Since God of War: Chains of Olympus, I got Space Invaders Extreme for PSP as a kinda filler until something really good came out for PSP. And since then I've been waiting. And waiting. And waiting...

Now, I know "really good" is subjective and some people might consider Secret Agent Clank "really good," so I guess I should be more specific. I've been waiting for a new PSP game to really get me excited. (I also guess I could consider playing Crisis Core: FF VII, but I'd want to play the original first and I'm having an impossible time finding a copy anywhere--isn't this a prime opportunity for the Playstation Store?) What I mean by "really good" is a great fighting game or action-adventure or action-RPG or something that will breathe some life back into that system that still has so much potential. Where's the PSP's answer to Portal? Where's the PSP's answer to Virtua Fighter or SoulCalibur? Where's the PSP's Okami or Shadow of the Colossus? Tecmo did such a great job with Tekken, but that was ages ago. Where's the follow-up?

I've been actively, faithfully browsing the Playstation Store every Thursday, close to desperation, just looking for an excuse to spend my money on downloadable games, but they keep posting the most obscure, lame-looking PS1 games (Why not FF VII?). The Classic PSP games are overpriced (I'm talking about the UK PS Store) and I already played them the first time around.

Thankfully, Loco Roco 2 and Patapon 2 are on their way to relieve my PSP ennui (although actual release dates are still pending), but that appears to be it as far as I can tell. How is it that the PSP, that has only recently released its 3000 system, is almost completely dry as far games go? Why not a PSP version of Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix (I know, I know, the PSP is not HD, but something equivalent for the PSP) or Street Fighter IV (or even Street Fighter III!). Some PSP games to match the best games the DS has to offer. Why have developers given up on the PSP?

Well, until Loco Roco 2 and Patapon 2, I guess my PSP will continue to serve as my too-large-and-clunky MP3 player...

So in my last entry, way back in August, I said I got a laptop (which continues to rock) as well as Portal and Titan Quest: Gold. Each game cost me $20 Canadian. Each game was worth every freakin' penny, including the 13% tax in Ontario.

I played Portal first. I beat the game in under four hours. Then I played it again with the developer commentary. That took another two hours and a bit. Then I played Titan Quest. And played. And played. And thankfully the game itself keeps a tab of how long I've been playing, because I wouldn't otherwise have been able to figure out that I clocked over 48 hours of play, taking my Guardian across Greece, Egypt, East Asia, and down through the depths of the Underworld, left-clicking badguys to Hades... or right back out of Hades, when I started shoving my weight around down there too.

Buying these two games at the same time for the same price really brought to my attention how different two games can be, particularly lengthwise.

Portal has received tons of flak from fans and reviewers for being too short. Pretty much every review I've read sums it up with, "Awesome game! Too short!" On the other hand, long games like Titan Quest frequently garner praise largely because they promise players a certain guaranteed minimum number of hours of gameplay. I've seen God of War II criticized for being too short, because it could be finished in under 15 hours--despite the fact that those 15 hours are solidly brutal and fun. How long do games have to be to be "long enough"?

I can understand some instances where it would be disappointing for a game to be shorter than expected--if it were a comparatively expensive game or if it ended before the story were reasonably resolved. Or if it were obvious that the game's ending had been rushed because the developers ran out of time. Those I would understand.

But I have no problem with Portal's length. In fact, I think it is an ideal length for what it is and for what it does. Because it is a relatively short game, Portal's story remains tight, no frills, no dross, no excess. You are left wanting more--not just because it is short, but because every moment of it is just so freakin' good and fresh. More than any other game I've played, Portal was the closest thing I've experienced to an immersive movie. And it was the game's tight story as much as anything else that contributed to that effect.

Additionally, I thought it smart that Portal was kept short because of the fact that your character does not develop new abilities or acquire new weapons that switch up the gameplay. Sure, you learn new ways to work with Portals as you go (and the game crafts brilliant ways to teach you how to use Portals gradually), but you're still working with the same Portal gun and nothing else. Also, with the fact that the whole game takes place in a single building--how much longer would it be worth making? How many more sterile grey labs should Chell slip her way through? How many more corroding catwalks should she climb? I think that Portal comes off that much stronger because of how much it has to offer in such a compact package.

Those who maintain that Portal is too short and demand a longer game have options: With quality user-generated content, like Portal: The Flash Version mappack and Portal: Prelude, available completely free for PC, there's plenty of stuff out there to extend the Portal experience. I'm readying myself to play Portal all the way through once more--and then I'll follow that with these two new mappacks to see how they compare.

Titan Quest on the other hand was long. Very long. Super-freakin' long. And it is hard to sustain a compelling story for such a long time. (Yes, I know it's not impossible. Lord of the Rings did it. Many others have done it. It can be done.) So much so with Titan Quest though that I didn't even bother following the story. I'd stop listening to most characters before they finished speaking because what they said wasn't all that interesting--and it usually pretty much amounted to "Go to point X and kill monster Y". I wasn't sucked in the same way I was with Portal.

Which is not to say I didn't have fun. I enjoyed Titan Quest for what it had to offer. Adventure. Treasure. Items. Abilities. Battles. More adventure, treasure, items, abilities, and battles. Endless hours of adventure, treasure, items, abilities, and battles. I defeated over 16,000 foes, playing the game through on Easy. And as the game uses ragdoll physics, no two foes fell quite the same way. (A largely entertaining thing to do in Titan Quest is build your character up past level 30, then return to the early levels of the game, and just watch the satyrs and wild boars fly when you whack them.). But having finished Titan Quest once, all the way through, on the first difficulty setting, I'm ready to set the game aside and have a long break, and I'm left with that kind of gross feeling of overindulgence like I get when I eat too many Doritos. Did I really play that much just to beat one game? And although Titan Quest was incredible value, it has not left nearly the same impression on me as Portal. For me, Portal was one of those amazing gaming moments, like when I first saw a Nintendo Entertainment System. Like when I first learned how to throw a fireball in Street Fighter II. Like when I first played DooM. Like when I first played multiplayer DooM. Portal was one of those landmarks.

And at $20, it was by far the least expensive.

Oh yeah! This past weekend, I picked myself up a new lappy to replace my old one that died before I left England. Along with the laptop, I picked up a copy of Portal, which I've been dying to play for months, and Titan Quest Gold, to tide me over until Diablo III (as well as StarCraft II) comes out.

Awesome!