Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
I never understood the logic of "don't buy this game, you can beat it in 20 hours".
.
|
it was reflective of the amount of time and money dumped into the game. part of the whole flawed movement of trying to make games on par with movies. if a publisher dumped tens of millions of dollars into a product it was considered necessary to be thoroughly satisfying to the point of being thoroughly sick of the game by the time you beat it. at the same time though, if you're only starting to really get into a game and then the end credits start rolling it's pretty effing disappointing, especially when there are similarly priced games that offer similar gameplay and much more fulfilling content.
at this point it's always going to be a criteria for major AAA titles, then again they're attempting to create 'immersive experiences' more than games to be played. on the other hand it's not like the whole indie game movement that's been gaining steam for the last few years hasn't been going back to the style of games meant to be played and beat within a sitting or two.
and welcome back