Business Insider is full of shit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thief

Only more people these days are now accustomed to play all games like "next!" I seriously don't understand collecting is even so popular with this mentality, trade them all in toward the next purchase instead of turning them into glorified dust collectors.

---

There's always the mind of going back to them one day. I, for one, have been "buying to keep" since day one. No trade or sale afterwards is guaranteed. Many games become absurdly overpriced after a while, so good luck getting those back for the same price. And I, for one, have gone back to many of my games many times over. I had the same mindset about movies way back when, but that ship has sailed for me; mainly because of the continuous change in formats, VHS, DVD, BluRay, and now straight-up streaming in HD. Games on the other hand, will remain the same in that respect; Sonic 2 on the Genesis will play on my Genesis via a cart whether it is through my CRT or some HDTV. It's going to be the same ROM, so the physical format will have aged much better than, say, going with a movie from VHS to DVD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

To play devil's advocate, when you have access to multiple games, you're not as likely to sit down with one, until you master it.

That's been the issue with games since... well, either 5th or 6th generation. Once they're long, but you're going to beat it anyway, because the challenge isn't nearly on par with 4th generation or prior, the minute you're done with a game, it's just like "next!" You're probably not exactly looking back either...

---

Yeah but if that's the case, why would you want "replay value"? Much of the time, when I see a game praised for certain features adding replay value, I really wonder if the reviewer actually has any intention of replaying the game, and if said features genuinely factor into it. They usually don't do much for me, though there are a few exceptions. If a game is just good enough to play through, no amount of "replay value" added features are going to make me play it again.

Sonic Adventure 2 is a good example for me. I like the game well enough that I've played through it multiple times. But I can't be bothered to earn all the emblems with the alternate challenges in every level. I'd rather play the plain levels over again than indulge their attempt at adding replay value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

To play devil's advocate, when you have access to multiple games, you're not as likely to sit down with one, until you master it.

That's been the issue with games since... well, either 5th or 6th generation. Once they're long, but you're going to beat it anyway, because the challenge isn't nearly on par with 4th generation or prior, the minute you're done with a game, it's just like "next!" You're probably not exactly looking back either...

Just one of the many(MANY) reasons I burned out on modern gaming at the 7th generation. (Hell, even now, I'm starting to not care for the handhelds. The one plus is that they're not using discs)

---

This is a huge issue with modern games that don't have a huge marketing hype train machine behind them. If you don't get people hooked in the first minute, they will just move on to the next game, after all there's thousands of free games out there to try. It's even much worse on mobile, hence why it's so flooded with trash (and now that entry to barrier in Steam just became nearly as low as for mobile, we may see it getting as bad on PC too, as if cheap sales weren't making it bad already...).

Replaying was much more justified back in the day where you could get a new game only once in a while (not to mention many games back then couldn't save, which outright forced you to replay).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sik

This is a huge issue with modern games that don't have a huge marketing hype train machine behind them. If you don't get people hooked in the first minute, they will just move on to the next game, after all there's thousands of free games out there to try. It's even much worse on mobile, hence why it's so flooded with trash (and now that entry to barrier in Steam just became nearly as low as for mobile, we may see it getting as bad on PC too, as if cheap sales weren't making it bad already...).

Replaying was much more justified back in the day where you could get a new game only once in a while (not to mention many games back then couldn't save, which outright forced you to replay).

---

Hey, Arcades back in the day had to get you hooked in the first minute too, I thought? Unless... is this why Arcades died? :D

Arcades died because consoles caught up to them and there was no point going to arcades anymore =P (they stopped being impressive and they were also more expensive and you had to go there instead of staying at home)

And yeah, arcades also had to do that to keep you pouring in coins. But once you decided to start playing you've made a commitent, and if you had spare coins the continue screen was a good way of convincing you to retry (assuming you didn't get completely smashed to the point of losing all hope...). Also incidentally, first they would have test locations (i.e. just deploy the cabinets in a single place) to know if they're likely to flop before going on a full blown commitent them and possibly making an expensive mistake. Can't say the same about modern stuff that can be deployed around cheaply (and hence is more prone to flooding the market)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

Yeah but if that's the case, why would you want "replay value"?

---

Possibly because you're old enough to remember when games had it, and you're currently in the middle of a burnout? There's a lot more to the older stuff than being shorter, harder, and all you had for about a year. I mean those are true, but the best ones got played again and again after you've beaten them 100 times, and a longer, easier, FMV filled "experience" is never going to replicate or replace that.

People have forgotten the inherent value of skill-based gameplay, something these old games had to rely on in lieu of photo-realism. A solid 2D side-scrolling action game from the 16-bit era should stand up even today on account of the gameplay itself. The fact that there is usually an actual threat in older stuff calling on the player to perform well/beat their personal best is part of the hook.

I agree with midnightrider, I've played all my best games hundreds of times. In the case of couple of MD games like BKII, maybe thousands.

For me, while I love the sequels the first for me is a piece of gaming perfection. Every stage (by and large) has fast and slow set pieces that blend innovative speed based elements whilst keeping traditional platform conventions in place for well rounded gameplay. It's the one I play most often.

There is some nostalgia here, it's the first game I saw on MD and it wowed me, so there's that. I think what makes a game from any era truly great is the ability to play it twenty years later and not be comparing it to a contemporary and saying to yourself what a great game it is.

I do get why it's less appealing to some though, the speed element, in hindsight, was perhaps overplayed as being the one and only main element.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bottino

Ah yes, that magic term. But a game is not over just because you saw the ending credits roll.
Otherwise why are arcade games from the 80s still played in this day and age?

---

Sonic does have replay value, the fact that it's fun means its rewarding to replay.

But in this instance, Crash actively does things that warrant replaying chunks of the game, to earn more of the game (and a new ending)

For the record, the other day I was just going to screenshot the island in the background of Angel Island 1 (hence why this pic exists) and kept going up to completing Angel Island 2 and stopped there only because I was restrianing myself (my intention was just to take the screenshot, not to get tempted and play two whole acts =P but I wasn't going to waste the chance to go through the upper part since I got there without Tails...). Make what you want out of that :​v

If the gameplay wasn't enough, Sonic's replay value was always in the emeralds. In the first game you'd go back to get them, solely based on not wanting to see Robotnick juggling them, while the game tells you to do better. After that, Super/Hyper mode. That or finding the secrets you missed the first... however many times you missed them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

If the gameplay wasn't enough, Sonic's replay value was always in the emeralds.

---

Replay is exactly what made Sonic CD so great for those that "got it".
First: just finish the game. Second: complete all the bonus stages to get a good ending. Third: play around with going to the Past Zones to destroy the Mecha Sonic pollution machine and then go finish the Act in the good future. And on and on,,, play just past levels, play just future levels, how good are are? Find all the hidden rooms and secret coin statues and that sort of thing... Best your times in the Time Attack mode.
Sonic CD required more of the player than any of the other 16-bit Sonic games, which is why I think it is misunderstood. It isn't straightforward and requires extensive replay.

The time attack feature in Sonic CD was a welcome addition. I was a little disappointed that Sonic 3 & Knuckles didn't have one even though it had a battery save. Sonic Jam added that feature and I made good use of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sik

This is a huge issue with modern games that don't have a huge marketing hype train machine behind them. If you don't get people hooked in the first minute, they will just move on to the next game, after all there's thousands of free games out there to try. It's even much worse on mobile, hence why it's so flooded with trash (and now that entry to barrier in Steam just became nearly as low as for mobile, we may see it getting as bad on PC too, as if cheap sales weren't making it bad already...).

Replaying was much more justified back in the day where you could get a new game only once in a while (not to mention many games back then couldn't save, which outright forced you to replay).

---

This is also a huge deal with classic systems when you have a large collection (or a flash cart). Now you've got everything in the world available to you and no time to finish it all. I'll bounce around from game to game aimlessly for weeks and then I'll just play S&K + Sonic 3 or Crazy Taxi for the millionth time. I have a hard time playing games that were classics I've missed because I have to learn something new.

In that particular case, I'd say try to cut the roms back to the 30 or so favorites you're sure that you're likely to come back to.