Poll: Is the age of replay dead?

[Banana Phone Man]

There are a few games that I replay over and over. They would be Half Life 2 (Orange Box), Warcraft 3, Bioshock, TF2, Portal and some others. Games nowerday don't focus too much on replayability but more on a long game or multiplayers.

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

I wouldn't say its entirely dead, but certainly not as present as it used to be. I've found replays of Half-Life 2 and Bioshock to be increasingly boring, but I love going back to old Mario games. I tried replaying Half-Life 2 a couple months ago and got about halfway through Water Hazard before stopping out of boredom, but I got all 120 stars in Super Mario 64 and loved every minute of it a short while ago.

 

[Craftybonds]

Ok so people renting a game at one sixth of it's original price is good for the gaming industry? You may want to rethink that. If the average game is rented out at one sixth of it's retail price (roughly 10 bucks), then 6 people have to rent that one disc in order for the company to get the price they originally intended. And since a single disc can be rented out by multiple people for a cheaper price, then fewer discs are sold in in both the short and long run. Fewer discs sold means less money for the company, hence it damages the gaming industry.

Uh, what? You're speaking like Nintendo, Microsoft, etc is renting games directly to the customer.

A renting company has to get their games somewhere in order for them to rent them out to people. I think that you're trying to argue that a rental company buying 10,000 copies of a single game doesn't help the industry.

Game developers do not rent out discs. they sell them to retail companies, who in turn sell/rent them to the consumer. Full out renting would mean that the retailer needs to buy fewer discs from the developer, hence developer sells less copies to the retailers, hence they make less of a profit, and hence they lose money. There's your ruined industry. You make it sound like the retail companies are holding up the whole thing. That is absolute crock. Even if there are no retailers, games could still be sold, albeit more directly. But if the game developers don't make any games, then the whole thing falls apart. Can't have a forestry industry without any trees, can we now?

That entire post was more sarcasm than anything, i already know how things work. Besides, you missed a step. Gaming companies sell their games to their distributors, who order purely based off demand. Once the games hit the distributors, the entire industry doesn't care what happens after that. they've already made their money off of the distributors, they rarely see any money from the retailers that the distributors sell to.

Retailers are one of two things; A rental company/video store, or A games dealer/department store.

A games dealer or department store is only going to buy what they need; they only order based off demand. And while a department store doesn't deal with used games, a games dealer does. the buying and selling of used games is nothing but glorified renting. An individual buys a game, then they trade it back in when they're done with it, usually losing more money the longer they have it. (sounds like renting to me) By trading a game in, you are decreasing the demand for a new game; a customer is likely to buy the used copy, and their used copies will almost always sell faster than the new ones.

Alright, so let's take rental companies. Here's the thing about the release, it's not always possible to determine the demand for something prior to the release date. Rental companies are forced to buy a minimum amount copies for each title at release to satisfy their customers. If they rent out less than they bought for a certain title, this is free money for the industry, these were games that they wouldn't have needed otherwise, because there is no renter demand for it.

If a specific title gets fully rented out within the first day, the rental company is FORCED to buy more copies of this specific title, otherwise they will lose a whole lot of business to all of the customers who could not obtain a copy of this title. What does that sound like? well, it pretty much sounds like they're creating demand for the game, and selling more titles for the industry.

Besides, let's look at the obvious, if rental companies didn't generate a shitload of money for the industry, almost every distributor would be blackballing every rental company now, but this doesn't happen at all, and every rental company that i'm aware of has no problems obtaining games.

If this an argument on whether the industry makes more money on a single individual when they buy, versus when they rent, yeah, i can agree with you on that one. But that is only a valid argument if every single person who has interest in a certain title is going to go out and pay 60$ for a sealed title. I know i wouldn't, and i know plenty of people who won't. I would be spending 200 dollars a week on video games if i went out and purchased every single title that sparked any kind of interest for me.

 

[Angry Caterpillar]

It would help if the games would give you the ability to play back through with all your weapons and such intact. Also, I've noticed that for games where you can't do that, having co-op instantly guarantees at least a second play-through for me.
*tosses a controller at developers everywhere*
HINT HINT HINT.

 

[Legendsmith]

Publishers would prefer you rent than buy "used." They actually get money from rentals. As far as they're concerned, every "used" purchase is the same as a downloading the game.

Since making something with staying power exponentially more difficult than squirting out mediocrity, the less staying power the game has the more money the publishers make.

So yea, "replay" is dead. The best we can hope for is online multi-player, and unless you really really like dry, dumbed-down counterstrike clones, you're fucked there.

Um, I wouldn't call Team Fortress 2, Dystopia, or Halo CounterStrike clones. Does CounterStrike have teleporters? No. Does it have you jacking into cyberspace and fighting in the real world as well as there? No. Does it have many gamemodes that anyone can customize as well as the same for its maps? No.

I would call them counterstrike clones, dystopia was even made on the same engine. As for your examples, throwing in a few gimmicks but having the same core gameplay is what I would consider a clone. Also you can change game modes (RPG leveling up for example) and create maps in counterstrike so I dont know where you were going with the last one.

I really have to disagree. I can' speak for dystopia (I haven't played it), but Team Fortress 2 is not a Counter Stike clone. A clone game is basically one where you can use most of your skillset from the original. TF2 is not like that. The gameplay is very different.

CS has no respawn, a money and weapons buying system and no classes.
In CS, the game modes are:
Bomb:
Terrorists must get a bomb to a location and plant it, then defend it from being defused.

Hostages:
Terrorists must top the counter terrorists from rescuing the hostages.

Tf2 has 9 classes each varied so there is almost no overlap in roles. Tf2 does have weapon unlockables, these are not upgrades but rather sidegrades. They provide no absolute advantage, they just change what you can do with them. Not to mention that the art style and feel of teh game is very different and the skills for TF2 and CSS are also different.
In Tf2 the gamemodes are:
Capture Point
The objective for both teams is to secure all the control points on the map.

Attack/Defend
ne team already holds all the points and must defend them from the other for a set amount of time.

Territorial Control
Each team must capture the other team's single active control point to secure that section of the map. Once all sections have been captured by one team, they are then able to attack the other team's base directly.

King of the Hill
1 control point. 2 timers. When a team gains control of the point, their timer starts to count down. If the other team captures the point, the former team's count down is stopped, and the latter team's starts. When a team's timer reaches zero, that team wins.

Payload
In payload maps, one team has to work to escort a bomb cart along a track through a series of checkpoints, eventually detonating the bomb in the other team's base. The other team has to defend their positions and prevent the cart from reaching the end within a set amount of time.

Payload Race
Like Payload, except both teams have a cart. And both must attempt to both push their cart while stopping the enemy's.

CTF
Capture the Intellegence. No explanation necessary here.

Arena
Arena is a team deathmatch mode. Arena maps focus on smaller environments and no respawning after the death of a player's character. A team wins in arena by eliminating all of the other side's members in the arena or capturing the map's central control point.

I really fail to see how Tf2 is a CS clone.

All FPS games have similarities, it's why they're grouped in the FPS genre. But saying that all team FPS games are clones? That's just ridiculous.

 

[The Heik]

Ok so people renting a game at one sixth of it's original price is good for the gaming industry? You may want to rethink that. If the average game is rented out at one sixth of it's retail price (roughly 10 bucks), then 6 people have to rent that one disc in order for the company to get the price they originally intended. And since a single disc can be rented out by multiple people for a cheaper price, then fewer discs are sold in in both the short and long run. Fewer discs sold means less money for the company, hence it damages the gaming industry.

Uh, what? You're speaking like Nintendo, Microsoft, etc is renting games directly to the customer.

A renting company has to get their games somewhere in order for them to rent them out to people. I think that you're trying to argue that a rental company buying 10,000 copies of a single game doesn't help the industry.

Game developers do not rent out discs. they sell them to retail companies, who in turn sell/rent them to the consumer. Full out renting would mean that the retailer needs to buy fewer discs from the developer, hence developer sells less copies to the retailers, hence they make less of a profit, and hence they lose money. There's your ruined industry. You make it sound like the retail companies are holding up the whole thing. That is absolute crock. Even if there are no retailers, games could still be sold, albeit more directly. But if the game developers don't make any games, then the whole thing falls apart. Can't have a forestry industry without any trees, can we now?

 

[DustyDrB]

I've played Mass Effect six times and it's sequel twice (one more as soon as Kasumi arrives, and surely many more times after that). Dragon Age I've played through three times and could play it over and over. Take any Zelda game (other than the DS ones) and I can replay it endlessly.

Of course, this is offset by the fact that I don't like very many games.

 

[Exeloth]

Publishers would prefer you rent than buy "used." They actually get money from rentals. As far as they're concerned, every "used" purchase is the same as a downloading the game.

Since making something with staying power exponentially more difficult than squirting out mediocrity, the less staying power the game has the more money the publishers make.

So yea, "replay" is dead. The best we can hope for is online multi-player, and unless you really really like dry, dumbed-down counterstrike clones, you're fucked there.

Um, I wouldn't call Team Fortress 2, Dystopia, or Halo CounterStrike clones. Does CounterStrike have teleporters? No. Does it have you jacking into cyberspace and fighting in the real world as well as there? No. Does it have many gamemodes that anyone can customize as well as the same for its maps? No.

I would call them counterstrike clones, dystopia was even made on the same engine. As for your examples, throwing in a few gimmicks but having the same core gameplay is what I would consider a clone. Also you can change game modes (RPG leveling up for example) and create maps in counterstrike so I dont know where you were going with the last one.

I really have to disagree. I can' speak for dystopia (I haven't played it), but Team Fortress 2 is not a Counter Stike clone. A clone game is basically one where you can use most of your skillset from the original. TF2 is not like that. The gameplay is very different.

CS has no respawn, a money and weapons buying system and no classes.
In CS, the game modes are:
Bomb:
Terrorists must get a bomb to a location and plant it, then defend it from being defused.

Hostages:
Terrorists must top the counter terrorists from rescuing the hostages.

Tf2 has 9 classes each varied so there is almost no overlap in roles. Tf2 does have weapon unlockables, these are not upgrades but rather sidegrades. They provide no absolute advantage, they just change what you can do with them. Not to mention that the art style and feel of teh game is very different and the skills for TF2 and CSS are also different.
In Tf2 the gamemodes are:
Capture Point
The objective for both teams is to secure all the control points on the map.

Attack/Defend
ne team already holds all the points and must defend them from the other for a set amount of time.

Territorial Control
Each team must capture the other team's single active control point to secure that section of the map. Once all sections have been captured by one team, they are then able to attack the other team's base directly.

King of the Hill
1 control point. 2 timers. When a team gains control of the point, their timer starts to count down. If the other team captures the point, the former team's count down is stopped, and the latter team's starts. When a team's timer reaches zero, that team wins.

Payload
In payload maps, one team has to work to escort a bomb cart along a track through a series of checkpoints, eventually detonating the bomb in the other team's base. The other team has to defend their positions and prevent the cart from reaching the end within a set amount of time.

Payload Race
Like Payload, except both teams have a cart. And both must attempt to both push their cart while stopping the enemy's.

CTF
Capture the Intellegence. No explanation necessary here.

Arena
Arena is a team deathmatch mode. Arena maps focus on smaller environments and no respawning after the death of a player's character. A team wins in arena by eliminating all of the other side's members in the arena or capturing the map's central control point.

I really fail to see how Tf2 is a CS clone.

All FPS games have similarities, it's why they're grouped in the FPS genre. But saying that all team FPS games are clones? That's just ridiculous.

Most of your examples of game modes can be grouped together, Attack/Defend = territorial control = King of the hill, there all just territory modes. Both payload examples are the same thing as CS bomb plant, and arena as you call it is just a deathmatch which you can do in CS as well. The only real difference in game modes is CTF and territory which I think the former theres a few CS servers that run those kinds of modes.

As for skill sets their both FPS so you use the same skills, run, aim, shoot. But yes their are differences in other aspects, as there should be, like you said Money system for CS and class system for TF2.

 

[Snotnarok]

Naw I have a few titles that I've replayed recently. I think anyway.

Two titles I have no interest in replaying are

Uncharted 1-2

Great games but they're very straight forward I guess and I just don't feel that urge to see it through again.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

If I like a game (Which I usually do) it's a sure thing I'll replay it at some point. If it's reeeealy good, I might even replay it immediately.

 

[Easily_Forgettable]

Off the top of my head this gen I've played through Dragon Age:Origins, Mass Effect , Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3, Oblivion and MGS4 at least five times each.
So I think its still going just not quite as many titles.

 

[Katana314]

Wait...did someone just call Dystopia and Team Fortress 2 Counter-Strike clones?
Pfff...

Pfhe...

Yeah, I'm not even going to bother arguing on that one.

But yeah, something people need to be considering a lot more is the replayability. It's so annoying when people dish out $50 day one for a game they'll only play once and forget about quickly.

(Anyone who sees the irony between my previous statement, and the sprite I used, gets a cookie)

 

[blankedboy]

Rayman 3 is currently being replayed by me, alongside Jak 3.

Multiplayer games like Cube 2 and Counter-strike can't have replay value, but you end up playing them for ages.

 

[Hollock]

I almost exclusively replay 2-d games.

 

[mesoforte]

I'd say it's sitting there, bleeding to death and getting ignored by all the damn medics.

I don't usually play a medic, but if it makes you feel better I could set it on fire.

A lot of games lose their re-playability because of their story. If the story is memorable the first play through, there's little reason to go back and replay it when memory alone is enough.

 

[Srkkl]

Maybe for people with low attention spans but I usually play through games 3 times before I am done with them.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I'll replay games if I can choose the level. Otherwise, forget that. I'm not tolerating the crappy levels just to play the good ones.

But some games are so good I'll replay the entire game several times. The Punisher, Devil May Cry 3 and God Hand are three such games.

 

[Phoenix1213]

I can answer this in three words: PC, mods, modders.

PC because of mods

Mods are the thing

and most importantly Modders... people who aren't trying to appeal to the largest amount of people, and don't need you to go out and buy their sequel every year or half a year. Also note that modders are people who actually play the game, unlike the developers, and since they play the same game as you they're more likely to make what you want than the developers are. Developers make games for money, Modders make mods for themselves.

The "Integration: The Stranded Light" mod for Oblivion I've played through about 5-6 times already and I'm still not tired of it.