Long Live Long Games

I love long games and would love to play the ones I have on a far more regular basis. But I get that most people don't have time or patience for them. I'm glad that I've created a new TI3 group that is actively approaching me to play, but that's pretty rare and I still haven't gotten things like Here I Stand on the table in years.

I don't think that long games are required for the epic stories or the "Remember when...?" moments. We've had plenty of those out of shorter games. Back in the early 90s, I had an RPG friend who actively disdained the idea of boardgames because he said they didn't have enough narrative sense for him (i.e. they couldn't create a story he'd remember.) I proved him wrong with 2nd Ed. Talisman and he became one of the regulars on that game and we have stories that we still remember today. But I do think that there's something even more satisfying about winning a long game because of the time and effort invested. Like Barnes, I'm not obsessed with winning, but I do play games to compete AND socialize, so that element is still there.

I think part of my tolerance for long games comes from playing GW's stuff for so long, in which a three-hour wargame is standard and playing two can easily take up a day. I'm fine with that because (at the time) it was fun (i.e. the point of games.) But I certainly understand the desire to play 3 different games in the space of one TI3 and we've done that, too.

What I find interesting is comparing game lengths to movie/tv show lengths.

15-30 mins you get your quick, cheep entertainment.

60-90 mins is that transition area where you can still get cheep entertainment, or a light story arc can develop.

90 mins - 4 hours is that point where you can really develop some meat and context.

4+ hours though and you're getting into some very epic stuff.

As to where the bridge from average to long is? I'm not quite sure.

JonJacob wrote: ... as for the no time thing. Jeff nailed it, it's usually "I'd rather" and that rather is things other than games. Music and family usually. But my internet time does not cut into that because I only post at work or when I have a few minutes at home.

Obviously when you say you don't have time you mean that you have other priorities. I could leave my family and band and friends and focus on games I suppose... not going to happen. But the fact remains that when I can squeeze in a quick game of something there is a huge part of me that longs for something more expansive. It may be nostalgia but that counts too.

You guys are too broad in your comments - there are people I know that literally can't escape for 8 hours, or even 4. One guy is so fucking henpecked by his velociraptor cunt of a wife that just trying to get him out for a 3 hour disc golf game is disastrous. I feel for the guy and he constantly complains, and I continually tell him that he's a great big fucking pussy for not standing up to the cunt. But, he has money and 3 kids, and I know for a fact she plays the "I'll take your kids and house" card when he does push back. like the old joke, "You know why divorce is so expensive? Because lawyers knkw it's worth every penny." funny thing is he's a good looking, smart, successful guy but his wife is fucking hideous and a total dirty dishrag bitch. I think it's a confidence thing.

Anyhow, there's other considerations, too. For me, my "long game group" is an hour away, so we're talking about 2 hours transit time, 5 hours game time, and I could drive 7 minutes to Circus HQ and play shorter games all day long, i make the pilgrimage, occasionally, but the logistics thing keeps it from happening because I dont want to drive an hour, get ripped for 5 hours, and drive an hour home, squinting and paranoid about Cincinnati cops (cunts, all) pulling me over because I have a bright red sports car.

But anyhow....

I think the only real draw to the longer games isn't immersion, but rather the long-view reward. That's bullshit. Shorter games like Heroquest, Ravenloft, Ascending Empires...all are immersive and awesome, but don't take all day. What makes them different is that you have far more turns and moves to create an overarching, long-view strategy that you cannot have with short games, generally. Some games like Dungeon Run are short but allow for a longer-term strategy, but nothing caon compare to a huge game of Conquest of the Empire where you have a 12 turn flanking maneuver that wins the game over 4 hours. that's the only draw I see. At least, that's how I feel. That said, I don't "feel" any more like a proto-Roman Emperor playing that over 5 hours than I feel like a Space Emperor playing Acending or a Marine playing Ambush Alley.

Much of this discussion has been dedicated to comparing apples to oranges. "I don't have enough time" doesn't prove "long games suck." So let's clear that shit out of the way.

Let's say that you're free on a Saturday afternoon and some friends are going to be playing boardgames with you. Would you rather play one big game, or 6 short games?

One long game, but simply because I get that so seldom.

I've posted too much in here when all I really wanted to say was length has nothing to do with quality. Games are good or not regardless of length. Some end too soon and some go too long, but it's based on the game that I make that call, not the length.

Hands down I'd rather play the long game. Even if I played a long game like that every weekend.

Long game. Easy decision. Rather play something I get my teeth into than short games over too soon.

Don't care if it turns out to be a non memorable experience.

It's a cop-out, but it frankly depends on the games. If those short games include Cosmic Encounter, King of Tokyo, Nexus Ops, what have you, the long game had better be Dune if I'm going to pick it.

I don't mean to say that one kind of game is inherently better than the other. There's no single quality in a game that makes it good or bad, it's a whole combination of stuff. That's why people like one auction game and not another, for example.

But I did have a great time with that game of Fury of Dracula, and I think part of that was because that game in particular survives on the ebb and flow of its pace. There can be stretches where it seems like a lot isn't happening, and then Dracula attacks Mina and suddenly everything is cooking. Not only are those parts exciting by themselves, the contrast with the slower parts makes the tense parts even better. That only works for certain games I think (there's a reason Nexus Ops is my favorite DoaM game), but it's a legitimate thing.

4 hours may just be my maximum tolerance. I can spare four hours. Finding other players, that can spare those four hours, at the same time is a challenge. Getting them to play the game 3 or 4 times in a reasonable timeframe to get to the enjoyable level of play without having to restart reading and explaining the rules and having everyone starts from scratch all over again, is near impossible.

I'm sure Here I Stand is a great game. But no. Just no.

Just so we know:

Play Here I Stand with Jay and Flim Flam and it's over in about 10 minutes.