<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Longer and harder</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/</link>
	<description>Chuck Jordan's Personal Weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Seppolopolis</title>
		<link>http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/comment-page-1/#comment-3887</link>
		<dc:creator>Seppolopolis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/#comment-3887</guid>
		<description>The thing is, for me, I want a game that suits the quality of its mechanics. And that doesn't mean short is bad. Max Payne, clocking in at something like 7 hours, was *perfect*. I could shoot, I could shoot in slo-mo, and they had just enough narrative twists and turns to keep it interesting for exactly the length of the game.

Halo, they had a couple of interesting mechanics that got boring as shit halfway through the game. No one complained it was too short, they complained that the middle of the game sucked.

I don't want a game that's 60 hours, that's padded out by more walking around and doing boring shit. I've got a job, a dog, and a wife. I like reading, and watching movies, and other things. I want my gaming time to be spent *efficiently*, where every moment is totally fucking awesome.

Note that "totally fucking awesome" doesn't actually mean *fun*. Epic, tragic, funny, whatever. Bring on the variety of emotions and experience that challenge what we're used to games being. But don't, whatever you do, saddle it with an extra ten hours of walking to the next goddamn cutscene, okay?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing is, for me, I want a game that suits the quality of its mechanics. And that doesn&#8217;t mean short is bad. Max Payne, clocking in at something like 7 hours, was *perfect*. I could shoot, I could shoot in slo-mo, and they had just enough narrative twists and turns to keep it interesting for exactly the length of the game.</p>
<p>Halo, they had a couple of interesting mechanics that got boring as shit halfway through the game. No one complained it was too short, they complained that the middle of the game sucked.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want a game that&#8217;s 60 hours, that&#8217;s padded out by more walking around and doing boring shit. I&#8217;ve got a job, a dog, and a wife. I like reading, and watching movies, and other things. I want my gaming time to be spent *efficiently*, where every moment is totally fucking awesome.</p>
<p>Note that &#8220;totally fucking awesome&#8221; doesn&#8217;t actually mean *fun*. Epic, tragic, funny, whatever. Bring on the variety of emotions and experience that challenge what we&#8217;re used to games being. But don&#8217;t, whatever you do, saddle it with an extra ten hours of walking to the next goddamn cutscene, okay?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grickle man</title>
		<link>http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/comment-page-1/#comment-3703</link>
		<dc:creator>Grickle man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 19:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spectrecollie.com/archives/2007/01/longer-and-harder/#comment-3703</guid>
		<description>amen, brother.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>amen, brother.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
