They don't bother me per se; I have always loved the value you get from a good JRPG. However, with my current life time constraints that I have in my mid 30s, I find it much more difficult to find the time to play them all the way through anymore. I watch my son, who is just getting into them and long for the days when I could just kick back and play for hours on end.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Do lenght in rpgs bother you?
- Thread starter Ganondorfo
- Start date
shrimpjive
Banned
That's a doozy of sentence.
Very much this, it can be intimidating to sit down in front of a game you know has 50+ hours of content. I always put it off
Terrible post.
If lenght bothers you why would you buy any Bethesda game? They're known for watering down their games to inflate the lenght. Not only that, they're bad.
FormallyFamicom
Member
They don't bother me, and I do like (not love) a lengthy game, but usually the better it is the more I overdo it. For example, with Baten Kaitos Origins, I loved that game so much that I attempted to do all of the sidequests, then got so tired of the game that I never finished it. I put 265 hours into The Last Remnant, but at least I finished it. 
Sentenza
Member
I love long games, as far as their length is matched by an appropriate amount of content.
As example, I could point Baldur's Gate 2 + Throne of Bhaal: almost 200 hours of goodness with virtually no time sinks or fillers.
And no, adding optional story arcs or slowing the pace here and there doesn't count as "dragging" in my book.
Also, I don't play games for the frenzy to reach their end, I play them cause I enjoy the journey... And if I'm not enjoying it anymore, than the problem isn't the length, but flaws in the overall design.
As example, I could point Baldur's Gate 2 + Throne of Bhaal: almost 200 hours of goodness with virtually no time sinks or fillers.
And no, adding optional story arcs or slowing the pace here and there doesn't count as "dragging" in my book.
Also, I don't play games for the frenzy to reach their end, I play them cause I enjoy the journey... And if I'm not enjoying it anymore, than the problem isn't the length, but flaws in the overall design.
Ideal length for me is a main quest that is 30-50 hours. I don't mind having a ton of optional stuff but if the main story goes on for longer than 50 hours I usually have to break it up with a completely different kind of game in between. Not that I would wish longer games to disappear altogether, of course.
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
Never used to, now it does. Mostly because I have less time in my life, and because I simply have a lot more games at one time.
Also I think years ago, games were coming out with new mechanics or twists all the time.
Unfortunately, it seems development is so streamlined, its hard to be "surprised" anymore. After 8-10 hours, I feel like I've already experienced what the game has to offer. If it's got a really compelling story, I'll stick it out. If not by that point, I just end up moving on.
Net net, I still buy them... but am I super intimated to open Xenoblade right now due to how long it takes? Yes. Yes I am. That's why Skyrim is still in its package, too. Maybe I'll do Amular next...
Also I think years ago, games were coming out with new mechanics or twists all the time.
Unfortunately, it seems development is so streamlined, its hard to be "surprised" anymore. After 8-10 hours, I feel like I've already experienced what the game has to offer. If it's got a really compelling story, I'll stick it out. If not by that point, I just end up moving on.
Net net, I still buy them... but am I super intimated to open Xenoblade right now due to how long it takes? Yes. Yes I am. That's why Skyrim is still in its package, too. Maybe I'll do Amular next...
In my youth it didn't, but now it does. I'd be fine if a game like Versus 13 was 15 hours long. As long as its not priced at $60
I also would like it if an option to respec your character was standard in every rpg. I hate wasting points on a skill I'll never use. Its the main reason I don't want to finish skyrim.
I also would like it if an option to respec your character was standard in every rpg. I hate wasting points on a skill I'll never use. Its the main reason I don't want to finish skyrim.
Fallout is an example of how I like long RPGs to be done: it's 100 hours of mostly optional content. If you want you can see the credits to that game in probably 10 hours. It's basically as long as you want it to be. Anything over 30 hours for a mandatory main quest starts to strain my patience though.
Charoncaori
Member
RPGs have always been too long for me personally, I almost never finish them.
I'm more likely to enjoy an RPG on my DS, like DQ9 or Pokemon. It's much easier to play in spurts.
I'm more likely to enjoy an RPG on my DS, like DQ9 or Pokemon. It's much easier to play in spurts.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
Length in RPGs is only a good thing as long as they give me stuff I enjoy doing during my time playing.
Yes, between work and life, if I get 1 or 2 hours a day on weekdays I'm doing well... I don't mind playing the same game for 80 hours though. I've basically only been playing Dark Souls recently, mostly because I can spend 100% of it playing and not have to sit through any NPC dialog or whatnot. I'm in the middle of FFXIII-2 and Tales of Graces and I just can't sit down to play them for this reason.
Arxisz
Member
This.
witchedwiz
Member
It depends really....
70+ hours persona is pretty enjoyable....
70+ hours persona is pretty enjoyable....
chickdigger802
Banned
Pretty much all Tales of games are 10-30 hours too long.
I still enjoy them for the most part.
Playing a bunch of rpgs back to back makes it easy to burn out.
Past few months I went from TWEWY to Tales of Graces to now Radiant Historia.
I'm liking RH, but a lot of rpgs... does make it tiring?
So taking a break from that stuff. Playing some racing games, sports games and shooters (Uncharted 3!) and what not.
I still enjoy them for the most part.
Playing a bunch of rpgs back to back makes it easy to burn out.
Past few months I went from TWEWY to Tales of Graces to now Radiant Historia.
I'm liking RH, but a lot of rpgs... does make it tiring?
So taking a break from that stuff. Playing some racing games, sports games and shooters (Uncharted 3!) and what not.
Impeccable
Member
I like 40-50 hours as the 'main story'. And like another 50 hours of stuff you can do after the main story, if the game is good enough then I'll want to play another 50.
Attackthebase
Member
Only when it's filler.
Captain_Spanky
Member
I think an RPG needs to feel epic and grandiose, length can play a part in that, but a significant difference between your prowess at the start and end can do just as well. Party members, spells, enemies fought, dungeons traversed etc.
Felix Lighter
Member
I'm kind of the opposite. I can't justify purchasing a game that I'll end up finishing in 5-8 hours and likely never go back to, for more than $10-$15.
When it comes to long games, I'll play a game as long as it's able to keep my interest. That can be 100+ hours in some cases. I'm not opposed to just stopping if a game becomes boring and losses it's draw. I'm also willing to drop all sidequests if they don't contribute to my enjoyment. I find a lot of gamers let themselves be burned out on a game or genre because they are completionist that can't stop what they started or they feel compelled to see every bit of content, no matter the quality.
When it comes to long games, I'll play a game as long as it's able to keep my interest. That can be 100+ hours in some cases. I'm not opposed to just stopping if a game becomes boring and losses it's draw. I'm also willing to drop all sidequests if they don't contribute to my enjoyment. I find a lot of gamers let themselves be burned out on a game or genre because they are completionist that can't stop what they started or they feel compelled to see every bit of content, no matter the quality.
Captain_Spanky
Member
Totally, I'd rather finish a game that's a bit short than leave a long one unconquered.
Good RPG examples:
The World Ends With You
Valkyria Chronicles
Vagrant Story.
I find RPG:s to be the worst when it comes to padding with drawn out dungeons and side quest that offer nothing to richen the experience except a few experience points and gold coins. But I guess the problem more comes down to RPG:s rarely having an interesting enough combat system to warrant as much combat as some of them have. Not interesting to me at least.
Only when its bullshit padding. I remember playing Tales of Symphonia and I kept thinking the game was over and then it would just, keep, going.
The whole PS1 era of RPGs ruined RPG length. It became some bullshit battle to have the longest game even if it meant your game was padded with crap.
The whole PS1 era of RPGs ruined RPG length. It became some bullshit battle to have the longest game even if it meant your game was padded with crap.
In the past I didn't have problems with lenghty games. Nowadays though? I love western open-world RPGs, but I'm always hesitant to start them, because I know that I won't have enough time to play them the way they are supposed to be played. I still play many JRPGs, but I think that many JRPGs are long just for the sake of being long. Many become dull in the last third.
If I really anticipate a release, I don't have a problem to waste much time with it, though. I played over a hundred hours of Xenoblade when it was released in Europe and I enjoyed every second of it.
If I really anticipate a release, I don't have a problem to waste much time with it, though. I played over a hundred hours of Xenoblade when it was released in Europe and I enjoyed every second of it.
skochtaype
Banned
I don't think I endorsed anything in particular in my "terrible" post. All I stated is that if someone is getting into an RPG and dreading a long game, the quality of said game not being the issue, they're gaming on the wrong side of the spectrum and should probably invest their time in something more their speed, perhaps whatever 5 hour "action cinema" game is currently being hyped by the industry for $60.00.
20-40 hour main quest with around that much in terms of sidequests is about my limit. Most JRPGs I play are about 60 all-in, give or take (e.g., DQ5 DS only took me 35 hours to near-100% it, and P3P took me about 75, and that was with rushing through the final arc because I was tired of it). Like others have said, if the content is there to keep things interesting, it can be as long as it wants.
Depends on the type.
A sandbox-y, 'immersion'-fest like Elder Scrolls benefit from having hours of mindless, repetitive content. It's not there to be all done, it's there to be could have been done. The seemingly-infinite amount of stuff to do makes the world seem easier to jump into. Same reason why the world is vast and at times uninteresting - because that is more naturalistic and immersive than an impressive vista or unique structure every five minutes.
For a story-led RPG? The shorter the better. I genuinely think 20 hours is the sweet spot. Chrono Trigger is one of the greatest story-driven RPGs ever made and is very short.
A sandbox-y, 'immersion'-fest like Elder Scrolls benefit from having hours of mindless, repetitive content. It's not there to be all done, it's there to be could have been done. The seemingly-infinite amount of stuff to do makes the world seem easier to jump into. Same reason why the world is vast and at times uninteresting - because that is more naturalistic and immersive than an impressive vista or unique structure every five minutes.
For a story-led RPG? The shorter the better. I genuinely think 20 hours is the sweet spot. Chrono Trigger is one of the greatest story-driven RPGs ever made and is very short.
Never did until these days where I'm just so fucking busy and don't have the time to play like I used to.
I wanted to finish Xenoblade before Diablo 3, but I'm only 35 hours into it and not even 1/3rd of the way done with the game just sticking to the main story. Sucks, because once D3 hits, I know I won't touch Xblade till like August or later.
I wanted to finish Xenoblade before Diablo 3, but I'm only 35 hours into it and not even 1/3rd of the way done with the game just sticking to the main story. Sucks, because once D3 hits, I know I won't touch Xblade till like August or later.
And all the generations before it. Seriously. I don't know how anyone can say that only the games in this generation are too short. Everyone can easily beat Super Mario 64 and Mishief Makers in under 4 hours, and several SNES games are also short.
Like the glorious SNES days eh?
Like some said it already, if they don't put in massive amounts of filler and padding, I don't mind it. I also don't have much time as I have to work, but I still play games that have a length of ~40-50 hours. It just takes longer to beat them. It took me 6 months to get 98 hours in Final Fantasy XII, but I enjoyed it completely throughout the whole time.
glaringradio
Member
As long as the length is justified by remaining interesting from start to finish, whilst always introducing things to keep you glued throughout the entire game.