Originally Posted by Deluxe
OP is what is wrong with gamers nowadays.
True gamers want the days of 20h+ single player games back, and the newbies seem to want shorter single player games?
haha ah mate, "true gamers?"...careful. you have no idea what you're on about
you must be young to say something ignorant like that, if so fair enough. let me put it into perspective for you. there are a TONNE of new games that come out all the time, most of them well worth playing, even Bioshock Infinite. theres even more older games out there that embarrass new release titles in terms of quality and still get played over their newer counterparts.
so with the current market, devs are hard pressed to provide a good balance of game quality, longevity, replay value, approachability, and of course fun as well as many, many other factors. the games that get game of the year, 9-10/10, they achieve all those targets with the best, most equal balance.
NOW, as I said, my comments were not to slander the quality of the game in any way, I stated my own disagreement with it based on my own play style. If you knew how many games I've played and still play, you'd question how I have time for much else. but that, right there, is the key word. Time.
some of us, like myself, don't have as much time to play as others do these days, due to work and lifestyle. i can sometimes squeeze couple hours a day at best, less while im away at work, so I enjoy short games on occasion. of course I get pissed if I pay $80 for a game and its over in 4 hours and theres no replay value or online component and it just collects dust after a few days playing. and i love playing games like Skyrim, GTA, KOTOR, and I've just discovered the wonders of A-RPGs like Torchlight and Titan Quest after being a predominantly FPS player the last 20 odd years. currently Borderlands 2 is my most played game with over 300hrs played and not looking like stopping any time soon. I also play X3: Terran Conflict as much as I can, so if you want to question my choice of long or short games, try again
SO, when a game comes out that is a long game, by long I think its fair to say that if it has a single player component that takes more than 12 hours its a fairly long game really, especially for a FPS corridor-style game that is pretty much linear, it really needs to shine and offer something amazing and unique to stand the test of its own time and make every hour enjoyable. for me, Bioshock 1 couldn't have been any better, what they did there was amazing and I loved every minute of it. I think I've played through it nearly 5 times? Bioshock 2, I enjoyed but not as much as the first due to the story.
games like Half-Life arnt 20hrs long, yet they arnt exactly short and I play through that game every few months, that's my 10/10 FPS game, for me it hit the nail on the head for every possible feature.
let's also remember, just because you play a game for "x" amount of hours, doesn't necessarily mean the game is THAT long. any game is as long as you want it to be really. when devs state a game has a 6hr campaign, or 10hr campaign or whatever that is the average time it would take to complete the story, not factoring in endless exploration if possible or the different playing styles of each individual player. so categorising a game on its length of play is a very broad argument, with a LOT of differing variables.
Now Bioshock Infinite, without spoiling anything, I've got 11 hours play time and I'm up to the bit where the weird ghost people attack. That shouldn't spoil anything. I have no idea how far I am from the end, but I can tell you, for me its been a chore getting there. At first I was loving it, was amazed at the technical design behind the game. As it dragged on, I found myself thinking - "come on, this again? whats next?"
in the first Bioshock, I was always frantically going from weapon to plasmid, mixing and combining attacks and really getting into the whole atmosphere of the game. In Infinite, I have rarely used my powers in combat, sometimes totally forgetting about them, in favour of gunplay. that was just my style with the game and its worked so far. but the game sort of demands this type of play too, to be honest I'm surprised they didn't implement some kind of cover to cover system, it's almost required.
If it wasn't for Infinite's story, i'd have stopped playing already. the story is awesome and very intriguing, I really want to know how it ends. I have my suspicions but the constant little twists keep throwing my guesses out. So I'll be finishing the game just to see this apparent awesome ending. Will I replay the game? doubtful, not for a while. I hear 1999 mode is worth it though.
so yeah, don't make the naïve mistake of assuming that every gamer out there wants a 20+hr campaign because they have all the time in the world to play with nothing better to do...just because you might want games like that, doesn't mean we all do.
and ask yourself this, if Bioshock Infinte was slated as having a 20hr campaign by the devs, meaning the average time it would take to complete was 20hrs, not factoring in an individuals own approach, exploration, replay etc, but nothing was different about the game at all, was just the same as it was but twice as long... would those of you who enjoyed it all the way through still have? really think about that, because I highly doubt it.