What I am currently doing is getting a few good chess friends and setting up online games with them. We play games specifically for helping each other out. I play a move, explain the rationale behind it and he does the same. We point out tactics that could happen, but for one little thing.
Hopefully this is working and we are learning, but to get to your question, to make this work I need at least an hour per move and so I only have about <10 games going. I find it easier to concentrate.
If you have enough time to think about your moves, it's okay to play a lot of games. If you find yourself just making random moves, or dropping a lot of pieces, you should cut back.
Its more about the quality of games rather than the number. More quality games is better, but as soon as the guality of your games drops then it is too many
Thanks for your insight guys! This has helped me alot 
I am addresssing this soon in my group. go back to lesson 001. How much time do you have for chess? If you can allow 2 hours for each reply, you will learn more about chess than playing 20 long time control games. Plus, try to look at your games when it isn't your move.
One of my current opponents has 352 current games. I try to keep mine 12 or less. Any more, I start to lose track of the lines I've analyzed and the character of each game.
Well in my case playing well over a year I have slowly improved to a competent standard, but it feels like a long time. I was very rusty at the the start as I had not played since I was a teenager. Stopped playing live soon after as I was just pants, so built up my ability by playing on-line to really learn as I went on. The analysis board is really useful to plan the next move, Maybe I shall revist Live with my better understanding soon.
I feel just playing a couple (maybe 10 max) is the best for your development. You should analyse and annotate the games deeply after they're done, and preferably have them checked by a stronger player.
Best is SLOW games, as often as possible. Nobody improved with exclusive blitz.
Aristotle had it right: moderation in all things.
Play a mix of blitz, long standard games and correspondence chess. Use correspondence chess to deepen your understanding of specific openings and to delve deeply into individual positions.
Use blitz to help with pattern recognition and to build up your chess intuition. Intuition, after all, is merely the term we use for subconscious knowledge based on wide experience. Experiment in your blitz games. Practice pawn storms, defending against pawn storms, wild attacks, exchange sacrifices, queenless middlegames, and so on.
Use standard time controls as the gold standard: Play your very best openings, get into the habit of spending 20 minutes to analyse a single position, and then manage your clock for the rest of the game. Most players agree that the skill that matters most is the ability to play standard time controls well.
Smyslov fan is spot on. Mix blitz/bullet/correspondence, and use that last to really learn openings, 3 or 5 mins to practice them.
Don't take on more than about 12 games, you will lose your way. I personally don't take on anything more than 3 days, otherwise you might end up spending 6 months or more playing a single game.
Use the analysis board ALWAYS! and write up move ideas in the notes.
Some of the above comments are a bit strange - 1 hour on a single move? If you are really stuck, leave it overnight and come back fresh.
I'm trying to get better at chess so I'm playing alot. I have about 30 or so games going on, and I want to get some opinions of which is better: to have less games so you can think more, or have more games so you get more experience