- Nov 10, 2020
- 45
- 100
I follow several game threads and one of the most common complaints is the "fans" accusing the developers of milking or dragging the game on without sex scenes or any substantial plot advancements.
Is it crazy to think that it would be possible to create a game that lasts 5 or 6 hours in total gameplay and tell the story?
Especially when it involves just a single developer. Games that have teams of people to code, do art work, and write the stories are not what I'm focused on.
It would seem to me if a developer was able to make a game that conveyed his story in 5 or 6 hours of gameplay (up to 10 hours) the game would have a better chance of being finished. In turn he could began a second game and a 3rd game and so on.
Then the developer would have a history of completed games and In my thinking would attract more people to support him or her.
I know a 5 to 10 hour game would still take a long time for a single developer to complete, but I feel the story would have to move quick enough to keep it fresh and keep people from accusing the developer of milking or dragging the story on for no other reason then to make the game longer then it needs to be to tell their story.
There are several people who like hours and hours of slow burn corruption etc...and that is fine, in fact depending on the game I like it too, so I'm obviously not saying every game needs to follow this formula.
Just thinking out loud here, curious if anyone agrees or disagrees. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Is it crazy to think that it would be possible to create a game that lasts 5 or 6 hours in total gameplay and tell the story?
Especially when it involves just a single developer. Games that have teams of people to code, do art work, and write the stories are not what I'm focused on.
It would seem to me if a developer was able to make a game that conveyed his story in 5 or 6 hours of gameplay (up to 10 hours) the game would have a better chance of being finished. In turn he could began a second game and a 3rd game and so on.
Then the developer would have a history of completed games and In my thinking would attract more people to support him or her.
I know a 5 to 10 hour game would still take a long time for a single developer to complete, but I feel the story would have to move quick enough to keep it fresh and keep people from accusing the developer of milking or dragging the story on for no other reason then to make the game longer then it needs to be to tell their story.
There are several people who like hours and hours of slow burn corruption etc...and that is fine, in fact depending on the game I like it too, so I'm obviously not saying every game needs to follow this formula.
Just thinking out loud here, curious if anyone agrees or disagrees. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.