-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Does game length affect your purchase decision?
- Thread starter HighFive
- Start date
It does affect it a bit. Based on certain qualities of a game I decide what price to buy it at and will wait until that price to purchase it.
So if a game is really short that knocks down the price for me. I waited until Titanfall 2 was about 10 dollars for instance, since I wasn't interested in the MP.
So if a game is really short that knocks down the price for me. I waited until Titanfall 2 was about 10 dollars for instance, since I wasn't interested in the MP.
This. It's part of the reason I've been gravitating towards RPGs and visual novels as of late.
No, don't care at all. As long as the game is worth spending time on that's what matters. I don't check movies or books for length either. It doesn't matter if a movie is two or three hours long or a book 400 or 800 pages, as long as they achieve what they set out to do. Some experiences require a certain length to be realised properly though.
Games are no different.
Games are no different.
It doesn't really matter much if I'm sure I'm gonna like the game.
If I'm not I prefer shorter experiences since they take up less of my time (and let me have more time to clear my games/movies/tv series/books backlog), and dropping a game halfway always feels bad.
If I'm not I prefer shorter experiences since they take up less of my time (and let me have more time to clear my games/movies/tv series/books backlog), and dropping a game halfway always feels bad.
Nah, I'm all about quality over quantity, and a major bugbear of mine this gen is games that last too long. I'm sick of the bloat. Nier: Automata damn near killed me in that respect.
The only great AAA game to come out this year that I haven't purchased is Persona 5 and that's not because it's too short but rather because it's too long. I like variety and I like finishing games so if you present me with something that is a minimum 90 hours from beginning to end it's just not going to happen.
Yes, but not because of a value proposition. Because of work and life and"adulting" I don't always have the time to sink into giant games. For me the quality of the game is what is important , not the quantity..but sometimes I'm simply not able (or don't want to) to play a game because of it's length.
Yes. If I expect to be able to beat a game in 20 hours or less I typically won't buy it until it goes on sale. Especially for linear campaigns that I don't expect to have much replay value.
Games like Until Dawn really benefit from this. If there are branching storylines it's fun to go back and see how the story plays out based on different decisions. Also, the "Immersive Sim" encourages multiple playthroughs using different styles of gameplay (stealth vs assassin, good vs. evil).
It does but not for the normal reasons. I just don't have the time and energy to play something that goes on and on for 30+ hours. This is also my main issue with games as a service, it's open ended. I'm much less likely to play a game if I hear its a service that will drag on for ever or takes 50 hours to get through.
OP
OP
I think you point the perfect example of a short game that reward you for multiple playthrew. Its not a long game, but playing it multiple time, making different choice add to the replay value of it. Its a game that deserve being purchase full price.
Yes, it affects the value proposition. I would never be turned off from a game because it's too short but it would affect how I view its worth. I would find it difficult to justify a game like South Park: The Stick of Truth at full price for example because of its very short length and zero replay value.
I don't really understand the problem of some people finding games to be "too long". For me if I expect a game to be the most enjoyable thing I could play at the moment then it would only be a positive if the length of that game was long rather than short since it's a longer period of enjoyment. I wound up playing the Witcher 3 and Persona 5 over a period of months rather than weeks and I enjoyed every moment of both and certainly wouldn't have preferred to have played 2 or 3 smaller and less enjoyable games in that timeframe instead.
I don't really understand the problem of some people finding games to be "too long". For me if I expect a game to be the most enjoyable thing I could play at the moment then it would only be a positive if the length of that game was long rather than short since it's a longer period of enjoyment. I wound up playing the Witcher 3 and Persona 5 over a period of months rather than weeks and I enjoyed every moment of both and certainly wouldn't have preferred to have played 2 or 3 smaller and less enjoyable games in that timeframe instead.
Nope. If a game looks interesting and it's something I want to play, I'll play it. Sometimes you get a few hours, sometimes you get hundreds.
I'm perfectly fine paying full price for a short game if it's something I'm interested in, but if I know it's too long I'll try to wait until I know I'll realistically play and beat it... In most cases anyway, because a bunch of the games I happen to like are pretty long.
For me the length doesn't influence me whether I purchase or not...that being said it does influence priority and order of what to play. Sometimes I feel overwhelmed by longer games with more content and would feel better checking out the shorter ones first.
Game length being to long can have me justify not following through on a purchase I was on the fence about or not too serious about.
Game length being to long can have me justify not following through on a purchase I was on the fence about or not too serious about.
Game length is very important. I don't want to spend $60 for a 10 hour game. I think $1 = 1 hour is a good system. For a game to be truly worth $60 then you need to spend 60 hours on it. Which includes: main story, multiplayer, side quests, post game content, replayability.
Only in extreme cases. I won't buy a full price digital version of a game which can be fully finished in less than 10 hours. I either wait for a sale or buy a retail version and then sell it. If it's a 15-20 dollar game I don't care about the length, it can even be 2-3 hours (hello most walking sims ;)) as long as the game delivers.
It didn't used to, but my gaming budget is drastically lower than it used to be so i'm very selective with my games these days. Often buying games a year or two after release (just grabbed The Wither 3 complete for $20) with a focus on GaaS or MMO's as they are often a great value for how much time you can get out of them.
not at all, in fact needless padding turns me off to a game
if a game is quality and appeals to me I'm there
if a game is quality and appeals to me I'm there
I'm playing through Evil Within 2 and thats about as a big an open word I can deal with now.
Last traditional open world game I completed was Sleeping Dogs because I loved the setting.
Got bored of Horizon, Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed 2.
So.. no. The shorter and tighter the story is the better.
Last traditional open world game I completed was Sleeping Dogs because I loved the setting.
Got bored of Horizon, Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed 2.
So.. no. The shorter and tighter the story is the better.
Basically this. I don't care if a game is 4 or 120 hours. A great game is a great game. Value is not part of the experience of enjoying media.
Yes, some times. But for the opposite reason as for most people. I'm a little bit tired of all the 50+ hours "games as a service" games at the moment and if I hear that a game only goes 6-8 hours, it's a huuuuge plus for me and a reason to buy it.
I used to love long games. But now I'd much rather blast through a good three hour game than grind a 300 hr RPG.
Doesn't really affect my decision, but I will admit I can't stand a lot of filler/busy work in my games. It's why I didn't make it through horizon zero Dawn.
yep. usually the shorter the better. i only really look for long play times if it's an RPG. games i've played recently or currently playing are all short.
(times from How Long to Beat)
limbo - 3 1/2 to 4 hours
inside - 3 1/2 to 4 hours
game of thrones telltale - 12 1/2 hours
walking dead telltale - 7 1/2 hours
hellblade - 7 to 8 hours
fractured but whole - 16 to 19 1/2 hours
it's just that i'm really slow at stuff be it playing a game, reading a book, or watching a tv show. i wish i could just sit down and consume for hours at a time but i can't. the only games within the last few years i've played for over 100 hours are witcher 3 + rocket league. most games are <50 hours and only a few between 50-100.
(times from How Long to Beat)
limbo - 3 1/2 to 4 hours
inside - 3 1/2 to 4 hours
game of thrones telltale - 12 1/2 hours
walking dead telltale - 7 1/2 hours
hellblade - 7 to 8 hours
fractured but whole - 16 to 19 1/2 hours
it's just that i'm really slow at stuff be it playing a game, reading a book, or watching a tv show. i wish i could just sit down and consume for hours at a time but i can't. the only games within the last few years i've played for over 100 hours are witcher 3 + rocket league. most games are <50 hours and only a few between 50-100.
I rent most of my games or sell them when I finish them so length doesn't really impact my habits all that much. To be honest I try to avoid long games these days, I just get worn out after 25 hours, unless it's a never-ending MP game like Mario Kart where I can just play it for 20 mins here and there.
I try to get $1 per hour out of my games. It doesn't always work out, but I'm very selective on what games I buy.
