I read a lot of gaming blogs and forums and news sites in order to keep up with my hobby, and to keep in touch with what are the more pressing topics and concerns of the gaming world of late. One such topic that seems to come up more and more is the “worth” of a game as equated to the length of play from start to finish. In other words: “This game only took 10 hours to beat, therefore, it’s not worth the $40-60 purchase price.”

There’s also the follow up argument that games “back in the day” took a lot longer to beat, and to be sure, I still haven’t beaten the original Castlevania on my NES in over 22 years (it should also be said, however, that the game normally glitches out and freezes on the Grim Reaper battle in Level 5). In either case, I guess you could say I got my money’s worth.

I started thinking about this complaint as to why people can plow through games now in a relatively short amount of time, as opposed to the hours/days/weeks it took back in the NES and often 16-bit days. I remember quite well Read the rest of this entry