Then, once we got game engines that enabled anyone to make a game, we started seeing walking simulators and extremely short artsy games. Long, fun single player campaigns which were replaced with 4-6 hour campaigns and a multi player mode i have no interest in. I had no issue for paying even more for games back in the C64 or Sega Master System era but something changed right around the first Call of Duty MW. In the case of Untitled Goose game, while it's a novel idea it's not one i would over pay for because i want more of it. In your example, i'm sure my research would have resulted in me knowing that despite it's short length, there would be a lot of replay value and i would have no issue paying for it. If it's a sports game, i know i will get my moneys worth as long as the gameplay is goodģ - So i look at it differently. Finally i check the hltb website at which point i usually feel like i can make an informed decision. First stop is Steam user reviews and forums if they exist, if not then a subreddit. Untitled Goose game does not strike me as a game that have any of those thoughĢ - I like to think i do my research properly. Usually, i'm ok with shorter games at a high price point if they have a new game+ or are high score chasers or have such great gameplay that you'd play them again and again. It's an idealism, and you're probably smart to avoid the tax, but what do you think of the idea of 'the stingy gamer with good taste' being a major culprit of the stagnation of the $59.99 game?Ĭlick to expand.1 - I've never played Vanquish sadly but if you can potentially get 50 hours out of it despite it being a short game, then it's fine in my book. That support failed, obviously, and most TPS games are still Gears clones with different lipsticks on. The game doesn't say you're done - in my mind it's the "editor's voice" saying you're done and to move on to the next game to review for deadline.ġ) What do you think of that paragraph of nonsense? Agree? Disagree? Tl drĢ) How do not miss these games, if the headline chatter is all "short campaign"?ģ) What do you think of the idea of "support"? Like, I pay the day 1 premium because I want more games like Vanquish. I like Vanquish as posterboy becuase it absolutely belongs in that AAA space and pricepoint - it's literally commentary on the zeitgiest of the era - and as such is taken to task for it's length from 'Start Game' to 'Credits'. If you fall in love, you could get 50+ experimenting with different paths and techniques to mastery. On paper, it's a "6 hour" game, but it has a proper game-ass game trajectory of about 20 hours. Here's a game that has the goods in the gameplay department, liberal "AAA" setpiece and spectacle, zero fat on the bone, and a layer of depth that is not obvious until the end. ![]() I think the best game to discuss for this is Vanquish. Our taste seems aligned, and I think the difference would be the "arcade" style of content via mastery. I bet if we diff-ed our libraries (and I crossed out every game I got burnt on) that would be the list we could talk about. Gameplay is king indeed! (and "Content" is for bedwetters). Nah man, you're not coming off annoyed and i didn't mean to imply it Arcade games would not fall under my rule since they have crazy replay valueĪll that being said, i actually really like your rule and it's definitely an interesting perspective i hadn't thought of Gone Home, Monument Valley and Firewatch are great examples of the kind of game i actively avoid. It is the most important aspect by far and the games i reject because of my rule are usually preachy walking simulators or pretentious puzzle-lite games. ![]() I seriously doubt you could name one game i've missed because of my rule that i would have enjoyed. So while it may not be relevant to you, it is relevant to me Some people are happy to pay for a one hour walking simulator and to them it's completely irrelevant. Is it a relevant criticism for anyone else? That depends entirely on your perspective. ![]() As such, it will be a very deciding factor in whether i buy a game or not, thus it is a relevant criticism for me. Click to expand.Nah man, you're not coming off annoyed and i didn't mean to imply itĪs for the length and the resulting criticism, here is how i see it - for me, the length of a game is an important factor.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |