I hate 'small games'

[rusty_shackleford]

I noticed these have exploded in popularity lately. I have no interest in playing these lite, typically near featureless, games.
I refuse to accept that anyone actually has a passion to make these, they're just made for social clout.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Small as in 1 or 2 hours long?

[rusty_shackleford]

Small as in 1 or 2 hours long?

Games that are obviously small scope in design and development, with no real depth.



loop hero, etc.,

[rusty_shackleford]

Arcanum will always be a better game than any of these games because it was massive in scope and design. The fact that they only got 60% of what they wanted done doesn't detract from that 60% being more than 100% of most other games.

[WhiteShark]

I've enjoyed a couple, but I agree that they're ultimately unsatisfying. Not enough to sink your teeth into, let alone lose yourself in the game world. It's as though I can taste that 'the game is over now' sadness before I even start.

[Norfleet]

Same, can't be bothered with games that end faster than they start. If it's already going to be over, I may as well not bother, I can just wait it out.

[J1M]

I would rather have a small game than a game that hides its real game behind 100 hours of grinding like many games do these days via roguelike elements.

[rusty_shackleford]

I would rather have a small game than a game that hides it's real game behind 100 hours of grinding like many games do these days via roguelike elements.

these are the same thing

[Norfleet]

I would rather have a small game than a game that hides it's real game behind 100 hours of grinding like many games do these days via roguelike elements.

I'd rather just have no game at all. A game that was nominally 40 hours today should be worth 100 hours today after you adjust for inflation. People still ******** out measly 40 hour games today would be like ******** out a 16 hour game in 1990.

[rusty_shackleford]

I would rather have a small game than a game that hides it's real game behind 100 hours of grinding like many games do these days via roguelike elements.

these are the same thing

to be clear I mean that trying to stretch out your game by watering it down and feeding it to the player in small parts does not make it a bigger game

[psychic_dream]

Does Child of Light fit your description of a small game? I played it way back in the day, and it was fun

[rusty_shackleford]

Does Child of Light fit your description of a small game? I played it way back in the day, and it was fun

I don't know what that is

[psychic_dream]

Does Child of Light fit your description of a small game? I played it way back in the day, and it was fun

I don't know what that is

It's a turn based rpg made by the frogs at Ubisoft, based on the engine they used for Rayman Legends. You should try it because it’s really captivating both in gameplay and art direction.

[Orvas Dren]

I noticed these have exploded in popularity lately. I have no interest in playing these lite, typically near featureless, games.
I refuse to accept that anyone actually has a passion to make these, they're just made for social clout.

I feel the same way about most short films, or other variants of short form content. It's just a waste of time ironically

[Roguey]

I absolutely hate it when a game is overscoped but I question the point of making and charging money for something ridiculously small in scope when this is the competition https://steamdb.info/stats/releases/

Just more slop for the slop pile.

[Stack of Turtles]

I noticed these have exploded in popularity lately. I have no interest in playing these lite, typically near featureless, games.
I refuse to accept that anyone actually has a passion to make these, they're just made for social clout.

I feel the same way about most short films, or other variants of short form content. It's just a waste of time ironically

I feel the same way about forum posts

[Vergil]

I really depends on what you mean by "small games". You've mentioned before that you don't think it's fair to criticize games for being long on the basis that if you like a game you should be able to enjoy it essentially indefinitely (if I understand the argument correctly feel free to correct me) but I fundamentally disagree with that.
If we're going by the most strict definition there are definitely extremely tightly focused games with very small scopes that I have enjoyed.

There's an indie game called "It Comes in Waves" which is very, very short (I have less than an hour of play time in it) but I enjoyed my time with it. It's about three dollars currently and I think I even got it on sale for less. I'd say I'm satisfied with my time playing it. I could probably mine some more enjoyment out of it even but I don't think it needed to be anything more than it was which is a short little game with some neat art/gameplay.

I would really prefer a game leave me wanting more than become a slog to get through. There's plenty of games that I loved, even some I replay, that eventually wear out their welcome and I start to just want to get to the end.

[wndrbr]

I don't have anything against short games if those short games were short for good reasons. What I really don't like is Game jam slop.

Stuff made by indie devs who stopped trying to shoot for the stars and decided to start making these limited gimmicky games with a purely commercial goal in mind.

I've read a bunch of gamedev diaries on this, most of the devs are pretty upfront about that. They don't even have any grand ideas or dreams of making some cool and ambitiout game, they target "small scale gimmicky game that can be easily picked by streamers" from the get go. No difference from some greedy corpo producer like Bobby Kotick.

[Norfleet]

I would really prefer a game leave me wanting more than become a slog to get through. There's plenty of games that I loved, even some I replay, that eventually wear out their welcome and I start to just want to get to the end.

Slogging is a game that artificially inflates its actual content, which is no good either.

But a game where the effort of acquiring and learning to play it doesn't justify the investment because it will immediately be tossed aside is similarly pointless. We have too much **** bloatware that takes longer to download than to play, and simply isn't worth the bother of figuring out given that I can just ignore it a few more hours for the same result.

[Stack of Turtles]

I've liked quite a few small games made with actual soul. If you feel sad about them not being longer, I guess there's always fanfiction...

[OnTilt]

If you don't count .io or flash games, I think the shortest game I've played was FTL. And that is only short if you count a single play-through as the game. I guess I can't say that I don't like short, small-scope games since I haven't tried them -- but none of them have ever appealed to me enough to even try one. I think I want to get lost in a new world, or get lost in learning a new system. Short games just don't sell me on either.

[Tinky Winky]

I still play old console games like Contra and Mega Man occasionally, and I have more fun with them than mediocre slogs.

[quetzalcoatl]

Return of the Obra Dinn made for a game jam by Lucas Pope, dev who made Papers Please. He's a savant at spitballing random ideas and turning them into enthralling adventures. Return of the Obra Dinn would perhaps diagnose whether you hate small games or just games that were **** out for cash. I loved it

the shortest game I've played was FTL. And that is only short if you count a single play-through as the game.

I opine a roguelike is only complete once you stop being surprised, FTL takes some time to get there.

[rusty_shackleford]

What I really don't like is Game jam slop.

Good term for basically the same thing, most of them are just gamejam crap that got stretched into a semi-releasable state

[anvi]

I hate them for a lot of reasons. Firstly, if they can't make something that is even half as good as a low budget classic from 30 years ago, then they are worthless twats.

Also, they game the system with fake reviews, fake comments online to promote them etc. There are ****** little games that have rabid fanboys and it's completely suspect. It's also shocking that some of these tiny games seem to spend more on the fake promotion than the game itself.

Places like Reddit are full of paid shills and everyone running that place should hang for their crimes. Not to do with gaming but to do with their subversive attacks on society. The fact that they shill any product for money just makes them even more despicable.

[Marcus]

If you don't count .io or flash games

What are .io games?

[DemoGraph]

What about Space Invaders? Or Bomberman?

[OnTilt]

If you don't count .io or flash games

What are .io games?

Snake.io, and their ilk. Basically browser based games that you play for a few minutes as a novelty. About as complex as space invaders or arcade games generally.

[Marcus]

If you don't count .io or flash games

What are .io games?

Snake.io, and their ilk. Basically browser based games that you play for a few minutes as a novelty. About as complex as space invaders or arcade games generally.

So io games are just browser games? Why not just call them browser games, then?

[OnTilt]

What are .io games?

Snake.io, and their ilk. Basically browser based games that you play for a few minutes as a novelty. About as complex as space invaders or arcade games generally.

So io games are just browser games? Why not just call them browser games, then?

Because the particular games that I was referring to all have a .io address, and generally have a particular feel or aesthetic to them, similar to how all flash games do.