Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

A good RPG cannot be short

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
Everyone who is saying "AoD has branching! You haven't seen anything in a single playthrough!" are completely missing the point. Short games with no replay value (or any value at all) are AAA territory and that already means it's not a good game. If your argument is "find me a good game which by definition is bad", then you've "won" by a technicality, but it's also nonsensical. Whoop-di-doo.

Also, Dungeon Rats.
 

SausageInYourFace

Angelic Reinforcement
Patron
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
3,858
Location
In your face
Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit. Pathfinder: Wrath
I have to admit that my opinion on this question has not been entirely consistent.

There were several "big" RPGs in the last years that I never had the patience to finish while I finished and liked "shorter" RPGs like the Shadowruns. That led me to believe that it might be a time thing. We all get older and who has lifetime hours to dump into all those huge games of yesteryear. So I was beginning to prefer shorts games.

Lately, I have noticed that I absolutely loved DivOS and I played that for about 100hrs. It never got boring to me and it gave me the 'full' RPG experience, whereas in hindsight, while I certaily enjoyed the tighter experience of the SRs, they also felt not only tighter but also a lot 'lighter' and perhaps ultimately not as satisfying.

So I guess for RPGs to be a fully satisfying experience, I am still looking for these meaty games. But they are hard to make in a way as to not get boring after a while and its an art to pace your game and keep player interest high for many hours. I enjoy smaller scale games as well but I'd be hard pressed to consider any of them 'classics'.

Maybe it feels a bit like a 'snack' rather than a 'meal', however tasty said snack may be.

Regardless, I don't see why we can't have both or see point in arguing that one thing is objectively better than the other. Whatever's fun is fun.
 

hivemind

Guest
it's roughly as long as AoD and just as good
literally both wrong
DR is a fun little game, but it's complete and utter shit compared to AoD
it's also like hardly a great example because much of the atmosphere and setting stuff relies on the established AoD universe imo

Short games with no replay value (or any value at all) are AAA territory and that already means it's not a good game. If your argument is "find me a good game which by definition is bad", then you've "won" by a technicality, but it's also nonsensical. Whoop-di-doo.
most autistic post of the generation

hurr short games are automatically bad so how dare you say short games are automatically bad durr that's like obviously by definition so I'm gonna pretend non-short games are short and if you point out it's wrong you are missing the point and make no sense

unironically consider applying for a state sponsored visit to a post natal abortion clinic
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
No, the goalpost is constantly being moved and the argument revised to essentially "show me a bad game that is good". There's nothing autistic about pointing that out. People want a short RPG, linear and with no replay value, but also good. Not gonna happen, and is a pointless exercise. Like I said in the beginning, we don't have a good sample size of short RPGs to come to a satisfactory conclusion.
 

Castozor

Scholar
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
151
it's roughly as long as AoD and just as good
literally both wrong
DR is a fun little game, but it's complete and utter shit compared to AoD
it's also like hardly a great example because much of the atmosphere and setting stuff relies on the established AoD universe imo
It is roughly as long if we take 1 (combat heavy) play trough as the standard, you claiming a single play trough does not really count for AoD is not my problem. I also disagree on the other two points, to me DR > AoD, even though I do like them both and I played and enjoyed DR before AoD and didn't really feel like I missed much atmosphere/setting wise by playing in this order. I guess this comes down to what exactly we preferr to see in our RPG's, I value good, challenging combat above all you obviously have other priorities.
 

Cross

Arcane
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
2,983
Aren't System Shock 2 and Bloodlines on the short side? They can't take much more than 20 hours even on a completionist first playthrough and in the case of Bloodlines, it would've been improved by greatly shortening or removing all the trash mob filled areas in the last third of the game (the Hollywood sewers, Hallowbrook Hotel, Ming Xiao's temple, Ventrue Tower).
 
Last edited:

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
According to CRPGAddict's blog, most of the Goldbox games fall into the 20-25 hour range (and I'm assumng he's including reloads in the time count).
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
A couple of short RPGs I've played the last couple of years:

Neverwinter Nights: Kingmaker
Paper Sorcerer

Both of which can be completed in one or two decent gaming sessions, possibly with time to spare and both have a certain satisfaction to them, the former even has replayability built into it with a choice of dungeons within a time limit. But neither is what you'd call epic. Just nice snack/break food.

This whole thing about replayability is where RPGs differ from other genres of games. It's their USP almost that RPGs only need to be played once and that when you do you sacrifice a lot of time for the singular experience. Like reading a novel instead of watching the movie, like going for a hike instead of doing a few miles on a treadmill, like having a three course meal and all the extras and trimmings instead of a burger and chips. Contextually, and on paper, there might not be any real difference between a short game and a long game, but in reality if RPGs didn't hold on so tightly to that long-play USP then it's quite possible they could find themselves indistinguishable from a whole host of other genres when people subconsciously choose what to play.
 

AdolfSatan

Arcane
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
1,871
Don't remember exactly, but LISA must have been around the 10 hour mark and it's a great game. inb4 "but it's a WJRPG", fuck off.
Diablo I was rather short as well.
Fallout 1.5 is another good example.
Do we consider NEOScavenger an RPG? That's another one.

Except for Diablo, they're all rather new, so it remains to be seen how they'll hold with time.
Hardly think they'll get a huge following since neither of them have gotten the exposure they'd warrant, but that doesn't negate their quality.
So is it possible for an RPG to be both good and concise? Surely. It's not the norm by a long stretch, but the possibility is there.
The OP does come across as an overly sensitive faggot that wants his point proven and agreed rather than conceding the possibility of an honest discussion though, so this is all rather pointless.
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,793
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
Challenge lost in 2 minutes :lol:

Nah. You might be able to rush through to the end of Fallout in 14 hours, but a reasonable first play of the game while taking the time to converse with most of the characters, explore, and poke around will be closer to 25-30 hours, and probably more, as the HLTB poll numbers indicate. "Main story" means exactly that. Fallout is pretty tight, narratively speaking, but there's still more to do than complete the main story—and unlike a great many RPGs, it's extremely replayable. In fact, it's so replayable that a person is likely to play it again right away or soon after the first playthrough. That's something I did only with Fallout and Fallout 2 (and then again, and then yet again), but never with any other RPGs until Underrail and AoD were released for public consumption well over a decade later.

But yeah, if you define "completion" as finishing the main story with absolutely no stops along the way, ignore several critical factors, and fudge the numbers, then sure, you won the challenge. That's not actually how I define "short" RPGs, though. I'm thinking of the ones that can be completed in 10-15 or so hours, the whole meat of them, and then you're done with them because there's no genuine replayability/desire to replay.

Fallout is an exceptional and cherished RPG anyway, so rushing straight for it rather than coming up with other examples is about as faggy as you can get. I'm still waiting for more actual examples.
You are a liar and a bad one.
I did all that (look for every quest, converse with every NPC, take my time, explore) and I absolutely did not take longer than 14 hours. Fallout 1 is a very short game.
Actual examples? Wizardry 1. Spirit of Adventure. Gorky 17. Wizardry 6 is relatively short, compared to 7 and 8. Diablo. Paper Sorcerer. Dungeon Master. Legend of Grimrock. Ultima 8 (though I took longer than average due to playing it before the platforming & saving patch came out. 2-3 minutes to save and load.) Shadowrun on the SNES is more RPG than jRPG and not very long. Nu-Shadowruns are very short.

Most of those games are pretty good, though it is debatable.

What a weird thing to even discuss.
 

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,318
Location
Hyperborea
The question for me is: is the game length's suitable for the scope of the adventure that your character(s) is on. A mission to seize the whatzit and defeat whozit at the bottom of a 10 floor dungeon can be relatively short and be completely satisfying. A world spanning quest to defeat world ending evil, not so much.
 

HeatEXTEND

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,928
Location
Nedderlent
Stick of truth is an awesome rpg if you really like Southpark, 15 hours MAX.
All i can think of though, OP might be right :shittydog:
 
Self-Ejected

CptMace

Self-Ejected
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
1,278
Location
Die große Nation
I guess it'd be more correct to defend the idea that there are several characteristics of an rpg - although they might no be necessary to consider a game as an rpg - that just cannot be done under a certain length. Like character investment and world investment.
Then, short hack n slashers would be more tolerable and enjoyable. While I don't think a story like planescape torment or new vegas could work without making sure the player has the time to connect with these characters, factions and worlds.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
6,235
Nah a good rpg can't be short.

This is correct.

Indeed. For the reasons you mentioned, as well as for the broad mechanics and systems to actually be applicable in the first place. You can't bunch relatively DND-derived systems into video games that also feature things like exploration, extensive story, lengthy animation etc and expect it to be fulfilling and all the implemented systems to be relevant and actually put to satisfactory use.
Optional content too is relevant here. If there is no long-term gain for completing optional side content because there is no long term, the value of optional rewards are lessened considerably. Say you complete a bunch of side quests and got some new stuff for it...was there much point if it is all only going to see half an hour's worth of potential use before end game, and wasn't strictly needed to begin with?
 

Taurist

Scholar
Joined
Dec 8, 2017
Messages
108
I strongly disagree with the How Long to Beat hours given for Fallout 1. Its legitimatly a reasonably short game.
 

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
11,759
Just checked my save files, and in my first playthroughs I beat Legend of Grimrock in 12 hours, Paper Sorcerer in 14 hours, and Legend of Grimrock II in 17 hours. All great RPGs. +M
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,656
Alpha Protocol. :smug:

I can enjoy 10-20 hour RPGs just fine, and I'd like to see more of them. Odd Gods looking pretty swell.
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
warlock of firetop mountain

Finished twice and steam shows 3h for me

Yeah, and I can complete a game of Hero Quest in two hours.

Alpha Protocol. :smug:

I can enjoy 10-20 hour RPGs just fine, and I'd like to see more of them. Odd Gods looking pretty swell.

Although I didn't explicitly state that the RPGs in question have to actually be good, I believe it was heavily implied, although Alpha Protocol wasn't memorable either, so....

Current grasping at straws level ITT: INCALCULABLE
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,624
When you make a short RPG, there's a higher chance the content will be unique and good. Unless you are one of those assholes who even adds filler to a 20-hour game.

I like Fallout because it is short and to the point. You always have something specific to do. It never sends you on pointlessly long quests either. If someone tells you where the Deathclaw cave is, you don't enter a cave with multiple levels full of Deathclaws: you enter a specific cave with the damn Deathclaw at the end. One of the things that really fucking annoyed me about Fallout 2 was the amount of combat in the game and how damn slow it felt. Arcanum is also another RPG that feels a bit on the long side. And the less I say about Baldur's Gate, the better.

It's very difficult to make a 400-hour game that is worth every hour spent on it. But that doesn't mean I also want RPGs to be 10 hours of great content. Give me more, motherfucker. 50 hours of great content would be amazing, and if the game is REALLY good, then you'll easily get 200 hours on repeat playthroughs. But I've found I get more time out of fun RPGs than I get out of RPGs that offer multiple paths and the like.

EDIT: I just remembered King's Field. It was a very fun game for the first two levels, but it ran out of steam on the third level. A real shame.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom