I'm not sure what low UID's have to do with anything. I can be just as stupid as anyone here, I promise =)

I think you're misunderstanding me. My argument isn't that games used to be shorter. It's that they weren't artificially longer like they are now, and I believe strategy guides, GameFAQs, etc. are to blame. There are very few "secrets" baked into a game anymore, and if some special item is hidden, there's little to no chance you'll find it without the aid of some guide.

Contrast this with the 8-bit Zelda games, where it was entirely possibly to find everything in a game without the aid of any guide, simply because strategy guides were not mass-produced and pushed out at game launch like they are now.

So when I see a /. article like this one, where it's possible they've realized the toll all this freely available information is having on gaming as a whole and are finally cutting the fat to deal with it, you can imagine my frustration at all the crying that games won't be so long, as if that's the only measure of a great game.

Video games (RPGs in particular) were doomed exactly when strategy guides became a decent source of revenue. Instead of challenging a gamer's problem-solving skills, this forced developers to artificially lengthen games, by either requiring the player to grind for experience points, or to grind in order to raise his/her skill level. Personally, I prefer to work on my skills in a game, but each is still technically grinding.

And sure, you could say "I don't buy strategy guides", but the damage has already been done. Games have changed.

So for everyone saying "20 hours or less? Not good enough!" - Be careful what you wish for. I'm glad you have enough free time, and you are obsessive-compulsive enough to grind your way through those extra hours. I sure don't, and the idea that your whining is actually being heard by game developers is SO frustrating to me.

Sorry, /if/ they're losing so much ground.

I can't believe I'm making this point, but here goes...

As a web developer I actually appreciate the bloat. The average user does not have patience to look for extensions that fill in the core features that other browsers offer. Without the "bloat", those users would have likely stayed with IE, Microsoft would have no motivation to improve, and we'd likely be stuck developing for something much closer to IE6... ugh...

So for me, bloat is forgivable -- I'm just happy we're finally at a spot where web standards are taking hold. It's hard for Microsoft to embrace and extend they're losing so much ground.

Happy Birthday, Firefox =)

They could have made the reward $100,003 instead...

+1 Insightful. Alas, I have no mod points now. =/

I think we're missing the point. This isn't about Google or Microsoft, or even Wave. This is about some guy trying to achieve Jesse James Garrett status by coining an even more annoying buzzword than Web 2.0. Don't let it happen!!

Why can't we just stick with "...considered harmful" and move on, Ozzie? Please??