Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: JAB <noway@nochance.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Subject: Re: Oh, Randy (Borderlands 4 edition)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 08:12:41 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <1011498$1sn9n$2@dont-email.me>
References: <1f5q2klhv6dkvp8run8f29lpbkqtbs3thi@4ax.com>
 <dor03kpuf5dtieg104r6k6ll89orbjk2vl@4ax.com>
 <l4013k9d2cvq4c9ulg4sa2fk90g78hum2j@4ax.com>
 <sj613klqjq6c3megf1g5ocgne93gf8q05f@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 09:12:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="abb3bac36d860a9ea6bb33d0e582be2a";
	logging-data="1989943"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+fJHei1bepxAx2Wf8yoWkp"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mQsTkHKva/OS6OMluzvy+TKRSHA=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <sj613klqjq6c3megf1g5ocgne93gf8q05f@4ax.com>

On 23/05/2025 17:17, Zaghadka wrote:
> Procedurally generated open world grinds have 30 hours of real gameplay,
> IMO. Elite: Dangerous for instance. Or TES. Some people get unlimited
> play out of that, I get about 30-40 hours and then I'm bored. Often to
> the exclusion of the story quest. Which is plenty. But it's not because
> the game is actually full of content. Skyrim's map is pretty tiny, for
> instance, and E:Dangerous is 90% empty space.
> 
I spent many enjoyable hours in FO:3/NV and Skyrim just exploring the 
different stories. I think it works, for me at least, as it doesn't feel 
as though you're grinding but instead every gameplay session you 
discover something new and make what feels like progress.

> Civ, otoh, I play and play and play. I have over a thousand hours in Civ
> V (with considerable help from my wife). I have 100 in Civ VI, on my own.
> I never counted the hours in earlier versions. But that's a different
> experience. You can get a lot of mileage out of something like "Monopoly"
> or "Parcheesi." A game where your approach to random starts is more
> important than actual content gives many hours to the player. It's like
> you're procedurally generating the game yourself.
> 
> So "large" games are mostly a gimmick to me. Nobody puts the actual time
> in. I was shocked at the 15 hour, story driven single-player FPS when it
> first happened, but it really is the sweet spot, as demonstrated by the
> original Half Life. FarCry is not the sweet spot, unless you really like
> ambushing things over and over again only to have them respawn.
> 
The sweet spot for me is anywhere between 10-25hrs depending on what 
type of game it is with action type games being at the lower end and 
story driven games at the higher end.

The tipping point is when I realise I'm no longer really enjoying the 
game so I'm now playing it just to complete it. If the game doesn't have 
a strong story then I'd probably just give up at that point.

> If I get 60+ hours out of a game, it's probably due to interesting play,
> not the size of the content, and very few games truly provide the content
> to begin with.
> 
That's the problem I have with the longer games. They mostly feel like 
they've been padded out just because the dev's think that they need to 
do that otherwise people will complain about value for money. It was one 
of the complaints about the Outer Worlds as you might typically spend a 
'mere' 25hrs to complete it. For me it was almost perfect as I felt I'd 
seen all the game had to offer including the ending.