Comment As long as it takes (Score 1) 126
"This is something that's been happening for years before I got paid to play games."
Kristan, you dolt, the only thing that's been 'happening' in the years before you got paid to play games is that the attention span of the young is faltering, imagination is dwindling. People are fine with -literally- throwing away 10 hours a day infront of the television, of which a solid 1/3 is simply to be prostheletized by comercial after commercial.
What I'm reading is "Whine Whine, I don't have time to finish all these games I have to review". I'm willing to bet that you have something else soaking up gobs of your time? Perhaps a certain game even, that's caught you up in it?
When I was younger, in the quiet roar of the SNES' struggle with Sega, when the -real- RPG's started hitting the shelves. We would take a look at those suggested times on the box right after we read the back, guess what, anything under about 20 or 30 hours went right back onto the shelf...
Why?
Because it was a sure sign that some company had thrown something together, fleshed out a back story as quickly and raggedly as possible, and had flunked miserably. There are a few exceptions, and even those seem to take a long time to beat the first time, longer than one might 'require', because you're busy soaking up the storyline.
I have -no- regrets in finishing FF II (FF4 In Japan) three or four times, a few for the english release, a few for a translated japanese version. At about 60-80 hours of play a shot.
Nor do I have reservations with other wonderful games, most of Square's games from that period (both english and japanese), nor other stellar titles.
And I have a stack of useless, idiotic games that might last 80 hours, do I feel sorry for not finishing them? Not one bit...
A game is as long as it needs to be, just like a novel, or a really good movie (before they slice and dice it for the public). Some games are just that good, good enough that you're willing to invest your 80 hours to -really- enjoy something. And some games will never be good, whether it takes you 5 hours or 50 hours. And it is that, nearly exclusively, that will determine what lures you back to the computer or the console, and what gets filed under G, for garbage.
Asking them to remove content is like asking for a hole in the head. FF 2, 3, and even seven were wonderful games (even if I didn't perticularily care for seven's storyline).
But Eight? Nine? They weren't bad...
Final Fantasy X? was SUB-PAR. Yes, you've heard me right, everyone I know who has played the older FF games as much as I, or has seen much of their overseas work has said they graphics were wonderful, but it lacked substance. Would you like to have a row of games you've finished, that look great, sound great, but leave you feeling empty?
Or would you like to have something you can feel proud of finishing, absorbing into yourself, a true classic...
Shame on you, asking them to strip away what in some games is one of their most precious, endearing features.
Kristan, you dolt, the only thing that's been 'happening' in the years before you got paid to play games is that the attention span of the young is faltering, imagination is dwindling. People are fine with -literally- throwing away 10 hours a day infront of the television, of which a solid 1/3 is simply to be prostheletized by comercial after commercial.
What I'm reading is "Whine Whine, I don't have time to finish all these games I have to review". I'm willing to bet that you have something else soaking up gobs of your time? Perhaps a certain game even, that's caught you up in it?
When I was younger, in the quiet roar of the SNES' struggle with Sega, when the -real- RPG's started hitting the shelves. We would take a look at those suggested times on the box right after we read the back, guess what, anything under about 20 or 30 hours went right back onto the shelf...
Why?
Because it was a sure sign that some company had thrown something together, fleshed out a back story as quickly and raggedly as possible, and had flunked miserably. There are a few exceptions, and even those seem to take a long time to beat the first time, longer than one might 'require', because you're busy soaking up the storyline.
I have -no- regrets in finishing FF II (FF4 In Japan) three or four times, a few for the english release, a few for a translated japanese version. At about 60-80 hours of play a shot.
Nor do I have reservations with other wonderful games, most of Square's games from that period (both english and japanese), nor other stellar titles.
And I have a stack of useless, idiotic games that might last 80 hours, do I feel sorry for not finishing them? Not one bit...
A game is as long as it needs to be, just like a novel, or a really good movie (before they slice and dice it for the public). Some games are just that good, good enough that you're willing to invest your 80 hours to -really- enjoy something. And some games will never be good, whether it takes you 5 hours or 50 hours. And it is that, nearly exclusively, that will determine what lures you back to the computer or the console, and what gets filed under G, for garbage.
Asking them to remove content is like asking for a hole in the head. FF 2, 3, and even seven were wonderful games (even if I didn't perticularily care for seven's storyline).
But Eight? Nine? They weren't bad...
Final Fantasy X? was SUB-PAR. Yes, you've heard me right, everyone I know who has played the older FF games as much as I, or has seen much of their overseas work has said they graphics were wonderful, but it lacked substance. Would you like to have a row of games you've finished, that look great, sound great, but leave you feeling empty?
Or would you like to have something you can feel proud of finishing, absorbing into yourself, a true classic...
Shame on you, asking them to strip away what in some games is one of their most precious, endearing features.
