Games

The problem is when games go for size is that they don't populate the world

The modern Assassin Creed games were a prime example of this - big world, completely barren

I don't need bigger game I just want Shakespearian spectacular quest and events, gripping storylines, and endearing character.

You could have a tiny map full of passion and I would love the game.

I do care about finishing games but not completing them. I will play the main story and some of the side quests. I am happy with games being 20-100 hours long.

I look at the RPGs I enjoyed and the ones I didn't and I think what I want more than anything in RPGs is for them to be fleshed out and well fitting.

If the world is too big for the story it feels empty and the side quests don't feel connected. If it's too small, it feel cluttered. It's a fine balance.

A lot of quests in games have a specified start and an end, and are unimaginative. It's 2025. I'm not bringing somebody 20 orc horns for a slightly better sword. Well, I will, but I don't want to. It just feels lazy.

I'd rather stumble across a thread woven into the world and follow it both ways to it's logical conclusion, choosing any branches along the way.

Honestly, I think "big" works against developers if they're trying to make something that just fits. When you look at something like BG3, the world isn't that huge. But once you start filling out all the blanks, it takes you a long time to get through.

He's right. We don't need maps bigger than Skyrim, we just need content and good core gameplay loops. Being hugely moddable like Skyrim really helps too.

I think the issue is that most game's core gameplay loops are not endlessly replayable. Lots of single player RPGs fall into the trap of being alright to progress through for maybe 20 hours, but you can quickly become so powerful that the rest of the game falls into busywork. It's really hard to meaningfully introduce new and interesting gameplay after the 30 hour mark, but without it things become same-y.

I'd argue this is just a fault of poor game design though. There are RPGs with really well iterated gameplay loops, with a wide array of variety, that I'm happy to put 400+ hours in. Games like Baldur's Gate 3, or Elden Ring, have a lot of freedom and variety in the way you can approach a playthrough, even allowing you to dramatically change things mid-playthrough, while still feeling mechanically satisfying to play. A 10/10 game will feel good to play forever, but a 7/10 might get boring after 15.

I quite like sandbox games so in those cases I would like it bigger, but at the same time I have no need for some main storyline to be in the game either. I want to be able to live in the world and either challenge comes just from surviving or things you find while exploring.

I think it really depends on the game.

An MMO or a sandbox game I can sink hours and hours into. I don't know how many hours I've lost to games like Minecraft, Rimworld, etc. Even if those types of games might have "objectives", I'm more likely to just kind of do my own thing.

And I had something like 500 days logged in with my Final Fantasy XI character. It was my default game and I kept playing because I always felt I had something to do and people to meet.

Narrative focused games? Nope. While I might enjoy playing, the narrative can feel more like a chore in a game that has too much stuff to do, especially if mechanics or areas are locked behind it. I will end up ADHD because I hit a block or feel like the game is forcing me to do the main story when I don't want to.

I had that happen in Fallout 3 where I was just wondering around, having fun exploring and stumbling on things, and I end up finding someone I didn't even know I needed to look for connected to my dad and suddenly I felt I was being pulled away from what I found fun.

Might be why I really liked 76 despite the hate it got/gets.

Skyrim is huge. I played it last year, going to all locations and doing main and side quests. That takes 100 hours or so.

Now I'm playing Elden Ring with SOTE, doing the same thing. I'm around 180h in and honestly I kind of want to finish by now.

So yeah, I don't see 600 hours of playtime as a positive goal. Unless they mean expand the map but don't keep up the content ratio. In that case, why the fuck would that be good? More travelling isn't worth anything.