bbc.com
Longer Video Games: Diminishing Returns and a Shift in Design
The video game industry is grappling with the issue of increasingly long games, with analysis suggesting that longer games lead to lower completion rates; however, a shift towards shorter, more focused games is emerging, prioritizing player experience and value.
- What are the immediate impacts of the trend of increasingly long video games on player engagement and the profitability of game developers?
- Tsundoku" is a Japanese term for unread books; gaming has a similar phenomenon: the backlog of unplayed games. More games are released than ever, and blockbuster games are increasingly longer, with estimates showing only 10% of buyers complete them. This trend, however, might be changing.
- What are the potential long-term implications of this shift towards shorter, more focused games on the video game industry and player expectations?
- The gaming industry is experimenting with shorter, more focused games to improve player engagement and value. Studios like Obsidian, with their game Avowed, are prioritizing player experience and offering options for shorter playthroughs. This suggests a shift from prioritizing game length to providing a high-quality, immersive experience within a reasonable timeframe.
- How does the design philosophy of games like Avowed, which offer shorter playthrough options, challenge the conventional wisdom of prioritizing extensive game length?
- The increasing length of video games correlates with lower completion rates, suggesting diminishing returns on longer development times and budgets. Analyst Rhys Elliott found that longer games, despite potentially offering more content, result in fewer players finishing them, impacting profitability. This challenges the industry's focus on sheer game length.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue of excessively long video games as a problem, highlighting the negative consequences of lengthy gameplay and the potential benefits of shorter experiences. While it presents counterarguments, the overall framing leans towards advocating for shorter, more focused games. The headline itself contributes to this framing.
Language Bias
The article uses generally neutral language. However, phrases like "digital cabinets of shame" and "insidious creep" carry slightly negative connotations. More neutral alternatives could be used to maintain objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the length of video games and its impact on player completion rates, but it omits discussion on other factors influencing player engagement, such as game mechanics, storytelling, or online features. While acknowledging the practical constraints of space and audience attention, a brief mention of these other factors would enrich the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by implying that the only solution to the problem of long games is either making games shorter or offering choices for shorter playthroughs. It doesn't consider other potential solutions, such as improved game design to encourage more focused gameplay or more streamlined progression systems.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the trend of increasingly long video games and the resulting impact on player engagement and completion rates. This relates to SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) because it highlights the need for businesses to consider the value and lifecycle of their products (in this case, video games). Creating shorter, more focused games, as suggested in the article, would promote responsible consumption by reducing wasted time and resources on unfinished games.