Longevity of Big Games.

[iloveannie]

Halo Reach for instance. It's obviously a fantastic game so why after two weeks am I happy for it to stay on the shelf?

I'm not referring to the mp which draws so many people in, just the single player experiences.

Fallout. Too big to want to play twice.

Fable. How much more can you see on a second play through?

So many like this.

[sj33]

I've always felt that the problem wasn't necessarily the size of the games, but the fact that so many games are designed to be 'epics', in a push to create a narrative that closes the gap between games and, for example, films. And just like most 'epic' films are not really intended to be rewatched within a short space of time, the replayability of games is impacted as a result.

Contrast this with, for example, Outrun, arcade-style games or similar such non-epics where effort has been made to make the game a joy to replay, even if narrative is non-existant.

Not that it has to be an either/or choice, but you don't replay a game for it's epic narrative.

[MikeRox]

I commented on something similar in the Dreamcast thread in the retro forum. I find shorter more gameplay focussed games infinitely more playable. Infact, really I think this is why multiplayer gaming is now booming. It's the pick up and play side, but if somebody dares to release a non epic, pick up and play title, reviews slate it for lacking content/depth and state it should be a download, not a retail title.

I'd be quite happy for Sega to relaunch Sega Ages, only give up a genuine HD remake of the games leaving the core gameplay as it was. I'd happily shell £25 or so out each for Sega Rally, Daytona, SCUD Race with online modes (as well as their beat em ups, random crazy games etc.). They could look at their other stuff too. Half the work is already done (course design, gameplay mechanics etc.) if 1 bloke can go about remaking Duke 3D, I don't see why it'd be overly expensive for a small team to get work doing these. They might have a very specific audience, but I'm sure it'd be big enough to make it worthwhile.

[Wools]

I think it's more to do with age, although that may just be me!

As a kid, I only had a few games a year but could play them for terrifyingly long amounts of time. Despite this, I only completed the odd game as I would replay favourite levels as most games did not allow you to save. It was only the PSone era where game prices and Pre-Owned allowed me to buy more and Memory Cards allowed me to save my progress.

Now I take less punts with a game I know little about and only buy games I'm interested in or have scored very well. Along with that, I have far less time because of general life being different and work commitments. Now when I do pick up a game, I will normally play it with no other distractions and complete it fully. As a game would have to last me longer as a kid, completing less games and replaying particular levels, I was always flitting between titles. Now, I will fully complete a game or let it go and will revisit it if it's very good from time to time.

I don't think more people put games back on shelves because of their quality or being unmemorable, more that we've aged and have less time to re-play games when new one's are taking up our game time.

[speedlolita]

Fable. How much more can you see on a second play through?

Well, for the first Fable at least, I had a good character, then completed it as a bad character.

[cavalcade]

It's time isn't it? When you were a kid you had less money and more time, these days you have less time and more money. It's cruel.

e.g.

It's thursday night
She's out at Zumba
Counting down, till
Tea time is over
Kids off to bed
Chores are all done
Head for the sofa
Pour yourself one
Perfect silence
The clock ticks nine
Xbox flicked on,
Got a little time

To play, online
Tonight

Friends list up
He's displayed as Away
Last logged on a date,
A number of days
Arranged this at work,
Tonight's the night
Battlefield 2
Gosh I hope he's alright

Not randoms
Not randoms tonight

He's on at last
Message comes through
Headset off
'Cos she doesn't approve
A silent match
Then the baby cries
Pad thrown to the floor
Can't text goodbye
She's home early
You could weep
The screen turns to gray
At least the console can sleep

[InvisibleKid]

(OT: Did you write that?! Cos that is pure win. Thumbs up!)

[rmoxon]

Halo Reach for instance. It's obviously a fantastic game so why after two weeks am I happy for it to stay on the shelf?

I'm not referring to the mp which draws so many people in, just the single player experiences.

Fallout. Too big to want to play twice.

Fable. How much more can you see on a second play through?

So many like this.

Arent most games like that?, at least anything that has a story, its like watching a film, you wouldnt sit and watch the same film every day, why would you play the same game every week?

There are lots of games I will play again, but obviously not stright away, they will sit on the shelf until I have no games to play (which admitedly is rarley as I buy too much) and then I will go through them again, possibley on a harder difficulty if it had one that i unlocked after the first playthrough.

[nakamura]

Fifa is the only game that gets all year around play single or multi. The rest of my games I like to play through one at a time from start to finish. I tend to have a few on the go at once of varying styles to play through.

Halo may be a brand new title but it is nothing new in terms of gameplay so that maybe why it is easily left on the shelf.

[Briareos]

The length (or depth in may case) of big games can be a problem. Through no fault of it's own Fallout 3 proved too much for me. I intentionally avoided the main quest and played the side missions until I reached a saturation point where I didn't feel like picking it up anymore. The sad part is now i feel no need to pick up Vegas as I haven't finished it predecessor.

As others have said it coul be down to a reduction in free time as life goes on, massive games are amazing when you have loads of free time but at the moment I spend more time on here at work than I acually spend playing games! As a result I'm looking more for smaller games or those with a more bite sized structure, pehaps Mario Galaxy 2 should be my next target?

[charlesr]

I hold the same policy for films and books these days. There are so many out there, I rarely view them more than once unless there's something I missed (e.g. Usual Suspects or Use of Weapons by Iain M Banks). There's no way I'd play Red Dead Redemption again, even though I really enjoyed it the first time, but I'll certainly be playing Deadly Premonition again because there's so much going on.

Slightly off topic, but I seem to veer around, so for a few months, I'll play big games and then I'll play shmups and arcade games for a few months. Rarely at the same time. I'm on the small game mode at the mo.

[mr_sockochris]

Briareos^ Mario Galaxy is perfect for that, great for 10mins or a few hours

Here's a few reasons why my habits have changed...

- Less spare time as you get older.
- More money as you get older so you don't HAVE to play the same for months.
- More games in general these days. Seems like there's a few games every month these days that I want, even in the summer months. These days I tend to beat a game then move onto the next one. Also, there are plenty of games I'd love to play through again (I want to play through Mass Effect 2 again and I always have the urge to go through the Half Life 2 games once more) but I can't justify spending my spare time replaying something when I have newer games on the shelf.

[J0e Musashi]

I generally only play through something one time, unless it's something like Demon's Souls where repeated playthroughs are needed to fully complete it or an arcade-style title where you are encouraged to play again and again.
I play on the hardest difficulty offered so as to see all of the game, maximise my trophies and make it last a little longer.
I'm currently going through Darksiders (yay for JPN games supporting full English) on Apocolyptic setting. Once it's done it'll be shelved indefinitely.
I do not sell games though. I have something of a gaming graveyard going on. If my games could speak they'd moan if neglect and loneliness.

[englishbob]

My main concern for this current gen of online-enabled consoles is that, in 10 years time, most of the functions of games will disappear or become unuseable.

Think about it, most titles,even offline ones, have some sort of online interaction, some even won't let you play them unless you are connected to the internet.

For example, digging out Demon Souls in 10 years time will mean a large function of the game will be missing, because the servers will be switched off. Some Arcade / PSN won't work...

[spagmasterswift]

But then maybe we will all be playing Demons Souls Classic Edition in 3D?