Don't give me this crap about minimum length! Games are an experience in a box, with a price tag on them.
That rainy day playing a co-op campaign with your friend? That evening of rock band? That weird little indie game?
These are the experiences we pay for.
If a game makes you shout with tense exultation (Company of Heroes), transports you into a different world (Mount & Blade), or makes you cry (Mother 3), THEN GREAT!
You've just had a hand-crafted interactive experience.
If I've enjoyed an experience, and feel it's worth the price I payed for the game, then I feel satisfied. Be it movie, book, game or piece of music.
Screw you, real men cry.
Yes, if the experience is short, then OF COURSE I want more. But at some point, the flavor becomes bland. Do I want it to be extended at the cost of becoming dull?
Halting the game before it loses it's flavor takes skill.
Leave 'em wanting more. Various TV shows that blather on for several sessions
too many come to mind. Portal did what it did, and did it strongly.
Saying that the developers should have stretched that out for another couple of hours is bullshit! Some concepts are longer then others. I don't WANT a game that is a weak experience because they've been forced to spread the the idea across too much ground. I want a strong experience, not some weak diluted crap.
- Michael Todd
www.spyeart.com
Also, some great people have been posting their thoughts on this topic:
Ron Carmel of 2d Boy
(I thought this article was great)
Steve Swink (Steve is an amazing person)
Greg Wohlwend of Intution Games (A haiku, awesome)
Chris
Hecker of Spy Party (Hecker's a smart guy)
Dave Gilbert of Wadjet Eye Games
Matt Gilgenbach of 24 Caret Games
Eitan Glinert of Fire Hose Games
Cliff Harris of Positech Games
Scott Macmillan of Macguffin Games
Lau Korsgaard of Copenhagen Game Collective
Martin Pichlmair of Broken Rules