I'm working on 2 games, one is more of a simulation game and the other is going to be a fantasy RPG where it has a leveling up system...
Let's talk about the RPG one, I have decided it will have a few hours of gameplay since it's kinda pointless to have a leveling up system for a game with less than 1 hour of gameplay.
The story will include unique characters and their backgrounds, side quests, and a diverse world to explore...
So what are your thoughts on the duration of a text adventure?
personally, I feel shorter text adventures with a story-driven plot tend to feel rushed and kinda plain since you don't really get attached to the characters or the world due it's short duration.

I think it depends on the TA. If I can beat a TA in less than thirty minutes, no matter how well written, it's not attractive to me. I'd say a solid 1-2 hours to beat WITHOUT a ton of punch-in-random-commands-until-I-want-to-jab-my-eyes-out-with-a-spoon riddles is perfect. I think the trick to a good text adventure is NOT the size of the games (room #s, object #s, word count, etc), but the quality of the puzzles in the game. Personally, that is what I struggle with when making my own games (that and #^%3#%$ turn scripts!) - in game one, I think I had fewer puzzles (maybe 10), but they were tougher to figure out. In game two, I went with more puzzles (likely mid-20s) but I think they were a little easier. So... I'm no help, but I really don't think length matters, as long as it is not too short, too easy, or too obscure...

Happy gaming!

Yours truly,

Goldilocks =)

Also, I am looking forward to your game releases. From the impression I get, they will be good ones. No pressure...

Unfortunately, no one likes a short game. But the problem is... even the biggest games (both the in-game world itself and the coding needed), such as a RPG game, often still comes out to a short amount time needed to win the game (a short game). How many of you RPG players, beaten those massive epic RPGs in 3 days? So, even with such a massive RPG, the game time playing it is still very short, and it already took a massive amount of coding too.

The amount of work required to add even minutes onto game play time, is unfathomable, and really the only way to "cheat" it is to not do it via game play but via having them watch cinematics, laughs.

The only games to really reach long (over 3 days of typical old-school RPGs, and excluding speed~expert runs) game plays (not cinema based) would be (in my limited knowledge) the TES (Skyrim) games, and those are the most massive RPGs of RPGs... the amount of work needed for that.... yeesh.

-------

though to state the obvious, repeating what XanMag said already, quantity doesn't mean anything if it's not quality-quantity, hehe

(most quest games are made by noobies with just a lot of Objects and clicking~Verbs, 'hide and seek' games, with whatever degree of puzzles, and not even hardly any descriptions either, so, this isn't very immersive, nor enjoyable)

quantity is the worst
quality is decent
quality-quantity is the best

lightwriter wrote:Let's talk about the RPG one, I have decided it will have a few hours of gameplay since it's kinda pointless to have a leveling up system for a game with less than 1 hour of gameplay.
The story will include unique characters and their backgrounds, side quests, and a diverse world to explore...
So what are your thoughts on the duration of a text adventure?
personally, I feel shorter text adventures with a story-driven plot tend to feel rushed and kinda plain since you don't really get attached to the characters or the world due it's short duration.

IFcomp has a requirement that games last less than 2 hours, and that is for the practical reason that judges need to play perhaps 30 games in a month. On that basis, I would say anything less than an hour is too short, and "a few hours of gameplay" would be ideal (assuming you are not entering it in a competition!).

Speaking of length of games...

Why won't someone beat "Xanadu - the World's Only Hope" and tell me how long it took to beat it. I'm curious! I didn't make a walkthrough, but am more than willing to give hints either through PM's or on the activity board.

HegemonKhan wrote:Unfortunately, no one likes a short game.

The dozens of speed comp and one room comps say hello. Oh, and the IFComp running since 1995 and aimed at short games, says hello too.

XanMag wrote:Speaking of length of games...

Why won't someone beat "Xanadu - the World's Only Hope" and tell me how long it took to beat it. I'm curious! I didn't make a walkthrough, but am more than willing to give hints either through PM's or on the activity board.

Sorry I got stuck pretty early on. I'll pick it up and try again soon but I'm pretty much all IFed out till the weekend. Meanwhile I hadn't exactly been timing myself while I played but the game is definitely one of the lengthier ones.

I do like longer works of IF since they're not seen as often, but short games can be great too. Short games tend to be more popular but I'm just going to advance the controversial opinion that the best length for a game is one that fits exactly the story the author is wanting to tell.

Though I'm not really sure where RPGs fall on that spectrum since they'd probably include some grinding that would pad out the play time, but they're generally not what one thinks of when talking about a text game anyhow.

true, I'm definately coming from a (traditional) rpg perspective, and not an 'if' game perspective, and thus I also include the grinding into the game length automatically. Ya, if you took out the grinding, those RPGs would maybe be only a few hrs in length, laughs.

I feel like turn based RPGs are a lot like a IF already, I mean just look at Pokemon, there is no hack and slashing, it's mostly point and click.

Sometimes you feel like a novel, and sometimes you feel like a short story. They not only each have their place, but they are created and structured differently, and they each appeal to me at different times. Neither is good or bad within itself.

There are undoubtedly IF games where, if you knew the solutions to the puzzles, they'd be over fairly quickly. But the working out of the puzzles can take days, and that can be an enjoyable part of it.

lightwriter wrote:I feel like turn based RPGs are a lot like a IF already, I mean just look at Pokemon, there is no hack and slashing, it's mostly point and click.

RPG style games work in this format--just look at MUDs--but they're still very different beasts. RPGs at their core are about running around a world increasing stats and skills and killing monsters for XP and sweet loot. While traditional IF is about puzzles and exploring and interacting with your environment at a more detailed level, or unfolding a personal story for the character.

RPGs are more focused on width and IF is about depth, I guess you could say?

You can make a pretty memorable IF game with just one room: http://textadventures.co.uk/games/view/6ku5qzozc0iu_ihtuch2aa/shade
Or just one move: http://textadventures.co.uk/games/view/6dhzogeig0kfmqli925rpg/aisle

Wouldn't work so well in an RPG.

I'd define them based on Marzipan's post (as I'm new to 'if' games and his~her post helped me understand the differences between, RPG and IF, better), a bit differently:

RPGs is about CUSTOMIZATION (control)

IFGs is about IMMERSION (depth)

the BEST games of all time: RPG+IFG, hehe

I do think that TES (skyrim,etc) games really do embody this the best.

I'm a her

And yes, I always love games that combine the two. I suppose the Elder Scrolls or Fallout games are some of the better examples, though I don't think it's ever been done perfectly yet, even by a big studio.

I don't plan on entering any contests and I believe a text adventure is a lot like a novel, where you have to expand the universe so the players (in this case) become more attached to the story and characters as the game progresses... I mean if a text adventure is only like 1 hour, I doubt someone would grow attached to a guide character and bawl if that character dies at the very end in the final battle. However, if it's a few hours and you learn all about the 'guide' character and become attached, I'm sure most emotional people will shed 1 tear.

You've never read a short story that affected you emotionally?

Though honestly I'd argue further and say a text adventure is not like a novel at all. The entire way its structured and the way the player gets at the information and therefore the way it has to be written is completely different.

I mean theoretically (or okay not really theoretically because it's been done) you could take a very small area--say the home of someone the main character loves, or absolutely hates--and just by doing normal IF-playing things like examining objects the player would learn all about this person and start to share the main char's feelings, without ever even needing to interact with them.

I've got a partially made game, where the first area is just the player combing over a trashed lab. It's only four rooms but it's enough to give the player a solid understanding of who their character is, who some other key characters who will be introduced later are and how they feel about them, what exactly happened there before the game started, and what it's implications are for the rest of the world.

You can pack a lot of information into small amounts of text. And with IF you've got lots and lots of text cut into bite-sized snippets that the player can access at their own pace so it doesn't ever become overwhelming.

I see... I personally am more into books and games where the story is story driven and the universe is large and can be expanded on.

Well good luck. Just warning you that what you're setting out to do sounds like it's going to be a huge project. You'll need a solid knowledge of coding, how to balance the combat aspects, and a good understanding not only of writing an effective story but of how to get it across to the player in this medium. It's IF, keep in mind... they're not just going to sit passively by while you throw plot at them.

In my opinion as a newbie feeling my way through this whole Interactive Fiction thing at this point I am under the belief that quality trumps quantity... By that I mean if you make a good game it can be short and it shouldn't be a major detractor from the game as you can always add more... Like a tv show for example... People love the original star trek series even though the later series like next generation had nearly twice the episodes.... and honestly if the original series had 100 more episodes it would have grown tiresome.... I guess what im saying is if you do a short high quality game the worst case scenario is that you will leave the players wanting more... where as if you take a good game and stretch it too much it becomes a chore that the played feels they have to finish making the last portion less enjoyable and replay less likely.... for a long game to succeed it must be of the best quality or else it will be like butter spread over too much toast... If its too short you can always make it longer.

wyattwak wrote:"...it will be like butter spread over too much toast...

Ahh... a classic Bilbo Baggins quote.

Your right Bilbo did say that.... I guess im just quoting the great hobbit subconsciously at this point. lol

Oh, I know quality beats quantity but I was just referring to duration...
I guess the worst that could happen is someone not liking it but it's impossible to please everyone anyways.

Resurrection of this post, I know, but...

If you see my recent post on the GD forum, I wonder if there is such a thing as too long? My second game is a HUGE, non-rpg game. At first I didn't realize how large it was going to be, but it is massive. I'm priding myself with game 2 - I think it will be fantastic, but my question is this...

Can a high quality game with massive quantity be great? I'm a bit worried now...

Consider this: I will have a separate website with a hint type walk through system available so there should be NO excuses for getting stuck for lengthy periods of time.

And imagine, my intent was to make one game out of these 3 "episodes"! Silly me!

obviously at some point the length of media (game, game series, book, book series, tv show, tv series, movie, movie series, etc) can be a detriment to even the best quality media. Though that 'point of detriment' in length is probably something that rarely ever is reached, but in theory at least it can happen, and maybe there are some such real examples of it happening. It is far more likely (99%) that people want your media to be longer (especially the more they like it ~ the better the quality of it), and 1% of the time think it's too long, wanting it shorter, lol. So, don't worry if you think your media is too long, as it likely isn't at all. Of course, get feedback for the answer on whether your media is too long, too short, or just right.

there is the concept~phrase of: "it just drags on and on... argh! Just end it already!" ~ but again this rarely occurs with media creation.

In my experience, Some people are fussy while others will enjoy what you do. Whether it is a short or long story with good or bad quality, Can either turn out good or bad. I've played games or watched movies or series that had a low budget but turned out to be really good. In short: Sadly you can't please everyone haha.

If you feel happy about high quality and it fits in with you're game style and story. I don't see any problem with it.

I miss the days when a game could take more than a few weeks to complete. Specially when you couldn't save.

I'm glad not everyone is against longer games and I think it's unfair to say because it's longer automatically means it's lower quality...

I think as a general rule, it's easier to make a small game that's of high quality than it is a large one. Once games get beyond a certain size, they become difficult to manage as there are way too many things to keep track of. A small game is also much easier to test than a large one.

But there's definitely an audience for both. The IFComp's focus is small games and that's been running for years now and has always proven successful, and the recent interest in Twine - which generally produces small games - shows that there's an audience for them. Personally I prefer really long games where you can spend weeks or even months playing, but I suspect I'm in a minority.

davidw wrote:
But there's definitely an audience for both. The IFComp's focus is small games and that's been running for years now and has always proven successful, and the recent interest in Twine - which generally produces small games - shows that there's an audience for them. Personally I prefer really long games where you can spend weeks or even months playing, but I suspect I'm in a minority.

I'm the same way! I love games that have tons of side quests and what not!

dido, if only I was young again, with all the time in the world and none of the responsibilities, I would love-live playing Skyrim (and like games~mods) 24/7, as I did with the old console RPGs when I was young. I'm a perfectionist, so I make games last much much longer, over-grinding, finding~doing everything, maximizing characters, and etc, lol.

Good to know that there are people that enjoyed games that took a while to finish. It's rare these days and not many games of today have a replay value, There are a few but not like the old days.

Well it's indeed good to hear people don't mind longer games.
The game I'm working on is supposed to be one you can't really finish.
Even when the game is complete, I will probably continue adding more into it.

That makes me think of a book I read some of. You might find this discussion of it interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_and_Infinite_Games

jaynabonne wrote:Sometimes you feel like a novel, and sometimes you feel like a short story. They not only each have their place, but they are created and structured differently, and they each appeal to me at different times. Neither is good or bad within itself.

There are undoubtedly IF games where, if you knew the solutions to the puzzles, they'd be over fairly quickly. But the working out of the puzzles can take days, and that can be an enjoyable part of it.

I completely agree. And sometimes you want to relax and let your mind wander, and sometimes you want to be engaged and interactive. Speaking of which, is anyone working on a 'choose-your-own-ending' game right now?

I have three or four endings in the game I'm working on but I have thought up another game story already for a sort of "choose-your-own-ending" though I will only maybe work on that, Once this first game is complete. Though I wish there was away to put a gamebook feature into quest in the GUI, Since I'll never use the code. I don't see the point of using the code while there is a GUI feature. Once the GUI feature vanishes, That's when I'll have to look for something else to use.

I'm so interested by choose your own ending games. I love the interactive component, although I know that the text work is more difficult, but that's part of the appeal. I would love to work on something that is really interactive like a choose your own ending, but even beyond that so that the player actually has control to generate the story line. I would also like to make it more of a virtual reality thing, but that is still too new for me to do it any justice. If anyone is adept at VR and wants to collaborate, I'm all for that.

I don't know what 'choose your own ending' means, but if it means having different endings based upon your choices during game play (multiple story paths), I'd highly recommend checking out Jay's (Jaynabonne) Game:

Spondre ( viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4883 )

it is so well done, Jay's a great writer and great coder, the game is very professional !!!

HegemonKhan wrote:I don't know what 'choose your own ending' means, but if it means having different endings based upon your choices during game play (multiple story paths), I'd highly recommend checking out Jay's (Jaynabonne) Game:

Spondre ( viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4883 )

it is so well done, Jay's a great writer and great coder, the game is very professional !!!

Thanks HegemonKhan. I will check it out.