"Dear critics: Stop sneering at players who don’t buy short games, you’re being assholes"
Gone home looks like a fantastic game but the only "criticism" some gamers have made is the pricing of the game which only last 2-3 hours.
Here is an excerpt of the article. Here is the full article
"Gone Home can be finished in a few hours. I believe I finished Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons in about three or so. Both are fantastic games, well worth your time and money, but there has been this oddly pretentious backlash against gamers who say that these games are too short.
I've read plenty of comments that note, at the current asking price, some people just aren’t willing to spend the money for what amounts to a few hours of entertainment. And then critics and developers shake their heads sadly at the unwashed masses who just don't understand QUALITY and ARTISTRY.
There is a part of me, and I’ll admit it’s probably a snobby part, that also balks at the idea of measuring the worth of a game by its length. We don’t value paintings by the foot, do we? When you pay more for a nice Scotch, you don’t get more in the bottle, you simply get a better product. We don’t remove points from certain films because they’re under three hours, and likewise epic-length films aren’t better simply because they’re longer.
It can be frustrating when people dismiss entertainment due to its length, but I’m uncomfortable with casting any judgment on anyone due to how or why they do or don’t buy certain games. Keep in mind that games, in a broad sense, are supposed to be fun.
The dollar per hour valuation isn't meaningless
Critics don’t have to look at games and see a dollar per hour value, and that’s a pretty shitty way to judge games as art. But I also get uncomfortable when critics, writers, or even developers sneer at players who are being smart consumers and making purchasing decisions to get the most bang for their buck, especially at launch when games are their most expensive."
I dont mind if i pay the full price of a game which would only last me a couple of hours. Its the quality i am after but i see why some people would critise the price of a game which would only last a couple of hours.
Here is a couple of tweets from some journalists also former creative director Adrian Chmielarz of People can fly on this topic and Greg Kasavin from Super Giant Games. Also i understand Greg`s Stance on this subject
For example, most gamers claim they want big long games. But only 25% of them ever finish a game, even if they like it.— Adrian Chmielarz (@adrianchm) August 21, 2013
(Also, I don't think using the word "asshole" is the best way to start the dialogue, but hey.)— Patrick Klepek (@patrickklepek) August 21, 2013
@patrickklepek apparently, i'm an asshole. but i'm used to it.— Adam Sessler (@AdamSessler) August 21, 2013
If you don't want to buy a game because it's short, that's fine. But if you decide it's "not a game" because you're not interested, stop it.— Philip Kollar (@pkollar) August 21, 2013
What do you guys think ? Is it right for critics to "sneer" at gamers who wont buy Gone home because it is too short and a tad expensive? Or do you think Ben makes a point in this article. Also i don't think Adam is an asshole :(