Board 8 > As you get older, do you tend to look for games with shorter playtimes?

(+) Yeah! (+)

A friend recommended the critically acclaimed FF XIV to me but hearing that the main story takes 300 hours... I'm sorry, I sometimes had to force close Candy Crush Saga if the session takes too much of my time, not sure I have the willpower for games that long anymore.

I've always preferred games with lower playtimes in general. It's nice having a long game once awhile, especially if it's actually all quality and not busy work, but short is always the way to go for me. Makes sense since my favorite genre is survival horror and they always tend to be short.

I don't play story based games so my ideal game is something that I can (theoretically) play for infinite time without coming any closer to an "end". And in that respect the number of games which I've played for 200+ hours has only increased the older I get.

I don't necessarily look for shorter games, but they're definitely the ones I'm more likely to actually play after buying lol

More so than just total playtime, I prefer games that are easy to pick up and put down. There's no faster way to make me not want to play a game than to put hours between opportunities to save, for instance.

I'd prefer if games were shorter rather than longer. Too many games, especially of the open world variety, pad their length with monotonous side content. I've tried to get better about not doing all that shit but sometimes it's hard.

To put it another way, I see more value in playing 8 games that are 5 hours long than 1 game that's takes 40.

Having said that, I've played nothing but Elden Ring for the last month+ and I have no regrets.

Ultimately, I try to mix it up. If I play a long 40+ hour game, I'll then try to play a bunch of smaller games right after that.

-hotdogturtle-- posted...

I don't play story based games so my ideal game is something that I can (theoretically) play for infinite time without coming any closer to an "end". And in that respect the number of games which I've played for 200+ hours has only increased the older I get.

I'm the complete opposite lol. If a game doesn't have an ending, I'm generally not interested. It just stresses me out.

I probably should, but most of the games I really want to play are story driven. Then since I have less time to game in general, it ends up taking me like 4 months to beat Trails of Cold Steel IV.

I actually prefer longer games. If a game has a 6 hour or less average game time, it definitely bums me a little from the get go. 20+ is what my preference is, especially if it's for something I know I'm going to enjoy. I want to get to know the characters, the story, the music... everything. Anything less than 20 just feels too short for me. It might be because I'm pretty picky in terms of games and such so if I DO find something I want to play, I want it to last more than just a couple days.

playtime doesn't factor into what games I play

Not necessarily, but the longer a game is, the harder it is for it to hold my interest. A lot of the novelty of me playing games no longer exists, so it's a much shorter period of time between me starting a game and thinking "yeah, I think I've gotten all I'm gonna get out of this".

I still gravitate towards longish games, but then my favorite genre remains JRPGs, and it often comes with the territory.

Not particularly. I'm playing Elden Ring right now, and I'll probably hit 200 hours or more on that game.

I do play way fewer games in general, though. When I was younger, I wanted to play every game there was. Now I only play something if it really interests me. I haven't touched a turn-based RPG in ten years and I have no regrets.

I still play long games about as much, but I've found I'm far more critical of that length than I used to be. Like I'm totally down to drop 100+ hours on Elden Ring with zero complaints but if it's something like GTA5 or especially Ubisoft games where there's just a ton of padding and the scope isn't truly justified, I'm going to be much more harsh and likely to drop it.

Honestly I'm not convinced that shorter playtime is better for people who are older and busier. It may even be the other way around - sometimes I just don't have the energy to want to learn a new game and memorize new skills, map, systems, etc - so I'd rather stick to something I already know that can last for many hours.

I'd say it's less about the length and more about the difficulty. As I've gotten older, I've been less interested in hard games and more interested in easier ones, and less interested in action games and more interested in puzzle/narrative focused ones.

It's not something I've really considered, but looking at the last few games... I seem to be playing longer games more often these days

Nope, I prefer longer games, so long as the content is meaningful (ie not open world checklist-for-the-sake-of-it stuff).

I've spent 175 hours on Berseria, though that counts taking notes as I play and chatting with people so it's not like that means much.

It's still a JRPG. The only reason I don't play as many JRPGs is because there aren't as many ones coming out, at least not in English.

I play whatever I want to. Same as always.

I don't want my games to be long at all, but I like RPGs, so it's kinda rough

Opposite for me, cause when I was younger I spent more of my free time socializing, playing sports, etc. so I didn't have much time but now pretty much all I do on weekday evenings is play games

I still play plenty of long games, but I definitely see a game being short in a more positive light than when I was a kid

No, I don't think my preferences have ever changed

I like games with a lot of side content. I don't like it when games put too much repetitive gameplay in the way of the main story

In some ways, a game having a worse story can make it more bearable- I'm not eager to progress, and can just play for the combat when I'm in the mood

very much the opposite, i don't bother picking up a game that i'm not gonna spend at least 50 hours on

Nah, I still play mostly JRPGs that are pretty long. Or rhythm games that you can't really beat in the conventional sense.

I like to play something short and simple in between longer games sometimes, but I mostly just play what I feel like.

I like games that don't have to be long, but invite you to play for a long time if you so desire. Maybe that's through replayability, maybe through side content, maybe through other means.

I definitely prefer shorter experiences and multiplayer games, but I still play longer games (15+ hours). It just takes me having to talk myself into initiating the time commitment.

If you say yes to this poll, you really owe it to yourself to check out the First Five YouTube channel. Focuses on games that respect your time

Not necessarily, though I've noticed I've become less patient with games that don't actually need to be as long as they are, if that makes sense

Snake5555555555 posted...

I've always preferred games with lower playtimes in general. It's nice having a long game once awhile, especially if it's actually all quality and not busy work, but short is always the way to go for me.

This, Gaming experiences that are 8-12 hours are pretty much the perfect length.

i voted no, but i've never been someone who puts 200+ hours into a game.
60-80 hours would probs be my limit. A few games i've got 100+ with in the last 5-10 years but probs wouldn't need more than 2 hands to count them.

Thanks for sharing, folks.

Now that I think of it, I think my stance is most similar to Kenri's + LotM's. It's not that I avoid game with longer playtimes but it's easier for me to appreciate and pick up games with shorter play sessions.

I play a lot of big isometric WRPGs, and I've been wishing lately that there were more shorter options. There aren't any like 10-15 hour examples in the genre, which would be ideal for me.

No, that would compromise the quality of games I play. I just take longer to beat them now.

I get "fatigued" by games longer than 30 hours because I can only invest an hour into gaming per day.

Which means, if I start a 30-40 game, I have to commit to it for more than a month.

plasmabeam posted...

I get "fatigued" by games longer than 30 hours because I can only invest an hour into gaming per day.

Which means, if I start a 30-40 game, I have to commit to it for more than a month.

i don't get it, i'm the same way except i view it as i have to find another game within a month if it's short