Today, games run the gamut of lengths from short arcade-style experiences to grand stories that can stretch for 100 hours. It is rarely indicative of the quality of a game, but it can change to whom it appeals. Do you have a minimum or maximum requirement for game length?
The PlayStation Brahs:
"Gris is a masterpiece, a puzzle game that is a level of engaging and in-depth I haven’t felt since Portal 2. And a beautiful journey across a beautiful world, and while I am avoiding mentioning many story details to avoid spoiling, it is still a thought-provoking and emotional story, that made me tear up once or twice."
Dave writes: "Playing GRIS for the first time, in its Xbox Series X|S format, has been an early 2023 highlight."
Neil writes: "GRIS is a serene gaming experience that has now released on Xbox and PlayStation, making the most of the power of Xbox Series X|S and PS5"
some games are too long and not very good. so, you may never see the end of a campaign. but, in those cases at least you can never feel like you were ripped off by the length of the game. I absolutely loved playing Skyrim and other games but just never made it to the end :(
10 hours at the minimum and 60 hours at the very max. Anything under 10 is too short, and almost every game about 60 is very slow paced and boring - no matter how good its story is
I've weighed in with my stance on this before, but as much of a cop-out as it sounds, there are many different kinds of games out there, even within genres, so I don't believe there is a catch-all perfect mean for game length. Some games thrive on being short, and some need to be long.
I do find that the importance of how captivating a game is, is somewhat proportionate to the length of time devs expect me to put into the game. There are games that fail to engage me for even a short time, but it's far easier to keep my interest long enough to see the end credits if a game is short than it is if it is long. Conversely though, games I give a 10/10 (which for me is exceptionally rare) tend to be games that are not only more than long enough to give me my money's worth, but manage to engage me for that length of time.
On the other hand, I prefer when games that are super short are at least offered at a low price, because I don't like sinking $80 CAD into a game only for it to be less than 10 hours long. That's not to say I've never enjoyed a short game. In fact, I do enjoy short indie-type titles on a fairly regular basis. I just can't justify spending too much on them. They can however have some of the best experiences, and are often highly underrated. I try not to crunch numbers such as length/price too often as that can prevent me from enjoying something I might otherwise enjoy.
In short, I don't believe there's a perfect formula for game length. Games come in so many different shapes and sizes it's not even funny, so for me, trying to assign an ideal game length to all of them is pointless.
Well it depends really, if youre a trophy/achievement hunter it will take longer cause of requirements