What is the ideal length for a single player, non-rpg campaign?

I’m thinking 15-18 hours, if there is enough content to justify it. Resident Evil 4 is a good example. Otherwise, 12-14 hours I think is good. The MGS games are a good example of this. How about you, SW?

I like about 7-8 hours like Spider-Man 2 has.

Well it should be quality over quantity of course...should go without saying.

However assuming we are talking a full priced modern AAA game: I'd like to see 25-35 hours of game. Any lower than that and it starts to raise eyebrows. If I was really excited for a game and it turned out great but was only 10 hours long, I would be less likely to pay the 70 bucks for it. I'd wait for a sale.

But yeah it can be a tough answer. Games are not a simple Hours/Euro value proposition.

I think you’re mixing that up with Super Mario Wonder.

From 8 to 20.

@SolidGame_basic: He’s not counting the 6 hours of cutscenes.

20h. I am disgusted by short games.

Game balances great gameplay and story telling, that’s a bad thing?

General rule of thumb: 10 hours.

Albeit a number of factors can alter that number: replayability (i.e. variable content on new playthroughs), density and quality of interactivity, gameplay style, etc.

15 hours.

20+ hours.

10-20 hours if it's a linear or mission-based game where the story is the primary draw.

I usually won't even make it that long unless the game play allows for some level of customization.

I dig 10 to 15 hour range...if the game is good of course.

10ish hours.

Btw, 10 hours is also my ideal length for an RPG. Undertale and Lisa were great games.

Anywhere from 10 to 20. If we're talking VR, 5 to 10 hours.

Such a casual gamer. You truly do disgust me, Maroxad.

Not sure. Depends on the game. But at least 10 hours.

10 hours of intense gameplay > 100 hours of gameplay where I can practically auto pilot my way through.

There is a reason I enjoy games like Bayonetta or Streets of Rage 4, while Baldur's Gate 3 bored me to tears.

Firstly, nobody is talking about a 100h game. Secondly, why do you always assume that a longer game has worse gameplay? TLOU2 is twice as long as TLOU, and has SIGNIFICANTLY better gameplay.🤷‍♂️Eternal is much longer than Doom2016, and is significantly better when it comes to pretty much everything🤷‍♂️

And BG3 bores you to death because you're a casuals gamer, and the game is made for those who want an immersive experience.

14 hours, in my view.

10-20 hours of gameplay is the sweet spot for me for single player non rpg games.

I don't mind cutscenes, but they should be minimal and not be 20 minutes to an hour long. Kojima, I am looking at you.

Uncharted 4 leaned too heavily on cutscenes for my tastes (around 6 hours with 15 hours of gameplay), but Ghost of Tsushima was pretty good on the cutscene length coming in at around 4 hours and a main story of 25 hours or so. A story can be told without leaning on long drawn-out cutscenes. I feel like cutscenes are becoming more and more dominant in games these days, and it is one of the things I like the least about modern gaming. They take me out of the game everytime.

Because most long games tend to have a very low fun per hour. Both Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3 are sleeping pills. Very few games have enough content to justify over 20 hours of playtime. Doom Eternal isn't much longer than Doom 2016. TLOU2 is one of the few rare games that remains excellent throughout. But at what cost?

Give me more 10 hour experiences, 15 hours is still within the healthy range. But anything longer than that and the game is getting fat.

You sound like an impatient zoomer that plays call of duty and has an attention span of 20 second. The one that is incapable of watching a youtube video over 60 seconds long.

What a shame.

@hardwenzen: I have a career, other hobbies and a life. I don't have time for games that don't respect my time. If I am playing a game, I don't want my afternoon ruined by a bunch of samey low effort encounters, or copy paste "Chalice dungeons".

10-20 hours is good, especially if it has great replay value.

10 hours is the sweet spot for a linear non-rpg. I've enjoyed longer games, but nearly all of them started leaning on repetition and filler to some extent.

I have no hard rules for required length of time in my games but between 10 - 30 hours seems like a generally decent range. That can vary though depending on the game, replay factor, etc.

@SolidGame_basic: Depends. If half the game is story telling and you can’t skip the scenes, I’d rather watch a movie or read a book.

I think 15-25 hours is the most replayable t campaign length. Think MGS4, TLOU, RE4.

But the perfect length for a one and done (or just 2-3 playthroughs MAX) is 25-40 hours think TLOU2, Sekiro, God of War

And here we go, i don't have the time to do anything blah blah blah. Casual gamer.

Casual and Hardcore isnt about time investment, but how much you apply yourself.

You playing Low Skill Scrub games like Baldur's Gate 3 and Diablo 4 is considerably more casual, than me S ranking levels in Pizza Tower or getting good in Street Fighter. I am still casual, but not as casual as you.

You primarily play RPGs, you are in no position to call anyone casual.

@SolidGame_basic: I'm glad you specified "non-rpg" because I expect at least 20+ hours out of a good RPG (be it action-RPG or some other hybrid or a classic DnD-style RPG).

Anyway, with the exception of RPGs, my ideal length of time is 10-20 hours, not including side missions. Long enough that I consider it a good value, but not so long that the game becomes so tedious it turns into a chore.

Truth is, with my disposable income (not bragging, I just actually can afford two or three games per month whereas in my past I couldn't afford more than a handful of games each year) and the sheer amount of games released (good ones, too!) these days, I actually tend to favor shorter games than I do longer ones. This was not the case 10+ years ago.

That's rather rude.

He gave valid reasons to prefer shorter games.

Or is it because he insulted your precious Elden Ring? 😂😋

12

You can't apply yourself when you are out of time to do anything, and learn what you're playing. I recall you were showing me a bunch of SF6 vids, implying you'll be there one day, and i bet you haven't even played the game in weeks. Seriously, you're becoming the most casual gamer on SW.

And what the hell are you talking about me playing rpg almost exclusively? I filter games, and play what is good. Release BF Bad Company 3 tomorrow, and if its anywhere near as good as BC2, i will be playing the game on daily basis for years to come. What you don't understand is that i don't pay attention to the genre, but the quality of games, and since Fartnite came out, all competitive games are mtx/skins/seasons bullshit filled, and i will never play a game that consist of unlocking dogwater skins through a season pass🤡All this season pass zoomers shit can gtfo, and give me a real game like what the OG Dice offered. Might even get into The Finals cuz the beta was fun af, but again, simply seeing mtx skins and the innevitate season passes, it makes me🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢

He didn't just insult it, he called it shit written in caps. This is not something i will forget anytime soon.

Ooooooooooh you better watch out @Maroxad

yeah, ideally closer to 20+ if theyre charging £69,99

@Macutchi: No argument there. I sure as hell ain't paying 70 for games.

@mrbojangles25: I am right, regardless of how upset he is about it.

Elden Ring is Shallow, Hackeneyed, Imbalanced, Tedious

There is a reason the high level play scene in Elden Ring is pretty absent: the PvP scene is niche as hell, and the speedrunning community has been had less output than TotK despite TotK being out for less time. The game simply isnt very appealing at a high level. The game relies far too much on execution and too little on player expression.

30 hours

Depends on the game.

Inside was a really cool game and is around 3-4 hours long. It's very simple in that the only things you do is run, jump and drag things, basically. Would be hard to make such a game not feel boring if it was longer. I usually prefer when games are longer than that. Metoidvanias are fun, and I'd like those to be at least around 10 hours. ~20 wouldn't hurt.

30hrs minimum. They're charging more now for games then ever. Unless you play for an hour every couple of days, then games aren't gonna last you very long at all.

10 hours or more. Games with replay value.

12-15

Campaign, I don't think it really matters how long if the content is quality. Some games have high replay value, or achievements to obtain, or new game plus, etc. Something like Mario doesn't need double digit hours if the games levels are top notch, because no one (over exaggeration) plays Mario for the story. If a game like Spider-Man 2 offers 10-15hrs of campaign, and then another 5-10hrs of open world content, I don't see length as an issue for the the main story. Then again, I'm someone who doesn't care for video games story's anymore and I immediately skip any and all cut scenes to get right into the gameplay

12-15 is perfect.

For $70 or more, I better get my hours worth. Today I normally wait a while for patches and price drops. Too many shenanigans to pay full price.

That's the sweet spot for me. +/- a couple hours either way and I'm good.

20 plus levels.

Dont understand this trend to have only 10 levels. Makes a game boring.