Suggestion (length field)
|#1 by echo|
2010-01-08 at 00:56
|You think it would be a bad idea to put somewhere to put the actual line count in something? To me, this is a much better indicator of length than some subjective hour count. Apologies if this has already been suggested, I glanced through the first couple of pages and didn't see anything about it, at least.|
|#2 by chikan|
2010-01-08 at 01:00
|As much as I like the idea, accurate line counts and script sizes (without the coding, obviously) are quite hard to obtain so I don't think it justifies having its own field.|
|#3 by izmosmolnar|
2010-01-08 at 01:08
|Line counts aren't that good in the end. A giant line from a wall of text TL;DR counts the same as an ellipses only line.|
On the other hand adding the trimmed down MB scriptsize (which doesn't have code and other rubbish) would be appreciated indeed.
|#4 by yorhel|
2010-01-08 at 07:16
|While many people use the scriptsize as indicative of the length, I don't believe that is very accurate, either. A simple formatting or character encoding change could make a huge difference.|
A more accurate measurement would be the character count, only including visible characters (no formatting stuff). But this will be rather hard to obtain for so many games.
|#5 by kelpie|
2010-01-08 at 07:38
|It might be neat information to have, but probably less than useful--a game that diverges heavily may be short but have a huge script due to all the divergent paths, whereas a purely linear game will be longer than a less linear game with an identically sized script. This, combined with the difficulty of actually obtaining the information, makes it seem to me not worth the trouble.|
 Of course, here I'm using length to mean the length of any single play-through, rather than taking all possible routes. It *would* be kind of nice to have a way to mention that a game has lots of replay value... is there a tag or something for that?
|#6 by silver|
2010-01-08 at 07:53
|well, there are several tags describing game's routes (see g26), but many players read all or most of the routes anyway (and for some games, v17 for example, it's impossible to get a big picture without reading every route), so length should describle time to read the most part of in-game text.|
But maybe it's good idea to indicate number of routes somewhere - it would be also useful to see if you have completed the game (well, that can be checked by gallery or other means) or there's something worth searching for
|#7 by echo|
2010-01-11 at 14:55
|I'd still consider a game with a lot of short routes long, if it had enough routes to justify it.|
|#8 by gabezhul|
2010-01-11 at 16:53
|I can't see the problem. I think the current system is as good as any other, since you could never make a perfect length-score because of the individual reading speed of the reader.|
For example, even though Ever 17 is listed as a Long (30-50 hours) game, I finished it in about 20 hours or less. I can read like a machine when I'm interested. :P (And before you ask: yeah, all the routes and the true ending, without the bad ends, and without a walkthrough...)Last modified on 2010-01-11 at 16:54
You must be logged in to reply to this thread.