Partly I'm wondering in general, for a style of gameplay, how long will people play before they go to a different game or want a change in gameplay? Also I'm wondering for the specific game I've been designing. I'm looking at a generational type RPG. The first character has to do the basic survival activities such as gathering food and maintaining a house. Once the children are grown up the children can help with some of the activities so the parent can start working on other activities. As the generations continue the player would control the head of the household and can focus on expanding the household through politics, technology, pure military strength or other approaches as the rest of the household runs the basic survival activities. Essentially building a dynasty. How long would you expect a player to be willing to work the different stages before wanting to move up to something bigger or just different?

I think it all depends on how fun the game is.

When I finished Oblivion, I wanted more and spent countless hours trying to find more quests to complete. After a while I just gave up because there really wasn't anything more for me to do.

However, the game was amazing and I loved it. I played it for months. In fact, I even bought it twice. I played all the regular version on the PC, and then I bought the game of the year edition on the Playstation 3.

So, in answer to your question, if there is enough interest in a game to keep people motivated in playing, then they could spend months on it. However, if they game doesn't draw you in or give enough new excitement when you most need it, people will move on to something else.

For example, I'm playing the Witcher right now. I've been playing it on and off for about a week. I'm almost ready to stop playing it for good as nothing seems to be that exciting about it. It really is a very generic RPG and I don't know if I'll have the desire to finish it.

John

Yeah, I completely agree with above post. There probably is an upper limit where people need change, but it definitely changes from genre to genre and, more importantly, if Oblivion didn't hit it, then chances are you won't because Oblivion was really big :P

Another thing which is very important to keep one playing is to keep a certain degree of diversity.

Take Assassin's creed. That's one overhiyped game. But once you have played the first two hours of it you come to realise that all you will ever do in the whole game has already been introduced to you throughout these 2 hours and will merely be a tedious repetition thereof.

The game loses it's appeal even though you haven't even finished it yet.

Another thing: give people what they expect to get.

I am not saying that you should just make the next clichee game because that's what people would expect. Far from it.

I'd like to take the witcher as an example. When I bought this game in the special edition I was expecting a captivating RPG with interesting, action intense and maybe even tactical combat. At leats that's what most reviews say about it anyway. I was very dissapointed. Not that it's not fun at all, but it just doesn't motivate me to play on. One can't explore freely, all characters look alike and you have to do a lot of running around (without bein able to take shortcuts since you can't move freely) and talking.
Combat is as simple as clicking at the right moment, without requiring tactics or any thinking at all.

Maybe it's just me, but from an RPG I am expecting more freedom, more believable characters (I don't trust the witcher's world and it's characters for that matter) and at least a bit of a challange when it comes to combat.

It sure is fine for some people, but it didn't meet my expectaions. That's why I can't force myself to keep playing.

That's a shame considering I spent 40 bucks on that damn thing...

bottom line: be sure to appeal to your target audience and, even more importanty, keep it fresh

Players who can't get enough will wish there were more to do in a short game, and players who are only mildly interested won't want to complete all of a long game.

My advice is to find a way to prolong the game for people who adore your game without prolonging it for everyone else. You need to figure out which elements will be most attractive to your devoted audience, and less attractive to others. Use those things to entice the player to wander into optional activities. Make the shortcuts undesirable to players who are having fun.

Great input guys. I can see the point of making it what someone wants to play will make some gamers only wish the game was longer. For me I can see it in Fallout 3 vs Mass Effect.

In Mass Effect I played the game through four separate times running both male and female as well as good and bad characters. I'm not entirely sure what it was I liked so much about mass effect but the missions and general storyline felt much more engaging. I think perhaps it is the different tactical options. If you feel like a simple shooter a soldier can mow down the opponents but if you want alternate tactics the biotics or tech skill sets (or combined) allow for varying tactics for different situations.

Fallout 3 was different. I enjoyed the first play through to follow the story but just haven't been able to really get back into it for trying other paths. I think a lot of it is my trying to use a specific character type (pure shooter vs pure melee, etc) and getting locked into specific tactics (for melee its sneak up and bash em on the head...). Also Fallout 3 has a large amount of traveling to discover places and this is a large part of the game whereas Mass Effect the traveling was not as extensive (unless you want to search each planet for artifacts).

It this similar to other people's thoughts? Is this the type of thing you were think about as far as RPG tactical combat buckED?

Thanks for the input guys!

Quote:

Original post by Drethon Also Fallout 3 has a large amount of traveling to discover places and this is a large part of the game whereas Mass Effect the traveling was not as extensive (unless you want to search each planet for artifacts).

I hated the travelling in Mass Effect, it took way too long with the loading screens and the videos, just to goto another star system, even if i wasn't planning on landing on a planet.
I don't mind the travelling in Fallout 3, because as long as there isn't any enemies nearby, I can fast travel, else I get to kill then fast travel.

If I'm going to go through a game twice, there has to be a good reason, like new storyline plots, or unlocked areas with extra content. Having a few new weapons and armor like in Dead Space, just puts me off, I try playing through, but I get bored since I know everything that is going to happen, I can plan ahead.

If you're basing your replay or extended-play value on just having more and more content available, then you'll have to gamble every time you shift gears that the shiny new zone will be enough to keep players engrossed just long enough to unlock the next one, so they won't get bored and won't feel cheated.

Spore tried the tiered gameplay, and I found it very boring to have to learn a new game dynamic for every phase, and then "winning" it just when I was getting the hang of it, and having to either spin my wheels with nothing left to do or move on to a new game which might not be as much fun.

For you, the designer, you have to make several games, and then integrate them into one product. It's more work, and since the players will be obligated to play all the games, and not just the ones they like, you'll wind up with the intersection of all the target audiences, not their union. Can't you just make five seperate games, each one encompassing the gameplay from one "generation" of your idea, and let players pick the one they want to play?

I guess I'm in the minority, having really enjoyed Assassin's Creed. Sure, there were only about two hours of "Content Being Revealed"-type experience, but once you get through that, you're faced with a long game featuring that gameplay, which I thought was a lot of fun. If the second chapter had had me sitting in the castle managing resource allocation, and the third had me commanding troops in defending its walls, and the fourth had me redesigning the aquifer, and the fifth had me seducing and marrying the most eligible bachelorette in town, I'd have been less happy with the product.

People spent hundreds of hours playing Pac-Man and Berzerk, after all.