I may have played Factorio for longer, but Factorio didn’t make me feel emotions like Frostpunk did. Playtime isn’t the only measure of a game’s worth.
What Remains of Edith Finch is a great way to break this metric as well. Fantastic emotional rollercoaster of a story that’s over in about 2-3 hours. The original Portal also fits here. Probably about 4-6 hours for most people, but hits hard on quality and impact.
Go listen to Sentient a few more times while thinking about what you’ve done to those poor bugs and tell me again that Factorio doesn’t make you feel anything.
Playtime isn’t the only measure of a game’s worth.
This concept seems to be lost on many these days. If a game doesn’t provide gaas-levels of constant content, or have endless “endgame”, it’s considered a rip-off. For me, some of the shortest games I’ve played have been the most impactful and worthwhile.
Y’all be strawmaning me here. There’s such a wealth of video games to choose from, I generally have no problem finding stuff I will thoroughly enjoy while staying well above my value threshold.
Additionally, how much a game costs to play per hr doesn’t necessarily have any relationship with how enjoyable it is.
The article is specifically boasting about play time metrics, so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to look at how it compares to other games in similar or adjacent genres.
I mean, for one, that’s the only metric you chose to measure games by, so I’m not sure what else you would expect. Should we reply as if you used an entirely unmentioned metric?
Second, I specifically mentioned “many”, not you in particular. That’s not strawmaning, that’s talking about a general trend.
I may have played Factorio for longer, but Factorio didn’t make me feel emotions like Frostpunk did. Playtime isn’t the only measure of a game’s worth.
What Remains of Edith Finch is a great way to break this metric as well. Fantastic emotional rollercoaster of a story that’s over in about 2-3 hours. The original Portal also fits here. Probably about 4-6 hours for most people, but hits hard on quality and impact.
Go listen to Sentient a few more times while thinking about what you’ve done to those poor bugs and tell me again that Factorio doesn’t make you feel anything.
This concept seems to be lost on many these days. If a game doesn’t provide gaas-levels of constant content, or have endless “endgame”, it’s considered a rip-off. For me, some of the shortest games I’ve played have been the most impactful and worthwhile.
Y’all be strawmaning me here. There’s such a wealth of video games to choose from, I generally have no problem finding stuff I will thoroughly enjoy while staying well above my value threshold.
Additionally, how much a game costs to play per hr doesn’t necessarily have any relationship with how enjoyable it is.
The article is specifically boasting about play time metrics, so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to look at how it compares to other games in similar or adjacent genres.
I mean, for one, that’s the only metric you chose to measure games by, so I’m not sure what else you would expect. Should we reply as if you used an entirely unmentioned metric?
Second, I specifically mentioned “many”, not you in particular. That’s not strawmaning, that’s talking about a general trend.
*Instance federation issues. Response reposted on alt account.