PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => PS3 Discussion => Topic started by: Caspian on August 17, 2001, 05:23:34 PM
-
IGN\'s Off the Record (http://ps2.ign.com/news/37509.html)
Sony Says Make Games Shorter, Prettier
About a year ago, Sony officials suggested to many PS2 development studios to not necessarily make mammoth, epic games. Instead, they lightly suggested endeavoring to make shorter games with more polish and panache. That was in 2000. At this year\'s E3, the same message was sent to developers, but it was sent in a stronger way, and the Sony executives added that they wanted better looking, shorter games because they didn\'t want studios to spend too much money on each project (because the costs for next-generation projects are already high), but mostly because they wanted their PS2 games to look especially good when Nintendo\'s and Microsoft\'s games arrived on the next new systems.
Hmmm... It seems to make some sense, then doesn\'t it, that some of the games in early 2001 were rather short. Personally, we don\'t mind a 10-hour game at all, and not all games should be compared to RPGs in length. God help us is every game were 40 hours! So, depending on how you look on it, it\'s either a good or a bad thing, this shortening of games, but either way, it\'s not a coincidence.
Bad Sony. . .
-
this depends on the definition of Short
if games are 15-20 hours and have some extras for longevity then no foul
If games are 5-10 hours then I agree completley
Games like Drkan, Blood Omen, Sould Reaver, Bladurs Gate DA, FFX, are all going to be 20 hour plus games with more on the way so I wouldn\'t get to upset about it
and it is off the record as well
-
I can understand why they want to head in this direction. I just hope that the developers don\'t take this as an opportunity to slack off and concern themselves only with the graphics of their games.
-
i heard ffx was more then 100 hours if you do everything!
-
You would be correct.
-
Just as long as the gamess stay the way they are. Or try and stay really close and long.
-
ould explain why Dream Factory took out all the extra features they were planning to put into The Bouncer...
-
lol I thought they just took them out because it would have taken to long to put it into effect.
-
lol I thought they just took them out because it would have taken to long to put it into effect.
ould explain why Dream Factory took out all the extra features they were planning to put into The Bouncer...
I think your both correct.:D
-
Gran Turismo 3 is by no means short. Still, there is games like Kolona 2, Onimusha and the Bouncer that are way short.
I think Sony suggested shotered games because they was afraid that developers would get extremely "happy" with the DVD storage medium, and end up making games too long. Or than again, it could be because of development times with the PS2 hardware and how long it would take for a huge game to be developed.
Its a good and bad move, in my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
Gran Turismo 3 is by no means short. Still, there is games like Kolona 2, Onimusha and the Bouncer that are way short.
Yep. And how could I forget the short little game simply known as Z.O.E.
-
Originally posted by Bladez
Yep. And how could I forget the short little game simply known as Z.O.E.
All action games are short... End of story....
-
If anybody remembers those old 16-bit beatem-up games like Bouncer, you\'ll notice that they are about the same length as the Bouncer is. You just can\'t have a Bouncer type fighting game that lasts over 20 hours. You would get bored with it. The thing that would have made the Bouncer better would have been to include a multiplayer mode. :cool:
-
What do you mean, Bouncer already has multiplayer...but let me guess, you meant, multiplayer story co-op mood sorta deal? That would make the game better...but a number of things would make the game better.
While 20 hour Bouncer would, probably not work, a more interactive, more involving game on the other hand, that might last, first time 12 hours instead of 3 would raise The Bouncer from its mediocure state. Afterall, one thing having a simple beat em up, another thing, having a beat em up where the background can be interacted, go from one part of the story to the other without CGI would be nice as well. Afterall, the gameplay of watch movie, beat people up, watch movie, beat more people up, and watch another movie just doesn\'t work these days. I like the Bouncer, I just didn\'t think it was a great game.
As for this rumor, if short as in RE short (with plenty of extras to continue playing afterwards), thats fine. But short as in Bouncer short, ick. having long games are nice and all, but long games don\'t make a mediocure game any better (in fact, I doubt many, if any people here would play a crappy game for the total 40 hours needed to complete it).
And since it is a rumor, I\'ll take it with a grain of salt.
-
Bad Sony !
making their games to short, and there was me thinking it was becasue i was soooo good at PS2 games.
Now it turns out they are Short and I Suck !
:crying:.
-
I swear I told this to a freind of mine before the US launch.
I was looking at a running loop of the launch games and I remarked to my friend: "Wow, it looks like all these games have FMV in them, I wouldn\'t doubt Sony makes them put it in"
Plus, with the many games deemed super-short recently, this confirms that.
My friend is a mega-sony fan and always whines about how Dreamcast games just can\'t do FMV because not many games have them. I just tell him that Sega doesn\'t make developers do anything, I call it freedom.
I love Sega.
Eric Jacob
-
Im a faithfull follower of the Kings of FMV. But thats just a coinsidence.
-
Short games suck...
Why would you want better-looking, short games? That would make the gane less enjoyable.