GAME LENGTH: IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE YOUR GAME TOO LONG?

Posts

Pages: first 12 next last
unity
You're magical to me.
12540
I've been working on a game in RPG Maker XP for years, with all the dungeons planned out, and the progression of character's skills/levels/etc matched to which dungeon they'll probably be in when they should have those skills/be at that level.

But at this point I've completely finished 14 of the 21 dungeons (with the rest of the dungeons mapped, but not yet filled with monsters/chests/events). The playtime has reached over eight hours. I've tried to make most of the dungeons short with a variety of monsters, but I'm starting to wonder if there's a point where the player will get tired of dungeons, no matter what happens in the story between exploration.

I'm used to games where there are 40+ hours of gameplay and dungeons galore, and I started the game with that mindset, but is it possible I've gone overboard and games of that length are too long for most people? Is it possible to make your game too long?
Sailerius
did someone say angels
3214
I'm unlikely to finish an indie game that's longer than 4 or 5 hours. I just don't have that kind of time anymore. Also, games much longer than that tend to have trouble with pacing and filler.
No, but it is very possible to make your game too boring.
edchuy
You the practice of self-promotion
1624
Long games aren't for everyone ... most people nowadays (I'm don't consider myself among them) want instant gratification. Must be the ADD in action or people just seem to busy to want to get engaged in such a lengthy game!
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I think 20 hours is fine if you can keep it from getting repetitive. The longer your game is, the more times the gameplay has to meaningfully change over the course of the game.

I'm not talking about minigames, although I guess some people like those, and they help a little. I'm just talking about the gameplay progressing and expanding in natural ways. New types of skills, new characters, new strategies emerging, new enemy tricks to deal with, different styles of dungeons.

Pacing is important. Dungeons all being the same length gets old a lot faster than when there's a good variety. You want to put a short dungeon between two normal length ones. You want to follow an extremely long dungeon with a gameplay segment that isn't a dungeon at all - overworld exploration, or a series of cut scenes with a gauntlet battle at the end, or a minigame. You need to figure out how long to keep the party members on the team before replacing them, when to unlock new classes, when to push the player into using those new characters and classes instead of what he's become comfortable with. There's a rhythm you can achieve where the pacing starts to feel like music. If you can keep this going, and keep the gameplay feeling fresh and exciting without making it feel disconnected from the rest of the game, I think your game isn't too long yet.

Unfortunately I don't really have a rule of thumb or anything like that for this kind of thing - I can just sort of sense it. Unhelpful! Try not to make the player feel like he's doing something he already did, I guess. If two generic-feeling dungeons are played with the same party, using mostly the same skills, against enemies that mostly use the same kinds of strategies, it's gonna make people get tired of the game.
author=LockeZ
I think 20 hours is fine if you can keep it from getting repetitive. The longer your game is, the more times the gameplay has to meaningfully change over the course of the game.

I'm not talking about minigames, although I guess some people like those, and they help a little. I'm just talking about the gameplay progressing and expanding in natural ways. New types of skills, new characters, new strategies emerging, new enemy tricks to deal with, different styles of dungeons.

Your post in general is very much correct, in my opinion, but I feel this part of it really sticks out.

The length of the game really doesn't matter, in my opinion, as long as you keep it fresh throughout. Even if a game's 10 hours long at most, you HAVE to keep things exciting and unpredictable (in a good way). You want to give a player a reason to continue; the same old shit for a dozen or so areas without any attempt to spice things up won't work very well.
A good story ties a game together. If the story makes the RPG long, it's unavoidable, if you have a lot to say. But too many irrelevant tasks like side-quests are damaging to a long story, because they allow for distraction from purpose. Purpose is why we select and play through these things in the first place. If players are given time to remember that a game is being played, they'll remember.
unity
You're magical to me.
12540
author=Sailerius
I'm unlikely to finish an indie game that's longer than 4 or 5 hours. I just don't have that kind of time anymore. Also, games much longer than that tend to have trouble with pacing and filler.


I think cutting it down to that point would hurt what I'm going for, unfortunately. But I'll definitely be shooting for a game closer to that range after I finish this one.

author=kentona
No, but it is very possible to make your game too boring.


Yeah, definitely. I'm just not sure how good of a judge of that I am ^^;;

author=edchuy
Long games aren't for everyone ... most people nowadays (I'm don't consider myself among them) want instant gratification. Must be the ADD in action or people just seem to busy to want to get engaged in such a lengthy game!


I like a good, long RPG every once and a while. Though I must admit, I don't play through the long ones as often as I did when I was younger.

author=LockeZ
Unfortunately I don't really have a rule of thumb or anything like that for this kind of thing - I can just sort of sense it. Unhelpful! Try not to make the player feel like he's doing something he already did, I guess. If two generic-feeling dungeons are played with the same party, using mostly the same skills, against enemies that mostly use the same kinds of strategies, it's gonna make people get tired of the game.


I think at this point, I'm just going to have to get more experienced as to when I can feel out that rhythm for myself.

This has all given me a lot to think about. I think I will be trimming some of the less vital remaining dungeons and see if I can work harder with trying to gauge how the player might feel about how interesting things are, as well as how everything affects the flow of the plot.
pianotm
The TM is for Totally Magical.
32388
I'm the kind of person that likes big epics. Lord of the Rings, Dune for a general idea. In video games, Final Fantasy, Star Ocean, Silver Star Story. Doesn't have to be a book or an RPG either. I'm a dedicated Metal Gear fan.

When I feel a game doesn't have much to offer, it loses me. I will get a bunch of new games for a buck each off Amazon, and when I get them, try them all out, skipping around, trying out one one night, and one the next.

What happens is in one game that--if I didn't have other games to compete with it I might ordinarily play through--I try out, I may come across something that breaks the flow of gameplay. In a book, this might be a case where the author routinely writes clumsy sentences. In the case of Magna Carta, I found myself spending more time figuring out how the combat system worked than actually playing the game. This tends to put me off and when there is competition, I'll find myself playing a preferred game through, and often inadvertently forgetting a game that, in spite of a clumsy mechanic, I otherwise enjoyed.

If you've got a long game. Even the most innocuous problem can stick out like a sore thumb and put a player off the game. It's easy to write to much. It's hard to make sure everything in a giant manuscript flows smoothly.

So, I don't think it's possible to make a game too long. I DO think it's possible to make a game too unmanageable.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
As I touched up a bit here, it's not necessarily the length of the game you should be concerned about, but making one that is worth coming back to until completion and perhaps revisiting once the journey is over.

I wouldn't expect anyone to go through any game (unless it's especially short) in one sitting, so I don't see the logic behind "I don't have the time to play x because I'm a big boy now". Just make the game that helps realize your vision and, if you plan on releasing it to the public, keep a keen eye on making sure everything flows and feels refreshing, if not straight up "new".

Then again, when it comes to "new"; it shouldn't be so much a concern that what could be added is good, so much as what you have might be bad if there should come a time when you feel the need to throw in something completely different to keep the player interested. Even with all the extra, unnecessary fluff, what's bad will remain, so you'd do best to fix that above all else.
Well, just to add that it is not literally possible, but "sort of" possible to make a game too long, especially when you add in things like unnecessary fillers, unnecessary repetitions and whatnot that don't make any sense whatsoever. What is important is that you get to the point, and that everything, even side quests, ought to have goals to them that make sense.
Most people who boast about having 30-40 hours of gameplay normally equals 25% Story and 75% filler for the most part. :\ For me, at least. 20 hours is more or less manageable, depending on the kind of game you're going for. But even that is hard to achieve. I suppose if you were to divide your game up into 20 one hour long 'chapters' ( like I'm doing for Lady of the Lion ), it becomes a lot more doable.
author=kentona
No, but it is very possible to make your game too boring.

I was actually going to say yes, but then this. THIS.
I'm looking at a certain game with a synonym for End and Salty eye-water in the title, which was 100 hours long (apparently) but impossible to play thanks to boredom.
If you make a long game make sure it hooks the player in, has common sense in design (shortcuts if there's several dungeons in a row with no resting/plot points, the ability to run from battles, custom random encounter systems if used, non-slow walking speed, easy enough difficulty so as not to get wiped) and it helps a lot if the player feels like they're making progress instead of being on one long-ass grind.
I've played plenty of games that have outstayed their welcome. Usually I tire of a game due to repetition. Like others have said, its not aboit length, its about variation and maintaining interest.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
So since I don't really have anything remotely resembling an answer to this question - I know, unheard of for LockeZ to not have an opinion on something! - I thought I'd do the other annoying thing I do sometimes, which is overanalyze shit to the point where everyone just wants me to shut up. And I picked Chrono Trigger, because it has amazing pacing. And I focused on the gameplay instead of the plot, because I think plot pacing is something that you can find plenty of info about on your own. I mean, people have only been making gameplay for a couple decades, but they've been making stories for millions of years. So yeah.

LockeZ overanalyzes the pacing of Chrono Trigger's gameplay with such a ridiculous amount of detail that he has to use a hide tag:

I'm just going to fast-forward to the end of 2300 AD because up until then the game isn't long enough for anything to have really gone wrong pacing-wise unless you're just SUPER terrible at gam mak. That's five dungeons in (Cathedral, Guardia Prison, Lab 16, Arris Dome, Factory) plus a couple small zones with like three battles each.

Heckran's Cave: Six dungeons in, the game introduces magic and party-swapping at the same time. At the same time, to make the magic more meaningful, it has this entire dungeon full of physical-immune enemies. This dungeon is actually pretty boring and lame; the physical immune enemies force you to use the new spells, but don't do a good job of really introducing you to the difference between physical and magical skills, since you can still only see one of the two. The boss is also the first boss that forces you to wait; this changes the dynamic of how useful dual techs are. But since only one dual tech is useful anyway, the player again doesn't really feel it yet. Overall there are a lot of new concepts introduced, but not fleshed out.

After Heckran's Cave: You can now travel through time non-linearly for the first time in the game. Whee! Exploration! Where to go next isn't obvious, so if you're playing for the first time, you'll probably spend quite a while exploring before getting to Zenan Bridge.

Zenan Bridge: This is a gauntlet of battles, not a dungeon. There are no new gameplay ideas here, but the lack of exploration and the short duration are a nice change from previous areas.

The Masamune: There's a bit of a puzzle to solve on the southern continent, collecting the Masamune Hilt and the Hero's Medal. It doesn't take long to figure out where to go, but it rewards the player for doing stuff other than fighting monsters and equipping new armor. You will also end up walking in and out of Frog's hovel in the forest multiple times - the player is rewarded here for weaving between the enemies and can potentially get through the whole zone without a battle with some practice. This is actually the first time in the game that dodging the same room full of enemies is something you learn over multiple attempts; there are avoidable enemies in earlier repeatable zones, but they don't move, you can just walk around them.

Denadoro Mountain: New concepts introduced: Enemies that undergo major changes after being hit with specific elements. Enemies that attack you outside of battle. Enemies that summon more enemies if left alive. The boss is really boring, sadly; all it does is a countdown attack, and it's not the first boss to do one, and you don't actually have any defensive skills so I don't know why Chrono Trigger has countdown attacks at all.

Forest Maze: Heading to 65 Million BC gives you a new party member who works very differently from your other four. She doesn't use weapons, she has a totally new set of abilities, and once you gain a few levels she can steal from enemies (which will happen about halfway through the dungeon). The second half of this dungeon is very unique in how it's explored (you have to let monsters dig holes, and then fall down them). The way dinosaurs respond to lightning attacks is also a new mechanic here. Aside from that, you're also suddenly locked out of time travel for the first time since 2300 AD, and you're given a new type of optional dungeon where you can collect items to trade for gear. Tons of new ideas in this section.

Magus's Castle: A party member returns, far more powerful than when he left. He quickly learns several new skills as well, and is forced onto your team. However, the main thing that's notable about Magus's Castle is the variety of enemy strategies - there are like fifteen or twenty brand new strategies used by enemies in this dungeon, both in and out of battle, and you have to figure them all out. There are a bunch of traps throughout the castle, set by Ozzie. It's also got four different bosses, and the last one is an extremely climactic boss battle, one of the most memorable battles in any video game. This is all very good, because this is a ridiculously, absurdly long dungeon.

Dactyl Nest: After Magus's Castle the game gives you a breather. You get to walk around a familiar area and talk to people you've met before. The next dungeon is also very short and very simple. There are no branching paths, it's just one straight line from start to finish, and the enemies are very simple. There's no boss, either. This sounds boring, but after Magus's Castle, it's exactly what the player wants. Sometimes you have to give the player a break. You probably don't even remember this dungeon, because you were still winding down from defeating Magus.

Tyrano Fort: The game briefly gives the player the ability to fly, but it's a trick. You can only fly one place you haven't been before. The game then does something that is a little exasperating: it gives you another humongous dungeon, and this time it's kind of a maze. And this one is a lot less interesting than Magus's Castle - there are no guillotine conveyor-belt traps, and only a few types of enemies. The enemies are utterly uninteresting and very repetitive. No new concepts are introduced at all, except that Ayla is forced back onto your team. There are only two bosses, and one of them is just a stronger version of a boss you've fought before. You can kind of tell that the game designers were as exhausted from Magus's Castle as the player was. By the end of this dungeon, the player is totally and completely exhausted with dungeons, and is ready to turn the game off as soon as the next one starts.

12000 BC: The player heads to a new era, and visits an icy town. Then he gets on a warp pad and goes to a flying continent, where he can explore another town full of interesting plot. And then another town. And then another town. There are a bunch of cut scenes in each one, and a bunch of hidden stuff to find, and at the end are some pretty neat cut scenes. You fight only one battle in the entire era... and you're allowed, but not required, to lose it. And then at the end of it all, probably over an hour later if you've never played the game before, the player is sent back to the End of Time. And starts sidequesting through time. This isn't accidental. This is a very meaningful shift from the chain of megadungeons that the player's just been subjected to, and it works beautifully.

The Epoch: On the way to getting the time machine, the player gets to roflstomp the 2300 AD Sewers, which are a solid 20 levels below him by this point. It's hilariously easy, and possibly empty if you beat it earlier in the game. Then you get the Epoch and can warp freely to any time period. Tons of exploration is unlocked. The player eventually heads back to 12000 AD, having STILL not entered a real dungeon, or even fought a single real battle, since the Tyrano Fort.

Mt. Woe: First, a short interlude in the caves against a few enemies and a miniboss. It's only three battles plus a boss; just right to ease the player back in. Then, immediately afterwards, another proper dungeon. We're pretty far into the game to be introducing new major battle concepts, but they keep showing up anyway. Enemies here give several times more tech points than earlier enemies, and if you've used one party for most of the game, your party will come very close to learning every single available skill. The high level skills that start to unlock at this point have new targeting methods, giving the player far more combat options. These replace the boring Element2 magic spells that just hit all enemies. This is also around the time when the player will get his first triple techs. Enemies here also use a couple new strategies: confuse status, and battles that give huge rewards if you win fast enough. These are only two things, but but they both massively change how the player fights.

Ocean Palace: The enemies in Ocean Palace use a huge variety of new complex strategies, including dual techs, elemental shields, element-matching counterattacks, guarding each-other, stealing HP from each-other, and more. This dungeon nevertheless drags on a bit, mostly because the enemies don't give as good of rewards as the ones in the previous dungeon. The player is anxious to get through, which is unfortunate, considering what happens at the end

Death Peak: The enemies in Death Peak aren't terribly noteworthy - they use tricks the player has seen before like Demi and timed counterattacks. They're far better at these tricks than earlier enemies were, though, so the player really has to respond correctly and can't just bumble through it as easily. The main difference here is the removal of the main character from the team, for the first time in the game. This alone is a massive paradigm shift that singlehandedly freshens up battles.

Sidequests: The end game sidequests in Chrono Trigger are so well done that I would be here the rest of my life if I started talking about them. Suffice to say that the game creates a sort of puzzle of deciding what order to do things in, and that the way this part of the game builds on what happened earlier in the game creates some very satisfying gameplay moments. A lot of loose plot threads come together here, but in the same way, so do a lot of loose gameplay threads. You get to use characters you had been ignoring, you get to open sealed chests and doors you saw 20 hours ago, you finally get to enter one of those damn blue pyramids, and so forth. It all feels very good.

Black Omen: Chrono Trigger does its final dungeon right, but so does almost every RPG, honestly. If you can't make a final dungeon feel interesting, you're a terrible person and should punch yourself until you get a concussion. At this point you don't need new concepts. You don't need any more paradigm shifts. The only things the player is unlocking here are things he would have unlocked earlier if he'd played differently - like unlocking Robo's final abilities here because he only used Robo in three dungeons before this. The game is testing for mastery.
As people have said, it's very easy to make something long and enjoyable, but also long and boring. My game right now, at 50% completion, stands around 30-40 gameplay hours, give or take a few depending on how the player plays. Is it boring? I dunno, I haven't heard anyone complain about the story being boring per say (confusing a bit maybe, but that's part of the charm of the game and for the story in general). It depends on how the pacing's done in the game and whatnot.

Of course, this is subjective and varies from person to person. A game like Final Fantasy XII where you can easily hit 100 hours from doing everything can be entertaining to some, but just drag on for others. But that's just an example. I honestly don't know how many RPG Maker games even go past 10 hours (mostly because who wants to make a 60 hour game? ;>_> <_<; ).
edchuy
You the practice of self-promotion
1624
author=LockeZ
I know, unheard of for LockeZ to not have an opinion on something! LockeZ overanalyzes the pacing of Chrono Trigger's gameplay with such a ridiculous amount of detail that he has to use a hide tag:


I love it when people talk about themselves in third person (edchuy thinks you're a weird one, LZ!). I got that temptation of my system ... ;P
The thread title implies that game length is usually a good thing, but I would disagree. The shorter and simpler the game, the better it can get.

Of course this is not considering money, because if I pay $50 for a game and then it's only 60 seconds long, I'd feel ripped off no matter how deep its message is.

Generally for RPGs I think my absolute limit is 30 hours. If the game is longer than 30 hours the chance that I'll never finish it is over 90%, no matter how good it is, because it simply gets boring. And with most RPG Maker games I can't even stand playing them for more than 4-5 hours because they are often not something completely new. Of course there are totally unique RPG Maker games where this doesn't apply, but I can't imagine any way to make a game interesting for more than 30 hours ever.
unity
You're magical to me.
12540
author=LockeZ
LockeZ overanalyzes the pacing of Chrono Trigger's gameplay with such a ridiculous amount of detail that he has to use a hide tag:


Whoa. That was incredible. That analysis explained a lot of my feelings on the game that I felt only on a gut level rather than a mental one (For example, why Magus's Castle is more interesting and less tedious than Tyrano Fort, which just goes on forever). Thanks a lot for that!

Also, it puts me in mind of two things: 1) My enemies need more tricks to keep surprising the players, especially around mid-game. I may need to look into some new scripts to allow them to do more interesting things.

2) My game's very linear until the biggest dungeon, after which it opens up a little more for exploration. The example of CT's megadungeons leading to the Epoch makes me feel better about that.

author=pianotm
If you've got a long game. Even the most innocuous problem can stick out like a sore thumb and put a player off the game. It's easy to write to much. It's hard to make sure everything in a giant manuscript flows smoothly.

So, I don't think it's possible to make a game too long. I DO think it's possible to make a game too unmanageable.


Makes me wish I'd gone with a shorter game this time, as I still have a lot to learn about making the experience smooth and problem-free. I've put years into this game and polished it a lot, though, so I'd like to see it through even though I've learned a lot about what to do and what not to do through it.

For the record, it's not my first game or anything, I've done two quite lengthy RPG 2000 games that shall never see the light of day because I don't think they're good enough. But it has taught me a lot about how I could make a better RPG. ...I wonder if every RPG I make will do that...

author=yuna21
Most people who boast about having 30-40 hours of gameplay normally equals 25% Story and 75% filler for the most part. :\ For me, at least. 20 hours is more or less manageable, depending on the kind of game you're going for. But even that is hard to achieve. I suppose if you were to divide your game up into 20 one hour long 'chapters' ( like I'm doing for Lady of the Lion ), it becomes a lot more doable.


I'm trying to get a good balance between Story and Non-Story as well (though from what I've played of Lady of the Lion, I think you've got me beat on the story to non-story ratio ^_^ ). My story is very character-driven, and part of the reason for its length is to really feel like the characters get to know each other.

author=RyaReisender
The thread title implies that game length is usually a good thing, but I would disagree. The shorter and simpler the game, the better it can get.


I used to feel like an RPG needed at least some length to be good, but that's before I started getting in to some of the games on this site, which quickly taught me that you can have a fine RPG that's relatively very short. That doesn't mean I don't also crave a meaty multi-hour RPG every once and a while (I played DQ3 recently just because of such a craving).
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=unity
I used to feel like an RPG needed at least some length to be good, but that's before I started getting in to some of the games on this site, which quickly taught me that you can have a fine RPG that's relatively very short. That doesn't mean I don't also crave a meaty multi-hour RPG every once and a while (I played DQ3 recently just because of such a craving).
Commercial RPGs have to be longer than most other genres of commercial games because they have little replay value and no multiplayer. Commercial games of any genre are expected to give the player a certain amount of play time for their price tags, but for most other genres that play time doesn't happen in the campaign mode. Just something to think about when you start equating RPGs with length - understand the reason why that's become a tradition. It's not because the length is needed for the sake of the story.

However, players will not understand this, they just know that RPG = long game, and are probably looking for games that remind them of other games they enjoy, which are also RPGs. So they'll very possibly feel off-put if the game fails to meet their expectations.
Pages: first 12 next last