Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games) Entertainment Games

Does Videogame Length Vary By Territory? 52

Posted by simoniker from the it's-how-you-use-it dept.
asphyxiation_query writes "I've been looking at the relative length of videogames (in terms of overall gameplay, how long the game stretches out from start to completion) based on region. Can Slashdot Games readers discern any obvious regional patterns or variations in this information? For example, are games from Korea typically longer than Japanese? How do European and North American titles stack up in this respect?" Or is content similarly long if part of the same genre, regardless of country of origin?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Does Videogame Length Vary By Territory? More

Does Videogame Length Vary By Territory?

Comments Filter:

  • Asia (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 28, 2003 @01:18PM (#7078684)
    Asian ones aren't shorter, that's a myth!!!

    Oh wait, games. Yeah, nevermind.
  • Game length depended on region? Well it all depends on the type of game and what you consider game length. Exactly when do puzzle games like tetris end? Flightsims do they end or do you simply upgrade to a new version and keep flying?

    How about Neverwinter Nights or morrowind (pc edition of course)?

    Multiplayer FPS and MMORPG's obviously last a different amount of time depending on the player not the game. People are still playing Counterstrike. Noone ever played motorcity online.

    I think this is one of the

    • RPG's (Score:2)

      by phorm ( 591458 )
      Multiplayer FPS and MMORPG's obviously last a different amount of time depending on the player not the game.

      Somewhat true, but you can gather information based on average and combing the outliers, as any region will have "low, nominal, high" players.

      This could also have decent bearing on standard RPG's, as for some reason many of the Square RPG's are bastardized when they come to the USA (FFIV J/FF2 USA, FFX USA in example), why modify the original gameplay - that's alway seemed silly to me (if they f

  • maybey not longer but more challenging (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sknja ( 196640 ) on Sunday September 28, 2003 @01:36PM (#7078828)
    For the most part ive noticed that Japanese games are quite a bit harder than the American counterpart. For example soul calibur 2 (GC). Many of the weapon mode challanges are quite a bit tougher with shorter times to beat stages, and harder battles than the equivalent american game. Not to mention an extra subchapter. Also Zelda TWW (kaze no takuto) is also quite a bit harder when trying to find the triforce shards. Im sure with enough though more could be thought of.
    • Also Zelda TWW (kaze no takuto) is also quite a bit harder when trying to find the triforce shards.

      That was changed in the American version because EVERYONE bitched about how tedious it was in the Japanese game. Take a look at any import review; they all say the game gets really tedious towards the end.

      The most glaring example is Super Mario Bros 2. It wasn't released here because it was considered too hard for American gamers. Instead we got Doki Doki Panic with Mario characters added in.
    • "For the most part ive noticed that Japanese games are quite a bit harder than the American counterpart."

      Tomonobu Itagaki, leader of Tecmo's Team Ninja, seems to disagree with you in the following quote from Gamespy's Tokyo Game Show coverage [gamespy.com]:

      In addition to expected tweaking, Itagaki is considering making the game more difficult. "I feel that Japanese gamers are a bunch of wimps. American gamers are more hardcore and I want to make it challenging for you guys," (emphasis mine) he said.

      My feeling is th

      • In addition to expected tweaking, Itagaki is considering making the game more difficult. "I feel that Japanese gamers are a bunch of wimps. American gamers are more hardcore and I want to make it challenging for you guys," (emphasis mine) he said.

        Itagaki isn't the only one saying this. Just look at any interview with anyone from the teams behind Devil May Cry, Shinobi, and other famously hard (or, in my eyes, "appropriately difficult") action games and you will hear the same thing. They get nothing but bi
        • The reason they don't put variable difficulty settings in certain games is simple: Money. They want to get the games out the door as fast as possible, and it takes extra time to balance out extra difficulty settings. I expect this is particularly important with "first sequels" as they want to ride the crest of the buzz wave of the original.

          Me, I hated Devil May Cry. But I found out later from friends that the reason I quit (the lava spider - normal difficulty) was, oddly, one of the really difficult bo

          • The reason they don't put variable difficulty settings in certain games is simple: Money. They want to get the games out the door as fast as possible, and it takes extra time to balance out extra difficulty settings. I expect this is particularly important with "first sequels" as they want to ride the crest of the buzz wave of the original.

            The problem with this is that I'm talking about games that already HAVE balanced difficulty settings. Devil May Cry and Shinobi both had fairly balanced Hard settings,

  • While we're on this red-hot topic: (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What's the best technique for picking the nose during an intense game session? Is it affected by the type of controller used, whether you're left- or right-handed, or even the genre of the game? This question has been bothering me for a long time, especially since I seem to be losing a lot to players with more accomplished picking techniques.

  • Stupid question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Kyouryuu ( 685884 ) on Sunday September 28, 2003 @01:47PM (#7078902) Homepage
    This seems like a stupid question because you're asking us to compare apples to oranges. Not all RPGs are created equal, just as with RTS, FPS, and all of the other genres. Does there even exist a popular game whose Japanese version was produced entirely in Japan and the US version entirely in the US?

    When someone speaks of a game genre where length matters, RPGs are the classic example. The US just isn't exactly known for producing the best RPG titles. But likewise, the US has produced many titles that offer greater length in terms of replayability. No one honestly expects a person to play through a Final Fantasy game ten times - but titles like Unreal Tournament and most PC games can be played again and again thanks to robust multiplayer components.

    But is that "length"? Again, you are faced with the original dilemma - you're comparing apples to oranges. Specifically, comparing a designer-created "length" to a player-created "length." I would assert this isn't a meaningful comparison.

  • Final Fantasy IV (Score:4, Insightful)

    by questionlp ( 58365 ) on Sunday September 28, 2003 @02:02PM (#7079030) Homepage
    I think the prime example would be the difference between the original Final Fantasy IV release and the American (and possibly the European as well) release of Final Fantasy II for the Super Nintendo. The original FF4 was a PITA of a game (as it was finally released in Final Fantasy Chronicles) and Squaresoft had to release an easy version of the game. The easy version was the one that was released outside of Japan.

    In a way, the harder version of FF4 was "longer" mostly due to the fact that you had to spend more time building up levels and earning Gil/GP in order to buy the expensive items. That doesn't include the fact that a lot of the enemies and bosses were even more difficult to defeat.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • The original Final Fantasy was very, very hard... even the PSX version of Final Fantasy in "Normal Mode" is a bit easier than the NES version. The NES version only gave you four slots per character for each weapons and armor rather than placing spare equipment in the items list. Although it didn't raise the difficultly level, the fact that you could not purchase multiples of items in shops was a huge annoyance.

        The two things in Final Fantasy that made it so difficult was that you were limited to 6-9 spell
        • Don't forget that the NES version of FF1 also had that little thing where your attacks weren't reassigned if you killed a particular enemy. Of course, you can set this behavior in the PSX version, but who would really want to (unless they're complete massochists)? The longer you played the game, the more likely you were to take this into account when you attacked a group of enemies, but it basically changes the way some people (such as myself) play, especially when you aren't sure how strong an enemy is com
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Final Fantasy 1 wasn't hard - it was just boring because mindless leveling up was essentially required. None of the bosses, not even Warmech, have enough HP to stand up against a party with an average level of 25. Towards the end, once you had your entire party decked out with pro-rings and other status-effect negating nonsense the game actually turned out to be pretty easy - it's just getting to that point that's a pain. And with the exception of the final temple, none of the levels really were that lar
    • The entire game was simplified. Almost every character lost one or more abilities (so that's how the dark knight was using that ability!)
  • FWIW, I thought this was kinda an interesting question, which is why I let it through, but your howls of derision are also appreciated - it can definitely be argued that games are only long or short depending on the genre, not the country of origin.

    One thing I've noticed, though, is that many Japanese games, especially action titles, give bonuses if you play through the game multiple times (such as Silent Hill, Resident Evil, etc.) This doesn't really seem to be the case quite so much with US or European
    • But, as someone above noted, you're comparing apples to oranges.

      Take your example: Action games. I'm going to simplify this a tad bit. Yes, Resident Evil unlocks different game modes if you beat the game on normal. But so does Timesplitters 2 (hard mode, plus new characters and stages), or Eternal Darkness (eternal mode, and the ability to get closer to the 'true ending'), for instance.

      Simmilarily, take another example: Racing games. It doesn't matter if I'm playing Burnout 2, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit
  • Video game length is something you can't really measure. It's the addiction level that counts. Take for instance Diablo II. The game is very old, yet quite a few continue playing it. And it has a huge following in Korea.
    Sure, there are short games. But IMHO it differs more from publisher to publisher than from region to region. Daggerfall was huge and published in the same year as D2. Yet I daresay that the people playing it never reached the numbers of D2. And it took a long time to play it properly. Str
  • To do your own homework.

  • Endless games (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bourbon Man ( 76846 )
    How long is Everquest, Ultima Online, etc? What do these "endless" games do to the graph?
  • There's many ways to make a game longer, let's just discuss the RPG genre. You could make a game "longer" by forcing the player to build levels in order to beat enemies, by making enemies strategically harder (building up doesn't necessarily hurt, but isn't a necessity, knowing enemy weakness and attack patterns are more important), or by adding more story and dungeons (at least some of which are completely optional). Dragon Warrior is long in the first way, Final Fantasy Tactics is long in the second, an
  • ...as people have pointed out it does depend on what type of game you are playing, or if you count from start to finnish, or by actual gameplay value.

    for exampel the arcade games flooding the market are all short, and should be. you are not going to stand there playing a game for 50+ hours at the arcade without stopping - so thats fairly logical.

    Now those games does not get really bigger for the console/PC - and the extras are often just poor addons to the coresystem. No a game like Ikargua takes 20-25

  • I think that it would be easy to say that play time varies by genre, at least in single player games. Then perhaps you could argue that certain genres are are more popular in certain countries.

    However, even this is flawed. How long is the single player portion of Tetris or Bejeweled or the Sims? has anyone "beat" those? Do they have an end?

    Of course there are many that do not really think about games like Tetris or Bejeweled when they think of videogames (not to even mention microsoft solitare but sin
  • It is more difficult to make the comparison than simoniker let's on. As other early commenters have pointed out, the issue of genres is key, since there is little method or point to measuring Baldur's Gate to Tetris. Similarly, regional differences have in some measure evolved into genre differences entirely. The distinction of "console RPG" versus "PC RPG" makes that clear, and in fact it is as pointless to cross those lines as to say Soul Calibur gives more good play time than Mario Party. Although ra
  • Really, a pointless question. So NWN took me about two months to complete, Freelancer took about 2 weeks, GTA3 took the best part of three months.

    Yeah, playing about the same amount per day.

    The thing is, these are all big, reasonably open games that still have a definite plot to follow and goals to accomplish. You can keep playing each one after you're finished and discover vast new parts of the game you didn't even notice first time around.

    That's the problem, because for me the subjective "length" of th
    • Oh, anyone know why a great FPS is more expensive than a good RPG, when the RPG content generally stretches further (for me at least) than the content of an FPS? No, me neither.

      In the US, it doesn't, unless it's Halo and they're stretching out the $50 price tag until the sequel is released.

      On the other hand, in the past, when cartridges were king of consoles and PC games were released on floppy disks, RPGs were more expensive because they needed more floppies or needed to store saved games on the cartrid

  • It's Not The Size, It's How You Play It (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Babbster ( 107076 ) <aaronbabb@NOspaM.gmail.com> on Sunday September 28, 2003 @09:31PM (#7081625) Homepage
    It's bothered me over the past several years that people focus so much on the length of video games. It's not like video games have suddenly gotten more expensive, making it more important to get the most bang for the buck. So the most important question to me is this: Why do we care how long it takes to complete a game? Further, is there a direct correlation between how long a game lasts and how much entertainment it provides?

    Many people, including myself, say that Panzer Dragoon Orta is an excellent game even though it can be completed in 10-14 hours (less? a little more?) apart from replays and extras. On the other hand, I played Saga Frontier long enough to figure out that I wished it was over after the first five minutes.

    I suppose that for people who have nothing to do all day but play games, such a measurement might be important, since they could run through several games per week. But for everyone else, what's the difference, really? In fact, I would argue that people with lives outside of video games should be pleased if they get one 40+-hour game per year. After all, it's not in the industry's best interest if someone can play Final Fantasy X for 4-6 months before needing another game.

    I'm probably going to invite jeers for saying this, but it bears repeating because it's fundamental: If you're having fun, it shouldn't matter if the video game is 10 hours or 100 hours. Unless the flavor goes out of the game in less than 10 hours of play (which would cause me to call it a bad game with length of play probably being at the bottom of a list of shortcomings), you're probably getting your money's worth as compared to going to movies or buying DVDs.

    • To me, the difference comes in cycles. I have cycles where I want to sit down and play a game that's going to take me 20-60 hours (of playing) to complete. In other cycles, I want to play a game that might take me 10-90 minutes to complete, or to get a reasonable amount of the game completed in. I sat down and played straight through Max Payne in about 8 hours (taking short breaks), knowing full well that it was a short game. I enjoyed it, but would've spread it out a great deal more if I hadn't known it wa
  • If you are speaking of RPGs, long can mean different things. Is the game long because of a random battles every six steps (Skies of Arcadia)? Is it long because of endless cutscenes (Xenosaga)? Or is it so freeform that you could spend a year doing everything and not be done (Morrowind)?

    Or is the game long because it has a lot to do, a great plot, great gameplay, (Crono Trigger, Baldur's Gate series, etc.)

    There are games on both sides of the pond that fit either case.

  • I think genre plays a bigger part, I mean I just completed Jedi Knight - Jedi Academy on its hardest difficulty setting in a week (I say a week, it was 1-3 hours or so after work a day), I mean that just sucks for length (great game though). While RTS games I play take months to complete on a normal difficulty. (or it could just be I suck at RTS and have L33t FPS skillz ;-)

    FPS games tend to be shorter in my experience while RPG is longer but RTYS seem to be the longest lived games I play (especially tose w
  • This discussion is based on the false assumption that a single game necessarily has a fixed (or variable within a reasonably tight range) "length".

    The length of a game is determined by how long the player chooses to play the game. An obvious statement, yes. But there are no clear-cut answers to the question posed.

    Japanese RPGs are talked about a lot. I played Final Fantasy VII for 30 hours. Some played it for 100. The range for a single game can be so huge that it's impossible for any sort of meaningful

Slashdot Top Deals

"jackpot: you may have an unneccessary change record" -- message from "diff"

Close