60
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
60 points (91.7% liked)
PCGaming
6504 readers
1 users here now
Rule 0: Be civil
Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy
Rule #2: No advertisements
Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments
Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions
Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.
Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts
Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments
Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Great! I like games that I can actually complete in a reasonable amount of time. Padding a game just to make it longer makes it a chore to play.
You act like there isn't a difference between quality content and 100s of hours of gathering collectables...
The only game I've played that actually has 100+ hours of quality content is Persona 5.
Every other single player game trying to give me more than ~30 hours of stuff to do ended up being a chore.
I think part of it is that there is an ideal time commitment for story driven games and it is between 5 and 30 hours. It's similar for movies, where the ideal range is 90 t o150 minutes. There can be exceptions, made by particularly skilled people, but just because I enjoy the 4-hour cut of Return of the King does not mean I want the next Marvel or DC movie to be that long.
Probably because 90% of the games I've played, even the really good ones, would have been much better with some editing. But instead they tend to pad them out with unnecessary rubbish so they can put "100s of hours of gameplay" in the adverts.