Kids these days just have no love for the story mode.
"To that I say: If you’re playing a game just to beat it, then you”re playing it for all the wrong reasons." And who are you exactly to tell me that I am playing a game wrong? Are you some kind of authority on gaming? If I'm going to spend 65 bucks on a game, then it must have either a long enough single player campaign (7+ hours) that also happens to be very enjoyable and very polished, and very good OR it has to have at least a decent single player campaign and a fun multiplayer mode. But if you're going to make a game that's 4-5 hours maximum, and has no multiplayer mode and then have the audacity to charge me full price for such a short experience (talking about Vanquish here), then I'm not buying your game whenever I can go elsewhere and buy games that offer a much better experience for my money. With that said, had Vanquish been priced with a 30-40 dollar price tag, I wouldn't have hesitated to buy it, because it looks amazing, but without an amazing story AND amazing gameplay, a 4-6 hr game that only has great gameplay and great graphics isn't worth the full 65. If it had a good story in addition to great gameplay and great graphics, I would have reconsidered, but as it stands right now, the game does not meet the expectations I have for me to pay full price for it. I only replay SP campaigns more than once if the game is amazing. Telling people they are wrong for not replaying a game once they beat it is ignorant though.
I replay SP campaigns if they're amazing quality, or RPGS or such where you have the choice to go different paths in the game so that I can explore all the possibilities of it. And definitely agree with you (vickers500) on Vanquish. When I heard the 4 to 5 hour game play, I decided to save my money and wait till it hits $40 or so used. As for the article's comment "“Why spend 60 bucks on a game if I’m just going to blow through it in a day or two?” To that I say: If you’re playing a game just to beat it, then you”re playing it for all the wrong reasons." Games have gone up in price and $65 for a 4 hour game is idiotic. Some companies have taken notice and sold there games at $50 or $40 to get people to buy it. "Gamers have been so spoiled by online death matches and downloadable content that they no longer respect the value of titles that lack both." No, people have no respect for developers being lazy. If they're gonna make a game without online multiplayer / co-op, they better make the game long enough and have a good enough story for people to want to spend their money on it.
Agreed. Multiplayer isn't needed for a game if the singleplayer is amazing Even though it would be cool to run around a world like Oblivion with other players, no one can feel shorted by that game's singleplayer approach
"Telling people they are wrong for not replaying a game once they beat it is ignorant though." Not as ignorant of critiquing the value and quality of Vanquish without playing through it yourself.
If you actually paid attention to the article you'd see that I said it's okay to play a game just once or twice. The point was that games aren't about being fun anymore. People have been spoiled by multiplayer and created all these hoops that games need to jump through before they can be considered "good." Having not even played Vanquish you've already assessed that it would be worth 30-40 dollars. What if you played it and hated it? Would it be worth $5 then? Or maybe nothing? I would read a little more carefully next time before throwing the word "ignorant" around. You end up a victim of your own argument.
And spending $60 plus for a game with "no replay value" isn't? Fail.
When I used to finish games I used to get at least one new unlock for the next time I played the game again. For instance , Silent Hill 1 had a First person view unlock when I finished the game first time around. Now days we get noting but the credits with no replay value and no reward for clearing the game.
Oh how I miss those days, when playing a video game will lead to multiple paths. Passing say game in the hardest difficulty will earn you a costume or new character. Pretty much the gamer will get rewarded for exploring every nook and cranny of say game or pass say game in the hardest difficulty. Now I have to pay for it i.e. DLC ugh!!!
"You’re paying for an experience when you purchase a game" Well, yes, but if the time investment is minimal, then there is really no purpose in paying more to purchase the game if the experience of a rental would be exactly the same for less money.
Yeah this is dead wrong in my eyes. There's nothing wrong with replaying a game if that's your thing, but it isn't for me and never has been. I finish a game and then I'm done with it. I am definitely of the mind that if I am spending 60 bucks on a game that it better give me at least 2 weeks of enjoyment. Games like GoW and Dante's Inferno are so amazing and would be perfect scores if not for the shortness. It's not a gripe as much as it is a fact. For 2 years now I have been a faithful renter of single player adventures and I only purchase FPS, or multiplayer games. We have to seperate movies and games when it comes to replay value. We aren't playing movies. They aren't interactive. They also aren't in the 60 dollar range. So when we spend our rent money, or our paper route money, we want to get our money's worth. There's nothing wrong with that. It's called being practical. If we keep buying 10 hour adventures then that's exactly what TPTB will continue to feed us. The trend is dictated by the consumer. Would everyone's panties be in a twist over Black Ops if it were not? MW is mediocre at best, but it has incredible replay value because you get a different outcome each time you interact with diff players in different matches. Long lasting appeal stretches your investment out. Buying GoW does nothing but gives you 2 days of fun and 11 months of waiting. I say to you all......"Rent Rent Rent!!!!!!!"
To be honest, I've never completed a game more than once. I started Fallout 3 again, but changed my mind after 20 or so hours.
I'm from the old school of gaming and I always complained when a game was too short. I always wanted more replay value. I see it this way, some games you buy, some games you rent, or in my case, some you buy, then sell for almost the same price. I did that with God of War III. Amazing game! I had a blast for 3 days. Then it was over. I didn't wanna play it anymore. It had no replay value. So I sold it.
Well,the article is way off paying $60.00+tax for a game is a bit much. Only if the game offers the full experience story or strong game design plus atmosphere,etc. If the game is poor whether is gameplay, visuals, or a half ass story and no online play well is not worth it at that price.
and I pay 60 bucks, only for singleplayer experience, I care about the experience that the game gives me...if it was good then that justifies the money,if not then it was my fault in the first place and I have to deal with it. you have to choose your games carefully if you are going to cry about the money you spent. also by your logic GT5 is a $200 game and no one should complain about that.
Which is fine and dandy. But, if there isn't any replay value, then I'm still not going to feel like I got my money's worth. I think back in the day, when games weren't $60, then hey, it's fine to not be replay-able. But, I can't even take chances on games I'm not 100% sure of atm at that price point. If a dev wants to make a game with no replay value, and it isn't 100% amazing to warrant multiple play throughs, or the game isn't super long, and they don't reward you in some way for those multiple playthroughs.. Then they shouldn't be charging $60 for a game, imo, and then I would still give it a chance and I wouldn't complain.
Everyone seems pretty hung up on the $60 price tag for games. NES games ranged from $35-$45 and that was considered expensive back then. Check online and see how much the average Wii game costs. Not much difference. Even complaining about a $60 price tag seems ridiculous when you consider inflation and how much time goes into making games these days.The problem is everyone wants a game that'll last them months and months but only costs 10-20 bucks. There will always be good and bad games. Some games you'll want to rent and some you'll want to buy. And that's fine. But to set this imaginary entertainment goal at $60 bucks is ridiculous. Either you liked it or you didn't. A crappy game wouldn't be any better if it was $35 instead of $60. If you liked it then it was worth it and if that's not good enough for you then that's why you're free to trade the game in and get some money back so the entertainment value balances out with what you've actually paid. If $60 is making that big of a dent then you should probably be more worried about saving your money for things like food and rent.
Multi player too... replay value is always bigger for sandbox games....u shouldnt judge linear games based on that
what would they know about why people complain about replay value?
thats why i like rpgs. i get my moneys worth from any rpg be it jrpgs, wrpgs, and strategy gmes. other than that certain games like gears and kane and lynch 2 are fun to run through a few times whenever im bored. short games are rentals and long games are keepers. i spent like 70 hours on lost odyssey, 35 hours on magna carta 2, 25 hours on 1st playthrogh of mass effect, and im around 18 hours into divinity 2 and i just got my battle tower and the ability to turn into a dragon. i love long games with a rich backstory, multiple choices, and the ability to create a character. in divinity 2 you get to chose who lives and dies, you can solve quests in many different ways, there is so much replay value and just value. i spent around 20 hours on sidequest on lost odyssey from the time i couldve beat the last boss, hidden dungeans, secret weopons, hidden bosses, there was so much to do like in old final fantasys where you didnt want to beat it until you saw everything in the game. i rented alan wake and enslaved and while they were two of the most enjoyable games i have even had the pleasure of playing, i beat both in two days each. not worth the cash but i will still pick em up for 20 to support the dev but thats why games need replay value or a bad ass campaign like castlevania los.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.