/v/ - Video Games

>>16088938

>some questions I wanna ask /v/

are you implying you're not from here?

>>16088951

more like I wanna know the opinion of /v/.

Crazy Taxi is the perfect arcade game. Takes 5 minutes, can last 30 if you're good, great mechanics mean getting gud isn't a struggle. It's easy enough to play a round and not feel bad for being bad, but knowing you can do better. Everything should be up to the player's skill or decisions, including the time

Optimally a balance of the two is ideal.

>>16088938

>What's better:

<A single player long experience but with no replayability.

<A short game but extremelly replayable.

Why not both? Depending on how the game is designed, one would be more preferable than the other.

>Also, how do u define what's the perfect amount of time for an arcade title?

20 minutes max

>>16088938

>A single player long experience but with no replayability.

This one. I can replay them anyway if they're good. Arcade games just get boring fast.

>>16089029

>>16089032

It takes years of practice to master something like a fighting game.

>>16089051

>It takes years of practice to master

LOL

>>16089064

I've seen people who plays fighters since decades ago that can't do the most harder combos.

>5 minutes for tetris

Nigger which one? TGM? 150 Marathon 200 Marathon? A game with cascade enabled, the new one. Starting difficulty?

>>16089075

fighters aren't about big combos, stop playing gay anime fighters

>>16088938

>A single player long experience but with no replayability.

>A short game but extremelly replayable.

Depends on the game. I don't like to go to any extreme of the spectrum, but most people seem to prefer longer games, at least longer than an arcade game.

>Also, how do u define what's the perfect amount of time for an arcade title?

I don't get the question. Arcade titles can vary, and so can the time people play them. By the 15 minutes kof you probably mean arcade mode or first loop. If so, i would keep it short with 25-30 being the maximum.

Neither is better than the other. It depends on the game and how your time is spent in it. A 100+ hour long RPG can stay fun the whole time, or a 20 hour RPG can feel like it is dragging on forever. If a game is just long but with nothing enjoyable to keep you going then it would be better as a short game with some extra options for replaying. Similarly, if a game is shorter but doesn't offer much replayability it could be unsatisfying, making you wish it was just a longer game at least. Both have their places when done well.

The latter. Replayability is the most prominent property of good game design.

>40 minutes like metal slug

Only the first game is around that long if you're not playing for score. Most others are 50-60 minutes or even longer if you're trying for points.

I prefer my arcade experiences right around the ~30 minute mark, although there are some that are worth the endurance like Hellsinker. There is such a thing as a single-sitting game that's too long: Gradius III, Metal Slug 3, and especially Sin and Punishment 2 being a few examples.

>>16088938

It really depends on the genre but I think a smaller but much deeper and engaging game is better than having to play twenty hours of JRPG cutscenes and mashing.

Also multiplayer games are objectively better.

>>16088938

>A short game but extremelly replayable.

This one. Even if it's short, if you have fun replaying it then you will rack up more time with the shorter game in the long run.

But more importantly, a game that has no replayability is a game that is not fun to play in the first place. It might have some gimmick to hook you in, usually in the form of a story, but is the story really worth 40 hours of drudge? Or it might be a game that has good parts, but also shit parts intermixed that make you "oh no, I'll have to do that thing again" every time you want to replay it (like all the sailing and the triforce search in Wind Waker). If it's a PC there might be a mod to skip the crap, but otherwise it's not really worth the first playthrough either. If you really want to experience the gimmick just watch it on YouTube, at least there you can skip right to the good stuff.

>>16088963

This. My brother is playing Red Dead Redemption 2 right now, and for the first couple of hours the game is basically just a glorified collection of minigames strung together with cutscenes (and that's not even counting the five hours it took to install. On a fucking console). Oh sure, it might eventually let you do what you want, but in that time you could have beaten several games that are fun from the start.

>>16089115

What fuckin universe are you from where anime fighters dont have ToD combos like nobodies business

Both are great, but this is very subjective.

The long singleplayer experience has to be 4 hours or under though, unless the story is really fucking good.

>>16089051

>It takes years of practice to master something like a fighting game.

>years

It's just reflexes, concentration and intelligent guessing.

>>16089501

>A game with no replayability is one of those games that you only play for the story and don't touch again because there is nothing in there that makes it fun or challenging to go through again. Or similarly one of those ""puzzle"" games (More like quiz games) that once you know the solution you just type it in and go though.

I replay VNs though.

>>16089501

I have nothing to add to this thread I just want to say that image is insanely adorable.

I prefer to finish a game in one sitting. Anything over 5 hours is pushing it.

>>16088955

Instead of whom?

>>16089375

Limbo, Bioshock, Shovel Knight & Portal had little replayability but were good.

>>16089501

>A game with no replayability is one of those games that you only play for the story and don't touch again because there is nothing in there that makes it fun or challenging to go through again

>replayability is THE most important factor in games

But what exactly is replayability then?

I sometimes feel like playing the Arcade Robocop: no story no puzzles. But I don't feel the same about other games which I feel I'm totally done with them.

>unlike gameplay is actually more easily measurable.

Explain.

>>16089683

Portal is a shallow tech demo, no.

30-45 minutes depending on how good it is.

replayability is important no matter what.

15-30 minutes is my concentration limit, so most shoot 'em ups are good for me, unless they have scoring mechanics that require milking bosses. I don't like just sitting there pelting bosses.

>>16089683

>Bioshock

>good

It was a snoozefest with unengaging gameplay

Touhou has the perfect length because it scales.

Want to get through each game in a day? Just put them on easy. There, now you can say you've """"played""" them

Want a more in-depth experience? Normal or hard.

Want to get cuhrazee? Go with Lunatic.

Generally this means you're going to be mastering the game, which could take weeks to months. Then there are varying degrees of mastery. Want to get your 1cc? That'll take awhile depending on character and difficulty. What about a no-bomb run? What about a graze run?

You could dedicate anywhere from an hour to months on a single Touhou game and an entire lifetime on the entire series to be honest.

>>16089501

>>16089085

>Tetris does not take 5 minutes

Give me a ballpark figure for what you think that should say, because that's within an acceptable margin of error across most versions of the game

I rarely tend to replay games as it is, so I prefer longer ones in general. Can't really think of a single game that I liked more in a second playthough than I did the first, nor can I think of any that I loved the first time around but found significanly less enjoyable the second. If a game is good, it will be fun to replay.

>>16089501

I understand replayability more as branching paths, alternate weapons and smaller shit like cosmetics and so on. Resident Evil games are a good example, having branching paths and various costumes.

Under such a pretext, I would rather have that experience be worked into one consice long adventure, rather than several cut up mini-adventures. I would rather experience all of it in one clear run, instead of several, interrupted by "The End but not really lol haha",

To put it in an analogy, it's like a nice movie, with a beginning, middle and end, versus a season of a TV show, having that same beginning, middle and end with needless, overemphasized cliffhangers every 45 minutes.

>>16090243

It's not really about that, you don't need branching paths. You can have replayability just by how differently you engage the content each time you play the game. Like in Thief for example, you can beat the first level in a lot of ways. Even something super linear like Half-Life tests your aim and your skill. What happens each time you play is different depending on your actions and your knowledge of the game. Your first playthrough definitely won't be the same as your tenth one.

>>16090140

it is if you suck very hard at it I think. I just made a quick search of someone playing Tengen tetris and he went for 40 minutes. He was good but he wasn't a god of tetris or something.