Friday, September 29, 2006

The Most Game for Your Money

i was intrigued recently by a wired news post that expressed the opinion that a lot of games today take too much longer to fully complete than advertised or suggested online. other outlets like joystiq, kotaku and slashdot had plenty of voices representing each side of the argument on whether that was true or not.

i see both sides. frequently on here i write about how i can't ever find enough time to devote solely to games and how that often prevents me from picking it up and playing it all the time. i sympathize entirely with the wired author, with so many games out there for a variety of platforms, it's difficult not to go out and buy loads of games without having properly finished a game you've been working on (and enjoying) for a while. if you're trying your best to be an adult and an avid gamer, it's almost impossible to devote proper time to a well-crafted game as well as your loved ones, job, etc.

on the other hand, what is this guy complaining about? so the game was advertised as providing 20 hours of entertainment, and you got 40 hours of fun out of it? doesn't that sound like a good deal for your money? if you think about it, if you get enough entertainment out of a game, it's really a lot more cost-effective than something else like going to the movies.

i agree that at times developers could do a better job at making games a little less redundant, so that you don't end up completing a game in 40 hours when you really hated the middle 20 hours of it. i'd say overall i enjoy a 20-40 hour adventure-type experience over something that you pick up and play for 10 minutes and get nowhere. that's probably why, despite liking both games, i play paper mario a lot more often than say, katamari damacy.

currently, paper mario is my best example for the topic of getting the most out of a game to justify its cost. i would imagine most people could finish the game in probably 25-30 hours, but i'm currently on about 38 with just a little left to go. it's been a great, surprisingly fun game, but of course, i'm ready for it to be over with. i feel like i've mentioned it on this blog way too many times and i just need to get it over with and spend time on something else. funny thing is, i bought it in october 2004 when it had just come out, and basically let it sit on the shelf for a good year.

i read about some of these hardcore RPG types putting in well over 100 hours into a game and just think "wow, i'm staying clear of that game." there's definitely a happy medium somewhere between 5 minutes and 100+ hours.

--justin

1 comment:

Unknown said...

I've been playing Enchanted Arms on my 360... and I'm at the final boss who I can't beat, heh. Anyways, my gamesave currently says about 46 hours of gameplay or so.

And nah, I never once thought to look at how long I played WoW for. I guess getting a tangible number on how much time I wasted was too scary for me, haha.