Short Games, Mini-Games – Who's To Blame?

[ssbb_lover]

Ahh, yes.

I was, just... erm... testing. Yes, that's it. Testing. To help convey the point of the article. And stuff.

Of you were testing. I can understand that a writer such as yourself, who writes with such deep creativity, tests things out every now and then. It's only your nature!

(In all seriousness, cheers for that - penance for me writing and then reading with my eyes closed. That'll learn me.)

Welcome.

[Ads]

[Leviathan]

This makes sense to a degree, however if the audience are panderig for shorter things then why are succesful movies like POTC 3 and LOTR 3 so long?

[cbrotherson]

This makes sense to a degree, however if the audience are panderig for shorter things then why are succesful movies like POTC 3 and LOTR 3 so long?

I actually had something addressing this in the rough draft of the article; I dropped it because I hoped it would be better inferred than stated (I trust you guys to read between my long ass lines ).

But the short answer is held in the sentence: "big established names and sequels always have a chance in this progressively more throwaway market" -that's to say, sequels (and adaptations) can take larger liberties with their built in audience. Easy enough to see, really. I'm not saying 100% of the audience is "pandering for shorter things" but it's certainly a growing majority, hence the point.

[LordArchantos]

Great article, as usual.

I think, that if people are to blame Nintendo & Wii for this, they should also blame Microsoft and Xbox's for it. After all, a large amount of games for them are "run from point a to point b via narrow path and kill everyone on the way"-FPS games that you blaze through in less than 10 hours. And their success suggests that people want to play games that you can run through to the end in the same day you buy the damn game. Also, FPS's originate from the PC, so maybe we should ultimately blame IBM too. And while we're at it, why not find someone to blame for games being easier and easier, too, every generation.

So all of you who blame Nintendo & Wii for this, look in to the damn mirror.

[Bizzar0]

wow, that true...
Thx for post

[ssbb_lover]

This makes sense to a degree, however if the audience are panderig for shorter things then why are succesful movies like POTC 3 and LOTR 3 so long?

Keep in mind that movies and video games are very different. This came up in another article of Corey's. While in video games, the person has full control of what happens next (obviously not full control, as you can't just automatically tell your character to fly even if he can't, but you get my point), meaning the ability to go through the game in 2 hours or 10 hours is very possible. This is opposite of when one is watching a movie. That person has absolutely no control on the length of the movie or what happens next. I'm sure this is more exciting.

Regardless of the distinction, 3 hours watching a movie isn't long, if it's too much under that it's way too short...

[David328ci]

casual gamers aka n00bs, short games that suck, fast paced / stupid society
are all fine HOWEVER

I still want good games that are actually worth playing.

[ssbb_lover]

Just thought about games like Legend of Zelda. One of the longest games, yet one of the most popular in the history of gaming...

[bigwilliiy]

i feel bad now................. I WANNA FINSIH SSBB........awww

[ciper]

Good article. One important thing missing are the ports. Everyone is still raving over RE:4 which at best is equal in graphic quality as the GC version with nothing new over the PS2 version both of which are two years old.

BTW I disagree.