The Jimquisition: The Old ‘How Long Should Games Be?’ Debate

While past episodes have touched on the subject, we’ve had a surprising lack of shows dedicated to discussing game length. That may be because it’s an ancient topic that never seems to have any sort of resolution.

Nevertheless, with The Order: 1886 sparking a fresh whirlwind of debate, I figured it was time to actually examine the arguments in play and figure out exactly how important a game’s length is when it comes to the value of a production.

Because it IS important. And it ISN’T.

Ambiguous64
Guest
Ambiguous64

I’ve got 130 games in my steam library, and at least 10 that I haven’t even opened yet. I seldom spend more than $15 for a game since I’m always on catchup. Watchdogs, AC Black Flag, Arkham asylum series, Diablo 3, Tomb Raider series, Hitman Absolution, Final fantasy err.. 14, and 14-2, and so many others all bought on a dime. And I wouldn’t spend more on them, or buy them if they weren’t cheap. I can so easily get by on the literally thousands of more interesting games out there that may have a few rough edges still, but… Read more »

Kris
Guest
Kris

Jim is spot on. Wolfenstein: The New Order was worth every penny and then some while Far Cry 4 felt like it should have been a $20 expansion for Far Cry 3. Same guns, same vehicles (congrats you added a couple here), reused tired ideas like tower climbs. Seriously, stop with the fucking towers. These two games differ wildly in how long they are and I have finished Wolfenstein a several times while I struggled to stay awake to finish Far Cry 4 (still haven’t).

Sweet Roy the Candy Boy
Guest
Sweet Roy the Candy Boy

He can go as long as he wants, he’s Jim Fucking Sterling, Son!