• Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      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.

      • Ech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        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.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        *Instance federation issues. Response reposted on alt account.