Reply to Re: Epic length
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
It sounds like there is a lot of misunderstanding going on. I doubt Skull thinks that the side content of RPG's is not worth playing or that it shouldn't it exist, he just doesn't think it should be included when thinking of the length of the game for categorization purposes. Skull also seems to be thinking that we want every little optional thing to be included in length, which is also not the point (at least the point I) was trying to get across.
Let me just use an example, with the game Super Metroid. The game can be speed run in about 43 realtime minutes from start to finish. Technically, that makes everything else "optional" because by playing clever you can reduce the required "main story" to a smaller set of actions. In this way using Skull's definition, Super Metroid could be classified as the equivalent of Dink Smallwood romp... Which doesn't sound right to me. Especially since the average person playing the game for the first time is going to take a healthy 3-6+ hours to beat the game and that's not even doing everything. Same thing for Dink Smallwood main game since it can literally be speed ran in about 35 minutes or less even though the real gameplay is about 4 hours long or more for most first-time players. Keeping this in mind, should the original Dink Smallwood be called a Romp then?
My point is; WHAT is the "length of the main story" when it comes to a game or a DMOD? I think it should be defined as the length of time the average person would take to play through the game casually for the first time. Not trying to speed run, not trying to skip things just because they are optional (nor trying to do every single optional thing), but instead just to enjoy the game. Otherwise, most games are seriously shorter than their "average play length". I mean seriously, Final Fantasy 9 can be beat in 12 (actually the record is less than 9) hours and the game even encourages it with a reward, despite the real time to beat usually being classified somewhere between 40-60 hours (or even higher for completionists). This is why we can't just define length of the game by the amount of time it takes to get from the beginning to the end. And why things such as NPC's, hidden powerups, secrets and dialogue can not be completely left out from the categorized length of a game.
This is how it has been done for other games. Why should we change it for the way we classify DMODs? Just take the average play time for a normal player who is playing for enjoyment and not for anything specific, and use that to determine whether A DMOD is an epic or not. This kind of length can't be perfectly estimated, but it can be roughly estimated with some critical thinking. So I see no reason why we shouldn't use the tried and true method for rating a game's length.
That does leave one question though. What is the average length of Dink Smallwood's main game for a first time player? It's been so long, I can't tell you how long it would have taken me. I imagine at least around 8 hours though, since I was young. But some better guesses would be helpful.
Let me just use an example, with the game Super Metroid. The game can be speed run in about 43 realtime minutes from start to finish. Technically, that makes everything else "optional" because by playing clever you can reduce the required "main story" to a smaller set of actions. In this way using Skull's definition, Super Metroid could be classified as the equivalent of Dink Smallwood romp... Which doesn't sound right to me. Especially since the average person playing the game for the first time is going to take a healthy 3-6+ hours to beat the game and that's not even doing everything. Same thing for Dink Smallwood main game since it can literally be speed ran in about 35 minutes or less even though the real gameplay is about 4 hours long or more for most first-time players. Keeping this in mind, should the original Dink Smallwood be called a Romp then?
My point is; WHAT is the "length of the main story" when it comes to a game or a DMOD? I think it should be defined as the length of time the average person would take to play through the game casually for the first time. Not trying to speed run, not trying to skip things just because they are optional (nor trying to do every single optional thing), but instead just to enjoy the game. Otherwise, most games are seriously shorter than their "average play length". I mean seriously, Final Fantasy 9 can be beat in 12 (actually the record is less than 9) hours and the game even encourages it with a reward, despite the real time to beat usually being classified somewhere between 40-60 hours (or even higher for completionists). This is why we can't just define length of the game by the amount of time it takes to get from the beginning to the end. And why things such as NPC's, hidden powerups, secrets and dialogue can not be completely left out from the categorized length of a game.
This is how it has been done for other games. Why should we change it for the way we classify DMODs? Just take the average play time for a normal player who is playing for enjoyment and not for anything specific, and use that to determine whether A DMOD is an epic or not. This kind of length can't be perfectly estimated, but it can be roughly estimated with some critical thinking. So I see no reason why we shouldn't use the tried and true method for rating a game's length.
That does leave one question though. What is the average length of Dink Smallwood's main game for a first time player? It's been so long, I can't tell you how long it would have taken me. I imagine at least around 8 hours though, since I was young. But some better guesses would be helpful.
