-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Do really long games (80+ hours) excite you or turn you off nowadays?
- Thread starter Shizuka
- Start date
I can not imagine a single game with enough unique content to justify being anywhere close 80 hours. Impossible. Up to a point it just because a combination of grind, repetition and pointless filler.
Still excite me. I can skip what i want and finish the 80 hour game in 50 or 60 in most cases if I want. For example, I didn't HAVE to put 120 something odd hours into witcher 3, I wanted to. I could have beaten it in 60 and called it good but I wanted to see everything.
I like short games with the option to reward me with unlocks if I continue playing for a long time.
They still excite me, but it really depends on the game. I spent 100+ hours in Dragon Quest XI and loved every minute.
Right now at this very moment? Probably the biggest turn-off. But... there will come a time when that will sound great.
This does not count endlessly playable games though, such as roguelikes, etc. But if it's just a campaign with side content that takes that long or might even take that long to crit path? Forget it.
This does not count endlessly playable games though, such as roguelikes, etc. But if it's just a campaign with side content that takes that long or might even take that long to crit path? Forget it.
I really don't mind a game's length. For example it took me 53 hours on my first run of PoE 2 without any dlc, loved EVERY single second of it because the pace was absolutely terrific, aswell as the game giving the player absolute agency in terms of how one want to do the mission regarding any scenario they can think of (outside the main story line)
What truly is important is the aforementioned pacing. Persona 5 for example was / is a dreadful chore simply because the game hammers you down with the SAME messages and contingency and everything over, and over, and over, and over for the whole run. Its just awful
What truly is important is the aforementioned pacing. Persona 5 for example was / is a dreadful chore simply because the game hammers you down with the SAME messages and contingency and everything over, and over, and over, and over for the whole run. Its just awful
Definitely depends on the system for me. If it's the switch then lets go baby, length aint no problem. But PS4 time is strictly limited these days, starting uni in september as well so its only gonna get worse. I've got God of War and Resi 2 both unopened as ive not finished Read Dead yet and I know if I start one of them ill have to restart RDR2 later on.
I still love the idea of a really long immersive game. Which is why I tend to pick them up whenever I see them for a reasonable price.
However, actually playing a game like that requires me to be in a specific type of mood where I'm receptive to being immersed in a brand new world and ready to learn it's intricacies. While I love doing that still, it requires a type of concentration I don't have as often due to job and other commitments wearing me out sometimes. And if I'm not in that receptive mood, then I'd rather replay one of my old favourites than play something new. And that's how the backlog keeps growing.
However, actually playing a game like that requires me to be in a specific type of mood where I'm receptive to being immersed in a brand new world and ready to learn it's intricacies. While I love doing that still, it requires a type of concentration I don't have as often due to job and other commitments wearing me out sometimes. And if I'm not in that receptive mood, then I'd rather replay one of my old favourites than play something new. And that's how the backlog keeps growing.
I love it. I almost never finish short games, but will happily throw hundreds of hours at a long RPG.
Huge turnoff for me. Most of these long ass games maybe have a solid 20 hours of content with the remainder being craptons of filler, pointless sidequests and vast, wide open areas of nothingness.
I'll take a laser focused 15-20 hour game any day.
I'll take a laser focused 15-20 hour game any day.
I actually don't understand how anyone could have kept up with each consequtive 100-hour action RPG of the last generation. To me an 80 hour high budget experience is something you get maybe every second year.
After Skyrim I was pretty full, but open for more narrative- or action-rich experiences to try their hand with the formula. After Dragon Age and Witcher in 2015 I was fed up and it kind of bums me out the entire generation moved on to this format either as RPGs or as Shlooters.
After Skyrim I was pretty full, but open for more narrative- or action-rich experiences to try their hand with the formula. After Dragon Age and Witcher in 2015 I was fed up and it kind of bums me out the entire generation moved on to this format either as RPGs or as Shlooters.
it definitely depends on the game. for example i'm super excited to start DQXI S and i'm sure i'll play it for even more than 80 hours.
It depends on the game and its franchise, quality, variety, repetitiveness, and personal preference. A Yakuza game or something like The Witcher 3 is fine to me because of the variety oand quality of entertaining side and main quests, you can play an hour or two a day and be constantly seeing new stuff that's fun even if gameplay elements like combat will get repetitive. It helps that I'm into the franchises already because for something like Assassin's Creed, it's really hard for me to want to make that investment, and it's the same for many jrpgs. A good variety of things to see keeps the games from getting stale making it feel like you are almost watching a TV series where your always coming back to see new shit. I didn't really have the patience for Breath of the Wild because the variety in that game was mostly its shrines, which to me just wasn't very interesting because the theme was almost always the same.
Long games have to be like Star Trek to me, filled with a variety of interesting stories and stuff to see so it's worth my investment.
Long games have to be like Star Trek to me, filled with a variety of interesting stories and stuff to see so it's worth my investment.
I highly dislike them unless they are spectacular. Persona 5 is the only game over 15 hours In been able to finish in years.
Neither. I play games I enjoy. What does it matter if it's 10 or a 100 hours long if you like it? I swear some people on this site act like gaming is a chore. Even with limited time, if your gaming scheduled 20 minutes a day. What's the difference between a long game or a short one? You are still just playing a game. The only reason for not playing a game because of it's length is because you don't enjoy it that much and I stand by that. People are confusing game length with fun. Quit trying to frame this arbitrary factor as the main obstacle for your enjoyment or lack there of.
It really depends on the game and the gameplay.
Breath of the Wild is a long game if you do all the shrines, explore everything, and complete all side quests (forget about all the mini bosses and korok seeds though). Never got tired of it, though I did take a break about halfway through. Glad to have played it as much as I did, and can't wait for more.
On the other hand, there are games like Octopath Traveler that take about 100 hours to actually finish. It becomes a slog. Really would've been better as a 50 hour game. Sure, you can finish every character's story in about that time, but it's really unfulfilling without much payoff unless you do the post chapter 4 sidequests and true final boss. I wouldn't consider that truly beating it.
If a game is that long, it's a big plus if I can easily take a break and not play it for weeks (or months). Octopath and BotW are good for that. Games like Fallout and Skyrim are easy to do that with as wellāfinish a self contained quest line and the take a break.
Games that require a committed 100+ hour play through are not appealing to me unless they're really captivating and varied. Unfortunately, a lot of games aren't.
Breath of the Wild is a long game if you do all the shrines, explore everything, and complete all side quests (forget about all the mini bosses and korok seeds though). Never got tired of it, though I did take a break about halfway through. Glad to have played it as much as I did, and can't wait for more.
On the other hand, there are games like Octopath Traveler that take about 100 hours to actually finish. It becomes a slog. Really would've been better as a 50 hour game. Sure, you can finish every character's story in about that time, but it's really unfulfilling without much payoff unless you do the post chapter 4 sidequests and true final boss. I wouldn't consider that truly beating it.
If a game is that long, it's a big plus if I can easily take a break and not play it for weeks (or months). Octopath and BotW are good for that. Games like Fallout and Skyrim are easy to do that with as wellāfinish a self contained quest line and the take a break.
Games that require a committed 100+ hour play through are not appealing to me unless they're really captivating and varied. Unfortunately, a lot of games aren't.
I feel like a lot of people try consume games like they do movies
Cram it in as fast and hard as possible
I prefer taking my time
It took me 9 months to finish The Witcher 3+DLCs
With a 4 month break in the middle of that
I would rather step away and let the excitement build again
Cram it in as fast and hard as possible
I prefer taking my time
It took me 9 months to finish The Witcher 3+DLCs
With a 4 month break in the middle of that
I would rather step away and let the excitement build again
I wouldn't say they turn me off totally because if the game is good then I'll still play it.. but I definitely resent how long games like AC Oddyssey are. There's very little reason for the core story of a game to be 100ish hours nowadays. Certainly not one that is coming out yearly more or less. Persona 5 was really poorly paced and I was annoyed at it, but with an RPG that comes out like every 5 years I can excuse it to an extent. Red Dead's repetitive story meant that its duration felt obnoxious as well.
If a game happens to end up about that long just because it's really that long by default, then I'm fine with it. Those kinds of games are extremely rare though. Games that tout some 80+ hour playing time though raise red flags instantly and usually mean at least 20 - 30 of those hours are nothing but filler garbage.
In any event, playing times are overrated and focused on way too much now as a selling point. Some of the best games that actually ended up being pretty long did not usually ever exceed 60 hours, and in the past the average "long" game was closer to 35. I find myself not caring to finish a lot of modern games now because they don't usually have gameplay loops that can sustain extremely long playing times, and I usually get bored by the 50 hour mark and either don't finish them, or force myself to just because I might already be close to the end.
I've put anywhere from 250 - 600 hours into some games that I really enjoyed, but this was through replays, because the games were just that replayable to me, but I don't believe I have ever put even 70 hours into a single playthrough.
In any event, playing times are overrated and focused on way too much now as a selling point. Some of the best games that actually ended up being pretty long did not usually ever exceed 60 hours, and in the past the average "long" game was closer to 35. I find myself not caring to finish a lot of modern games now because they don't usually have gameplay loops that can sustain extremely long playing times, and I usually get bored by the 50 hour mark and either don't finish them, or force myself to just because I might already be close to the end.
I've put anywhere from 250 - 600 hours into some games that I really enjoyed, but this was through replays, because the games were just that replayable to me, but I don't believe I have ever put even 70 hours into a single playthrough.
Last edited:
As I'm getting old and I don't have as much time to play as before I find myself less excited to sink more than 20 hours in just one game these days. And it doesn't help that great games are released on a regular basis lately. Not a month goes by where one or two games that I really care about come out. But every now and then I'll enjoy an engaging and lengthy adventure like I did with NieR: Automata.
if its a game i like, im happy to play it for a long time. in ac origins i got sad when it seemed like the story was heading towards a finale after about 50 hours, then got excited when that wasnt the end and a whole new part of the map opened up with a ton of new side quests
No, because I get burned out long before I get near the finish. FE: Conquest any GTA game, and Bravely Default can attest to that.
Overall as i've gotten older i've seen my gaming interest change. Years ago I was all about trying out new games and getting lost in the world and playing for hours.
I'll still do that for high profile games that really catch my interest but overall I tend to lean toward the games where I can "mindlessly" jump in and not have to be overly invested.
I'll still do that for high profile games that really catch my interest but overall I tend to lean toward the games where I can "mindlessly" jump in and not have to be overly invested.
It all depend on the pacing.
I did not realize how much time I was spending on Xenoblade 2 ( ~100 hours ) because I liked pretty much every second of it.
If I love a game, it's story, and it's characters, I obviously want that experience to last for as long as it can.
As someone who was hyped for Fire emblem, I do get excited at the idea that if the game is good, I will actually get the opportunity to have fun with it for a long long time. Not just finish it the first weekend I put my hands on it.
I did not realize how much time I was spending on Xenoblade 2 ( ~100 hours ) because I liked pretty much every second of it.
If I love a game, it's story, and it's characters, I obviously want that experience to last for as long as it can.
As someone who was hyped for Fire emblem, I do get excited at the idea that if the game is good, I will actually get the opportunity to have fun with it for a long long time. Not just finish it the first weekend I put my hands on it.
It's kind of a mixture between those feelings, like a bittersweet sensation. As a JRPG lover, I'm used to long games and most of the times I thoroughly enjoy all of those hours, but sometimes it really puts me off to know that I'll have to spend 70 or 80 hours just to finish the main story.
Yes but only because I work full time, when we go to our slow season or vacation then it's game time!!!
It has to be extremely good or I don't have the time for it. Like w3 is the only game I can even think of that's worth playing for that long.
Mostly a turn off nowadays.
Give me a more compact experience without any padding or filler content or needless OW tropes and I'm all set.
Give me a more compact experience without any padding or filler content or needless OW tropes and I'm all set.
I eat them for breakfast.... on Switch.
On PS4 my anxiety crushes my aspirations and the game is never played. Persona 5 being the biggest victim of this. Anticipated for years, bought day one... never played it. š
On PS4 my anxiety crushes my aspirations and the game is never played. Persona 5 being the biggest victim of this. Anticipated for years, bought day one... never played it. š