a movie on Blu Ray or go to the Cinema, I can expect to pay £10 to £15 (assuming it's a new release) for, on average maybe 90 to 120 mins of entertainment on average.

For a good game however...I could £7.50 for an indie or sale title but get 700 hours of game play or I could pay £60 and get 10 hours yet in both cases, feel I've got my money's worth.

It's completely arbitrary and all down to how you feel about a game. Point in case..this guy.

Originally posted by Washell:

I rather pay $60 for 20 hours of solid content than $30 for 200 hours of traveling and fetch quests.

In my case, if I was entertained enough to keep doing travel and fetch quests for $30, I;d be more than happy. No one is forcing me to keep playing.

It's kinda like people getting mad about Bethseda re-releasing Skyrim. Sure I paid for it all back in the day and played through it. Then I bought it again and played it in VR. Total cost to me over 9 years for the games was £80 yet I got 400 hours of enjoyable game play in 2 different formats.

As long as you are happy with your purchase and you don't feel ripped off, it does not matter. If a game is priced to high to begin with, just go find something you can afford. It'll end up on sale sooner or later.