How Long should playtime be?

SEANMCAD

How many hours of play time should a game have before it starts to feel like the game play is exhausted

and why should one type of game maybe have more re-playability then another.

CrazKanuk

18.5

EponyxDamor

17

TheDarkrayne

42

RexKushman

 Clearly the answer is 42.

alkarionlog

SEANMCAD said:

How many hours of play time should a game have before it starts to feel like the game play is exhausted

and why should one type of game maybe have more re-playability then another.

depend on how it is the delivery, back in the day I could play games longer and over and over again (like chrono trigger getting all ending and having all chars in lvl 99 with the best possible gear and secret of mana I forgot how many times I finished the game) nowadays if I end it once  I stop playing the game, some games make me want to replay it

also the quality of the game today is a hell a lot of lacking, they only want to invest on graphics and forget the gameplay, simplier gameplay to keep the idiots playing without much thinking, its hard to find games like these I said or like Dragon quest 7 I had over 150 hour of gameplay without counting the hidden dungeon after the end of the game and you still wanted more

cameltosis

Thats a very complicated question. 

For the purpose of the question "how long should a game last", I would judge it on 3 categories:

1) Content - what is the developer guiding me through?
2) Mechanics - what am I actually doing minute-to-minute?
3) Replayability - are subsequent playthroughs significantly different?

Those three things are not weighted equally, but combine to give me my overall expectation. I'm also aware that virtually no games get all three right, in fact content and replayability are often at odds with one another. 


So, a game like Planet Coaster, for example, has very little content. You're not guided anywhere, it's not a crafted experience from the developers. You're just dumped on a map and left to your own devices. But, the mechanics are interesting and being a sandbox, each experience can be very different. 

But, a game like Deus Ex is very heavy on the content. It is hand-crafted to give you a specific experience and the mechanics are OK. But, replayability is down a lot because each playthrough is pretty much the same. 



So, I can never just say "all single player games should give me 100 hours of content" because it's not that simple. That said, I do have personal guidelines. 


For content heavy games, I expect a minimum of 30 hours of content, but preferably 50 hours. 
For games that focus on replayability, I expect a minimum of 100 hours of enjoyable gameplay. 

Good mechanics increase replayability, whilst bad mechanics make me quit early. 

SEANMCAD

alkarionlog said:

SEANMCAD said:

How many hours of play time should a game have before it starts to feel like the game play is exhausted

and why should one type of game maybe have more re-playability then another.

depend on how it is the delivery, back in the day I could play games longer and over and over again (like chrono trigger getting all ending and having all chars in lvl 99 with the best possible gear and secret of mana I forgot how many times I finished the game) nowadays if I end it once  I stop playing the game, some games make me want to replay it

also the quality of the game today is a hell a lot of lacking, they only want to invest on graphics and forget the gameplay, simplier gameplay to keep the idiots playing without much thinking, its hard to find games like these I said or like Dragon quest 7 I had over 150 hour of gameplay without counting the hidden dungeon after the end of the game and you still wanted more

that is why I am asking.

so for example, No One Lives Forever 2 was a fantastically fun game that came out in 2002. It didnt really have an 'arena' style mode and the game as I recall was rather short. (meaning under 200 hours)
But lately I have been playing some single player games that die before 200 hours and I feel like it should be longer, so for me my expectation as changed overtime. So I asked out of curiosity on others experience, thanks for your input

SEANMCAD

cameltosis said:

Thats a very complicated question. 

For the purpose of the question "how long should a game last", I would judge it on 3 categories:

1) Content - what is the developer guiding me through?
2) Mechanics - what am I actually doing minute-to-minute?
3) Replayability - are subsequent playthroughs significantly different?

Those three things are not weighted equally, but combine to give me my overall expectation. I'm also aware that virtually no games get all three right, in fact content and replayability are often at odds with one another. 


So, a game like Planet Coaster, for example, has very little content. You're not guided anywhere, it's not a crafted experience from the developers. You're just dumped on a map and left to your own devices. But, the mechanics are interesting and being a sandbox, each experience can be very different. 

But, a game like Deus Ex is very heavy on the content. It is hand-crafted to give you a specific experience and the mechanics are OK. But, replayability is down a lot because each playthrough is pretty much the same. 



So, I can never just say "all single player games should give me 100 hours of content" because it's not that simple. That said, I do have personal guidelines. 


For content heavy games, I expect a minimum of 30 hours of content, but preferably 50 hours. 
For games that focus on replayability, I expect a minimum of 100 hours of enjoyable gameplay. 

Good mechanics increase replayability, whilst bad mechanics make me quit early. 

I agree that its a complex question for examples you have given.

I have found myself expecting more time out of certain games and less time out of others but then it hit me, just because most games of that type are long doesnt mean I 'deserve' if you will a game that is just as long in content.

but I hear what your saying for sure

SEANMCAD

RexKushman said:

 Clearly the answer is 42.

there is that responsibility thing I was talking about before.... anyway, joking aside thanks for your input

Sovrath

It depends on the content.

Something like a straight up shooter might be excellent but wear out its welcome after so many hours. A role playing game will last longer as the story unwinds itself. However, too long and one might lose its thread and start not to care.

GeezerGamer

Unless there are actual games that can put this discussion to the test, what is the point?
I played Skyrim for thousands of hours. I played ESO for less than 40.
Question for both games is "Why?"

SEANMCAD

GeezerGamer said:

Unless there are actual games that can put this discussion to the test, what is the point?
I played Skyrim for thousands of hours. I played ESO for less than 40.
Question for both games is "Why?"

What you are trying to say in the context of the question is that you believe the time in a game completely depends on the game, not even the game type but the game itself.
but I wonder how one determines if X hours for X game is reasonable or not

Asheram

what happened to the snowflake?

Grunty

Asheram said:

what happened to the snowflake?

Just another trip to the sun lamp.  A few more trips and there won't be anything left except air pollution particulates.

k61977

Depends on the type of game and the person playing it.  Some love games like ARPG where the goal of the game is to basically grind, grind, grind which can take 100's of hours to 1000's depending on what that person is wanting out of the game.  Others play single player RPG's where you have a set story and only so many play through before you have nothing left to complete and depending on the person can be a short or long experience and time consuming if they are completionist.  Now if you are talking about things like MMO's in reality there shouldn't be a max time as it is something you are suppose to play for years which many do not do today but that is the idea.  So overall you will not most likely get the same answer for two people because everyone is different and has different needs and wants.  Personally for me a better question is how many hours are people playing in one sitting on average.

btdt

I want a game to last forever... not have a shelf life.  

Just when is a game too old to be consumed? Is it safe to play a game once it's shelf life has passed?  Should I be leery about consuming a game that is half price?  

Unlike milk, a video game can potentially last forever.  When you give developers the license to place an expiration date on their products... you're telling them that all you want is a carton of milk... and that is exactly what you get.

It's funny how people complain that there is nothing to do in a game, and yet, can precisely tell you how long it's playability should be... and it's usually no where near what they really want.

I think a game that has 20 hours of playtime is too little.  100 hours is too little.  I'm not buying a game for 20 hours, I'm buying it until it can no longer be booted up.  Whether I choose to play it that long, is my choice, but the option SHOULD ALWAYS be there.

Ever notice how no game states how many hours of playtime there is on the packaging?  Because they don't want to get sued.  So what you have here is a game that could only last 5 seconds or 100 years... for some reason, people seem to think less is acceptable.  Probably the same people who spend $4 on a cup of coffee that has enough calories to constitute an entire chocolate cake.

If currency went thru a stat squish, it might become abundantly clear just how much we spend for so little compared to days of old.  Are we really getting value or just spending more money because we can?

imevu

i think 5 hours

Elsabolts

Longer then it takes a SnowFlake to melt ?

SEANMCAD

what I have noticed is that if a game is a 'sandbox' (and not a marketing termed sandbox but a real one) the expectation is that the game should last for hundreds of hours, and if it doesn't then the game deserves to be flamed.

BUT..if its not a sandbox and its story based, 50-200 hours max is perfectly reasonable.

I think the points here are good ones however the part where I take issue is the idea that a 'sandbox' deserves to be flamed if its anything under 1000 hours of play time

Kyleran

GeezerGamer said:

Unless there are actual games that can put this discussion to the test, what is the point?
I played Skyrim for thousands of hours. I played ESO for less than 40.
Question for both games is "Why?"

I used to read comments about Skyrim and players who played it forever and roll my eyes, 100 hrs for me and I was bored witless.

Then recently I enjoyed Fallout NV for almost 300 hours and thought, well maybe, but still not drawn in to do more than one good play through.

Good thing, because I moved to Fallout 4 and at first I didn't quite enjoy it, there were differences between NV I did not like.

But I kept at it and am now well past 300 hours and refusing to complete the main story line.

Level 54 now, and have been boosting charisma so I can become a "local leader" and figure out how to build up trade routes between the many settlements I've not only established, but steadily built up and defended on many occasions. 

Ran into a surprisingly brutal gunner assault on a settlement, had to go full psycho on them with the combt shotgun at close range instead of my preferred boom head shot sniper mode.

I could easily see myself spending 500 hrs or more on my current play through and am probably going to try it with a non violent, heavy trading, high charisma build to see how much I can negotiate through. 

Kyleran

SEANMCAD said:

How many hours of play time should a game have before it starts to feel like the game play is exhausted

and why should one type of game maybe have more re-playability then another.

I really only play RPGs and expect near 200+ content from them.

I need to play some others like XCOM or 7 Days to see what might expect from them.

My guess is at minimum 100 hrs but who knows.

laxie

It's a really interesting question.

Abzu comes to mind. It's an underwater narrative game. It was made by a team of artists and musicians, in many ways it's more about spiritual and artistic ideas than about "gameplay". It has a little over 2 hours of playtime.

When I finished it, I wasn't disappointed. The game spoke to me on a honest level. The experience felt a lot more meaningful than most 100+ hour games. I did not regret my purchase at all. Yet, there was a big uproar from most players, saying the game is good, but anything that short is a ripoff no matter the content.

It's quite interesting to think about. If someone designed a 30 minute experience that will reach out to you on a deeply intimate level, would it be more valuable than a 10 hour experience that's not bad at all but not outstanding either?

CreatePrivateServer

Depends on the game

Scot

SEANMCAD said:

what I have noticed is that if a game is a 'sandbox' (and not a marketing termed sandbox but a real one) the expectation is that the game should last for hundreds of hours, and if it doesn't then the game deserves to be flamed.

BUT..if its not a sandbox and its story based, 50-200 hours max is perfectly reasonable.

I think the points here are good ones however the part where I take issue is the idea that a 'sandbox' deserves to be flamed if its anything under 1000 hours of play time

The whole idea of a sandbox is that your are not led by the nose so it may seem there is not a lot to do. But there is so much you can do that if you actually bother to take the time to work out the games capabilities it will last for ages. It does not always work out that way, sandboxes can be as bad as any other type of game, but that's the intention. So yes, they are expected to last longer.

Elsabolts

I would say as long as it takes a Snowflake to melt in the spring time. Or how ever long Mom and Dad let the heat be turned up in the basement.