Boasts 40+ hours of gameplay? I'll pass,
I'm not sure why adults use "hours of game time per dollar" as a measure of how good a game is. As I see it, there's two types of people
Kids: Lotsa time, little money
Adults: Lotsa money, little time
Obviously, not all adults have lots of money, and not all kids have tons of time (but they should! let them play!), but roughly that is the relative breakdown.
So if you're an adult, you can blow money, but the game just won't be worth it when you have 40 hours of diluted gaming as compared to 10 or fewer horus of nop notch stuff. Of course, you can have 40 amazing hours of gaming, but honestly, I've yet to come across a game that will just keep me riveted and in love for that long. Sure I'll play it, but there just isn't the "by god this is great!" feeling you get constantly from a shorter game.
Plus, I'll never finish it. It just gets old, there's more stuff to play... it gets dropped by the wayside.
Gamasutra's question of the week dealt with this, and I'm encouraged to hear that at least most other game developers prefer short and sweet. Of course, game designers are known for their short attention span, for figuring out what the game is at its core, then tossing it aside, but maybe other adults prefer shorter games, so I might be in luck.
Bleh... I hate to call what I would like to make games... but honestly there's just no better term right now. Interactive entertainment is too broad, too verbose. And anything that's not a game but might be called a game.... is "interactive". Gotta be some way to get around that interactive word...
Kids: Lotsa time, little money
Adults: Lotsa money, little time
Obviously, not all adults have lots of money, and not all kids have tons of time (but they should! let them play!), but roughly that is the relative breakdown.
So if you're an adult, you can blow money, but the game just won't be worth it when you have 40 hours of diluted gaming as compared to 10 or fewer horus of nop notch stuff. Of course, you can have 40 amazing hours of gaming, but honestly, I've yet to come across a game that will just keep me riveted and in love for that long. Sure I'll play it, but there just isn't the "by god this is great!" feeling you get constantly from a shorter game.
Plus, I'll never finish it. It just gets old, there's more stuff to play... it gets dropped by the wayside.
Gamasutra's question of the week dealt with this, and I'm encouraged to hear that at least most other game developers prefer short and sweet. Of course, game designers are known for their short attention span, for figuring out what the game is at its core, then tossing it aside, but maybe other adults prefer shorter games, so I might be in luck.
Bleh... I hate to call what I would like to make games... but honestly there's just no better term right now. Interactive entertainment is too broad, too verbose. And anything that's not a game but might be called a game.... is "interactive". Gotta be some way to get around that interactive word...
Post a Comment