can a game be good if it's exceptionally short?

>>382056639
yeah. Resident Evil 7 was incredibly good despite being short

>>382056639
Yes, it has to be priced differently though imo

Depends on if it's a blind first runthrough compared to how much it cost.

If it's a 1 hour game on the first completely blind playthrough for more than 5 dollars, it's trash.

Period.

I got furi """free""" through ps plus
Each boss was pretty cool and unique and the game probably would have suffered if they jammed it with a bunch bosses

File: manly tears in drag.png (1001KB, 759x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 759x1600px

majora's mask is much shorter and compact than ocarina of time, but is every bit as good

Cave Story

most good NES games were relatively short, so yes

Length and quality are in no way correlated

>>382056639
portal

Length is only important when it comes to purchasing value. The idea of longer being "better" is a completely sterile way of determining a game's greatness and is completely divorced from anything that makes games great. In fact, there's often diminishing returns when a game gets long enough. Super impressive "100 epics" usually involves repetitive and recycled content that doesn't really add any new experiences. Is MGS3 "bad" because you don't have an ep*c openworld and a thousand shitty sidequests to pad out its "experience"? The sweetspot for many games I've found is anywhere between 15-35 hours imo.

>>382057158
were there anymore pics of him crossdressing?
he's really cute in a dress.

>>382057737
the other pics i saw but didn't save included him sticking the back end up a stapler up his butt, then using it to staple some weird crayon drawings together, and one of him arching a load onto a lit scented candle