Viewing Thread:
"shorter gaming"

Just read an interview with the mighty shigsy in which he stated that nintendos games in future will probably be shorter in length than most n64 games.
Now admitidely he did'nt say which games he meant but luigis mansion is very short and he did hint at mario sunshine following the same trend.
The reason for this seems to be that apparently most of the games playing public dont finish the game and that that portion of the game is then deemed to be a waste of time that could have been spent making another game.
I dont know about you but i am on quite a tight budget and I would like my game to last a-while or at least have some replayability like zelda oot it took me three months to complete great stuff never felt i had been cheated out of my £45.
But will I feel the same when I complete my £40 game in just a few hours play.
No i will be gutted and will be going straight to part ex it for another that hopefully gives me some value for my money.
Any way I hope I am wrong and we see some real epics that blow us all away just like the zelda games on n64.
Fingers crossed eh?

:)

I you're talking about games to complete, then games like Ready 2 Rumble and other games like that can be completed in a few hours. Adventure games like Luigi's Mansion, I think, kind-of-ruined the Nintendo legacy, as they usually make quality games, that take 50+ hours to complete, like Zelda and Mario.

no... games are getting easier. I haven't played a game that took more than 3 days to complete since Code Veronica came out on the DC!

On the subject of games being shorter, I am increasingly finding that I complete most of my new games in one week or less, without playing them on weekdays at all. This happened with Max Payne, Medal of Hono(u)r, Soldier of Fortune, Jedi knight II, and most recently Rogue Leader. (Sorry if that sounds boastful, but bear with me)
Now, these games all cost upwards of £30 (except SoF), and lasted me less than 8 hours. I know in relation to films and such, this is relatively cheap for 8 hours of entertainment, and that some games have replay value, but is this justified.
Maybe I’m just getting better at games, but if Nintendo make their games shorter, I will soon find myself having a huge catalogue of completed games, and lots of money spent on games that last a week.
Not that I won’t buy the games, after all, I am a fool when it comes to spending money o
on games

that was ment for the cong mans ears, not yours sonicrav.

if you did your nintendo homework, then you'd know the new disks hold 190 times the amount of space super mario 64 took up. that must be the most knieve, simple minded, unthought-through suggestion in history. why would nintendo use a kind of disk, that despite being smalleer, also has less space on them? that does not make sense! so why would nintendo do that? they wouldn't! are you so un-confident in nintendo's inteligense you would be-foul them with such a stuporious suggestion? sir, i demand satisfaction!

Sorry! 256Mbit isn't 32 MB at all! it's under 64MB though...

†hë_Çøñg_Mðñ wrote:
> Would it bit spurious to suggest it may also have something to do with
> Nintendo taking the strange decision to put out smaller discs?


It's not this at all... aftre all, DC discs only held 1 GB and they weren't small... nor were 400MB CDs on the PSX.... nor 256 Mega bit (ie 32 MB) N64 carts...

Would it bit spurious to suggest it may also have something to do with Nintendo taking the strange decision to put out smaller discs?

Don't be to hard on him, he wasn't here 4-5 months ago...

:)

Good topic, except for one thing...

We were talking about this non stop 4-5 months ago!