4 ms·

Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? I don't buy many new games, but I'd have thought that there was a higher ask of a game than just

Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? I don't buy many new games, but I'd have thought that there was a higher ask of a game than just getting 90m out of it. I mean, I understand your point. My friend bought a used Mac once, and it had Sim-City on it. We hadn't seen it before and we fell into a black hole of playing it for 3 hours straight before someone accidentally kicked the plug. "Well, that's that!" and I can attest that none of us really went back to it. It certainly kept our interest for 3 hours though.

pawelduda 3y ago
Imagine going to a cinema and paying more for 90 min of movie and twice as much for popcorn/nachos. EDIT: forgot the 20 minutes of ads and trailers of other movies
p1necone 3y ago
> Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? It's not, it's just that there's a lot of very good sales and subscription services that firehose free games at you (humble bundle). So a lot of people have hundreds of games that they don't really need to extract any value from to get their moneys worth, so they only play most of them for a few minutes if at all, only putting real time into the few games that are really good. The games themselves don't only have 90 mins of playtime, it's just that most of the players have lots of games and not so much time to play them. There are short story-driven experiences, but even those generally last at least a few hours (the "walking simulator" genre - I'd recommend Firewatch as a good example of that type of game).
seba_dos1 3y ago
> Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? Why not? That sounds like a pretty sensible game length to me. I'd even say that within some genres stretching it longer only makes games worse. The current 2 hour refund policy is quite harmful for hand-crafted unique experiences created by small studios. These days nobody wants to finance short focused games. I wonder where the next Loom or Portal is supposed to come from in such environment.

pawelduda 3y ago

Imagine going to a cinema and paying more for 90 min of movie and twice as much for popcorn/nachos. EDIT: forgot the 20 minutes of ads and trailers of other movies

p1necone 3y ago

> Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? It's not, it's just that there's a lot of very good sales and subscription services that firehose free games at you (humble bundle). So a lot of people have hundreds of games that they don't really need to extract any value from to get their moneys worth, so they only play most of them for a few minutes if at all, only putting real time into the few games that are really good. The games themselves don't only have 90 mins of playtime, it's just that most of the players have lots of games and not so much time to play them. There are short story-driven experiences, but even those generally last at least a few hours (the "walking simulator" genre - I'd recommend Firewatch as a good example of that type of game).

seba_dos1 3y ago

> Is that the value proposition of modern games? 90m of content? Why not? That sounds like a pretty sensible game length to me. I'd even say that within some genres stretching it longer only makes games worse. The current 2 hour refund policy is quite harmful for hand-crafted unique experiences created by small studios. These days nobody wants to finance short focused games. I wonder where the next Loom or Portal is supposed to come from in such environment.