The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I have found that some of my most enjoyable games have been short games.
Keeping games short and sweet alows the developer to concentrate more on making sure that the gameplay elements are more enjoyable during them few hours. This is opposed to say making a game 40 hours but filling it up with boring crap.
Conkers bad fur day, is probably one of my most enjoyable games to this very day. It only took me bout 12 hours to complete first time round, but it was amazing to play. This was pritty remarkable for Rare to make a platformer this enjoyable and refreshing, especially after releasing the very very boring DK64 in the same sort of shell as Banjo-kazooie.
It may be argued that even Conker was in the same sort of shell, but the gameplay style of of bad fur day were very different. It involved much more enjoyable activities, compared to collecting say 100 bananas on each level. Instead the gameplay was based much more around speach, and cut-scenes showing conker interacting with the surrounding characters which made it a much more enjoyable experience for the gamer.
Anyway, I'm straing from the point here! Conker was sooo much damn fun becasue it was short. Maybe RARE were restricted by the size of the N64 carts from making a bigger game, but maybe Conkers bad fur day was the better for it!
More and more of the latest games seem to be very short, yet very enjoyable. Devil May Cry is a very recent example of. Apparently not more than 10 hours gameplay, yet it has been acclaimed as a huge leap from its roots in the Resi series. Silent hill is another example of a short game, only 8 hours i hear.
But for all you gamers saying you are being conned, saying 8 hours gameplay isnt worth £40, then there are also titles to suit your needs. Jak and Daxter is apparently 40 hours plus, and is considered a mario beater.
Well there you have it, will the future bombard us with short games? Or will there be a fine balance of between shorties and the more in-depth longer games?
Shigsy, has stated that to appeal to younger gamers he would make games shorter...make what you will of that. But would he really release a short Zelda game?
Keeping games short and sweet alows the developer to concentrate more on making sure that the gameplay elements are more enjoyable during them few hours. This is opposed to say making a game 40 hours but filling it up with boring crap.
Conkers bad fur day, is probably one of my most enjoyable games to this very day. It only took me bout 12 hours to complete first time round, but it was amazing to play. This was pritty remarkable for Rare to make a platformer this enjoyable and refreshing, especially after releasing the very very boring DK64 in the same sort of shell as Banjo-kazooie.
It may be argued that even Conker was in the same sort of shell, but the gameplay style of of bad fur day were very different. It involved much more enjoyable activities, compared to collecting say 100 bananas on each level. Instead the gameplay was based much more around speach, and cut-scenes showing conker interacting with the surrounding characters which made it a much more enjoyable experience for the gamer.
Anyway, I'm straing from the point here! Conker was sooo much damn fun becasue it was short. Maybe RARE were restricted by the size of the N64 carts from making a bigger game, but maybe Conkers bad fur day was the better for it!
More and more of the latest games seem to be very short, yet very enjoyable. Devil May Cry is a very recent example of. Apparently not more than 10 hours gameplay, yet it has been acclaimed as a huge leap from its roots in the Resi series. Silent hill is another example of a short game, only 8 hours i hear.
But for all you gamers saying you are being conned, saying 8 hours gameplay isnt worth £40, then there are also titles to suit your needs. Jak and Daxter is apparently 40 hours plus, and is considered a mario beater.
Well there you have it, will the future bombard us with short games? Or will there be a fine balance of between shorties and the more in-depth longer games?
Shigsy, has stated that to appeal to younger gamers he would make games shorter...make what you will of that. But would he really release a short Zelda game?
Page:
I haven't read all of the topic, just the first sentnce, and that alone made me want to reply! I have SO many opinions on the length of games, but I agree, there are merits to the Quality not Quantity game. I dislike games where there are loads of special items, 'unique' weapons and loads of cars, etc because it's very hard (if not impossible) to collect them all. So when you complete the game, your left wishing you'd gone back for 'the sword of power', or the 'spell of chaotica'. So, in my opinion, if a games long, great, but if its not possible to get all the special itms, that's annoying.
I have found that some of my most enjoyable games have been short games.
Keeping games short and sweet alows the developer to concentrate more on making sure that the gameplay elements are more enjoyable during them few hours. This is opposed to say making a game 40 hours but filling it up with boring crap.
Conkers bad fur day, is probably one of my most enjoyable games to this very day. It only took me bout 12 hours to complete first time round, but it was amazing to play. This was pritty remarkable for Rare to make a platformer this enjoyable and refreshing, especially after releasing the very very boring DK64 in the same sort of shell as Banjo-kazooie.
It may be argued that even Conker was in the same sort of shell, but the gameplay style of of bad fur day were very different. It involved much more enjoyable activities, compared to collecting say 100 bananas on each level. Instead the gameplay was based much more around speach, and cut-scenes showing conker interacting with the surrounding characters which made it a much more enjoyable experience for the gamer.
Anyway, I'm straing from the point here! Conker was sooo much damn fun becasue it was short. Maybe RARE were restricted by the size of the N64 carts from making a bigger game, but maybe Conkers bad fur day was the better for it!
More and more of the latest games seem to be very short, yet very enjoyable. Devil May Cry is a very recent example of. Apparently not more than 10 hours gameplay, yet it has been acclaimed as a huge leap from its roots in the Resi series. Silent hill is another example of a short game, only 8 hours i hear.
But for all you gamers saying you are being conned, saying 8 hours gameplay isnt worth £40, then there are also titles to suit your needs. Jak and Daxter is apparently 40 hours plus, and is considered a mario beater.
Well there you have it, will the future bombard us with short games? Or will there be a fine balance of between shorties and the more in-depth longer games?
Shigsy, has stated that to appeal to younger gamers he would make games shorter...make what you will of that. But would he really release a short Zelda game?
Keeping games short and sweet alows the developer to concentrate more on making sure that the gameplay elements are more enjoyable during them few hours. This is opposed to say making a game 40 hours but filling it up with boring crap.
Conkers bad fur day, is probably one of my most enjoyable games to this very day. It only took me bout 12 hours to complete first time round, but it was amazing to play. This was pritty remarkable for Rare to make a platformer this enjoyable and refreshing, especially after releasing the very very boring DK64 in the same sort of shell as Banjo-kazooie.
It may be argued that even Conker was in the same sort of shell, but the gameplay style of of bad fur day were very different. It involved much more enjoyable activities, compared to collecting say 100 bananas on each level. Instead the gameplay was based much more around speach, and cut-scenes showing conker interacting with the surrounding characters which made it a much more enjoyable experience for the gamer.
Anyway, I'm straing from the point here! Conker was sooo much damn fun becasue it was short. Maybe RARE were restricted by the size of the N64 carts from making a bigger game, but maybe Conkers bad fur day was the better for it!
More and more of the latest games seem to be very short, yet very enjoyable. Devil May Cry is a very recent example of. Apparently not more than 10 hours gameplay, yet it has been acclaimed as a huge leap from its roots in the Resi series. Silent hill is another example of a short game, only 8 hours i hear.
But for all you gamers saying you are being conned, saying 8 hours gameplay isnt worth £40, then there are also titles to suit your needs. Jak and Daxter is apparently 40 hours plus, and is considered a mario beater.
Well there you have it, will the future bombard us with short games? Or will there be a fine balance of between shorties and the more in-depth longer games?
Shigsy, has stated that to appeal to younger gamers he would make games shorter...make what you will of that. But would he really release a short Zelda game?
Page: