Number of hours doesn’t really come into it these days compared with how fun the game is for me. I’m nearly 40, and whether or not a game is engaging is most important. I’ve got about 50hrs into Avernum: Escape from the Pit (a retro style isometric RPG), but I’ve got nearly 80hrs into Teslapunk, my favourite Shmup(completing the game takes about an hour).I Iove Dark Souls 1 and 3, Bloodborne, and Sekiro, but eventually got bored of Elden Ring and its open world.
Ultimately how fun a game is combined with how painless it is to get started is what I’m most interested in these days. I don’t have enough free time to be worrying if there are enough hours of gameplay.
I think it’s highly dependent on the player. I’m not a completionist in any sense, I mainly play games to have fun. I stop playing them when I stop having fun. I’ve put down games after a few hours and I’ve played some for hundreds of hours.
The gameplay loop in that sense is important whether it remains fun and keeps me coming back. Time is short as you get older and I guess I don’t really care about beating games.
Some games like Ultrakill are short and sweet, but others like Factorio can keep you busy for weeks. Both of them felt right for me, but then again I have quite a bit of free time.
If you like shooters, check out anything from New Blood, Turbo Overkill and Postal brain danaged. Those games are segmented into individual levels, which is great for when you just have half an hour.
A session should be doable in 2 hrs or less (a single RTS game). Vampire Survivors nails it for short and sweet but I love open ended creation like Factorio.
I have access too and it looks like online matchmaking is not optional in this one. It’s going to be a hard pass from me especially when randos can’t get past the first mission on the easiest difficulty.
Also the gunplay is not great, the iron sights feel awful to use especially.
You can ready up the second you get into an empty lobby, but I don't see any way to just simply choose single player.
That means that if their matchmaking system is down, you don't get to play. And funny enough, their matchmaking system was down all night last night.
My overall largest gripe though is that in PD2, I love how if you are accurate with headshots, helmets pop with a single tap and you can just mow through 30 cops in seconds. In PD3, its taking me 2 to 5 headshots after the first wave. On the easiest setting.
I don’t think I could pin down a universal number. I really enjoy when a game understands the staying power of its gameplay loop and finishes up before it gets stale.
I’ve got 180 hours into TotK and I’m not sick of it yet because I discover something new every time I play.
Conversely I 100%-ed Dredge in 20 hours and that felt like the exact right amount of time. Any longer and I’d have been sick of it.
Or we can go even lower with something like Untitled Goose Game, which was under 10 hours and also finished up just as it got old.
So yeah. I’m all about the self awareness of a game with regards to the experience. Whatever amount of time that takes is cool with me.
Mmm i dont think its at all a static number. What matters is trimming it down to whats important. If you can keep bringing in new game mechanics, or exploring existing ones in new and interesting contexts, or keeping me engrossed in the story, it can go as long as it wants. Like, Chrono Trigger is considered a pretty short jrpg, because its very condensed for how broad of a scope it has, but boy is it a great game. Mario Odyssey got some criticism for how many moons are in the game, but i loved getting each and every one.
I really, really doubt that we will see an F-Zero game on the (current) Switch. The series has always been used to test/prove out some new tech that Nintendo wants to build into other, bigger games (mostly Mario Kart but not exclusively). We’re too far into the Switch’s lifecyle for that, unless maybe Nintendo wants to learn more into something like online functionality (yeah, right).
Generally, I’m not into the “price per hour” reductionism… I’d rather a game was a short, remarkable (bonus: replayable) experience – 10-20 unless a longer game truly is that long without filler. Can’t put a price on having fun 100% of the time!
Sonic 3 and Knuckles takes like 3 hours for an average person to beat.
Have a hard time dedicating consistent time with a single game because of other things like work. So any long story-driven game is gonna be a pass for me. If I need to remember a town name, map, or a character name and its more than a couple hours, its a nope. I simply have a hard time with dedicating the time to something like that, even if I enjoy it. MMORPGs or anything with dailies have similar issues.
I mostly tend to play games where I can spend a short period of time in a session and it doesn't matter if I come back to it in months. Over the past year or so, beatsaber and Terraria are the games that have fit that bill for me the most. Have over 1500 hours in Terraria and expect that number to probably grow over in bursts over the next decade.
I love Hades, one of my favorites in recent years.
The gameplay is tight and action packed, the loop is fun, not too long, yet different enough between each run.
There are still tidbits of story and lore, but nothing that really takes time away from actual action.
I guess the absolute opposite would be a Kojima game with 45 min cutscenes, which I usually bounce off hard.
Might be a weird comparison, but the pacing in Hades kinda reminds me a bit of DOOM2016. (Another game I loved.)
Although a completely different setting and top-down roguelike instead of FPS, I get the same action packed vibe out of it.
Really depends on the game. A linear story game is not going to be very long. Then there’s sandbox games where you can have hundreds to thousands of hours.
games
Najstarsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.