If you don't like a game-do you leave it unfinished?

murphyebass

The key for me with this is only buy games when you feel you'll get value for your money.

I spend €20 on a game I want 20 hours of play.

I used to buy games galore and they sat on shelves.

Not anymore, wait for price drops for single player games...

That way if I don't finish them so what.

or like with Destiny or COD or enter online shooter/game here, play them to death.

Digital Solitude

murphyebass wrote: »

The key for me with this is only buy games when you feel you'll get value for your money.

I spend €20 on a game I want 20 hours of play.

I used to buy games galore and they sat on shelves.

Not anymore, wait for price drops for single player games...

That way if I don't finish them so what.

or like with Destiny or COD or enter online shooter/game here, play them to death.

I use the €1 = 1hr gameplay too. If I get more hours from it, great stuff, if I get less, it could be worth it depending on the game.

Generally, if its not fun, what's the point? Through Humble Bundle and PS+, I've a very large backlog. Coupled with a small WiiU and 3DS collection I haven't played, there's too many good games I already own but haven't played to bother with anything that isn't fun.

I'll give a game 20 minutes, if its crap, its forgotten about forever. If its anyway decent, it gets another hour of play before I decide if its worth playing or not.

Nerdlingr

I have so many games unfinished... never finished bioshock 1 but bought the next two to give the impetus to go back and finish it (which i never did). Bioshock 2 is still in its box.
Did the same with mass effect, finished 1 bought the next two...decided to finish them so i could play andromeda and ended up playing wasteland 2 instead !!
Think the only games I've ever finished are the GTA ones, Fallout 3, Red Dead redemption, Witcher 3, Skyrim and Borderlands 1. :o

Would you kindly finish Bioshock 1!

Digital Solitude

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would you kindly finish Bioshock 1!

Would you believe I dropped it not long after the story climax

Nerdlingr

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you kindly finish Bioshock 1!

its on the list ! :P

Retr0gamer

Digital Solitude wrote: »

murphyebass wrote: »

The key for me with this is only buy games when you feel you'll get value for your money.

I spend €20 on a game I want 20 hours of play.

I used to buy games galore and they sat on shelves.

Not anymore, wait for price drops for single player games...

That way if I don't finish them so what.

or like with Destiny or COD or enter online shooter/game here, play them to death.

I use the €1 = 1hr gameplay too. If I get more hours from it, great stuff, if I get less, it could be worth it depending on the game.

Generally, if its not fun, what's the point? Through Humble Bundle and PS+, I've a very large backlog. Coupled with a small WiiU and 3DS collection I haven't played, there's too many good games I already own but haven't played to bother with anything that isn't fun.

I'll give a game 20 minutes, if its crap, its forgotten about forever. If its anyway decent, it gets another hour of play before I decide if its worth playing or not.

Can't think of a worse way to judge a game. Mist of the best games ever made pack all their goodness in a concise 6 to 8 hour game time. That's all they need. The story come to its conclusion and the game play systems have been explored as much as they can be. No need to drag it out to 40 to 200 hours since the game play isn't going to change.

Of course there are exceptions. The witcher 3 and breath of the wild remain as fresh and compelling long after that 8 hour period but the vast majority of games these days stretch the game out thin over too long a play time we'll after all the game play scenarios and mechanics have worn thin.

Digital Solitude

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Can't think of a worse way to judge a game. Mist of the best games ever made pack all their goodness in a concise 6 to 8 hour game time. That's all they need. The story come to its conclusion and the game play systems have been explored as much as they can be. No need to drag it out to 40 to 200 hours since the game play isn't going to change.

Of course there are exceptions. The witcher 3 and breath of the wild remain as fresh and compelling long after that 8 hour period but the vast majority of games these days stretch the game out thin over too long a play time we'll after all the game play scenarios and mechanics have worn thin.

As I said, depends on the game. A short indie for €20 goes past this system, but any AAA I buy is subject to it. Its more a way of judging my moneys worth over actually rating the game itself.

johnny_ultimate

'Content' and somewhat distorted concepts of 'value for money' are major factors holding games back. I would say it is close to the rule that most video games are more than happy to waste your time - whether that's through repetition, grinding, filler, whatever. Time wasting is baked into the very DNA of many schools of game design. While endless variants on a theme can work if it's an exceptionally well-judged loop in the first place, in many cases it's just looking to give you that irregular dopamine hit of a new piece of loot or achievement ping as a reward for minutes or hours of grinding. Frankly: **** that.

With that in mind, yes often it is just worth turning off a game - if it doesn't respect your time, then you don't owe it much respect either. The frustrating Nier Automata and the even worse Rise of the Tomb Raider are two recent games I suffered through and regretted after, both of which had nowhere near enough to say to justify the 20-30 hour ask. Other games I'm just increasingly happy to leave unfinished. As ever: give me two great hours over 30 mediocre hours any day of the week, even at the same price (not to mention that short form is often infinitely better for telling stories).

Developers should strive to avoid repeating ideas (allowances made for games that reward practice / skill - mostly taking about single player here). You can change situations, but do it substantially enough so the player re-evaluates or learns something extra about the core mechanics. Nintendo are the kings of constantly hurling out new ideas, but the likes of Titanfall 2 show it can be done within strict genre and commercial confines too.

Basically: most games are too damn long. Even Breath of the Wild - which is the most ideas-rich open world game I've ever played by a very wide margin - manages to unnecessarily recycle ideas from time to time (another test of strength?!). I don't think long-form gaming is always a bad thing - something like the Persona series embraces it to do something unique, while BotW (95% of the time), The Witness or Stephen's Sausage Roll prove that fresh mechanical ideas can still be offered up after 30, 40, 50 hours. Developers should strive for that, but many - whether through lack of imagination or limited resources - don't. And when that's the case, it's often not worth pushing through to achieve some arbitrary achievement or sense of closure.

Few if any mediums demand as much time as gaming, and yet so few games offer up something worthwhile in return for that investment.

Robert ninja

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Few if any mediums demand as much time as gaming, and yet so few games offer up something worthwhile in return for that investment.

The return is fun. Not everyone likes the same kind of games, that's all. I'll be investing 100s of hours into Tekken 7 and I expect I'll love every bloody second of it.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

give me two great hours over 30 mediocre hours any day of the week, even at the same price

Quality > Quantity sure but I've yet to find a game that can be fully enjoyed and is that good in 2 hours making me want to pay for full price for it. There's better ways to make that €60 entertain me. Well... each to their own. I'll probably never buy walking simulators for €1 let alone €60. If i wanted to navigate a game looking at 3D models and being told a story I'd play an audio book while fecking around gmod RP maps.

CiDeRmAn

It's simply about value for money.
And it's entirely subjective.
So the are those who bought No Man's Sky at full price for their PS4 and felt it was a fantastic buy, the were those who didn't hesitate but bring it back in disgust.
Even with widely lauded titles like Breath of the Wild, I'm sure there are those that are disappointed, preferring the tighter, more linear experience that Ocarina of Time delivered.
Proteus, Everyone's gone to the Rapture, Gunstar Heroes...
There are games that go on for 60 hours plus and you wished for more at the end, there are those that lasted 4 and if was 3 too many.

johnny_ultimate

Robert ninja wrote: »

I'll probably never buy walking simulators for €1 let alone €60.

I don't know if I've ever seen a new 'walking simulator' pass the €20 mark on release - so you'd be ****ing right to not pay €60 :pac:

pablomakaveli

I stopped playing Beholder this week because after 3 hours I found it too boring. I like the ideas and atmosphere it has but it just wasnt pulling me in.

Im more inclined to just stop playing a game now if I'm not enjoying it as gaming becomes a chore instead of an enjoyable pasttime. I never rule out returning to some of these games in the future. Sometimes, like in this case with Beholder, I'm just not in the mood for a certain game. Of course there are some games that are just terrible and I wont ever see myself coming back to.

CiDeRmAn

Breath of the Wild was started to become a chore for me, as I couldn't set aside a slice of time to play it.
Picked it back up yesterday after a fortnight of little or no play and I'm loving it.

awec

If a game doesn't grab me in the first 3 or 4 hours I probably won't bother with it. I don't have the attention span to have to work on getting into a game and anything grindy just bores me to tears.