reader discussion

Reader Discussion: Can A Game Be Too Big?

by Ben Reeves on May 09, 2015 at 09:14 AM

We're nearing the release of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, which looks awesome, but I'm also intimidated by the idea of playing through such a massive beast of a game. Do you think that a game can get too big, that a game can get to the point that it hurts the quality of the title?

When I was younger, I used to love the idea of diving into a game that was so massive it took months to beat, but as I've gotten older, I've found that I have less and less time to give to demanding games. It's a tale as old as time, I know, but I first started to feel like a game was too big for me when I was playing Skyrim, and now I'm staring down at the Witcher 3, and I'm wondering if I have what it takes to commit to that game? I remember playing Dragon Age: Inquisition and thinking that I would have enjoyed it a lot more if it didn't force me to complete a certain amount of side quests before opening up the next main story mission.

What about you? Do you think that long games are usually better? Do you think that developers who are trying to make a long game sometimes fill it with so much content that it can hurt the overall quality of the product? Could some longer games be better if they were trimmed down a bit?