CNN: Why people don't finish games they play...

Well in an MMO, if you beat one campaign, they'll just start another. You can't destroy the ultimate dark lord of infinite evil to rid the universe of evil forever(or else there's nothing to fight after the campaign is done). You just beat a campaign, wait for another update, finish that, etc.

Anyways, there are other reasons why I exclude multiplayer portions of a game, and games that focuses entirely on multiplayer even if they have endings. And most of it has nothing to do with seeing multiplayer games as inferior to single player, but rather it's because the two are completely different beasts altogether. It get's much more complicated once you take into account a game's multiplayer portion.

Go read post 44 for just one of the reason why I exclude multiplayer, using D2 as an example when I talk about how long a game should be...or most discussions about video games.

---

For me....Mirrors Edge was meh in gameplay and bad in terms of story.....the main concept of the gameplay gets an A+ in my book though...if that means anything. It was just too barebones and vanilla.

edited 21st Aug '11 7:57:36 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

My games which possess apparent storylines or goals to fill out include: I of the Dragon, Peter Jackson's King Kong - Gamers Edition, Oblivion, Morrowind, Guild Wars, World of Warcraft, Aliens vs Predator, Aliens vs. Predator 2, Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, Diablo, Diablo II - Lord of Destruction.

I've completed 7 of these, out of 11. Oblivion, Morrowind are games in which I purposefully ignored the storyline in favor of exploration. Diablo II & World of Warcraft I have fizzled out on.

Edit: I would vote no on developers shortening games. That's what saves & checkpoints are for, right?

edited 21st Aug '11 8:00:17 PM by Jheuloh

AKA "Jelly"

^ Cinema scenes don't make a game a game, though. In fact, that's just padding as well. Gameplay is by far the most important part of a game, for starters. if the gameplay sucks, then the story can't save it. If you can't get to the story, that is.

And I provided atleast one game with an actual Multiplayer ending. Which means they certainly can have endings.

And technically, if you're buying the next version, you can finish the older version, so there is a literal ending. "New versions" doesn't make the old game unbeatable. It's unbeatable in theory, only because new versions will keep coming out. But if a new version doesn't come out, that means it's beatable.

---

Moving on, frankly, there's too many similar games as is. Once you've finished the last vanilla FPS game, the next one is rarely going to be intriguing.

edited 21st Aug '11 7:58:49 PM by Hydronix

Quest 64 thread

Kingdom of Loathing is an MMO with something approximating an ending and back when I was playing, the speed runners could get through in 3 days which approximates to like 3 hours I think. That's being generous.

Also one of the reasons I don't consider games to be about story is that I still haven't met a game with literary merit except maybe Braid because it's got pretentious cryptic writing. Or Passage which is brilliant and has no words and is also pretentious as all hell.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

In terms of story, you want to watch every cinema scene...there are plenty of games that can do a story just fine without cinemas, but there are plenty of others that requires it to have a story, if not, then to add flavor to a story's setting.

...and then there are games that's practically one giant cinema+QTE.

So I generally don't consider cinemas padding. They're there to help develop the characters and story. Even if some games don't require it to do the same thing to an extent. But often those games uses dialogues in place of cinemas.

That's all the more reason why you want games to be as long as possible. Assuming you didn't specifically aim for generic vanilla games, if you find a good game, you want to experience it as long as possible...because that one in a million good game is few and far inbetween for most people. And once you beat it...well, for me, I dread the idea of finding a replacement game.

That and as I said before in the first page, the longer I play a game the more attached I get to the character and setting. I have a total of 92 hours in ARF atm accumulated by playing it for almost a year with the few spare time I have, haven't bought a single game while playing it, and don't want to buy another game...because I can't find a single game that can match it.

edited 21st Aug '11 8:10:52 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

The main reasons I would finish a game are:

• I like it.
• It's been tempting/haunting me for years.
• It's not pulling bullshit or being insulting.
• It has limited continues and/or deaths or continues that send you back (Call me crazy, but I would like to know how the developers want me to be challenged, and credit feeding or restarting at the (probably boring at some point) first stage every time I die to 1CC the game).
• It seems like the developers put heart into the game.
• It's not obnoxious in some what
• I haven't played a game in awhile.

The main reasons I would replay a game include the above and the following:

• It's great and intense.
• I'm still curious about the game.
• It's short.

Balance of all elements flows in the masters' bodies. To be a master, find the elements and fight the subconscious.

No games require cinema to actually tell a story. They did it just fine with text, and they still can to do this day. They just choose not to.

A long story doesn't equal good, though. In fact, that can get rather boring after a while. Being long won't make a difference unless the actual story is good enough to keep your attention.

And as I said, bad gameplay don't help much no matter how awesome the story is.

Regardless, I care less about the story if it takes forever to get there. A good example of this is Twilight Princess. The game was very long, and you'd forget the story quite easily before the next cutscene.

Quest 64 thread

With me it's an attention span thing. I'm heavily afflicted with Fleeting Passionate Hobbies. When I buy a new game I play it obsessively until it's done, or I get bored. Most games I'll finish inside 3 days, then I'll probably just mess around in new game+ before getting bored and moving on. If a game takes longer than a week, I start to lose interest. RPG's are really bad for this with me. I started Persona 3 a year and a half ago, and I'm still not done. If a game really interests me I might play it for 2 weeks tops, but by then I've seen everything the game has to offer and there's nothing left to keep me entertained.

Can't think of anything witty, so have this instead...

With the "long story is better" logic, that means Eragon is a good series and that Kafka's Metamorphosis has no deeper meanings!

PS. Back to talking about multiplayer games: one has to remember that explosion of single player games is a new phenomenon in the history of gaming. For most of history, games have always been about playing with another person.

edited 21st Aug '11 8:34:28 PM by ch00beh

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

^^^ Twilight Princess was short...or maybe it was so easy that I breezed through all the fights making it seem short...

Either way, it wasn't a very long game...

^ Eragon's a video game?

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

ಠ_ಠ

I'm talking about books.

edited 21st Aug '11 8:47:52 PM by ch00beh

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

Oh well....books are completely different...and I have no idea what's considered long/short for books. Mostly because I never paid attention to length.

Is Howls Moving Castle considered short? Is The Abhorsen Trilogy(Sabriel, Liriel, Abhorsen) considered long? etc.

edited 21st Aug '11 8:50:27 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

I consider short to be around 7k words max.

And the reason I bring up books is because books are all about story. More times out of not, you can't argue that a book is about the experience of turning the pages or looking at words (even if some authors do choose to take advantage of the print medium in whatever ways).

And with written works, one can safely say that there is zero correlation between length and merit.

If books and written language bother you, then we can move onto movies. Did you know that there's an 8 hour long film of the empire state building? Absolutely nothing happens in it because it's just a straight up recording of life or whatever. But it's long, so it has to be good, right?

(hint: the answer is no)

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

There are other factors, but a game's length is an important one.

Fullfilling one factor of a good movie while failing at everything else will still make it a spectacularly boring movie. Especially if it's about something as stupid as the empire state building...

A short movie, while can be entertaining at times, is in general pretty inferior. Little to no time to build up. Little to no time to develop the characters. And little time to rest. Just look at Blood The Last Vampire and Jonah Hex(although that movie had other problems beyond length)

edited 21st Aug '11 9:12:55 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

And stretching things out longer can also be pretty meh. I am pretty sure everyone knows the gag about Dragon Ball Z. And bringing things back to games, I don't think many could keep a straight face if they said Dragon Age 2's 40 or so hours didn't get repetitive/wak.

Yes, there is a minimum amount of time needed to work a story, but the thing is, stretching a story past that minimum does not guarantee an increase in quality, so it's kind of silly to insist that longer = better. In fact, longer might even be uncomfortable!

The point is: it's not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

And what, pray tell, is wrong with "simplified" games or games with "shallow stories"?

visit my blog!

dude probably didn't grow up with Mario or Doom.

it's a generational thing. kids these days don't understand how back before the Ecksboxes and the Segas, you had to carry a rock uphill through the snow for two miles so you could shift the bits over necessary to make Mario jump to the next platform.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

Did I say there's anything wrong with liking them?

Well technically I'm not that big a fan with them since such games are often incredibly simple. I'm just saying, such people are often the ones who cry about Final Fantasy's battle and mechanics being "too complicated"*

or a certain game's story is "too convoluted"*

^{Resident Evil being a common example people complain about}

.

edited 22nd Aug '11 1:02:36 AM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Because you're spending 60 bucks on something short and shallow?

If a game is short and shallow and costs like...I dunno, 20 bucks, it isn't that big of a deal I guess.

But for 60 smackers I want my games to give me MINIMUM 20 hours of gameplay and at least 30 if its an RPG.

And I dont understand how people can find a game to be too long. If its good, dont you want to keep playing?

edited 22nd Aug '11 1:08:42 AM by Thorn14

And in my limited experience of human behavior, the people who are most vocal about wanting epic narratives and/or less simplification can't name one good text adventure and have never touched Dwarf Fortress or Armored Core.

It's pretty great talking to people with strong opinions when they freely admit to going depth, not breadth. So many lols are had.

^_________________________^

PS. you spend $20 on DV Ds, which amounts to a 2ish hour non-interactive experience. You spend $10 on music albums that are about an hour long non-visual experience. Why should a $60 interactive audio-visual (and possibly tactile if you've got a rumble pack) be longer than 6 hours?

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

There's a reason why I don't bother buying DVD's and music albums.

Also, Armored Core isn't a text adventure...

edited 22nd Aug '11 1:16:56 AM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

I've finished 99% the games I buy. Even if I have to grunt it out.

I usually end up loving the game by the end, or at least have an appreciation.

Because I hold video games to higher standards than movies

I can't remember the last time I bought a movie on my own. Most of the time it was 2 dollar rentals or gifts.

(Anime is overpriced as hell, just putting that out there)

edited 22nd Aug '11 1:20:34 AM by Thorn14

You strongly implied it.

Though we seem to have contrasting definitions of what "simple and shallow" mean, so I'll let it slide.

Perhaps I am, but if I love it, it's worth it.

No, it doesn't work like that. No matter how good something is, it's always possible for there to be too much of it.

visit my blog!

Well I disagree, I'm nearing the end of my Fallout New Vegas run and i'm dreading ending it because I know I'll be pretty much done with it until Lonesome Road.

And wouldn't you love it more if you didn't spend as much money on it? Bastion is freaking amazing and the lower price only makes it better.