Topic: Is it just Me or...

[NC GRAVE]

has xbox 360 games have one thing in common? that they r getting shorter and shorter? is it because the game designers think if they put alot of action into it, it wouldnt matter? this doesnt apply to all games for the 360 but lately theres been a few thats been scrathing my head and thinking, "whoa, thats just wrong, completing a game in 2 or 3 days time when only playing for about 4 hrs a day(off and on of course)". and so my beef, why is it that games seem to be getting shorter? even though there might be more action, it doesnt really matter if the game isnt that long cause then u just repeat the process too often. found that short games tend to take up the less space on a disk than a decent game would. ace combat 6 wasnt a short game but when compared to previous ac series it is. but the same can almost be said for armored core but there are some non-heard of games that r decent and tend to be both long and full of action at the same time, the graphics might lack a little but thats about it. ps2 games have always been long and sometimes really hard to finish the first time but theres alot for them that is still hard the 2nd and so forth time as well. now fable 2 as i have heard is a long and kinda action packed game to play but i kinda question some of it. if any1 else has noticed or not noticed(which is fine) then leave ur thoughts here\/\/\/\/

[SMS SKULL 1]

Yeah, games do seem kinda shorter. Or, they're easier to beat so they seem shorter. (In the end, they're kinda the same).

I think the problem comes from the fact that serious gamers (not the, "I'm too Pro!" dicks mind you, the kind that really enjoy playing a quality title) are being outnumbered by more casual gamers. The kind of people who would rather see pretty graphics, but don't necessarily want a huge challenge/learning curve. Nor do they want to sit through the once prerequisite story-teller known as "Plot". No, the ever increasing number of casual gamers just want "omgholyshitawsumgrafixlolz" and maybe the old gaming stereotype of a hot, well-endowed chick to serve no real purpose other than being eye-candy.

My point with ^this^ is that time spent making a great game with good graphics, great plot/characters, and excellent gameplay mechanics/interface; is being replaced with more time spent making "omgpwettygrafix", "...meh"-plot/characters, and subpar gameplay. Which tends to equal a shorter game, and probably has less replayability.

Casual gamers don't want hard, challenging games. They want simple games with eye-candy, and easy-earned achievements. Maximum reward, for minimal work. Kinda sad really. .

*I think I missed the point of the OP, but whatever. 

[BeeRadBigs]

I agree they are getting shorter and shorter.  I remember games back in the day taking weeks to complete.  I also remember recently, games on the first generation XBox, like Conflict Desert Storm and Conflict Vietnam and Conflict Return to Baghdad taking me and my buddies a week or so to complete.  Nowadays all they want you to do is haul ass through the campaign and play online.  You ask, WHO IS DRIVING THIS DESIRE FOR GAMERS TO PLAY ONLINE, and I tell you it is Microsoft.  Microsoft PRESSSSSSSSSURES game developers to make the game largely playable online.  Their preferred mix is 40/60 with the 40 being offline and the 60 being online.  With that being said, the game developers are bowing/catering to Microsoft and forcing the purchaser of the games, me and you, to pony up that $50 for a yearly gold account or in wally's case $50 x 12 seperate GHEYmertags. 

They know if they make the game take weeks and weeks to complete as you work your way through it the ritalin crowd of today who ONLY want to buy a game and immediately jump online to play before even playing the campaign or doing what is required to "finish" the game, will drop the game and NOT play online or continue the offline campaign/mission.  We all can recall when we, "Beat the game!", whatever that game may be.  Those days are gone now.  Beating the game is no longer an accomplishment but rather a given if you put a few short hours in.  I won't mention any names but I know a few people that beat the HAWX campaign in 6 hours.  The commies in Romania at Ubisoft should be ashamed at themselves for the PISS POOR effort they put into the campaign for this game.  I mean honestly, 4 or 5 of the missions I have to escort shit.  Whatever happened to just letting me fly around and blow shit up.  Hell, I even had to escort Air Force One and I didn't even elect the son of a bitch inside it so I LET THAT FUQER get shot down.  I did it 4 times because that is what he is going to do to me when it comes to taxing the middle class to subsidize all of the lower class idiots that voted for him.  Whoa...  Back on topic in next paragraph... 

I couldn't begin to tell you how many people I have played HAWX against that have not even completed the campaign but are level 30 or higher because they bought the game and immediately jumped online and eschewed the challenge of "beating the game".  The same can be said for Gears of War 2, where I have played online against guys and with guys in Horde who have not even completed the first Act but have 3 gold stripes.  What Skull said above is right.  But he failed to mention it is a bane of our current society.  Kids & grown up's don't want a challenge anymore.  Everyone wants to win at all costs.  Which lends to boosting leaderboards, cheating via lag switch's and other lag tricks.  Very few people play the game anymore for the fun of it, they play because they want to be the best and then TELL you they are the best.  This forum has a handful of guys that have to tell everyone every chance they get how they are the best and no one can beat them or how they are the best and they can't be shot down or killed or beaten. 

Our society is a fuqing wreck and while I don't blame video games, rather I say that video games and their developers have taken the easy way out by catering to the instant gratification crowd and by catering to Micro-fuging-soft and their demands the games be largely playable online.

Rant over...

B-rad 

[NC GRAVE]

dude, that wasnt a rant, THAT was a fucking testament! i am glad i'm not the only one that thinks this and even if the games were only for offline play then comes the gamesharks, codebreakers and etc. cheating ways, i admit i've used them some but only after i've completed the game and most of the time i've busted my ass while trying to complete them. but thnx on ur opinions on this matter, maybe those who read this might be moved and stop others from doing all it takes to just be "unbeatable".

[Bearded Chabuda]

Yeah. BeeRad is right. Now that the online play is way more popular in games, they think that they dont have to make the campaign very long just because they have a decent online play.

[Yoda Sideous]

You guys are absolutely correct !! Before I read your posts I never put 1 sec. worth of thought into any of this but afterwards, I started thinking of all the games that got me hooked in the first place..... Metroid,Legand of Zelda,Doom,Duke Nukem and such...... In the beginning on-line play wasn't even a pipe dream.... AAHHH the good ol' days

[ripsta1981]

i agree wit ya beerad but i have to say the best game i have ever played was Mass effect i beat it 4 times (it took forever it actually caters to the fast beat and i'm done crowd, but it also caters to the ones who love hours of play ya decide how long the campaign takes.) and everytime i did i did wit a different character (it's sweet to have a female alien in love wit ur female character lol) and after 70 plus hours oon campaign i was nowhere near completeing all the campaign achievements. to beat the majority of the game (it's an achievements also) i had to end up beating it twice and paqyin more attention to what i did in the game.

[TECN15HADOW]

lol hence the 800 mp for newer maps the producers know that the games are short....if their not goin off o a budget to make the game they just make it for the eye candy...either way it still sucks for the serious gamers