You see people on steam who have hundreds of hours in a game they spent 30 dollars on and they say.. "Don't buy it" but why or how would you have spent so much time in the game.. you don't believe 30 dollars was well spent for 200 hours in game? Even 50 hours in a game that cost me 30 dollars I feel is significant.
I look at it in a different way. I've spent a bunch of hours on Neverwinter, but I really wouldn't recommend the guy. I played it, got addicted, and quit after getting bored and realizing it was a shallow ass game.
You can have fun in a game and not recommend it. Some people will play many hours trying to like something and giving it time before finally they have had enough. Also, a lot of times, the negative reviews come after game-changing patches and updates.
In other news, my lvl 56 char in PoE new league (HC mode) died due to my hubris/stupidity. I then played Icewind Dale that I just bought but stopped as I didn't like the combat. Then I went and remade another character in PoE. Currently, lvl 33 .
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
You see people on steam who have hundreds of hours in a game they spent 30 dollars on and they say.. "Don't buy it" but why or how would you have spent so much time in the game.. you don't believe 30 dollars was well spent for 200 hours in game? Even 50 hours in a game that cost me 30 dollars I feel is significant.
I look at it in a different way. I've spent a bunch of hours on Neverwinter, but I really wouldn't recommend the guy. I played it, got addicted, and quit after getting bored and realizing it was a shallow ass game.
You can have fun in a game and not recommend it. Some people will play many hours trying to like something and giving it time before finally they have had enough. Also, a lot of times, the negative reviews come after game-changing patches and updates.
In other news, my lvl 56 char in PoE new league (HC mode) died due to my hubris/stupidity. I then played Icewind Dale that I just bought but stopped as I didn't like the combat. Then I went and remade another character in PoE. Currently, lvl 33 .
Cryomatrix
I think thats interesting, usually I know within the first hour whether or not I'll be able to play a game for a substantial amount of time.
I know a lot of negative reviews come out once a patch hits, that's pretty common, but still, after several hundred hours of playing any game, if someone plays that long and tells me its not worth it, that's just crazy. I'm lucky to get 20 hours out of most games these days.
For me, it'll always be quality over quantity. Its easy enough for a game to give you a bunch of stuff to do for hours, but it doesn't always mean you'll have fun doing those things for hours. I mean, the game can be totally forgettable story wise and still have one redeeming quality that makes up for the price. The best example that comes to mind for me personally is FFX. For me, the story of FFX was pretty forgettable (well the end kind of stuck with me, without giving spoilers), but the thing that kept me playing it for 100+ hours was blitzball. I loved going around and getting new players, researching stat growths, seeing what skills/talents each guy had, all just to build the "perfect team." I'm sure that wasn't SE's intent behind the mini-game but worked out that way for me and many other people, so I never regret a dime when I play it (forget blitzball ever existed in FFX-2 please...).
I find this almost impossible to quantify, most importantly do your research before you buy, that way it will probably be worth it.
I think that's kind of tough nowadays. Research only gets you so far, I think steam allowing you to get a refund is a good policy, but even then you have people that play games 20 hours or so and then want a refund of a 15 dollar product.
You see people on steam who have hundreds of hours in a game they spent 30 dollars on and they say.. "Don't buy it" but why or how would you have spent so much time in the game.. you don't believe 30 dollars was well spent for 200 hours in game? Even 50 hours in a game that cost me 30 dollars I feel is significant.
Steam has a lot of "early access" games for sale. Due to this, I can see players logging in a load of hours, as patches come down, activities are added, and/or bugs repaired (killed?) and finally realize the game is not going as they wanted it to.
That's just one possibility
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I find this almost impossible to quantify, most importantly do your research before you buy, that way it will probably be worth it.
I think that's kind of tough nowadays. Research only gets you so far, I think steam allowing you to get a refund is a good policy, but even then you have people that play games 20 hours or so and then want a refund of a 15 dollar product.
And yet you constantly see fans of games berating people who didn't like, and either quit playing or refunded, a game after a short amount of time because "they didn't play it long enough to truly see how brilliant it actually is". So does this mean that certain types of games, say MMORPGs, should have a longer grace period of play before refund options are cut off, so players can truly see how a game's later features stack up vs the basic early features?
I don't think so. A game that cannot hook players is, at least in part, a poorly designed one.
There's a reason salesman dress and act the way they do (with that warm, haven't seen you in a while old friend vibe). First impressions are paramount. If I spend two hours in a game and cannot find a pending depth, story, or multiplayer experience I can see myself enjoying for a significant amount of time, I can only make the decision with the experience I have in the game to that point.
In short: if you plan on releasing primarily through Steam, you should make it a point to ensure the players gets a good feel for what your game offers within that two hour timeframe. Blaming people for refunding because they didn't play long enough puts them in a catch-22 in that situation. Consumers don't owe devs the purchase: the company is responsible for convincing the customer to give them money, not the other way around.
I find this almost impossible to quantify, most importantly do your research before you buy, that way it will probably be worth it.
I think that's kind of tough nowadays. Research only gets you so far, I think steam allowing you to get a refund is a good policy, but even then you have people that play games 20 hours or so and then want a refund of a 15 dollar product.
And yet you constantly see fans of games berating people who didn't like, and either quit playing or refunded, a game after a short amount of time because "they didn't play it long enough to truly see how brilliant it actually is". So does this mean that certain types of games, say MMORPGs, should have a longer grace period of play before refund options are cut off, so players can truly see how a game's later features stack up vs the basic early features?
I don't think so. A game that cannot hook players is, at least in part, a poorly designed one.
There's a reason salesman dress and act the way they do (with that warm, haven't seen you in a while old friend vibe). First impressions are paramount. If I spend two hours in a game and cannot find a pending depth, story, or multiplayer experience I can see myself enjoying for a significant amount of time, I can only make the decision with the experience I have in the game to that point.
In short: if you plan on releasing primarily through Steam, you should make it a point to ensure the players gets a good feel for what your game offers within that two hour timeframe. Blaming people for refunding because they didn't play long enough puts them in a catch-22 in that situation. Consumers don't owe devs the purchase: the company is responsible for convincing the customer to give them money, not the other way around.
While there are some games that I quit after a few hours, (BDO, STO) there are also some that took a solid month of playing to decide I did like them (DAOC, ArcheAge, & EVE) and a few I did not. (ESO, Cataclysm).
I actually tried to get a refund for ESO after about 3 weeks of casual playing (level 35) but they turned me down. Wouldn't have been so bad except they were giving refunds to EU players with more time played at the same time because of different "rules."
Their choice, I don't play the chargeback game, but I did tell them the lost a customer that day.
I'm still stuck buying some of their games indirectly, like Pillars or Fallout, but only at huge Steam discount and never a dime spent on DLC.
The heck of it is, I would have given the game another go, they did some interesting things with it, but you know, "rules" won't allow me to.
So I definitely think MMORPGs should have a longer refund period, two weeks at least, perhaps a month.
Not everyone can buy a new game and furiously play them right away, even the Steam policy sucks in this regard.
I've got a number of titles purchased but never tried but can't refund them now as its been too long I'm told.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I find this almost impossible to quantify, most importantly do your research before you buy, that way it will probably be worth it.
I think that's kind of tough nowadays. Research only gets you so far, I think steam allowing you to get a refund is a good policy, but even then you have people that play games 20 hours or so and then want a refund of a 15 dollar product.
And yet you constantly see fans of games berating people who didn't like, and either quit playing or refunded, a game after a short amount of time because "they didn't play it long enough to truly see how brilliant it actually is". So does this mean that certain types of games, say MMORPGs, should have a longer grace period of play before refund options are cut off, so players can truly see how a game's later features stack up vs the basic early features?
I don't think so. A game that cannot hook players is, at least in part, a poorly designed one.
There's a reason salesman dress and act the way they do (with that warm, haven't seen you in a while old friend vibe). First impressions are paramount. If I spend two hours in a game and cannot find a pending depth, story, or multiplayer experience I can see myself enjoying for a significant amount of time, I can only make the decision with the experience I have in the game to that point.
In short: if you plan on releasing primarily through Steam, you should make it a point to ensure the players gets a good feel for what your game offers within that two hour timeframe. Blaming people for refunding because they didn't play long enough puts them in a catch-22 in that situation. Consumers don't owe devs the purchase: the company is responsible for convincing the customer to give them money, not the other way around.
While there are some games that I quit after a few hours, (BDO, STO) there are also some that took a solid month of playing to decide I did like them (DAOC, ArcheAge, & EVE) and a few I did not. (ESO, Cataclysm).
I actually tried to get a refund for ESO after about 3 weeks of casual playing (level 35) but they turned me down. Wouldn't have been so bad except they were giving refunds to EU players with more time played at the same time because of different "rules."
Their choice, I don't play the chargeback game, but I did did tell them the lost a customer that day.
I'm still stuck buying some of their games indirectly, like Pillars or Fallout, but only at huge Steam discount and never a dime spent on DLC.
The heck of it is, I would have given the game another go, they did some interesting things with it, but you know, "rules" won't allow me to.
MMORPGs may be in that situation now, but is that really for the best? As it stands, one of the reasons it takes so long to accurately gauge those games is because, most of the time, they back-load the best content to endgame. I would prefer they sprinkled that kind of content throughout the game and focused more on the journey rather than the destination.
A specific example: battlegrounds in DAoC. They were literally mini-frontiers. That was an excellent way to show gamers what kind of awesome PvP experience they will have at endgame. Of course, this was way back when, and getting to those BGs took more than two hours, but it had the right idea: introduce endgame mechanics and endgame quality content throughout the game, not just on the backside.
I don't judge a game by how many hours you can play it, but by how many original and enjoyable experiences I have with it.
Many MMOs and strategy games take hundreds or thousands of hours to see everything, but most of the time you were just doing the same actions over and over again. The value per hour of such a bloated experience is very low. Compare that to a movie where each scene is a new experience. I am happy to go to a good movie and pay $15 for 2 hours of enjoyment, while I would be royally pissed off if I paid $15 for 2 hours of WoW.
Time spent doesn't equate to value in my eyes. You can spend 20 hours doing something that's alright or have the best moment of a year happen in 5 minutes.
People often complain about games that are "too short". This drives me mad. ABZU is one of my favourite games, yet it has under 2 hours of playtime. I've seen numerous posts on Steam saying "It is a really nice game, but it should have been longer. I will be refunding it".
I love seeing art, talking to people who draw and browsing their work. Most paintings I've seen in my life I've probably watched for under a minute. Some of them fundamentally change the way I feel and leave a lasting impression.
Here is a drawing by DestinyBlue. I study Psychology and love to browse through her artworks on mental health. You don't have to view it for hours, but if it speaks to you on some level, it will leave a meaningful impression after a quick glance.
I don't expect any sort of playtime from games. I try lots and if one leaves something meaningful in me that lasts, I see gaming as a worthwhile hobby.
Time spent doesn't equate to value in my eyes. You can spend 20 hours doing something that's alright or have the best moment of a year happen in 5 minutes.
I know what the best 5 minutes of MY year was last year. Hubba hubba!
I usually only intentionally do calculations like this to justify a subscription.
A few notables from my steam activity tell me that there's probably some subconscious decision making happening. At the very least, I suppose the playable hours should be greater than the dollar figure.
Terraria- $2.50 ~130 hours Enter the Gungeon- $7.50 ~130 hours Borderlands 2- $0 ~140 hours Skyrim- $60 ~289 hours
how long till you started repeating content in those games. For me personally, the amount of hours i get in all content i see the first time is the amount of hours i count toward my money.
Once i hit repetitive content the game no longer offers me value for my money, i just choose to keep repeating stuff i already did. That is the trap online games make us fall into. Go crazy on the same map and game mode before something new hits the servers. No additional value there for me.
From those games you listed I only finished Skyrim and It took me about 308 hours to finish, and i think i missed some side quests because i didn't see 100% of the map.
That makes sense but I think the term 'content' is somewhat subjective. Enter the Gungeon only has something like 7 or 8 levels and I would argue that 90% of my play time was a unique experience. Some people might beat level 8 and put the game down, I kept playing until I got bored.
Ironically, I think maybe 25% of my time in Skyrim was unique content. I have a problem with alt-itis and I burned out long before seeing everything.
Mmorpgs are more like baseball. Ten minutes of excitement crammed into 3 hours. They are both games that require patience to enjoy.
That's pretty much the perfect analogy for EVE Online. Hours and hours of planning, preparation and staging for a few minutes of sheer exciteterror. Yes, that's a word that I only use for EVE, because PVP is both exciting and terror inducing.
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
I try to keep a library median of an hour per dollar; if half my library is above this then I'm doing well.
I'm afraid I can't help you with the phenomenon of spending a hundred hours or more in a game then not recommending it; I don't understand this, either.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Changes are likely the number one reason. Addition of lootboxes/microtransactions that come with alterations to existing or new systems.
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Changes are likely the number one reason. Addition of lootboxes/microtransactions that come with alterations to existing or new systems.
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
In addition to what you've said, I think it's sort of like sticking through a long, terrible movie. Some folks are going to walk out half way through, but others will power on to see if the ending is just as bad as the rest of the movie. Others might want to sit through it just to say they've finished it. It's sort of like my current game of Pillars of Eternity. It's critically acclaimed, but I'm just not feeling it. I want to stick through to see if it gets better and to be able to say I've completed it.
I can think of more then one mmo that I actually really liked the game play but due to the p2w abusive nature of the cash shop I could never recommend the game. They did not start out bad but grew that way over time basically. For instance I played STO and like a few people really enjoyed the game because it is star trek, it is not hard to make a star trek game I will enjoy, but when Perfect World got it I stopped playing it and will never play it again, I hate PW so much, that I hate STO now. I really like DS9, I want to see what they did with it in the game, but nope never again.
Basically things change and the current state is not always what got us to spend lots of time in the game. Also lots of people get addicted to things and later go onto tell people not to do the thing they spent years doing and was addicted to. Nothing new there if that makes sense lol
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Changes are likely the number one reason. Addition of lootboxes/microtransactions that come with alterations to existing or new systems.
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
In addition to what you've said, I think it's sort of like sticking through a long, terrible movie. Some folks are going to walk out half way through, but others will power on to see if the ending is just as bad as the rest of the movie. Others might want to sit through it just to say they've finished it. It's sort of like my current game of Pillars of Eternity. It's critically acclaimed, but I'm just not feeling it. I want to stick through to see if it gets better and to be able to say I've completed it.
If I'm remembering correctly, Pillars is a game I enjoyed through the first two acts but the 3rd act was a bit underwhelming, seemed almost rushed and tacked on and my characters over powered for the content.
I believe GOG is offering two expansions at half off, but I'm not really feeling motivated to revisit the world.
Back to revised question, change is the big reason for a once enjoyed game to move to the do not play list.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Changes are likely the number one reason. Addition of lootboxes/microtransactions that come with alterations to existing or new systems.
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
In addition to what you've said, I think it's sort of like sticking through a long, terrible movie. Some folks are going to walk out half way through, but others will power on to see if the ending is just as bad as the rest of the movie. Others might want to sit through it just to say they've finished it. It's sort of like my current game of Pillars of Eternity. It's critically acclaimed, but I'm just not feeling it. I want to stick through to see if it gets better and to be able to say I've completed it.
I use to force myself to finish a game in hopes that it would get better but not now. An initial impression is everything to me. If the game doesn't engage me right away that's it I'm done. If I really wanted to like the game I may revisited it to see if they improved it after a major update or a year or two has past.
I also realize that a game can have a great starter zone and the end game can suck. If a game has a bad start and a great end game I will probably never get to see it as the starter zone turned me off.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Changes are likely the number one reason. Addition of lootboxes/microtransactions that come with alterations to existing or new systems.
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
In addition to what you've said, I think it's sort of like sticking through a long, terrible movie. Some folks are going to walk out half way through, but others will power on to see if the ending is just as bad as the rest of the movie. Others might want to sit through it just to say they've finished it. It's sort of like my current game of Pillars of Eternity. It's critically acclaimed, but I'm just not feeling it. I want to stick through to see if it gets better and to be able to say I've completed it.
Pillars is critically acclaimed but its also acknowledge for being for a very specific type of gamer and according to steam achievements only 11% completed the game.
I loved the game but that's because I had waited for that kind of game for quite some time and I'm happy that obsidian decided to make it for a smaller audience.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Maybe I should reframe the question, with another one.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
Guild Wars 2, for me. I purchased at launch and had some fun playing, but it never grabbed me like I had hoped it would.
I made lots of characters (at least one of each race), but the starting areas were very similar, though the stories varied a nicely. Once out of the starting areas, the zones and stories became the same for every race.
When I got to the end of the game (whatever that island was called), it was just a slugfest with nearly never ending monsters.I played for a month or two and then stopped.
It was "OK" while I played, but the game never grabbed me like I wanted an MMO to do.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I have never regretted the purchase of the game after a substantial amount of playtime so much as I have regretted that playtime in games that ultimately are neverending gear treadmills.
Comments
I look at it in a different way. I've spent a bunch of hours on Neverwinter, but I really wouldn't recommend the guy. I played it, got addicted, and quit after getting bored and realizing it was a shallow ass game.
You can have fun in a game and not recommend it. Some people will play many hours trying to like something and giving it time before finally they have had enough. Also, a lot of times, the negative reviews come after game-changing patches and updates.
In other news, my lvl 56 char in PoE new league (HC mode) died due to my hubris/stupidity. I then played Icewind Dale that I just bought but stopped as I didn't like the combat. Then I went and remade another character in PoE. Currently, lvl 33
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
I know a lot of negative reviews come out once a patch hits, that's pretty common, but still, after several hundred hours of playing any game, if someone plays that long and tells me its not worth it, that's just crazy. I'm lucky to get 20 hours out of most games these days.
That's just one possibility
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
There's a reason salesman dress and act the way they do (with that warm, haven't seen you in a while old friend vibe). First impressions are paramount. If I spend two hours in a game and cannot find a pending depth, story, or multiplayer experience I can see myself enjoying for a significant amount of time, I can only make the decision with the experience I have in the game to that point.
In short: if you plan on releasing primarily through Steam, you should make it a point to ensure the players gets a good feel for what your game offers within that two hour timeframe. Blaming people for refunding because they didn't play long enough puts them in a catch-22 in that situation. Consumers don't owe devs the purchase: the company is responsible for convincing the customer to give them money, not the other way around.
I actually tried to get a refund for ESO after about 3 weeks of casual playing (level 35) but they turned me down. Wouldn't have been so bad except they were giving refunds to EU players with more time played at the same time because of different "rules."
Their choice, I don't play the chargeback game, but I did
tell them the lost a customer that day.
I'm still stuck buying some of their games indirectly, like Pillars or Fallout, but only at huge Steam discount and never a dime spent on DLC.
The heck of it is, I would have given the game another go, they did some interesting things with it, but you know, "rules" won't allow me to.
So I definitely think MMORPGs should have a longer refund period, two weeks at least, perhaps a month.
Not everyone can buy a new game and furiously play them right away, even the Steam policy sucks in this regard.
I've got a number of titles purchased but never tried but can't refund them now as its been too long I'm told.
Fortunately I don't pay much for them but still.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
A specific example: battlegrounds in DAoC. They were literally mini-frontiers. That was an excellent way to show gamers what kind of awesome PvP experience they will have at endgame. Of course, this was way back when, and getting to those BGs took more than two hours, but it had the right idea: introduce endgame mechanics and endgame quality content throughout the game, not just on the backside.
People often complain about games that are "too short". This drives me mad. ABZU is one of my favourite games, yet it has under 2 hours of playtime. I've seen numerous posts on Steam saying "It is a really nice game, but it should have been longer. I will be refunding it".
I love seeing art, talking to people who draw and browsing their work. Most paintings I've seen in my life I've probably watched for under a minute. Some of them fundamentally change the way I feel and leave a lasting impression.
Here is a drawing by DestinyBlue. I study Psychology and love to browse through her artworks on mental health. You don't have to view it for hours, but if it speaks to you on some level, it will leave a meaningful impression after a quick glance.
I don't expect any sort of playtime from games. I try lots and if one leaves something meaningful in me that lasts, I see gaming as a worthwhile hobby.
Ironically, I think maybe 25% of my time in Skyrim was unique content. I have a problem with alt-itis and I burned out long before seeing everything.
How many of you have regretted a purchase of a game after a substantial amount of play time?
I think I'm just trying to see if theres some rhyme or reason to the people hating games that they've spent more than an average amount of time in, especially when they consider it "not worth the purchase".
I'm afraid I can't help you with the phenomenon of spending a hundred hours or more in a game then not recommending it; I don't understand this, either.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Sometimes expansions themselves cause the issue (looking at you, Trials of Atlantis!).
For me, it usually is a buildup of issues I noticed early on but seemed manageable or is something I hoped would resolve itself as I progressed through the game. An example is ESO's combat- the armor and weapon skill line system proved too constricting for me after I leveled my Templar to max and realized that endgame content meant completely discarding the idea I had for my character (heavy armor wearing, 2h wielding DPS). I figured out real quick that, in ESO, you don't get to choose what armor type you wanna wear because the armor types are literally tied to specific roles (as are some of the weapons, such as resto staff). Heavy armor is strictly for health tanking (and even in tank builds, heavy armor is used sparingly), medium strictly for stamina DPS, and light strictly for Magicka DPS.
Current game: Pillars of Eternity
Played: UO, AC, Eve, Fallen Earth, Aion, GW, GW2
Tried: WOW, Rift, SWTOR, ESO
Future: Camelot Unchained? Crowfall? Bless?
Basically things change and the current state is not always what got us to spend lots of time in the game. Also lots of people get addicted to things and later go onto tell people not to do the thing they spent years doing and was addicted to. Nothing new there if that makes sense lol
I believe GOG is offering two expansions at half off, but I'm not really feeling motivated to revisit the world.
Back to revised question, change is the big reason for a once enjoyed game to move to the do not play list.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I also realize that a game can have a great starter zone and the end game can suck. If a game has a bad start and a great end game I will probably never get to see it as the starter zone turned me off.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I loved the game but that's because I had waited for that kind of game for quite some time and I'm happy that obsidian decided to make it for a smaller audience.
I made lots of characters (at least one of each race), but the starting areas were very similar, though the stories varied a nicely. Once out of the starting areas, the zones and stories became the same for every race.
When I got to the end of the game (whatever that island was called), it was just a slugfest with nearly never ending monsters.I played for a month or two and then stopped.
It was "OK" while I played, but the game never grabbed me like I wanted an MMO to do.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR