Over the weekend, the Internet was once again buzzing with something related to video games. Pause to properly resume (but perhaps unintentionally advertise) NFT nonsense, it’s your turn Dying Light 2 to feel the flames of indignation. The game’s social account made a statement that the sequel to the zombie parkour survival in the open world it will take 500 hours (about 3 weeks) to complete. Boom. It was an outrage.
There has long been a kind of disconnect between game media types (that’s me) and consumers (you, unless you’re a game media type attracted to this through stupid tweets). my idiot) in terms of video game length. As someone who plays them for a living, a game that is – quite honestly – longer than five hours can be a source of stress. Most game media types who need to play games before writing about them will need to find these hours, somewhere. Where? Most likely in the evening, when the family is asleep, when you should be, and when you are not getting paid.
It’s a video game, right? Fun. Not working. Everyone wants to have this kind of job. I’m being confrontational to emphasize the point, but even hobbies and fun activities can start to appreciate when you’ve hit a deadline and need to defeat your enemies in 15 hours, knowing full well that only have 12 hours of maintainable “work” time.
However, I’m a big, broad professional as they’re often one of my favorite games. And frankly, they often translate into player interest and therefore website traffic, and my personal success in my business. I’ve played through The Witcher 3 and God of War in recent years as a fan, not as some sort of game vehicle. I can understand why consumers care about the length of the game: when you buy something, you want to get value for your money. I just think Dying Light 2 trying to associate game length with quality and that just can’t happen.
The Witcher 3 is the perfect example of a game that can take an exceptionally long time to fully complete, but doesn’t appreciate this attribute. It’s loved by many for its excellent side quests and optional content – in fact, some of the game’s best moments don’t come from the main story. Back in my childhood, GoldenEye on the N64 was known for its incredible multiplayer, but its amazing layered difficulty modes let players invest countless more hours into the campaign if they wanted to. . It is not a filler. Completing every level on Agent 00 is a rite of passage into an exciting (read: uncool) club.
The problem with Dying Light 2 is that 500 hours is currently just a number. It makes no sense. Do I want to spend 500 hours to finish it? Can’t say at this point. If the game is great and the side objectives are varied and interesting, then sure, I probably would. But selling a game on a single number makes no sense to me, nor does it make sense to you. Quality comes first.
As a kid, I spent what I now consider a luxury time playing Resident Evil games on PS1. These weren’t long games, at least not by modern standards, but I had to replay them 5 to 10 times each. As a number on a tweet, no Resident Evil game has impressed, but I got value from my scripted and saved purchases, that’s for sure. More importantly, I had a great time with some landmark games.
I got into the pitch game with my own hilarious tweet, but I really don’t object to how long the game lasts or people want the game to provide valuable daily content. But let’s not judge the value of a game on an arbitrary number that could have also been derived from the ether.
https://www.vg247.com/game-length-does-matter-but-its-right-to-be-skeptical-about-grand-boasts Game length doesn’t matter, but you’re right to be suspicious of big brags