Game lifespan - not so good :(

Soldato
Joined
7 Sep 2009
Posts
4,229
Location
Cheshire
Basically I'm bored, bored because I've played all my games - and I have bought about 10 new ones since the start of the year. I have about 50 PC games in total, dating back to mid-ninties but the majority of my pc games are from the last five years or so.
However it seems no sooner have I bought a new pc game that I've done it and seen everything there is to see, or if I haven't just can't be bothered to because it just isn't good enough to keep me playing - although this is rare as I have finished every story driven game I own.

The games I used to play like age of empires, unreal tournament, morrowind, neverwinter nights etc. kept me playing for years. I literally spent six years playing aoe2 online, the same for UT, and hundreds of hours on the various morrowind games.
I find games now keep me entertained for two or three months at most and then are cast aside, because I'm bored of them. Then despite having a large pile of games, all of which I've played to death or am bored of, I find myself waiting for the next game that has peaked my interest, only to no doubt have the same process happen again. The last game that kept me playing for a lengthy time was cod4 - for two years, but since then nothing - and before that I can't even remember.

An example being I've played ME2 through twice, but even this only amounts to about 60 hours playtime and a third playthrough isn't appealing, because I know the story and there's not enough variation in the story or the gameplay to make a third playthrough interesting.

Does anyone else find themselves searching relentlessly for games that they might have missed in the hope of finding something that can fill the gap until the next game you're waiting for comes out, despite knowing you've played everything you want to play. :(

Mafia 2 is the latest example, as good as it is - there's no replayability and I think, whats the point?
 
Last edited:
you need a break from gaming. SC2, BC2, Dragon Age, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and Mass effect 2 are in every way superior to the old games you mentioned.
 
you need a break from gaming. SC2, BC2, Dragon Age, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and Mass effect 2 are in every way superior to the old games you mentioned.

Oblivion sucked, finished it in no time at all and it was a poor game. ME2 I mentioned, played through twice. Bad Company 2, the SP is weak and the MP is tired - have played it plenty. SC2 doesn't interest me and I'm considering buying dragon age to keep me occupied at the moment.
 
you need a break from gaming. SC2, BC2, Dragon Age, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and Mass effect 2 are in every way superior to the old games you mentioned.

Surely this is opinion and not for you to just tell him they are better? Just because you, and even a million other people love them(Battlefield 2 was WAY better than BC2 imo) doesn't mean anything to him and his feelings about games as they are.
 
Surely this is opinion and not for you to just tell him they are better? Just because you, and even a million other people love them(Battlefield 2 was WAY better than BC2 imo) doesn't mean anything to him and his feelings about games as they are.

no they are just better in every way no matter how you put it. dont let nostalgia blind you.
 
Surely this is opinion and not for you to just tell him they are better? Just because you, and even a million other people love them(Battlefield 2 was WAY better than BC2 imo) doesn't mean anything to him and his feelings about games as they are.

Indeed.
 
I think its down to smaller communities which each game back in the day the quake community was HUGE as was UT99 to me it seems that there are just so many games coming out that a decent community is never given a chance to build before the next big thing comes out. This is even more of a problem with console releases where once the kids are max the achievements/trophies than they drop the game like a hot potato and the MP aspect of that game is then dead.
 
People suffer from nostalgia. The 'good old days'. Sure, a game may have seemed a lot more fun and longer, but thats because they bar wasn't set so high, and the expectation were lower. If you got someone who has never played games to judge a old game and new, I almost guarantee they';d got for the new.
 
It's called getting older.

+1 to that :p

i have been playing combat arms the past 2 weeks and finding it quite awesome however very very buggy.

the game is free to download but there are optional charges if you want 'the best weapons' or you can earn GP through games and rent.. yes RENT guns :p
game has lots of different modes and a decent leveling system (kind of like COD) one of those modes (which i play most) is 'fireteam' which it a lot like COD5 nazi zombies with 10 - 20 round depending on difficulty but i would recommend extreme mode only as it is MUCH better exp then others

so you should give this a try as its free and don't forget to add me as recruiter :D my in-game name is: qlimaxe
 
Games have relied on replayability for years - nothing has changed. Perhaps the reason newer games don't keep you interested as long is precisely because you played older games for so long.

There hasn't been very many truly unique or original games in years - they are all based, if only in part, on something else. It is simply a case of "been there, done that". The situation is made worse by the fact studios and publishers have to spend such a ridiculous amount of money to get a game out that they daren't risk trying something new nor have the time to make a game last forever.
 
no they are just better in every way no matter how you put it. dont let nostalgia blind you.

They're really not, like BC2 as an example. The only fps he mentioned on his list that he liked, was Unreal Tournament. Feel free to put up a poll asking people which is the better game. As much as they can't really be compared, it's their opinions. Oblivion was horrible in my opinion, Mass Effect never really did anything for me(my opinion) and as for Starcraft 2, you might want to ask yourself why a lot of Korean tournaments still use starcraft 1.
 
I agree with you there to a degree, but a lot of comments have been made about Starcraft 1 being the more balanced and better game for them.

I would say the same thing, it's been out a month, SC1 has been out for 10 and had years of updates, balance changes and time to become popular, SC2 hasn't even had it's first live patch yet.
 
I am finding it hard to play all the decent games i have. 2 Big ones for me are due out in september CivV and F1 2010. These both have the potential to be major time sinkers for me i am trying hard to play through some of the single player games i have not had a chance to play before they come out. I was hoping to polish off 3 games but 30 hours into fallout 3 and i feel i have hardly scratched the surface. Bioshock 1 and crysis are probably going to have to wait until sometime next year at this rate!
 
Starcraft 2, you might want to ask yourself why a lot of Korean tournaments still use starcraft 1.

everything else is an opinion so I'll ignore it. however KESPA which is responsible for organising all korean pro tournaments still hasn't finalised the deal with blizzard regarding what royalty fees it has to pay so it cant organise any sc2 tournaments yet. thats the real and only reason. lots of korean players have given back their license to KESPA so they can compete in sc2.

btw sc2 a month after release is much more balanced compared to sc1 a month after its release. sc1 didn't really become balanced until a few months after broodwar released.
 
Last edited:
Games have relied on replayability for years - nothing has changed. Perhaps the reason newer games don't keep you interested as long is precisely because you played older games for so long.
lies publishers dont want you to play the same game over and over unless they are selling you DLC ...

pc games used to last ages back when developers suported modding rather than try to restrict it.
 
Back
Top Bottom