Is it me or are singple player games getting shorter and shorter?

[StageLeft]

It's you; you've lost two inches already this year.

 

[0roo0roo]

really old games had tons of dead time and make work. running around in huge mazes where every room looked the same trying to find the piece of wall you could break or had a teenie hole in it to find a colored key that would work on a door in a room far away and which you cannot remember how to get back to.......

oh it was fun....but then again we were like what? 12?

 

[notfred]

The price of games has stayed the same.

The amount of work required to develop the graphics, models, levels, engines, etc. has gone up significantly.

Therefore, the amount of work put into something else (number of levels, story development, etc.) has to go down significantly to compensate, if software developers want to keep thier current salaries.

 

[BespinReactorShaft]

Damn, FarCry only has 10 hours? I'm relieved...

 

[0roo0roo]

yes, some of us would rather not play a game for 50 hours. i haven't met one where it has enough truely entertaining material to hold up that long ever. rather it be short and sweet then be a total time drain. online gaming doesn't count, human oponents aren't programmed.

 

[nageov3t]

Xenosaga: 60+ hours of gameplay
Disgaea: easily +80 hours if you go after sidequests... I know people who've logged over 100 hours into the game

 

[Lonyo]

CoD was about 6 hours each time through (I played it 3 times, then half way through a fourth). Not very taxing to finish.

 

[trmiv]

It's the drive for graphics, graphics, graphics. A game doesn't need the most cutting edge graphics. Look at the Baldur's Gate series, and Planescape: Torment. Not the greatest graphics in the world, but very deep games that take some time to beat. Best thing about Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 is, you can stick directly to the main quest, and finish in like 20-25 hours, or do every single side quest, find tons of items, etc, and have it take like 50.

 

[Insane3D]

I agree. It seems all emphasis is on multiplayer now. I never play online as it just doesn't interest me, and finding a good, long SP game is all but impossible nowadays. The last really good long game was Morrowind, and most people gave up on it. It also seems like good RPG's are few and far between these days. I just picked up Far Cry and COD, and while they are both great SP games, they don't last very long. 🙁

The price of games has stayed the same.

The amount of work required to develop the graphics, models, levels, engines, etc. has gone up significantly.

Therefore, the amount of work put into something else (number of levels, story development, etc.) has to go down significantly to compensate, if software developers want to keep thier current salaries.

I somewhat buy that, but you forget that a lot of games just license established engines. Remember how many games came out using the Q3 engine? This argument holds for something like FC which involved a new engine, and a whole new level of engine @ that, but when they can simply license a established engine, they should be able to concentrate on making a longer, more involved game.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
yes, some of us would rather not play a game for 50 hours. i haven't met one where it has enough truely entertaining material to hold up that long ever. rather it be short and sweet then be a total time drain. online gaming doesn't count, human oponents aren't programmed.

Just because a game is 50 hours long, doesn't mean you have to sit there and try to finish it in a couple of days. Some of us play in moderation, so a good 50 hour game might last for a long time....it's more about value. I prefer to game for an hour or so tops at a time personally.

Also, so what if some people don't want a longer SP game, they shouldn't make them then? Some of us have no interest in the cookie cutter FPS that you play for hours online, should they stop making those too?

 

[Insane3D]

Fable has a whopping 15 hours of game play...

Is Fable Xbox only?

🙁

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Fable has a whopping 15 hours of game play...

Is Fable Xbox only?

🙁

yes. for 15 hours, though, I'd wait until the price drops to under $25.

 

[trmiv]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Fable has a whopping 15 hours of game play...

Is Fable Xbox only?

🙁

yes. for 15 hours, though, I'd wait until the price drops to under $25.

Better yet, just rent it and beat in a few days, that's what I did. I thought I was just getting into it, and then I realized I had been given my last quest. I roamed around for the next two days trying to find stuff to do, got bored, and then just finished it. Yea, you can get married, buy houses, etc, but when you get down to it, that stuff is just not that fun after awhile.

 

[Mik3y]

old single player games = 30hrs of fun gameplay


new games with both single and multiplayer = 31 hours of fun gameplay

😛

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Fable has a whopping 15 hours of game play...

Is Fable Xbox only?

🙁

yes. for 15 hours, though, I'd wait until the price drops to under $25.

XBox uses DirectX does it not? If so, a PC port can't be THAT hard to make. I just read a review and it seems like it would be a great candidate for the extra power and higher resolutions a PC can provide. Do Xbox games ever drop like PC games? It seems like they are always $50.

I'd rent it, but I'm not the type to sit and play for hours at a time to try and beat it, I would want to do some of the extra stuff and just explore.

Maybe this game might be a reason to dust off the year's worth of dust on my Xbox...useless POS that it is.

Are there any plans for a PC version?

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
I agree. It seems all emphasis is on multiplayer now. I never play online as it just doesn't interest me, and finding a good, long SP game is all but impossible nowadays. The last really good long game was Morrowind, and most people gave up on it. It also seems like good RPG's are few and far between these days. I just picked up Far Cry and COD, and while they are both great SP games, they don't last very long. 🙁

The price of games has stayed the same.

The amount of work required to develop the graphics, models, levels, engines, etc. has gone up significantly.

Therefore, the amount of work put into something else (number of levels, story development, etc.) has to go down significantly to compensate, if software developers want to keep thier current salaries.

I somewhat buy that, but you forget that a lot of games just license established engines. Remember how many games came out using the Q3 engine? This argument holds for something like FC which involved a new engine, and a whole new level of engine @ that, but when they can simply license a established engine, they should be able to concentrate on making a longer, more involved game.

i dunno, work on an engine tends to continue. look at half life, call of duty and such. massive modifications to the engine. and actual implimentation of more complex features requires code many times more complex.

 

[Insane3D]

I'm sure that's true, but iI can't imagine even in a worst case scenario it's anywhere near the time a game takes that is making a new engine as well. Also, most of the newer engines seem to include editors, so I imagine this would make it even easier.

 

[0roo0roo]

i'm just guessing the budget allowed for a game drops if they use their own engine. would make sense to the bean counters. pc games are risky business, much more so then console games. piracy, smaller user base and such. console games have godly budgets these days. final fantasy VIII cost 26 million, and that was years ago heh.

 

[Aftermath]

Originally posted by: trmiv
I'd much rather have a great single player experience than multiplayer. I'm not a big fan of playing online, I can't remember the last time I did. I'm tired of all these MMORPG games too. Give me a good single player RPG.

I'd take a good MMO any day as it stands right now. I've invested around 57 or 58 days (1368 to 1392 hours for those who don't feel like doing the math) in Final Fantasy XI since the North American PC release about a year ago. The most time I've ever invested in a single player game before that was my second run through Final Fantasy VII, which was somewhere around 60 hours. (Trying to get all of the secrets, items, materia, etc.) The average PC games (FPS games mostly) last an average of 5 to 15 hours for the first run. Definitely not worth the $45-$60 they cost anymore, which is why I've purchased a hand full of PC games in the past three or four years. (No, I don't pirate. I just stick to what I like or grab older games off of bargain racks.)

Serious Sam for example cost me $4.99 (new) out of a bargain bin at EBGames a couple of years ago and I've never found such a deal before. That game has brought me many hours of fun in both single player, and co-op multiplayer. Doom 3 however, cost me $54.99+tax, I played through it once so far. While it was fun and moderately enjoyable, it certainly wasn't worth that kind of premium. I still haven't worked up the interest to play through it again though.

Edit: Fixed a typo.

 

[Anubis]

yes