For those that limit your gaming scope, how and why?

[Forlorn Drifter]

I don't know if that was a general reply, Xeogred, or if it was aimed anywhere, but I'll throw my .02 in.

I am completely fine with cutting out certain systems, and trying to figure out how I will is part of it for me. IE, the Saturn is something I've never been interested in, the same with the TG-16 and the like. While the Dreamcast is attractive, the actual list of exclusives isn't that great, and the majority of what I would want could be found elsewhere. It just comes down to what will give me the widest options of Non-Nintendo releases...and what will give me Nintendo releases. Looking at it all, I think Sony is the best bet for me on the non-Nintendo side, as long as they don't turn into re-branded Steam machines or some such.

As far as ROMS go, its about reducing how much physical media I'll actually need. I look at something like the SNES, where while there is a lot there that interests me, actual games I would stick with seem fewer. So, I figure its better to have those few games loaded somewhere ready to go rather than trying to dig down into the retro-game market. My other factor in emulation interest came up recently talking with my cousins husband. He isn't much of a gamer, but was big on multiplayer games when he was in college. He's recently got back in, and emulation has been a lifesaver for him. Being able to save anywhere, at any time on games with password saves allows him to finish something like Super Metroid while dealing with his own business, social life, and two young kids. While I'm a ways away from anything like this, and might just end up living in mom's basement ( ), when I do get to that point, I would like that modernity layered over the classic games, when possible.

[Xeogred]

Even the Wii U VC has save states and I won't deny they're useful.

Yeah I wasn't trying to point at anyone there, just kind of rambling on what I was reading throughout here and how I handle such things. Guess I'm just not that big on emulation in general anymore, though I mentioned it the other day but I can't really justify $50+ for an old game either unless I have played it before and love it, otherwise I'd emulate or go digital there in that case for sure.

[Tanooki]

I've been limiting myself slowly over the last few years, but the scope was originally to get rid of any crap I hadn't used in a long time. Then it goes to getting rid of anything I hadn't used recently I wasn't in love with or figured I'd go back to. Finally I got to where I just wanted to console wise keep whatever I bought/was gifted say pre-21st century. I've got that down to just a few games over that I just won't part with Nintendo side.

Problem is then I let myself this year get out of control and ended up owning a big pile of Sega games over 2 systems and now I feel kind of committed yet I rarely touch it which spits in the face of my plans so I feel kind of trapped. Had I the hours and motivation I'd kill that stuff, but playing DQ7 3DS the last few days now since it came out I'm enjoying stuff again more and DS before that was doing it as well. I think I need to either sell off another mass, or just accept it, shelve it, try my best not to add to it, and focus on what I'm working on so it's not all waste.

All that said I'm quite limited. I cut out Sony other than a few PS4 games which I don't really use anyway, cut out the other sega systems, cut out NEC, cut out the virtual boy too. I don't buy NES/SNES stuff anymore really, and rarely pick up Gameboy / Game Gear stuff too and I haven't snapped up a Genesis game in months. I maybe really alright, I"m under 400 titles over 31 years so that isn't too bad.

[alienjesus]

I'm going to half-way agree with Stark. Looking at specific genres I think is the better way to go about limiting your gaming

I disagree entirely. I think that limiting yourself to a certain genre is a good way to burn yourself out quicker due to repetition, whereas limiting yourself to a certain console or console manufacturer offers you a lot more variety whilst still narrowing the field.

[Anayo]

I prefer to play games rather than collect boxes and artwork. I don't generally hold back from eBaying anything that I won't sit down and enjoy one day, even "so bad it's good" enjoyment like Shaq Fu.

My main "filter" is price. If a real copy of a game I want to play is too costly, I'll just emulate it. My jailbroken Wii has emulators and roms for NES, Turbografx 16, and the pricier SNES games, for example. My Sega Saturn has a mod chip and a ton of CDR's. I've also ended up with a few repro carts for Sgea Genesis and SNES games that would cost an arm and a leg otherwise. It's nice that there's so many options available for this today.

[Tanooki]

Logical choices there. One I forgot to stick to was stick with one hardware maker. It takes a LOT off the table of backlog if you don't branch out (given you're happy with the variety there.) If you stick with say even Nintendo who hasn't the best track record since the Gamecube period, you can go back into the 80s, not much to be hurting there for choice at all.

[isiolia]

I guess it'd really come back to why you feel like you need to restrict things.

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to pre-define what you'll play. Tastes change, living situations change, and practically speaking, there was a first time you played anything. Drawing a box around what happens to appeal to you most right now and only playing that could well mean missing out on a lot. Including things that you may have liked even more. So, I think it's worth keeping an open mind.

That said, any of us only have so much time, money, and space. To me though, it's just more a matter of being practical or objective about it. I think that's kind of what Xeogred was getting at too, at least how I read it. It's less a matter of deciding what you're going to like, and more recognizing what you do like and investing accordingly. Things that you don't really get around to playing/using aren't worth putting the effort or money into.

[Sarge]

I play enough genres that burnout is only a general issue for gaming as a whole, not necessarily for single genres. I do have to admit that in the past, I've felt highly burned out by JRPGs. A lack of top-tier stuff left to play was part of it, but there's also the time commitment and the fact that many of them do the exact same things over and over.

I'm back on that train now, just because of Dragon Quest VII and XCX. But I don't know what'll happen with the rest of them. I mean, I've had Legend of Legacy for months now, and I've barely touched it, and I haven't even picked up Bravely Second. Admittedly, Bravely Default is my most-played 3DS game, though.

I have cut out particular genres (with occasional exceptions) because there's only so much time I have left, so maximizing my enjoyment is the number one priority. That means less second-tier RPGs, and very little time spent with RTS, SRPG, puzzle games, and the like.

[Forlorn Drifter]

I guess it'd really come back to why you feel like you need to restrict things.

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to pre-define what you'll play. Tastes change, living situations change, and practically speaking, there was a first time you played anything. Drawing a box around what happens to appeal to you most right now and only playing that could well mean missing out on a lot. Including things that you may have liked even more. So, I think it's worth keeping an open mind.

That said, any of us only have so much time, money, and space. To me though, it's just more a matter of being practical or objective about it. I think that's kind of what Xeogred was getting at too, at least how I read it. It's less a matter of deciding what you're going to like, and more recognizing what you do like and investing accordingly. Things that you don't really get around to playing/using aren't worth putting the effort or money into.

I see what you are saying.

I just figure that, as everything stands from what I can see, I'll be Sony > Microsoft unless there's a big change, and won't touch PC except for that handful of games I can't help myself with. Even going back to the past, first party and exclusive PS games pull more towards the Action-Adventure/Action Platformer/Brawler (?) side of things, rather than the shooter. RPGs... seem to be a complete toss up by generation and style.
--

Another thing I've been doing lately is being more... decisive? I guess that's the right word. When I finish a game (unless I absolutely dislike it and won't finish playing it) I tend to decide if I'll keep it or chunk it right then and there. I still run in to some games I'm unsure about, such as Vanquish, but others are clear cut. Spec Ops is going to go after I get the Platinum (since thats one more run through of a 6 hour game), Mirror's Edge was fun but needs to go, LA Noire is a keeper, and GOW 1-3 are going to go after another run through. Not to say GOW is bad, but the environments are so meh for me, I'm not big on the whole Greek style.