It’s definitely both for me, time management and responsibilities definitely play a part in what I’m able to dedicate to a game and some games definitely have subjectively useless filler for me.
I’ve definitely moved from playing RPGs and competitive shooters to just RPGs as I’m done with grinding for the most part and don’t want to spend my limited time that way lol. Totally get that a lot of people like rogue likes and souls type stuff where the grind is more the point, but it’s not really my cup of tea anymore.
I also see that there’s a trend for studios to just pack their games with a lot of content (Red Dead Redemption 2 having had some more interesting filler, to me, and stuff like Assassin’s Creed getting more grindy).
I find my gaming is more like how I consume books, now. I’ll have a couple RPGs going at a time (usually a replay of something I’ve enjoyed and want to reexperience and another that I’ll be trying out of my backlog) and just play what strikes my fancy.
I get what you’re saying with the bundle kinda thing where you may just skip a game if it’s not something that really grabs you.
I’ve definitely had a few false starts and games where I just kinda saw what they were about and didn’t want to continue or wasn’t super interested.
There are definitely games I’ve put on my docket that I’m more interested in because of their history and relation to the gaming industry, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines and S.T.A.L.K.E.R for example.
I think most of it is that I’ve needed to extend my playthroughs to make them work with my life as I’m no longer able to just come home from school and game for like 3 hours a day. I mostly want to either get into (or back into) a cool plot or story and/or consume some older gems I had not been exposed to earlier as I definitely don’t have as much free time.
I’m in a similar boat. I like to focus on more unique and interesting games nowadays (e.g., Outer Wilds), and let me tell you, Vampire The Masquerade is surely one them. I loved that game despite the jank, even if it won’t be your cup of tea, there’s nothing like it. (and STALKER is great too)
Haha I actually kind of loved the jank at points. It was also delightfully early 2000s campy (love those kinds of movies and still show 10 Things I Hate About You in my Shakespeare unit).
Big fan of STALKER so far and I’m slowly getting through the trilogy lol.
I don’t mind 30-40 hours as long as it has a definite end to it. I might play side quests if it’s a really good game and I don’t want the finale of reaching the end yet.
Welcome to the Patient Gamers world. Now that I’m in my late 30s with responsibilities, I’ll take a short linear game (e.g. Mafia Definitive Edition) with a compelling story over long, repetitive games (e.g. Assassin’s Creed). Quality over quantity for me. Since I don’t have a lot of time, I want to spend some quality time with the game.
I don’t really see how what you’re describing relates to patient gaming – isn’t patient gaming moreso to do with waiting until games drop in price, then getting them patched up with all their DLC?
I have to say, it’s also a subculture of it. When I used to participate in r/patientgamers, a lot of people (myself included) realised that we didn’t care about the latest releases because of our responsibilities (and maturity), and many of us preferred short to long.
I’d say it’s parallel to or supportive of patient gaming.
Like, that commentor has less time to dedicate, so they’ll go for games with plots they may have heard were good/engaging which may not always be the latest, pricey, AAA content. They may also return to a game they’ve already bought because they enjoyed it so much.
In researching games that they’re interested in, they’re already making value decisions based on content, so it makes sense that they may add in value considerations based on pricing as well.
I stopped playing AAA games because there is so much filler. I would prefer if games went for 3-6 hours for playtime with a clean and tight plot.
I don’t read books that have a cool intro, 300 pages explaining how everything works, 1000 pages of characters just doing random stuff for random people, and then a return to actual plot in the last 100 pages.
I stopped playing AAA games because there is so much filler. I would prefer if games went for 3-6 hours for playtime with a clean and tight plot.
I don’t read books that have a cool intro, 300 pages explaining how everything works, 1000 pages of characters just doing random stuff for random people, and then a return to actual plot in the last 100 pages.
I hope for a world where fun and optimization are prioritized over length and graphics
Tbh I think that in the world, games would be cheaper and micro-transactions would be seen in a better light. I think people don’t mind supporting a developer who makes an actually good title
Even when it’s a small developer, I’d still rather buy the whole game/expansion at once. It’s easier to find reviews that way, and less immersion-breaking. I don’t want to be reminded of real world-money while playing.
I was thinking about getting one but then I saw Retroid’s line of products. They run Android instead of using FPGAs so you can play regular Android games (including modern re-releases as well as Steam’s Remote Play) but they dual-boot a stripped-down version of Android for running emulators with better performance.
Was hella fun playing MediEvil on the flight from the US to India and that was with the Retroid Pocket 2, they have a much larger model out now.
The gaming space may have changed but I’d say it’s because you changed.
You brought in your decision the “worth playing”. Is this game worth to buy or is this game worth my time. When you can give your time a value, you can also compare it to what you are doing and if it’s worth to do that.
I tend to not really do that too much, because gaming is a hobby. If I start to compare it to what I could earn, well it doesn’t give the most “value” in monetary gain or maybe knowledge gain. But that is why it is a hobby for me, not work.
On the other side, is it worth playing? What is the comparison? The price? If you like the game? For me, if I can enjoy it, and come back to it, even if it’s very long (Warframe for example is the one where I have the most hours played), well it’s worth playing to me.
Tho some games are very expensive for the experience they give and some are really s* recently (gollum *cough) and those are not worth playing.
And is it worth playing compared to your other games? Maybe, maybe not? If you wait you can get discounts (at least on pc), and increase the value. And play your backlog in the meantime.
I think that playing the most recent games can be enjoyable but not always the best “value”. Tho I still play “newer” even if I have the backlog, which I use as a filler between releases and “patient gamers” style.
I think you’ve nailed it by outlining the worry of kids without an income of their own - if you can’t buy what you want whenever, game length is a plus, but when you’ve got disposable income, summer sales, the odd free game, and new good titles coming out all the time, brevity’s more valuable than each game being a forever-game.
Yeah, I feel the same. When I was younger I loved RPGs because they usually gave you 40+ hours of content just for the main story. Now I kind of dread playing them because it takes so much mental effort.
Then again, Long Covid also gave me brainfog. But I also felt that way before I had it. I guess back then my mental capacity was taken up by work.
Dude! Long COVID messed me up too, I had some serious brain fog for about six months and then it slowly lifted. I don’t think I’m the same for sure, but it’s gotten better.
I know it’s different for a lot of people so I’m hoping for the best for you!
I profoundly enjoyed UberDanger’s “Journey from 1-60” . An adventure though WoW Classic full of insanity, grinding and virtual gambling. Nothing like it. www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dXLG-Wf93s
A Game Boy clone console that can play original Game Boy (Color/Advance) cartridges with a terrific screen and support for many more systems’ ROMs via OpenFPGA.
It’s an expensive high end GameBoy clone, basically. It uses some specialized hardware (FPGA) to run original GB cartridges and can also run other retro consoles pretty well. It’s a bit nicer than most other handheld emulator devices that are on the market right now, although it’s limited in some other ways.
One limitation that games like Civ suffer from is that diplomacy is ultimately pretty shallow because there can only be one winner, so even when you’re building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).
What I would love to see is a multiplayer game like Civ but where each player has independent win conditions (so that a game could have multiple winners, or no winners). The condition could even just be to attain a certain level of happiness or wealth. And if you achieve that then you win even if other nations are bigger or stronger, and conversely if you don’t achieve it you lose even if you are the last nation standing. So decisions to go to war, or focus on technological development, or build alliances or trading relationships, etc, are driven by the wants and needs of your own people and not just a need to dominate others.
I think I’d like that if there was a single winner as well. Something like to win you need to complete two objectives, one public and one secret. So other players can still work against you but they dont know what you’re trying to do.
even when you’re building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).
This is exactly what made me gravitate away from Civ games and more towards Paradox strategy, where the AI actually behaves more like a real country would do instead of a player trying to win a game.
bin.pol.social
Gorące