Posted October 30, 2008
soulgrindr: I've never understood why "replayability" is factored into game reviews... i'd much rather have a great game that i can play for 6-10 hours than one that i have to play again and again.
Well, it's not like you HAVE to play it again and again. But if the game is good and you really like it, then if it offers a somewhat different experience upon a replay, that's certainly a point in its favor, IMO. Personally, I'd rather have a great game that I can play for 30 to 50 hours and then replay for that long again.
soulgrindr: I guess I probably replayed Jedi Knight (at least from the light/dark choice), and I've probably played Doom2 more than once. Oh, and KotOR from the Dark/Light choice too.
(but is replaying from a branching point really replaying? I'd say no)
(but is replaying from a branching point really replaying? I'd say no)
I think this is part of the replayability factor though.
soulgrindr: There are some awesome games i've played, but i don't have the time or inclination to replay most of them. Infact far too many are a chore to finish even once. I wish they'd shorten down some of the games so those of us with jobs have a chance to finish them.
Portal was perfect.
Portal was perfect.
While I have some games that were a chore to finish once, others were enjoyable enough to me that I don't hesitate to play them again and again. I realize some people look at their games as disposable one-shot commodities and there's nothing wrong with that, but others consider replayability a large part of the game's value.