Speaking at the Game Education Summit in Dallas last week, Junction Point CEO Warren Spector discussed some of his disgruntled views of the industry, and that he's "so tired of making games about guys in black leather carrying guns," He also admitted that he believes long games are on the way out.

"Game costs are going to be $35-40 million, even $100 million, and the expectations are huge. You have to differentiate yourselves. One-hundred hour games are on the way out," he said.

"How many of you have finished GTA? Two percent, probably. If we're spending $100 million on a game, we want you to see the last level."

It's hard to disagree with him when you look at it objectively. With the average age of gamers rising, most of them are now adults with full time jobs and families to support, but they still maintain a healthy passion for playing games; the problem is finding enough time to play them.

In that case, what exactly is the solution?

Tags : Dallas : Game Education Summit : Junction Point : Long Games : pc : PlayStation 3 : RPG : rpgs : Warren Spector : Wii : Xbox 360

Comments

By: Evren

Video Game Chat Member Avatar

On: 11:23 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

Bollocks.
Pure ass.

How long have these business men you speak of have level 70 chars on WoW or something to that degree.

I'm happy to have 100 hour games, means I have something to look foward to, even it means taking a year to complete it.

By: Dragonfly

Video Game Chat Member Avatar

On: 11:27 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

Evren;51338

How long have these business men you speak of have level 70 chars on WoW or something to that degree.

Warren Spector is hardly just some "businessman". The guy's opinion holds a little more weight than some.

The advantage of a game like WoW is its bitesized approach, where you can take it at your own pace and log in and out whenever you want.

Not many games have that ease of access.

By: Dragonsoul

On: 11:49 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

I'm inclined to agree. I just don't have the same time to game now as when I did when I was younger. More hours don't necessarily make or break a game, and a game can definitely be good even if it's "short". Problem is finding a good balance between lack of content, and more content than strictly necessary. I wouldn't want to kill all the add-ons and side quests, but sometimes I just can't arse myself to play a game if it's gonna add on to another pile of the started-but-not-finished.

By: Evren

Video Game Chat Member Avatar

On: 12:44 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

Pah, Hardcore gamers.

I in fact, have more time now, than I ever have, and thats with college, I just have a different view on them.

Besides, I never said he was "some" business man. I was referring to other business men.

Just because someone hasn't finished GTA or whatever yet, doesnt mean they dont want a really long game to play.

By: MistaRob

On: 01:54 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

I'm going along the lines that his belief is that gamers should be able to play a game where it doesn't take the better part of a day just to get through the tutorial section.

As for game length, I'd say it depends. A game that can be beaten within a weekend, reasonable playtime wise, can get repetitive after a while.(explored every cave, found the hidden areas, etc.) while a game that's too long can have players who are trying to progress through the story/game lose interest cause it takes a dedicated amount of time to get from one part to the other.

That's my two cents at least.

By: ApplesauceNinja

Video Game Chat Member Avatar

On: 07:16 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

Actually, if games were capped at 30 hours, I'd have no problem with it.
I don't get involved with games that will take any longer because I personally
don't have the time or patience for games that take immense amounts of
time to complete.

I've had several twenty hour experiences that were satisfying enough for me.

By: Charlie

On: 07:59 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

I like the idea of the 100-hour games, but those 100-hours have to have holding power. I can play fable for like 100-hours because i want to play it over and over again to get all the different reactions and all the little things i missed the first time, try new things and new stratagies... but if i dont want to do that, i wont play it through once, let alone after that.

If a game is short, then i want some darn good sequals, or to feel like i did ALOT in those few hours of playing. If thats the case, like lets say... the old spyro games. it was about 6 hours of play for me to beat the story, but i felt accomplished like i had been playing longer afterwards.

thats my take on it. game developers can do what they want, make good games, long or short, and i'll buy.

By: Kelz

On: 11:48 Jun 17th, 2008
Offline

I'm one of those people who prefer the longer games.

I can sit there and get immersed in it, and the ending is far away, giving me more time to spend with the game.

Also, if he's bored of making games about guys in black leather with guns, then make something different for a change! :lol:

By: Laylia

On: 02:44 Jun 18th, 2008
Offline

Why can't they just continue making long games and short games...? Doesn't that make more sense? o.0

By: Evren

Video Game Chat Member Avatar

On: 02:25 Jun 19th, 2008
Offline

It would, But that would make sense. =O

I would LOVE games with a tutorial that isn't 4 hours long. *glares at KH2*