Replay value

[N_of_the_dead]

i think the one game i replayed most was Ogre Battles 64: Person of Lordly Caliber which i have replayed multiple times uncountable. After that it would probably be Disgaea 1&2

but after that most games can lose their flavor if people do buy a guide like SmugFrog said as well as anyone who tries to do every single thing in one play through. Or people who over hype a game due to lack luster cause it couldn't live up to expectations.

But anything can have a good replay value if you really enjoyed the game

 

[Archereus]

ok maybe i explained it wrong, this is what i`m trying to get at mainly, any game has a replay value for as long as there a little bit extra, cheat side quests what ever, the best thing to do is go ahead and tyrying to beat the game as best as you can without any knowledge of the the bonuses or side quests or hidden locations or secret items, and then after beating the game at the best of your abilities hooking yourself up with the cheats or the guide will really make you want to play it again to see what you missed as you played. That is just my opinion any how, i find it always more fun that way, it at least make me replay the game 3 to 5 times, thats better then beating it once or twice then just giving it away right?

 

[SmugFrog]

No, it's not developers that need to get that into their head.
Ask any developer whether they'd like to have replay value in their game or not and see what they answer.
You'll get an anonymous 'yes of course'.

We're not morons you know.

Ask any developer if they want to create a successful fun to play game, and they'll likely tell you "Yes, of course!"! The sad fact is that there ARE games out there that absolutely suck whether it is due to the incompetence of the developer, or just a rushed schedule. What developer is going to say "Yeah, we set out to make a total piece of garbage."?

To say developers want to add replay value, and for them to actually do it, are 2 different things.

 

[SmugFrog]

I'm not blaming you for that Kanada - I mean, it's the whole process that is to blame. You could have the best game developers there are, and if they're dealing with a horrible boss that wants to rush things and doesn't really care about how polished the product is, things are going to start looking pretty grim.

I admire the devs that have the ability to take their time and polish what they release - Valve is a good example of this (frustratingly so to their customers).

That's an awesome story and I thank you for sharing it with us; but I've read so many of those reports from devs after they release a game. "Here's what went wrong," they all say. When I say the "devs", I mean the entire group and perhaps I should be more specific about who I blame for it. I mean, technically, the person in charge of your publishing that caused such a horrible gameplay change helped develop the game to what it released to be. With all of that said, however, I still believe there are devs out there that just aren't up to par and they continually release crap because just want to make quick $ - and I'm not saying you do this - but let's face it, you can't say every medical doctor in the world does 100% perfect work either. You may be one of the greatest programmers in the world for all I know. I feel sorry for the people that get tied up in affairs like yours turned out to be.

I would love to know the game you worked on; but I understand if you don't want to release it. Any chance you could tell me what the average review was for it?

 

[Xalmar]

I find replay values to be one of the main make or break issues when I decide if I really like a game or not. Take Mass Effect for example, I really liked the storyline, the graphics, and the gameplay, but after I was done I felt no motivation to do it again, or complete everything 100%. Games like Fire Emblem, on the other hand, offer quite a bit of replay value as you can form different teams and use different characters every time you play through. I still really like Fire Emblem, but I haven`t touched Mass Effect in months.

A few other games that I liked that had a bunch of replay value: Pokemon, for the same reasons stated in Fire Emblem. I also really liked Melee and Brawl, since no two matches are exactly the same. It adds a level of unpredictability and makes it more enjoyable. Most FPSs I play also tend to have a lot of replay value, as you can approach every battle differently and try to challenge yourself. Perfect Dark also had bots in multiplayer, which is a feature that desperately needs to make a comeback. Not every single gamer has (or wants) an Xbox Live subscription or a bunch of friends willing to play. Bots help to fill out a game with only two human players, and even lets a single person fool around on the maps for a while.

I let this get too long-winded so I should just leave it at that.

 

[SmugFrog]

Take Mass Effect for example, I really liked the storyline, the graphics, and the gameplay, but after I was done I felt no motivation to do it again, or complete everything 100%.

That's a really good example too. The game is just long enough for a casual gamer to pick up and beat and move on to something else - BUT it has enough extra content and bonus stuff for several more plays. I haven't touched the game in a while (so many other games to play), but I want to go back and play it a few more times to get achievements, use my main character again, and see other dialogue options.

 

[ffxfriek]

the first mercenaries just blow up buildings, bridges... repeat. hours and hours of fun

 

[Dr Spaceman]

People around me add a lot of replay value to a game. That's why I'm really starting to miss being in college. When I bought the expansion to Company of Heroes, my roommate suddenly noticed I was playing this awesome WWII strategy game and jumped on the bandwagon with me. I definitely replayed the original campaign and a lot online, things I wouldn't have done if he hadn't discovered the game with me.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Overall, The Elder Scrolls. For shooters, Halo: CE.

I don't know why Halo: CE is amazing to play. I'm not sure why 2 and 3 are less fun, despite their technical advancements. But I know that I have spent more time in that shooter than any other, and I could do it all again right now.

 

[Sensenmann]

Following things increase Replay Value for me:
Achievements
Explorative (getting you to take advantage of features)
Grinding (Not unfun grinding but overtime)
Educational (Like TF2 achievements)
Ridiculous ideas dont add value unless everything else inside game is ok (a la Amorphous+
Content
Character Customisation
Monsters
Procedural Content

 

[xitel]

Ratchet and Clank games have a lot of replay value, I think those are some of the best in my opinion.
I've played Overlord a couple times, but that was just cause it was funny.
Mass Effect has a fair bit of replayability, with the different classes and side-quests and whatnot.
Crackdown has a good amount of replay value, it's fun to run around with full stats and blow junk up.

 

[Baby Tea]

I've played the Baldur's Gate series more often than I can remember. Whenever I finished it, I wondered how I would fare as a thief-mage-whatever tripple class, or because I wanted to own that sweet Mage's Stronghold or whatever.

Baldur's Gate has to be the game I have played over and over and over the most. I LOVE that game. Heck, I love that SERIES! I have the mod for BG2 where you can play through BG1 and it's expansion and then go right into 2 and it's expansion which means you can play through BG1 with all the BG2 enhancements...Sorry. I love the series.

Also Diablo 2 (Duh!) and Oblivion (Over 1500 hours across all my characters...I wasn't married then).

And my thoughts: Replay value is one of the most important things for me in getting a game. If I get a game, beat it in 8 hours or so, and don't want to play it again (Which has happened more times then I care to count)...that isn't worth $60. Open world games where you can run around and do quests differently or in whatever order you want (Oblivion), or games whose levels change (Diablo), or games where there is such a level of options available that you just want to explore them all (Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect) are the ones that keep me going back. That or really fun multiplayer (CoD4).

 

[Vallen00]

The only game I can think of is DBZ Tenkaichi Budokai 3. I played through every character at least twice. Sorry is I spelled the name of the game wrong, but, I don't have a copy on hand to reference.

 

[Quaidis]

To me, replay value is defined by one simple concept. If the game was fun and enjoyable for about 75-90% of it, it has passed the test and I can easily play it again despite going through the same cycle over and over. If had had a great deal of fun that's all that matters, i could care less about open worlds, unlockables and such, those are just the cherry on top for me.

I agree whole-heartedly. This is especially true for rpgs: I find myself picking up "ChronoTrigger" from time to time simply to play it all the way through - not to find the eight some additional endings. It's like re-reading a good book every few years.

Because of this, I find replay value critically important in a game. Yes there are games with extra hidden levels, games you have to play on migraine-inducing hard, games with better guns or extra bosses, that will entice replaying. But you ultimately play a game a second or third time because it is at least, as Seraph stated, 75% to 90% fun and enjoyable.

 

[searanox]

Replay value doesn't necessarily come out of multiple ways to play, branching storylines, etc., but those certainly help. I've started new games in all the main Half-Life games more times than I can count (finished about half of the time, too), despite the fact that they're incredibly linear, simply because the core gameplay is polished to a pristine shine. I played Mass Effect through about five or six times after I bought it, trying out different genders, alignments, backgrounds for my character, classes, etc., but even then I still would have played it that many times just for the fun of it, as the core gameplay is incredibly solid (despite being very RPG-lite). It's good, genuinely enjoyable gameplay which stands on its own without gimmicks, graphics, etc. to hold it up that creates good replay value, which is why Ocarina of Time is always fun to play and why Gears of War is quite possibly the biggest chore to sit through ever.

 

[AuntyEthel]

I still play GTA2. I finished it properly ages ago, and found out that its up for download off Rockstar's site. I just like sticking on the all weapons and loadsa lives cheats and running around causing havoc.

 

[-Seraph-]

To me, replay value is defined by one simple concept. If the game was fun and enjoyable for about 75-90% of it, it has passed the test and I can easily play it again despite going through the same cycle over and over. If had had a great deal of fun that's all that matters, i could care less about open worlds, unlockables and such, those are just the cherry on top for me.

I agree whole-heartedly. This is especially true for rpgs: I find myself picking up "ChronoTrigger" from time to time simply to play it all the way through - not to find the eight some additional endings. It's like re-reading a good book every few years.

oh god...Chrono Trigger...not even the most sophisticated calculator in the world can count how many times I have played that shining example of RPG greatness.