It's cool to see the ''shorter games'' thesis in B2B media for the first time. 🎉 It's a topic I've discussed publicly since last year. I'm a firm believer shorter games can make AAA console/PC more sustainable. Let's unpack. AAA games can take over five years to develop, with budgets in the hundreds of millions. Most gamers who play the biggest RPGs – like Diablo IV, Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, and Baldur’s Gate 3 (BG3) – never finished the main story. Trophy and achievement data accessible via Steam, PlayStation, and Xbox shows this (see image). Many players get their gaming fix from sidequests and exploring game worlds, but enjoying the main story takes precedence for many. Yet, long stories can lead to player churn, difficulty is an issue for some players, or perhaps another game came along that was more engaging. 🥷Just 15% to 17% of players who started the 61-hour-long #AssassinsCreedValhalla campaign finished it. The title is known among players and critics for being bloated.🥷 ⚔️15% to 22% finished #BG3's 68-hour campaign. Most critics agree that the game’s content – including the side quests, often filler in other games – is curated, thoughtful, and a unique value proposition. It's the exception that proves rule.⚔️ 😈#DiabloIV, in which the story takes around 26 hours to complete, was finished by 25% to 52% of those who played it, depending on the platform (being on Game Pass drives its completion rates down).😈 🕸️Shorter single-player games in other genres, like open-world action game #SpiderMan (17 hours) and horror shooter The Last of Us (16 hours), have completion rates of around 50%🕸️ The negative correlation between game length and completion signals that growing development timelines and budgets have reached diminishing returns. If developers cut game lengths for titles like Assassin’s Creed by 20%, would players even notice? Unlikely. And even if they did, they might even appreciate it. The issue goes beyond wasting development time. It is tempting to think that once a consumer has bought a game, developers do not need to worry about how many actually complete it. However, the finale is the culmination – and often the peak – of the entire experience. Players who miss out on what's often the best part of the game are not reaping the benefits of the product they paid for, negatively impacting their perception of the game’s value and perhaps influencing future purchasing decisions. Shorter games can even be a marketing bullet point for time-strapped gamers who want a full experience but do not want to slog through 10 hours of filler content. Life gets in the way of game time. Completion rate is closely linked to a variety of factors: time, budget, and audience preferences. Games developers should carefully analyse the impact of each of these factors to maximise gamers' lifetime value. Put simply, a full experience does not mean more icons on the map. And it CERTAINLY does not mean wasting player time.
Justin Ruiss
2w
Absolutely agree. I find in certain instances that longer games (which still hold tons of value to them) can have diminishing returns. FFVII Rebirth feels like this at times where chasing the Platinum becomes tedious (and dare I say not fun). Conversely Alan Wake 2 is very well-paced with additional content being available post game. Conjecture on whether players will actually go back to the title months after, but the core game felt incredibly smooth (even if you consider the hour count to be "low").
Giorgio Duso
2w
Great post, Rhys! To increase the potential reach of this discussion: Churn isn’t triggered only by game length (how long it takes to beat), but also by the design of trophies in some games, which can sometimes stray too far from the “core fantasy” of each experience. Insomniac Games, especially with its Spider-Man titles, is trying to push players closer to “living the experience” (with in-game reminders) while also connecting trophies to a more fulfilling (and shorter) gameplay time. If you played, can you confirm it? 🎮
Boris Gojic
2w
Activision Blizzard employee here (disclosing for transparency). I don’t know if the three examples used here are the best to take into account. All of these studios have a tradition of putting out massive games, so players buy into this, whether they complete the campaign or not. It‘s been 11 years between Diablo III and IV. There‘s a great lesson for studios starting a new franchise/series though.
I guess the challenge is the messaging around this, particularly in the context of higher prices - if you ask consumers they will always want more, even if their behaviour says otherwise.
Lea G.
2w
Careful Rhys, people will start to think you are a mobile industry plant :-D
The question is if length is the only factor why the people stop playing these games? So you can avoid these factors. Additionally some games have a lot of gameplay besides the story. So the question is, so only because someone doesn’t complete the story it does not mean this person is not enjoyed the game or played not a lot. E.g. I don‘t complete the halo infinity campaign because the last boss is too hard for me, but I am playing a lot of in multiplayer. In this case the completion of story doesn’t say a lot about issue with length or playing the game a lot. Only an example which makes such conclusions complex.
Davor Igrić
2w
We can see something similar by using PlayTracker's data. There's a significant number of users, we call them "Skyrim Procrastinators" (people who have played Skyrim on any platform, VR included, for over 10 hours, but have not completed the main story) who are super into achievement hunting, super into buying new titles, but interestingly, not 100%-ing them. We can see all that by using our new analytics tool Lens, designed to help studios and publishers make better decisions about their games. So that's a great insight you have there, studios could really benefit from making their games shorter, at least for some audiences like the one I mentioned.
Tom Jongens
2w
Nice to see more charts on this. It's something we push with Exiin. For the player to have a more manageable game to play with the ability to finish and for the studio to focus is efforts and resources on. Such a waste of work knowing 80% don't reach endgame content.
Joe Marshall
2w
most things (games, movies, tv shows) should be shorter. Shorter run / play time, less games / movies in a series. Editing is good.
Games Analyst | Consultant | Writer
2wDive deeper into this trend with the following MIDiA Research content: BLOG Single-player game budgets and scopes have spiralled out of control – it’s time to shrink the scope: https://www.midiaresearch.com/blog/single-player-game-budgets-and-scopes-have-spiralled-out-of-control-its-time-to-shrink-the-scope BLOG Gamers aren't finishing games, and that's a problem: https://www.midiaresearch.com/blog/gamers-arent-finishing-games-and-thats-a-problem REPORT Bigger is not always better: Premium gaming's big AA opportunity: https://www.midiaresearch.com/reports/bigger-is-not-always-better-premium-gamings-aa-opportunity BONUS LinkedIn post from me talking about the topic at the beginning of the year: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rhyselliott_cyberpunk2077-phantomliberty-cyberpunk-activity-7150123153288036352-Rqbq/