Poll: Big ideas - small games...

[Max_A_Buck]

Hey there Escapists. I just wanted to run an idea by you, to gauge interest and learn what people out there want.

Long story short here is that I love games. The thing is, I feel sometimes they outstay their welcome. Like some games I've played for 20+ hours could have been better if they didn't take so long. I think of it while I'm taking ages to travel somewhere or grinding to level up, save money, etc. I just think back to how awesome Portal was. Sure, it took me all of 2 sessions to finish but damn I enjoyed myself. I even enjoyed Kane & Lynch 2, believe it or not.

My idea is simple. I'm moving soon (within Australia) and hope to work quite a lot (hopefully within the gaming industry) and save up some cash. I'd love to find some indie developer(s) who needs support with funding and give them the support they need and deserve. The catch is, I'd want the games to be short. Not a few hours or anything stupid like that but somewhere in the 8-15 hour mark. They, of course, would be cheaper than the big titles coming out so as to compete and give the gamer some decent value.

So I was just wondering, what are your thoughts on this idea? Is it crazy? Will it work, in your opinion? Is there anything you'd do slightly differently? This has been on my mind for a while now and I'd love to hear what you all have to say about it. Cheers!

 

[Traun]

Sounds like a bad financial investment. Truth be told the large portion of indi games aren't making a lot of money, they make enough to support their developers, but not enough to justify an investment.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Ha, most triple A titles out nowadays are shorter than 8-15 hours.

 

[shiaramoon]

Depends on the game. Sometimes I like a game that will take me 15 or more sessions (each session a couple of hours) to beat, sometimes I like something quicker. In the end though, whether or not I get a game depends on how fun the game is and whether or not I'm enjoying myself while playing. If it's something like a puzzle game, I like a ton of puzzles. I loved Portal, but I finished it in two hours. I would have loved to be able keep playing new and challenging maps, even if there wasn't necessarily a story to go with it. For the most part, I tend to prefer longer games because I get to spend more time with them and get more enjoyment out of it.

 

[s0p0g]

yes! if it looks and sounds good (=interesting), why not? if it's good, play it, if not, don't; also, indie titles focus more on the game (mechanics) than big titles (which seem to be more about the hype, often)

but just buying sth. because it's cheap is... well, cheap. i guess.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Super Meat Boy at $15 has far more depth, and has entertained me for more hours, than nearly any $60 "Triple-A" title (do note the quotes). So yeah, I'll gladly go with an indie title at a lower price.

 

[Scabadus]

Um... you know that 8-15 hours is actually more than most of the AAA titles released recently? I'm hoping that MAss Effect 3 and Skyrim can save the year, but... yeah.

I'll pick up on one other sentance in the OP though: "outstaying their welcome". A game doesn't have to be short to avoid becoming boring, it just has to be interesting from start to finish. Unique missions, dialouges, objectives and enemies. If it's a fighting game, interesting bosses. A story that's well paced and genuinly engaging. Not every game has to have all of these, but every game should consider all of them. Being short's an easy way to acomplish this, but being good is a much better way.

Multiple choices also help, and can be built into a story easier than you might think, this can easily open up a game to a second interesting playthrough to experiance new dialouge from the player's differing choices.

But I've said enough for now: yes I would buy a small game over a big budget title if it was better value. Price, entertainment and length are all relative to each other, if the indy game's as good at balancing them all out, there's no reason not to buy it.

 

[David Bray]

I dunno if indie's the right word for me. I don't want some crappy £2 production value game for £5 made by some guy in his basement reminsicing over Pacman, however, if you mean games with a close knit development team of smaller size and value like Castle Crashers, Limbo, or Torchlight, then yes.

 

[Max_A_Buck]

Great to see so much feedback already.

As far as being a bad investment, I'm not really thinking of making millions. I really just want to keep enough to keep going and helping out smaller devs with amazing ideas. That and to give back to the gaming community.

I totally agree that a games length doesn't always directly compare with the quality. Of course, I'd be doing my best to look for great ideas and so forth. I'd love to be in such a position that I could see the ideas being thrown around, worlds and mechanics being created, etc.

An example of what I was getting at, and people will likely disagree with me on this, is Red Dead Redemption. I think all in all I played for 25 hours or so. Of that time, I'm seemed to spend a lot of the time just riding from one place to another. While I understand that some people might love that because it gives them the chance to admire the scenery and it gives room for the devs to add side quests in random locations between missions, I just got really bored riding around so much. I still rather liked the game all in all, however.

 

[Hiphophippo]

I've probably gotten more enjoyment, in strict time, out of very low development cost indie games than most AAA games lately. And half of them are free, hell I'd pay good money for Desktop Dungeon.

 

[veloper]

I don't even care about length anymore.
Rarely have the time to finish long games and when there's alot of filler padding the game, I just get bored with it once I've figured out the better moves and strategies.

Gimme short and cheap, aslong as what is there is good. I'll simply buy more games and get more variety.

 

[leedwashere]

For my part I think of video games a lot like books, I like them to be really long and take me a good while to finish. I like getting absorbed in the story for as long as I can and then feeling wistful when its over. So... yeah. Longer the better for me, but only if it has an engaging story. I loved the heck outta both Fallout 3/New Vegas and Mass Effect 2, though Oblivion and Dragon Age never captured me. When I play a short game though it feels more like I killed time than anything.

 

[Max_A_Buck]

Again, thanks for all the quality discussion. It will be infinitely helpful if/when this idea ever gets off the ground. I'll try to add some kind of nod to the Escapist community.

I've seen in more recent times the rising popularity of indie games. So here's hoping that trend continues.

That's another thing that pointed me in this direction. I don't have a lot of time to grind and I'm hearing you on the filler point. I hope you'll be playing a game I had some part in soon.

I loved Fallout 3 and New Vegas as well. I, too, have struggled to get into Oblivion and Mass Effect. I'm not sure what it is about those games but I didn't really feel compelled to finish them. However, I've been getting right into Dragon Age lately, which is weird. It seems to have a decent story that isn't utterly generic and predictable. So I think that's what's drawn me in.