PDA

View Full Version : Should Game Co's list Game length?



ProdiGurl
01-01-2012, 04:11 AM
Game companies have to list a game's rating, I'm wondering if anyone thinks the companies should also have to list the approximate game length so we know about how long the game is?

I know to me it's important because I buy games based on replay value - or at least calculate how much I'll pay for so many hours....

Assassin_M
01-01-2012, 04:32 AM
Yes, but the problem is accuracy..
Revelations was said to be 15 hours without side missions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

ProdiGurl
01-01-2012, 04:46 AM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:
Yes, but the problem is accuracy..
Revelations was said to be 15 hours without side missions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Ya that is an issue. I notice they usually mention game length in Reviews but it really does vary from person to person.
It would be pretty easy for a company to stretch the truth in their favor even if it were mandatory

SixKeys
01-01-2012, 07:13 AM
Depends on the game. For something like AC I would expect a minimum of 15-20 hours, then again something like Skyrim which is ridiculously huge and full of things to do, having something like "60+ hours of gameplay" at the back of the box might be a little intimidating, not knowing if that's for the story mode alone or everything included.

ProdiGurl
01-01-2012, 07:49 AM
Ya that's another thought.

I'd think the SP campaign alone would be all they need to list, that way you'd at least have a general idea without having to research game reviews.

brick177
01-01-2012, 07:54 AM
Agreed, accuracy would be difficult to gauge because everyone plays and learns at different speeds. And experienced gamer who has mastered the controls and the quickest route to do every mission could clock a short time. But someone who has to redo every mission multiple times and has the dexterity of a cow might never finish.

Plus MMO's would all look awesome because they could officially claim infinite play ability.

ProdiGurl
01-01-2012, 08:07 AM
Ya but game Reviews do list game length.
They must be able to calculate it some way? Normally when they say a game is 10 hrs., I tack on at least 15 hrs. for me bcuz I take my time & I usually suck when I start a new game till I figure things out.

LordWolv
01-01-2012, 08:23 AM
I think they should put the minimum on the box. For instance, a perfect gamer that goes directly from mission to mission and completes them first time, at full speed and then completes all the side missions without doing anything else; only travelling directly. I think they should put that on the box saying 'Minimum', so you know it's basically guaranteed to be longer.

Games such as Skyrim though; would be a problem. It's a truly epic game that personally would keep my interested for a whole year.. I think it should be a range from 0 - 48 hours, and if it's longer should just put 48 +.

Black_Widow9
01-01-2012, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by Isaac500:
I think they should put the minimum on the box. For instance, a perfect gamer that goes directly from mission to mission and completes them first time, at full speed and then completes all the side missions without doing anything else; only travelling directly. I think they should put that on the box saying 'Minimum', so you know it's basically guaranteed to be longer.
I think this is more realistic. Everyone's play style is so different that exact hours would be too difficult to gauge.

ProdiGurl
01-01-2012, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Isaac500:
I think they should put the minimum on the box. For instance, a perfect gamer that goes directly from mission to mission and completes them first time, at full speed and then completes all the side missions without doing anything else; only travelling directly. I think they should put that on the box saying 'Minimum', so you know it's basically guaranteed to be longer.
I think this is more realistic. Everyone's play style is so different that exact hours would be too difficult to gauge. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Same here.
The reason I had asked this was due to 2 things recently -
I read some comments that ACR was too short & shouldn't have been full price (I don't think the game was "short", just shorter than the other AC's)
and over the Holidays I was doing alot of game hunting w/ reviews & one game I was looking at was clocked at being a 6 hour campaign.
I'd never buy it if I knew it was only 6 hours long & thought it would be nice for them to have an approximation on the box.

SixKeys
01-01-2012, 03:50 PM
Another problem with minimum playtime estimations is that you have speedrunners who are really adept at playing through the game as fast as humanly possible. Game companies could say their game takes a minimum of 15 hours to complete and someone comes along and says: "Lies! I played through this on the first day and it took only 10 hours!" Some people never even bother with side missions after finishing the main campaign.

FrankieSatt
01-01-2012, 04:45 PM
I spent 3-4 hours of the game exploring and sending my Assassin's on missions to level them up before going too far into the main quest.

Game length means nothing to me. I buy the game on how much I'll enjoy playing it, no matter what the length is.

ShaneO7K
01-01-2012, 05:09 PM
Completion times are definitely going to vary depending on the player and of course the game.

Some players will just go straight for the missions to get every ounce of the story, while others will take their time to appreciate what has all been packed into the game. I would be a bit of both, but that comes down to what the game has to offer, because you would get games that actually has a decent story but everything else is very "meh" so you would tend to stick to the main story missions. And then you get games which reward the players for just picking up a tool and has an entire world for them to explore.

RPG games, Skyrim for example, will vary massively as people could take 2-3 hours to try and complete the main story line. Or you could let it consume all of your free hours that you are not working.

The idea of listing a games lenth is good but you would have people saying the hours stated on the back of the box are misleading. And it would be off putting for a customer to go into a shop and see a 40-50 game that has only 3-4 hours stated on the box.