Do you prefer longer or shorter games?


  

99 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you prefer longer or shorter games?

    • Long
      52
    • Short
      9
    • Depends
      37
    • Don't care
      1


Recommended Posts

Quality of gameplay being the main factor. Those 12 hours were very immerse and a perfect example of how it should be done. BC2 SP though dragged on and felt like an age to get through.

yeah BC2 SP sucked imo.

hated the way the changed all the characters. haggard was no longer as funny. all he did was cuss and stuff. which is what i hated, they cussed way to much.

For me, a game has to be good and long for me to buy it on release day. None of this 15-20hr rubbish for ?40.

Examples:

MSG4

Final Fantasy XIII

GTA4

Heavy Rain (if you include replay value)

They are about the only games that I bought at release day and thought it was worth every penny.

I like long games, but a lot of developers lately have been resorting to padding in order to make their games longer. Final Fantasy XIII is perhaps the worst culprit that I have come across in some time. Some of the areas at the start of the game were twice as long as they should have been, and those areas were long solely because you were running through two or three variations of the exact same room over and over again. I understand that it's an RPG, and that repetition is a necessary evil to ensure that your characters are strong enough going forward, but it just goes to show you that it's quite easy to make a long game. On the other hand, it's very difficult to make a long game with no filler.

Short games have the obvious disadvantage of being poor value propositions. I've already put in my order for Splinter Cell: Conviction, but now I'm a little nervous at the supposed 5-7 hours of single-player gameplay with little to no replay value. Truth be told, I never rush through my games, and I'm quite a slow player generally speaking (I think I clocked 25 hours in Mass Effect 2's first playthrough and 55 hours in Final Fantasy XIII), so I'm usually not disappointed by the length of a game.

yeah BC2 SP sucked imo.

hated the way the changed all the characters. haggard was no longer as funny. all he did was cuss and stuff. which is what i hated, they cussed way to much.

You silly god-damned muffin-headed ****in' liberal.

I think for a shooter, 10-15 hours is great. I just don't have the time anymore like I did back in high school to pull 6h sessions. For RPGs, though, 30 hours is pretty good. These focus a lot more on story than shooters, so the length is required to get that "epic" feeling. However, with games like Final Fantasy, I'm starting to think it's way over the top. Especially for a completionist like me.

Sad thing is, most shooters are getting shorter and shorter. I remember when I borrowed MW2 from my little brother (who plays online religiously), and was surprised he would let me play it. Sat down after lunch, beat it by dinner... Damned short, and now I know why he didn't care I took it for a few hours, lol.

For me it depends on what genre it is. I don't want an FPS being too long (MW2 was just about right, maybe a tad on the short side), but RPGs like Mass Effect I want to be as long as possible without being repetitive. ME2 wasn't long enough, and IMO only served as the middle child for the epic ME3 in a couple of years, but we'll see.

I prefer longer games in general but they have to keep you interested the whole time. I'm not a big gamer in general but I can't stand spending decent money on a game and finishing it and then saying "that was it??"

Longer games like FFXIII. I've spend 70+ in it and I still have a few missions to do. I really enjoyed it and I'm going to play it again soon (well in a few months).

65 hours in Fallout 3 for me and that doesn't include any of the DLC :D Loved that game.

I'm pretty much on the same boat as everyone else. If it's long, but contains unique, fun content, I'm all for it.

If it's long because it's boring and repetitive and you find yourself completing the same tasks over and over again, it would have benefited from being shorter.

Depends on the type of game really.

If it's a game like Oblivion? I'm all for extending the experience.

I've got 859 hours in my 360 game, and I've got the PC version as well. I'm just restarting it soonish... I just needed to remake my character. :happy:

Depends on the type of game really.

If it's a game like Oblivion? I'm all for extending the experience.

I've got 859 hours in my 360 game, and I've got the PC version as well. I'm just restarting it soonish... I just needed to remake my character. :happy:

859 hours??? :blink:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Researchers claim Microsoft's quantum breakthrough is flawed by basic Python errors by Karthik Mudaliar Microsoft's aggressive roadmap to deliver a commercial quantum supercomputer by 2029 has now hit a bit of a snag, and it's not because of a complex sub-zero dilution refrigerator, but rather because of a few lines of basic Python code. A new critique published in the scientific journal Nature argues that simple software errors effectively manufactured the breakthrough that Microsoft's foundational research claimed back in 2025 into Majorana-based topological qubits. Topological quantum computing, the path that Microsoft chose for its research, relies on creating and controlling "Majorana zero modes." These are exotic quasiparticles that theoretically offer vastly superior error resistance compared to the highly sensitive superconducting qubits currently being championed by rivals like Google and IBM. However, physically proving you have created these particles requires sifting through massive amounts of complex electrical conductance data to isolate a specific "topological gap." Because of the sheer volume of data, physicists rely heavily on custom software pipelines to process the results. This is where the Python scripts come in. Now, according to the critique, Microsoft’s data processing software contained fundamental programming errors that ultimately skewed the published results. By mishandling data arrays or deploying incorrect logic within the Python script, the software supposedly discarded "noisy" or contradictory data. Which is why it only highlighted the specific electrical measurements that supported the topological-gap claim. The researchers behind the critique argued that this makes the findings invalid, suggesting the heralded "quantum leap" was actually a false positive generated by bad code and not a product of groundbreaking physics. However, Microsoft is pushing back hard against these allegations. The Redmond giant has formally rejected the criticism, saying that it's just a minor anomaly rather than a fatal flaw. According to the company, while there may have been a minor oversight in the data parsing scripts, it does not alter the fundamental reality of their physical experiment. Just weeks ago, Microsoft unveiled the Majorana 2 quantum processor, a milestone so significant that the company boldly accelerated its timeline for a commercial quantum supercomputer from 2035 down to 2029. But the new software allegations reopen an old wound. Microsoft's quantum division faced a remarkably similar crisis when a landmark 2018 paper on Majorana particles was famously retracted in 2021 after independent physicists discovered the data had been inappropriately cropped. That historical baggage makes the current Python-related allegations particularly sensitive. If the foundational math and data processing for the 2025 breakthrough are genuinely flawed, the highly anticipated 2029 commercial timeline could easily be delayed or, worse, cancelled.
    • Because of what they have done to VMware I will never buy anything Broadcom again.
    • AMD releases hotfix for driver install issues on Windows 10 PCs by Taras Buria Earlier this week, AMD released an important graphics driver update. Version 26.6.2 brought AMD FSR 4.1 support to the previous-gen Radeon lineup, the RX 7000 series, giving users better upscaling tech that was previously locked to the newest GPUs. However, the driver turned out to be a little buggy, with users reporting installation issues on systems still running Windows 10. AMD quickly acknowledged the bug and today released a hotfix to resolve the problem. The AMD 26.6.3 Hotfix update is now available for download from the official website. Given that it is a hotfix release, it has only one change in its release notes: AMD announced the update on its official X account and added that a WHQL driver update with the necessary fixes would be released next week. Meanwhile, users can apply the hotfix or roll back to the previous driver using the official AMD Cleanup Utility. You can download AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.6.3 Hotfix Preview Driver from the official website here. It is compatible with all currently supported graphics cards and 64-bit Windows 10 and 11. Full release notes are available on the same page.
    • With Microsoft now listening to its core audience and acting upon received feedback, fans can finally expect a much better version of Windows 11 than what was available five years ago. Here is to five more years, Windows 11! I guess we all need a good laugh now and again...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      465
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      123
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!