Something that I’ve been thinking about for a while now is the perceived value of any arbitrary game based on little more than the length of time it takes to complete it.
When I first saw Journey and it was revealed that the game would only be three hours long, we were especially careful how to present the information – gamers often all too easily reject a game if it’s not epic – an adjective incorrectly used to illustrate how many dozens of hours of gameplay are featured before the credits roll. To me, that just sounds completely and utterly wrong on a number of levels.
In retrospect, that deliberation wasn’t really necessary – Journey’s one of the best games released this generation and that’s partly because of the delicate combination of sublime visuals, wonderful music and balanced gameplay but it’s also because it provided a movie-like experience in terms of pacing, structure and length.
You can, if you wish, get through Journey in around an hour and a half.
Long past are the times when gaming’s first generation of gamers have endless time for the so-called epic titles. For some the change is gradual, but for others, with the onset of family and an all-encompassing job, it’s rather more sudden. Case in point, the thought of getting stuck into Skyrim still scares me to death, a telling difference from when I played through Oblivion, Skyrim’s predecessor, at least twice in full just a few years back.
[drop2]I’ve played big games, have done since I was a child, and I’ve enjoyed them massively. Some, like Phantasy Star Online on the Dreamcast, soaked up hundreds of hours (and the accompanying phone bill), and I’ll sing the praises of the likes of the Zelda games any day of the week.But things have changed, and now I’m looking for the smaller, more concise experiences that occupy my every attention for just an hour or two and then let me go, safe in the knowledge that I’ve seen everything there is to see and I’ve not missed out on a side quest or collectable that’ll take me days to tick off the list.
If those games can grab my attention for that relatively small amount of time then I’m happy. Of course, the criteria doesn’t apply to everything – deep driving sims can’t hope to cram in a full experience in the length of time it takes to watch a DVD, and I’m not expecting Bethesda to suddenly reduce the length of the next Fallout by 90%. What I mean is that I now actively seek out smaller, more appropriate games.
I’m not alone, either, and developers are starting to come around to this way of thinking. Dan Pinchbeck, creative director on the brilliant Dear Esther, agrees. “It still amazes me that some gamers are happy to explicitly say they don’t care about the quality of a game, it’s only the dollar-per-hour cost that defines value for them,” he said to Gamasutra, who are running a related feature.
“I find that completely extraordinary,” he adds. “It’s like going for a meal and basing whether it’s any good on how much food you get served rather than whether it tastes nice. I don’t see shoveling crap into myself as good value on the basis that there’s a lot of it.”
I’m not ignorant or arrogant to think that a lot of people will feel the same, of course, but as my free time becomes ever smaller I’m looking for games that fill the gaps and eschewing those that look like they’ll require considerable investment in terms of time. Personal preference, naturally, but then that’s just free choice and what makes us human.
As entertainment is served up in ever smaller chunks interrupted by adverts and calls to action, it seems gaming is split between the adventures happy to soak up a month of your time and the indie titles that just want to pull you in and take you along for the ride. Sony’s big on these just now – the aforementioned thatgamecompany title, but also PSN stuff like Datura, which was perfectly pitched length-wise – but the other big publishers are yet to take the gamble.
There’s the issue of cost, though. Developers can’t hope to pour endless resources into a game, regardless of length, and then sell it for 99p. Journey was pushed out at £10, which I think is just about right, but I wouldn’t expect games of a similar quality to be considerably cheaper just because they’re shorter than the standard £40 release.
But perhaps that’s for another blog, and I’d welcome your thoughts on any of this, particularly if you fall within the sort of group of gamer I’m finding myself in just now. The truth is, I’ll take a smartly produced, padding-free movie length game like Journey or Dear Esther over anything epic any day of the week, but your feelings may differ entirely.
But that’s me. Except on Sundays, I normally have a couple more hours free on a Sunday…
djhsecondnature
I love short games that can be completed in an afternoon, but would I want them all this way? Hell no.
The variety is vital and hugely important. Having a broad option for gamers is as important as ever. I love games that I can finish in an hour or two, and those that I can play for months and months if not years.
We need the big blockbuster games, the small indie games, the casual iPhone games and everything in between. We need variety, options and quality – something we’ve never had so good.
colmshan1990
Exactly my thoughts.
There’s nothing better than an epic game once you get into it, but if you don’t, it’s becomes one horrible slog.
haz360
Agreed. The variety is important. A good game is a good game regardless of its length.
I’ve put 100’s of hours into the likes of Skyrim, Uncharted and Assassin’s Creed recently, but I’ve always got time for smaller, shorter titles like the wonders of thatgamecompany, and everything inbetween.
Quality over quantity every time for me :)
Sympozium
Good points. Thing with Skyrim I don’t think its too bad, Oblivion would be worst. I think there’s much more to do in that game still compared to Skyrim since its more toned down.
I think some games like FPS/3PS don’t need to be long. They can often be a grind much like how I felt Uncharted 3 was with the tedious shooting sections I’d much rather prefer a system like Metal Gear than Unreal Uncharted every few mins; nice game I just find things like that to be boring or too long now in 2011/12. I just like it when games offer so much content and gameplay to last years kinda like sims or Dragonball Z Tenkaichi or even DMC 3 because of bloody Palace. Long campaigns just won’t do anymore in my books.
So I really welcome these small hour games, they’re really cool and interesting and they don’t really need to be urgently played like with a big release so loads of time to do another important things.
fs
Journey did everything in 3 hours on an emotional level, on a visual level its words don’t even come close to describing. I love long games but short games (done well) are just as good. You lose concentration with the long games sometimes so its nice to have a short story to get through sometimes. Also adds replay value, i’ve completed Journey about 15 times.
dizwod
Depends on the price of the game. I would love to pick up games which are only an hour or 2 long but I have to justify the spend, I cant buy games when they come out and have to wait for them to be cheap or borrow them from friends. So spending £6 on a game for 2 hours isnt value for money for me.
Main reason I wouldnt buy call of duty, 3 hour game (granted theres online) but I cant play online as im a novice and everyone annihilates instantly, pointless :P
Forrest_01
Yeah, that’s pretty much my standpoint too – I have to weigh up a £10 purchase of Journey (for example) against the fact that i can buy a full retail title for that price. & as i am happy to buy pre-owned for most things if required, that is often a reality.
This does not come down to preceived value from length though, but is more the fact that there is generally a little bit more to the retail title than its shorter downloadable friend.
Then you have things like HDD space & whatnot to take into account & all of a sudden the downloadable title isn’t looking quite as attractive anymore. Not to me anyway.
That said, i feel there is definitely room for both. Although i tend to focus more on my boxed titles, i do like to kick back with a puzzle game/platformer/arena shooter now & then & PSN is perfect for that. As long as the price is right, i don’t mind something that i will only put a few hours into, or that i can only play in short bursts.
Its all relative though IMO – RPG’s you expect to be long (& justifiably so) with skill trees, dialogue trees & whatnot, whereas something like a FPS doesn’t really need to be too long, just deliver a good bit of bombastic action. Hell, a game can be a few moments long if required, as long as it is the right price & does what it is supposed to do well.
pvwradtke
£6 for a 2 hours game is too much? It’s about a movie ticket price. Buy a pint of beer and it’ll cost about the same, will go away much faster than that and has no “replay” value, you have to pay again for it :). It’s all a matter of perception, we end up spending more on trivial stuff and tend to be hard on “money value” for games.
cc_star
Unlike a movie ticket you can play it again & again depending on the game.
Perception of value is the key, some people could think it odd if you didn’t spend £40 on a bottle of wine & it’s be absolutely crazy to spend the same on just a game.
Even within gaming, weighing up the value of Journey at £10, Vs a much older & used full game isn’t comparing apples with apple…
I just want great experiences and regardless of length or cost titles like Velocity, Flower, Journey, right up to Warhawk, FIFA09&12, Uncharted2, BlOps, Portal2 and others have offered that, a (quality) shorter game for a cheaper price has it’s entertainment more densely packed it’s all about quality to me
Forrest_01
How is comparing a downloadable title against a full retail game not comparing apples with apples (apart from the fact that one is considerably smaller of course)?
They are both gaming experiences to me, just one lasts longer/has more content than the other.
Here is an example i recently faced:
Journey £10
Yakuza Dead Souls £11
Now i had been looking forward to both titles, they are of course both games (albeit from different genres), but one is much better value than the other as far as i am concerned.
Suffice to say i went with Yakuza, as i get a lot more ‘game’ for my money & it isn’t stuck on my HDD until i delete it. I can sell it on if i wish.
zb100
ok then, compare it to the price of a DVD or Blu-ray release? You can watch those as many times as you want & Fopp sells most recent releases anywhere between £6 (DVD) – £15 Blu-ray. If it’s a bit older or better still, imported, £3 (DVD).
As you mentioned elsewhere, comparisons are difficult & subjective anyway.
X
Kronik76
Did you really put a kiss at the end of your post???
Forrest_01
Yeah, that was for me i reckon. ;)
zb100
It was intended for CC but Forrest, you can have 2! Xx
Apologies, was confused. Still baffles me that I receive work emails from clients signed with a kiss!
rht992
I don’t mind how long or short a game is so long as it maintains a good standard across its length. I love long lasting games more than any other because I feel I get what I paid for and I’m a sucker for long lasting story lines but the turning point for me was the first Uncharted. At the time it was the shortest game I’d ever played having finished it in around 4 hours but I didn’t mind because it was so enjoyable and had stronger characters and a far more interesting story line than a lot of other games I’d played. Better to play a shorter refined game than a long one which is made up of fillers. Its not quantity its quality that counts as my old english teacher would say.
zb100
The pricing needs to be appropriate.
Cinema price for cinema duration sounds fair.
I’d probably pick up & complete loads more games if this was the case.
cc_star
Does your cinema ticket entitle you to re-admission again & again & again along with potential resale value through retail, or new ruling with digital content.
Agree with your sentiment that things need to be proportionately priced, but comparison are difficult & subjective anyway.
Forrest_01
Yeah, not knocking your point but the resale only really applies to boxed products though doesn’t it? That digital resale ruling thing is pretty much all smoke & mirrors from what i could see.
DJ Judas
There’s a gap in the market here I believe.
Would us as gamers be willing to pay for access to a game that can be played through and experienced only once? Perhaps the ” player-decisions dictate the direction” type games could be put to fuller use, making games that really do have vastly different experiences depending on the decisions made throughout.
Theoretically a developer like Quantic Dream could make, say three “full” games worth of content and make a variety of different options available that offer completely different experiences. They’d all last a similar amount of time and the player purchases access to a single playthrough each time.
A completely experimental idea of course, but it’d be interesting to see how it did. Unfortunately the whole concept is spoiled by every path and possibility being available on youtube instantly…….until the days of plug-in experiences of course!
zb100
To be honest, I’ve never played a game through again more than once – (shock, horror) Journey included.
Maybe I’m missing out on something or maybe there’s just that many new exciting things out there to experience that I don’t have time…
(I have ONE platinum & it’s likely to stay that way.)
zb100
PS DJ Judas – assuming the experience is deep enough, I’d be willing to give it a try. Far too many unfinished games sitting on my shelf that I’ve paid full whack for then been side-tracked.
KeRaSh
I wouldn’t want to miss long games but I do appreciate a short game if it is done well.
People always bring up the movie comparison. I say, why not compare it to a good long book? It takes much longer to read such a book but I’m sure it also has the potential to deliver a much deeper, more fleshed out story as long as it doesn’t drag too much, which is always a possibility with long books/movies/games.
Both short and long games have their ups and downs so I don’t see why anybody would want to limit their choice by just having one of the two around.
I don’t have nearly as much time to play games as I used to have but I’ll just try to get through the games in shorter sessions and maybe a longer session on random weekends. However, that doesn’t always work out. Last Saturday I spent 3 hours of my precious gaming time trying to beat Roger Federer in Grand Slam Tennis 2. I failed horribly and was pissed that I just wasted a perfectly good gaming Saturday because I didn’t get anything done. I could have played some more Rayman Origins on the Vita, do a few missions in Unit 13, play some more Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath… Anything would have been more productive and enjoyable than what I went through gaming wise on that Saturday… Roger Federer winning the Wimbledon finals shortly after that was the final blow… I hate that guy…
zb100
The direct comparison here though is that I’d quite happily spend £10-15 upwards for a good full-length novel (just finished Neal Stephenson’s “Reamde” – thoroughly recommended for all members here, 1000+ pages of blissed out geekery) but for an equally enjoyable, yet throwaway “pulp novel” I wouldn’t expect to pay more a Sackboy T-shirt.
quinkill
I couldn’t disagree more! Whilst Journey is probably my current favourite game and I do love the two hour story design, there are very few games who do it and even fewer who do it well. On the other hand there are games like Uncharted, Skyrim, any Fallout game, any God Of War game (the list goes on) that could not provide the same experience in two hours, and thank god they didn’t try!
mrfodder
I think this is what I love about the Uncharted and Batman games. They are not 2 hours, but they can be completed in a 1 or 2 weeks with the 2 hour gaming sessions I get nowadays. More game built towards the 2 hour gaming sessions would be ideal for the time poor career/family man/woman.
colmshan1990
A few people are saying cinema price for a cinema duration is fair.
That’s not correct though- you only get one go with a cinema ticket. A blu-ray price, on the other hand is a bit more.
zb100
Yeah but often, I’ve not even finished one run through and I don’t think I’m in a minority here. Perhaps compared to some of my liveried colleagues here but not as a whole.
zb100
PS perhaps a more appropriate comparison would be comparing it to the price of a DVD or Blu-ray film?