Is replay value dead?

Stercus Accidit

Having just read the thread on DLC and online passes I saw that it is attributed to the second hand market, and games being sold a few days after release and I realised that this is probably the games fault.
I played through Fallout 3 and all its dlc's twice, and Metro2033 3 times, and Stalker SOC 3 times, I am replaying New Vegas at the moment.
But most generic games I blow through in a couple of days and flog.

Is replay value dead in most games, and do they deserve to be sold second hand in a few days? Do developers need to bring back games worth replaying?

Metro2033 has sequentially more difficult gameplay modes, real challenge, atmosphere and a different way to approach the game each time you play as you choose your weapons and brilliant gameplay and visuals non-stop. - I loved this game and yet it has only a single player campaign.

The Fallouts have so much play time, and modding value they stay in our inventory of games and off the bargain shelf.


At what stage do generic FPS producers have to stop and take responsibility for making a game people will only get a couple of days of entertainment out of? If your game ends up sold second hand, its because it isn't worth keeping and no dirty downloadable tricks can fix that. What do people think, what games have that special something that makes you keep them there, just in case you replay them and likely will, and what makes a game go straight back to the shop as a trade in?

Edit: Also, is difficulty dead? How many games do we play through with zero feeling of accomplishment, as our victory was inevitable? Does this also remove the challenge and hence fun of a game, removing the desire to play it any more, requiring more cheap tricks like 'achievements' and so on?

richymcdermott

I believe it is thats why there are trphies and achievements now, theres only a handful of games i went back to uncharted infamous vanish to name a few.it not like back on the ps2 era.

Stercus Accidit

richymcdermott wrote: »

I believe it is thats why there are trphies and achievements now, theres only a handful of games i went back to uncharted infamous vanish to name a few.it not like back on the ps2 era.

I don't get the achievements or trophies, I saw an interesting talk at TED by some influential dev (can't remember who) talking about their success, and how they subtly keep people playing with psychological positive reinforcement. It is the same thing that keeps people playing mmorpg's, the progress of achievements.
He went as far as to imagine a world where the most mediocre activity is rewarded with a 'bing' noise or other positive reinforcement for buying a coke, renewing insurance and the potential for 'achievements' being used in wider society.

I see them for what I think they are, worthless, not an achievement in the least and a probable escape from reality and really achieving something worthwhile. Suffice it to say, when I get 100 achievement points for passing the tutorial, I don't get a fuzzy feeling.

richymcdermott

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I don't get the achievements or trophies, I saw an interesting talk at TED by some influential dev (can't remember who) talking about their success, and how they subtly keep people playing with psychological positive reinforcement. It is the same thing that keeps people playing mmorpg's, the progress of achievements.
He went as far as to imagine a world where the most mediocre activity is rewarded with a 'bing' noise or other positive reinforcement for buying a coke, renewing insurance and the potential for 'achievements' being used in wider society.

I see them for what I think they are, worthless, not an achievement in the least and a probable escape from reality and really achieving something worthwhile. Suffice it to say, when I get 100 achievement points for passing the tutorial, I don't get a fuzzy feeling.

Ive a few friends who collect them , he thinks of it like high scores ya used to see in arcade machines and during sega nintendo days, i dont like them either

Stercus Accidit

A high score is hard earned by skill, achievements reward grinding IMO.

nyarlothothep

I think the achievement system suits casual gamers more, playing a game like gradius can become a chore and requires someone who is totally dedicated to it. I quite like achievements though and yes I agree that its basically a quick reward system to keep someone playing.

Skerries

games may have replay value but i have never really been into playing games again once finished or bored of, especially as i have a ton of games waiting to be played

too many games so little time

johnny_ultimate

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

A high score is hard earned by skill, achievements reward grinding IMO.

Bad achievements reward grinding. The best I tend to find are the ones that subtly encourage experimentation with play styles or genuine skill - acting almost as an advanced tutorial by suggesting other ways to play / what you should be doing. Of course, it's all utterly meaningless is at the end of the day, much like a high score is (a high score is theoretically earned by grinding aka practice too!). But when there's only one person in the world with a certain achievement (this or this) then you've achieved something! You should probably consider getting some fresh air though.

They're a fun extra, but definitely taken too seriously by some. Something like 'collect the 100 hidden flags' is not rewarding anything other than time commitment. Anyone can play a game for 100 hours to find 100 flags. Actually becoming better at the time and being challenged is an entirely different thing - it's why achievements that reward talent (something like Street Fighter IV or Bayonetta) stand out.

calex71

Quite true, look at the achievements in Fallout 3 !!!! Perfect example of achievements rewarding and helping you at the same time to get the most out of the game, as many are for quests and locations you might miss out on.

Achievements etc are another argument, I love them and it's well know
I hate MP ones especially, as they alter the way people play the game which can be very annoying to anyone trying to play the game naturally.

Anyway, the ps2 point is a good one indeed. I remember playing those games to death, they seemed to have a freshness to them that most of todays games lack , I could play them over and over just from the pure enjoyment of it than trying to reach a target for an achievement, and there wasn't any tacked on multiplayer either.

Also as a society we have moved on digital media has become the norm and to a point somewhat disposable and throwaway. We also have less time I suppose being older now with jobs and families.

sumsar

Well replay value is almost dead... I know alot of my friends who only replay fallout as mentioned.... while not playing other games including myself... the only game I see worth replaying for myself at the moment is LA Noire..

but regarding Trophies... I agree they are pointless but so are highscores as mentioned and trophies are just a modern version of highscores... If people like getting trophies then let them do it it's doing nobody any harm

richymcdermott

Isnt that why we are also seeing ps2 games being hd mastered have companies ran out of freash ideas to a degree, johnny ultimate brought up the discussion on the other thread i see better vaLue for some of the collection deals than having to face other fps shooter and we there all over the place.

sumsar

richymcdermott wrote: »

Isnt that why we are also seeing ps2 games being hd mastered have companies ran out of freash ideas to a degree, johnny ultimate brought up the discussion on the other thread i see better vaLue for some of the collection deals than having to face other fps shooter and we there all over the place.

that seems to be one of the main problems... alot of games going in the multiplayer direction... fps in particular... and I know alot of people who have gotten bored of campaign modes because of being spoiled with multiplayer... myself included unfortunately

calex71

richymcdermott wrote: »

Isnt that why we are also seeing ps2 games being hd mastered have companies ran out of freash ideas to a degree, johnny ultimate brought up the discussion on the other thread i see better vaLue for some of the collection deals than having to face other fps shooter and we there all over the place.

Maybe short on ideas but they also know plenty of people will plop down a crisp €50 on the counter of gamestop etc for the MGS + ZOE collections when they come out. Not bad for repackaging an old product with a minimal amount of work done to it.

richymcdermott

calex71 wrote: »

Maybe short on ideas but they also know plenty of people will plop down a crisp €50 on the counter of gamestop etc for the MGS + ZOE collections when they come out. Not bad for repackaging an old product with a minimal amount of work done to it.

Mgs and zoe aswell as the sotc and ico usually priced at 30 quid for 2 to 3 games how can someone say no , their classics

calex71

richymcdermott wrote: »

Mgs and zoe aswell as the sotc and ico usually priced at 30 quid for 2 to 3 games how can someone say no , their classics

I'll be beating the door down when they come out thats for sure!!!!

Says a lot about their replay value if I'm this happy about them be re-released and willing to play them all again and pay for them again

richymcdermott

Same here i never had the chance to play ico or the zoe games thanks to konami and sony im super duper excited

Magill

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Having just read the thread on DLC and online passes I saw that it is attributed to the second hand market, and games being sold a few days after release and I realised that this is probably the games fault.
I played through Fallout 3 and all its dlc's twice, and Metro2033 3 times, and Stalker SOC 3 times, I am replaying New Vegas at the moment.
But most generic games I blow through in a couple of days and flog.

Is replay value dead in most games, and do they deserve to be sold second hand in a few days? Do developers need to bring back games worth replaying?

What are you comparing it too tho ? The old arcade styled games ?

Multiplayer based games like CoD/BF/WoW/Starcraft etc have far more replay ability than any old game. Some games like say... LA Noire or Bioshock aren't really teh type of games that i'd go back and play again... but games have always been like that.. you'd get some that have tons of replay value and some that you'll play once.

Edit: Also, is difficulty dead? How many games do we play through with zero feeling of accomplishment, as our victory was inevitable? Does this also remove the challenge and hence fun of a game, removing the desire to play it any more, requiring more cheap tricks like 'achievements' and so on?

No... do you play your games on the hardest difficulty ? (I doubt it) Most games are pretty ****ing hard when you put it on the hardest mode... even games like CoD or Halo are challenging when you do.

richymcdermott

Magill wrote: »

What are you comparing it too tho ? The old arcade styled games ?

Multiplayer based games like CoD/BF/WoW/Starcraft etc have far more replay ability than any old game. Some games like say... LA Noire or Bioshock aren't really teh type of games that i'd go back and play again... but games have always been like that.. you'd get some that have tons of replay value and some that you'll play once.





No... do you play your games on the hardest difficulty ? (I doubt it) Most games are pretty ****ing hard when you put it on the hardest mode... even games like CoD or Halo are challenging when you do.

I disagree i still play the megadrive sonics to this day and havent spent more than a week playing call of duty online, depending on the person really , i cant spend more than a week on games these days ,espcially online

Magill

richymcdermott wrote: »

I disagree i still play the megadrive sonics to this day and havent spent more than a week playing call of duty online, depending on the person really , i cant spend more than a week on games these days ,espcially online

well yeah it obviously depends on the person, and it works both ways. I couldn't spend more than 10 minutes playing sonic.

Point is... replay value is still there... whether or not you take advantage of it is another story. I don't think anything comes close to the replay (Or just play value i guess) value of wow tho

sumsar

Magill wrote: »

well yeah it obviously depends on the person, and it works both ways. I couldn't spend more than 10 minutes playing sonic.

Point is... replay value is still there... whether or not you take advantage of it is another story. I don't think anything comes close to the replay (Or just play value i guess) value of wow tho

The problem is, these days there are so many games for our consoles and people buy so many that we are spoiling ourselves with choice...

When I had a sega mega drive... I only had like 6 games for years.... so I made the most of those 6 games and played them so many times... while these days after we finnish one game we just go get another.

deathrider

A lot of negative and depressing threads here lately, lads- E3 was ****e, the industry is going downhill, replay value is dead, FPS games are one of the signs of the apocalypse- I think you all need to play some Viva Pinata and think happy thoughts for a while :pac:

sumsar

deathrider wrote: »

A lot of negative and depressing threads here lately, lads- E3 was ****e, the industry is going downhill, replay value is dead, FPS games are one of the signs of the apocalypse- I think you all need to play some Viva Pinata and think happy thoughts for a while :pac:

absurd we will not have any talk like that going on here.... Loco Roco is where its at.

Stercus Accidit

Magill wrote: »

No... do you play your games on the hardest difficulty ? (I doubt it) Most games are pretty ****ing hard when you put it on the hardest mode... even games like CoD or Halo are challenging when you do.

I only play the hardest setting, and my impression of a game is how well it plays in that mode.

Stercus Accidit

deathrider wrote: »

A lot of negative and depressing threads here lately, lads- E3 was ****e, the industry is going downhill, replay value is dead, FPS games are one of the signs of the apocalypse- I think you all need to play some Viva Pinata and think happy thoughts for a while :pac:

Metro2034 and a new half life are on the way and thats my excitement right there . Thats another one, HL2, a linear fps that rewards multiple play throughs just by being that good.

I think some games these days I just don't enjoy playing them. A good game has multiple approaches to an objective, allowing it to be beaten in different ways. I find the more generic and bloody screen so real a shooter, the more a chore it is to beat even once.

Azure_sky

Achievements and trophies were designed with obsessive compulsives in mind. :pac:

Sarky

sumsar wrote: »

absurd we will not have any talk like that going on here.... Loco Roco is where its at.

Since reading that post I have listened to this about 20 times in a row:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QinOrlu1Xpw

Hell, this had immense replay value just for the joy of listening to the music again. Generic space opera and gritty sweary tit-filled "realism" is all well and good, but god damn we need to have fun as well.

Overheal

Truthfully I'm sick of 200 hour video games. The last great video game I liked the length of was FFVII, 60 hours but I'm older now and I have too many interests on my plate to spend that much time on one game. I prefer achievements and difficulty levels, a nice rich 20 hour game with reasons to play it again aside from the fact that it was a good game. And we can all think of a few games we've replayed to death, with or without direct incentives.

deathrider

Overheal wrote: »

Truthfully I'm sick of 200 hour video games. The last great video game I liked the length of was FFVII, 60 hours but I'm older now and I have too many interests on my plate to spend that much time on one game. I prefer achievements and difficulty levels, a nice rich 20 hour game with reasons to play it again aside from the fact that it was a good game. And we can all think of a few games we've replayed to death, with or without direct incentives.

I agree and disagree with the idea of long-ass games like Final Fantasy. It really depends on my mood. Sometimes, it's exactly what I need- spending 70 or so hours becoming part of this amazing fitional world, falling in love with the characters, and really feeling the passion behind the fight that you're taking to the enemy. Other times though, I look at games of this lenght and think "Ya know, I just couldn't be bothered dedicating myself to this".
That said, however, for me these kinda games have zero replay value. If I've spent that long on one play-through of a game, there's little or no chance I'll ever do it again. I recently finished MAss Effect 2 (for example), and although it blew my mind, I've no intention on playing it again. If I do, it'll be a good few years down the line. I think Final Fantasy VIII was the only one I've ever played twice, and there was the guts of ten years in between plays.

Overheal

Amateur. I played VIII about 3 times to wrap my head around the story and VII about 5 or 6 times just for being brilliant.

deathrider

Overheal wrote: »

Amateur. I played VIII about 3 times to wrap my head around the story and VII about 5 or 6 times just for being brilliant.

I'm not dissing the games, they are fantastic. I simply couldn't be arsed more than once. Same as long epic 3hour movies, there not much chance I'd watch one of those more than once either.

sumsar

Sarky wrote: »

Since reading that post I have listened to this about 20 times in a row:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QinOrlu1Xpw

Hell, this had immense replay value just for the joy of listening to the music again. Generic space opera and gritty sweary tit-filled "realism" is all well and good, but god damn we need to have fun as well.

ah i had fun popping my head constantly singing while playing a game... not many games ya can say that about! and great post (video)

Shapey Fiend

In single player for the most part yes. Too many people complained about 'finishing' a game in 6 hours that developers started padding their games out so much that replayability suffered.

Thankfully nowadays we have multiplayer and those people know one good map is better than 10 average ones. You can play the same 'level' a hundred times provided the game mechanics and challenges don't get repetitive.

Note: theres still a good replayability ethos in the low budget/indie game space cos those guys don't have the resources to create 'interactive worlds' or longwinded story driven content.

gflood

This is a great thread.

I play all games one level about default difficulty. it really makes a difference and while I rarely reply at least I had a challenge. Castlevania Lords of Shadow got poor review but if you play it on a hard difficulty and learn and master all the unlcokable moves the depth there is incredible. I play all Halo games on Heroic, its like playing a different game. Enemies duck, evade and try to flank you. its great.

Stercus Accidit

I miss 'levels' too, when did the blending of an entire game together into super short checkpoints become the norm?

A good hard level that depends on your quality of progress through its entirety is a wonderful challenge. Do bad at the start? The end is harder, do well in the beginning, that extra health and ammo will be put to good use and hard earned.

I find many fps games have checkpoints every room you clear, and they have to lacking a level based game. There is nothing wrong with retiring to a stats screen and options menu to reflect on as you await a fresh and newly themed stage of gameplay, blend it all together and you get a blur.