Do We All Want Longer and More Difficult Games?

[Rob Williams]

Which would you rather, playing a game that was developed in the year 2000, or 2010? I think most would say the latter, and for obvious reasons. In the year 2000, our 3D graphics were rather primitive compared to what we see today (even so, our minds were blown back then), so as long as the gameplay lives up, then why not opt for better graphics?

​

You can read the rest of our post here.

 

[cloud8521]

make it long, and variably hard. i cant stand short, makes me want more!

and the best thing about long is if you dont finish thats your fault and the game probably was not one you actually liked anyway

 

[Doomsday]

this is why i only SPEND on games i know i'm gonna play till its dry!

Mass Effect 2: takes 25hrs to complete. i have ended it 4 times! totally worth it!

Dragon Age: Origin >> Depends on u, the game can go on for 100hrs with all the side quests n optional missions. I ended it in 30hrs with some side quests. I have ended it twice. and its Expansion, Dragon Age Awakening once! totally worth it!

Dawn of War II and its expansion Chaos Rising. I have ended DOW II 5 times, 4 times the expansion! totally worth it!

 

[looisboo]

Yea i want longer and the hardest game ever..I bought nfs carbon from ebay for ps2 and i really liked that game because it was more harder then nfs 2 and midnight club 3 but my little sister scarathced the dvd and now it won't work... I burned it and broke it in 2 pieaces and tossed it out the balcony ... And this is what i do to games that don't want to work

 

[eunoia]

I'd prefer a game that was developed in the 80's. For all their limitations, it was the heyday of gameplay. Sure, modern games have vastly improved graphics, but most have about as much creativity and originality as Hollywood movies.

Longer? More difficult? Tough question. There are any number of hokey tricks game designers can use to make a game longer and more difficult, many of which don't make for a better gaming experience. The only thing that counts is "adrenalin time", all the time you have to spend going back to the hotel to save progress, or warping back to Cygnus X-1 to retrieve the gnome beard extract you forgot to pick up...screw that, life's too short.

 

[Kougar]

I's say 2000.... don't know why, but all the games back then were much more fun and replayability lasted forever with some of them (granted it was multiplayer, but still). Starfleet Command 2 players will know what I was talking about...

Originality, creativity, even decent basics seem to be missing from most of today's games. It's just a repackage of previous themes into new graphics, or borrowing an old title for a quick, cheap remake to turn some bucks.

I definitely prefer longer games... this is something I loved about the original Half Life. It wasn't a quick and simple 8 hours to save the world, it allowed the player to really get into the game and enjoy it. I can say the same thing about Tie Fighter... the collector's edition had enough missions to require the game be played over the course of several days to a week or two.

I don't mind short games, but I won't pay full price for one, let alone almost full price. I'm not buying a game for the graphics or (typically thin) storyline / plot, I'm buying it for the fun and experience. The graphics can be outdated, but as long as the multiplayer is fun and I have friends to play with the game can last years.