How long do you like your games? What about girth?
 

When I was younger ploughing countless hours into games was easy. I had a decent amount of time of an evening to cram in plenty of things from playing with friends to watching TV, and well homework could be easily rushed (or ignored). Plus being a kid I could only ever really afford one game at a time, usually having to trade things in sadly, and so I'd always try to eek every ounce of gaming I could out of it.

These days spending numerous hours on games is not so easy. Apart from having one of those real life job things I also have plenty of other things to fill my time with, from seeing friends to boring (but necessary) chores and a whole load in between. But the benefit of having one of those job things is I now have money to buy most games I want (and lack the will power to stop myself doing so). So I have less time and more games, and as a result I find myself having to consider the length of gaming experiences more and more, which leads me to the question posed here: how long do you like your games?

OK, so the question is slightly silly because how long we expect a game to be will be determined by the kind of game and experience we aim to get from it. If you're about to sink into an RPG you'll probably expect to put in a fair few more hours than, say, a first person shooter. However, as with most things you'll probably find that you have a preference for how long you like games to last, or that games you really love fit into. You may, for example, be put off by RPGs because of how long they typically last, or find yourself frustrated by FPSs that end too soon.

For instance, my current game on the go is Final Fantasy Tactics Advance 2, and it's a great game that I've enjoyed every minute of so far. But boy is that a lot of minutes. I believe I'm about two-thirds of the way through, but so far it's eaten about 75 hours of my time all in all over the last couple of months. With a stack of games I really want to play starting to build up I've got to confess that I'm starting to find myself wishing I was progressing through it quicker. OK, so I could, I could just stick to the 'story' missions and be done with it sooner, but that's not how I want to play the game and I wouldn't find that fun. At the same time it'd be disappointing if it'd ended too soon because of the style of game, but I do find myself tending towards games that don't need quite so much of a commitment.

So what's your preference for game length, and why?

At least a week or so for me. At that rate, I could complete it and be happy that I actually completed it since I rarely complete games as it is.

If anyone has seen my backloggery, about 60% of my games are incomplete, a good majority of the games on there are lengthy RPGs, long adventure games, or short games I just don't feel like beating. These days, I just don't have time to dedicate to really long games. The only way those type of games force me to beat it is if the plot and premise is actually interesting.

I have a short attention span when it comes to games, and it's unusual for me to play a game longer than an hour per sitting, unless it's the best thing since sliced bread. I don't do marathon gaming sessions on the weekend, and I've only got a few hours each night during the week to fit TV, internet and gaming. Plus, if I sit on the couch too long, the cat starts pestering me to come play with him. The length needs to strike a balance so that it's not so long that I'll be playing it for months on end, but at the same time, long enough that I feel I've gotten my money's worth.

I find that I enjoy games that are fairly long, but not ridiculous. Longer games seem to give you some sense of completion once you've beaten them, though past a point, it just seems pointlessly long. I personally prefer RPGs, and for that, I think they should be between 40 and 60 hours. Anything above that seems excessively long just for the sake of being long. Honestly, if you can't wrap up a good story within 60 hours, you've fucked up.

On the flipside, games that are too short seem really random. There are, of course, exceptions to this, depending on the game we're talking about. I mean, multiplayer games or games you play with others are exempt from this. As for RPGs, a game under 20 hours feels incomplete and simply lacking. And since most games carry nearly the same price, an exceedingly short game makes you feel you wasted money.

Obviously there are exceptions. A short game can be good if it tells an complete inspiring story in a short amount of time and, similarly, a game over 60 hours can also be good if it's cohesive enough to make you forget about the time you're putting into it. But the sweet spot, I think, is somewhere around 40 hours. (Again, all times here are based on RPGs).

I just don't have the patience for long vidya games anymore, ones that sap most of my time with their shitty storylines or forced training missions because it saves them having to print more pages in the black and white manual. I dedicated that time for you, vidya game! Let me at least access some of your hidden gameplay!

I'm all for the instant GO stuff.

In a world where change is the rule, we rely on the unyielding constants in life for comfort and security -- that the sun will rise, that the earth will turn. But what if we could no longer be certain of anything? To what then would we cling? For centuries philosophers and theologians have debated what it means to be human. Perhaps the answer has eluded us because it is so simple. To be human is to choose.

I choose FPS games a lot lately. While FFT remains my favorite game of all time, I simply cannot devote time into RPGs anymore - Mass Effect withstanding. And with my habit of "Play Four Games At The Same Time" the whole "pick up and put down" aspect makes me forget about involved storylines - which is really the reason I stopped playing Final Fantasy XII.

As most people said, life has taken over gaming time and as a result, I prefer games that I could pick up every now and then, thus gradually reaching the end in a week or two.

I don't know any specific examples at the moment, but those 20 hour games are usually on the spot to what my preferred gaming length is. I think part of the reason why I dislike RPGs today is because of the lack of time I can pay attention to all those stats :/.

Furthermore, short games, while they might suit my lifestyle these days, feel like a waste of money. Unless they have some sort of incentive to play over and over again, short games are a no go for me either. They just need some sort of replay value and I'll be set.

/end rant.

There's something to be said for the quick fix of downloadable games (XBLA, etc). Much like I used to play a few rounds of solitaire before writing a term paper, I often play a round or two of Geometry Wars or something similar before starting the meatier DVD game in my drive. The convenience of not having to get up off the couch to change a game cannot be overstated.

If a game's length is of concern, I just want it paced well. There isn't so much a specific time I prefer, so much as content that manages to grab me without being paralyzing. There are certain RPGs I'll pick up and play, but I'll pass on certain like superfluous grinding for sake of more organic progression.

Length really isn't the issue for me, so much as the content. I can make Tetris or Geometry Wars last for hours depending on how a score run is going, so having developers spell it out for me isn't really something of worth in my mind.

I spend way too much on a game than what is necessarily needed. I guess thats the perfectionist attitude getting the better out of me. The last 3 RPG's I've played have had game time of upwards of 150 hours or more. Sometimes after playing a game for so long to beat it; Its just nice to play a game you can finish everything within a few hours.

I find with each passing year I find less and less time to devote myself to game but it doesn't stop me from adding games to my collection. The way I look at I'll have more than enough to play them when I retire. If l live long enough to enjoy retirement. I'm just one of those people that believe that I have to enjoy ever aspect the game has to offer. I won't waste time in terms of doing incredibly irritating things such as getting every ending in star ocean 2 and every battle trophy in star ocean 3 to give good examples.

I would love nothing but to finish a game every couple of weeks instead of a few months, but its truly no fault of the game itself. I'm incredibly bad when it comes to finding tricks and techniques to complete the game faster. I usually end up doing things the long way around more often than not.

I honestly have playing long lengthened games. But than, I also HATE games that's too short when it comes to RPG. (Fire Emblem for instance.)


I generally HATE playing on console (ANYTHING that requires a controller and a TV), so I guess I always ended up picking a game that I can just play... like anytime (Beatmania is perfect example.)

For handheld consoles, I can pretty much take in any length (as long as the game isn't piece of a crap).

Right now, I am addicted to one of the shittiest MMO ever created in history of MMO. (A.K.A Maple Story, but W/E, its probably since its summer.)

Maybe that's just me. Meh.

I'll usually last around 15 hours on an RPG before I get bored of it and feel like I have to trudge my way through it. Generally I realize there's no point in me playing a game if I'm not enjoying it, so I'll just stop. I kind of feel that way about Odin Sphere right now, so I don't know if I'll ever get through Oswald's story.

For online games I tend to play them forever. TF2 has been the only multiplayer game I've touched since I got it back in January, and I've logged way more hours than I care to think into it (looking at my TF2 Stats...I'm over 100 hours). I'm hoping for some new online game I can get into soonish, since Dustbowl is starting to wear a little thin on me.

These days, I'm more of the quick hit and on the go games. That's why I love my DS. For RPGs, if it fails to catch my attention in the first hour or two, I'll probably drop it. The only reason I'm still playing FFTA2 is because of the quick save feature, if not for that, I'll probably quit in between long battles because I'll be needed elsewhere to do something or go somewhere.

I miss those days when I can just sit down for 12 hours straight and play games.

I'm one of those people that HATES to see a good game end. If I'm enjoying myself, I'll take my time, and can stretch a game pretty damn far. While it was long to begin with, I had Dragon Quest VIII up to nearly 200 hours before I finally got bored, 100 hours with Okami and possibly Odin Sphere. I dont even realize I'm doing it until I check the file.

I know the time will soon come where I cant sit for hours upon hours playing video games (how I did it during college I'll NEVER know), so I have noticed that I've been leaning towards 'quick fix' games lately... games on my DS where I can play for a little while then shut it off and feel satisfied.

I really couldn't vote. The hours depends entirely on whether the game has any appeal to me or not. Good games with many new features introduced constantly, I can spend a long time on them. Games that I feel repetitive (short attention span too), I don't play long at all.

While some good games should have long hours, there are other titles which are short, but ends perfectly too. So it's really hard for me to say.

I guess one feature in games that will keep me hooked for long, is customization. RPGs tend to have that; be it equipment for statistics or detailed appearance.

The first ever game that made me spend a long time on was FFVII. My in-game clock was maxed at 99:59, and I still continued playing after that. Games with fun gameplay or story will basically keep me glued on it. Titles off the top of my mind are Wild Arms (any), Grandia, Okami, just plucking out games I feel like playing right now.

Also note that I tend to complete games REALLY fast. Latest example would be MGS4, cleared the hardest rank within days of the game's release, and perfected it a little after the first week. After completing a so called 100% of the game, I find it meaningless to continue further. Bad habit.

I voted a couple of weeks, but really for me that vote means a month. If I can go through an RPG like Shadow Hearts with a FAQ by playing an hour or two a day, and get through it in a month, then I'm good to go.

On the other hand, when it comes to games like Jak & Daxter, I really felt like they stretched it out to the extreme with hunting for all the orbs etc. I feel like that should have been a two-week title. (I found all 1000 items so I'm sure that took longer than needed.)

However, what is most important for me, especially in an RPG, is pacing. I absolutely, positively do not want to be forced to play for more than half hour at a time without the ability to save. Game companies, I have other things to do and I'm not going to buy your games nor play them when you make me go an hour-and-a-half between save points. I don't mind plunking 100 hours into an RPG at all (just did it this year with FFXII in fact) but I absolutely do mind having to stay up and play while I'm falling asleep, leave the console on for hours so I can come back later, etc.

I rethought of what I put in this thread and wanted to add something - I'll always take a game thats short if there is high replay value. For instance, some of my favorite gaming "memories" (for lack of a better word) in the last couple of years have been Spider-Man 2 and 3. Its not because the games have great stories or good combat or interesting ideas never seen before (though I think they could've done with a subplot where Spider-Man fights for and wins Black Cat's virginity) - but because those games fulfilled a childhood dream of swinging around New York.

So replay is a big part of this.

This is a very solid point. The number of times I've hit issues like that when I need/want to go do something else but haven't been able to save yet. It's a truly irritating situation to find yourself in.

Pacing is a great point though. It's a bit like films, I don't mind a long experience if it makes sense that it's a long experience. However, if it feels like a short experience that's been padded or stretched artificially, then that grates (and vice versa on length).

I agree replay value adds a lot to how much time you end up putting into a game in total, but the core experience is still going to be of a certain length (you're just choosing to play a game again instead of playing a different game). You can argue though that 'replayability', to an extent, affects more sandbox type games where how enjoyable just messing about with the world is can greatly affect how much time you end up sinking into it.

However, I don't know as if wish fulfillment is quite the same as adding replay value. A lot of games provide an element of wish fulfillment, but not all of them contain replay value.

I don't tend to buy a lot of games in one go--rather, I like buying just one game and playing the hell out of it. I like games that get killed in roughly a week or two--main quest, anyways. I don't mind shorter games, but only if they're multiplayer or on the PC.

I want to avoid having a backlog since I do have other things I like to do in my free time.

I really like games with renewing content that I can go back to constantly (ie. MMOs, and AudioSurf). Because of this the overall length of a game doesn't make a difference to me, since I tend to play several games at once, in small sessions at a time.

I'm most interested in games where I won't need to clock more than thirty hours to beat the game. If there's stuff to keep me coming back, that's fine, it's even good. It's just not good if I'm still not close to the finish line when I've been playing for a couple of weeks.