Game collecting is not what it once was

[dunpeal2064]

Lets tackle HowLongToBeat first. *Looks up Ketsui*... Okay, 45 minutes. *Looks up DFK* Okay, 1 hour. So... they are just putting down the length of the game, and not how long it actually takes someone to clear it on one credit. So... completely useless for us to compare these genres, unless one thinks that you could feasibly clear Ketsui in 45 minutes on playtime.

So, that aside, I think its important to make the distinction between playing a game to its end and actively trying to beat it. I've played FF VII for over 500 hours, but I would never claim it takes 500 hours to beat it. TES games can easily be taken down in under a hundred hours, and speedruns show that even that is far above what is necessary to beat the game.

When I am talking about people dumping hundreds of hours into shooters, it is with the primary goal of beating the game. No side quests, no NG+, just winning, thats it. How many RPGs take hundreds of hours just to beat, with no other goal in mind?

And, if you think my examples are poor, then pick basically any arcade shooter, and I bet it would take the average player at least 40-60 hours of playtime, if not more, to clear it. Its not an extreme case, most of these games are hard as fuck.

Skill really has nothing to do with it, but in any case, its the best players that are taking this much time to clear these games. Most people that play them just never beat them.

The point I was making, is that a shooter taking this long isn't "You must live in another universe" crazy, or "the game must be broken or the player sucks". I'm not claiming that every shooter will take longer than every RPG, but they are certainly comparable.

[Luke]

I don't buy every game with the intention of playing it, I buy every game with the intention of having the option to play it.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I find what you typed to be extremely hilarious.

It's close to the equivalent of saying "Sometimes I go to an all you can eat buffet, pay for the meal, and eat nothing. But! I do have the option to eat when and what I want..if I so choose".

Buying a video game reminds me a lot of how and why I visit the library. I'll invest my time to pick out something I hopefully will like, and then invest more time in experiencing said product. I've never borrowed a book with the idea of "I got it, but it's my option to read it", I already invested energy in procuring the book, so why not read it? That was the intention of getting the book in the first place, no?

Again, I'm busting your ballz here, with no ill intent. And as far as I care you could say "Yeah I just bought twenty video games...Maybe I'll play 'em...Maybe I won't. What's it to ya?" . Your phrasing simply made me think silly things like "I bought some Stetson Cologne...Not that I'll wear it, but I live with the knowledge and comfort that if I'd like to wear Stetson cologne, I have that option".

[dsheinem]

I don't buy every game with the intention of playing it, I buy every game with the intention of having the option to play it.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I find what you typed to be extremely hilarious.

It's close to the equivalent of saying "Sometimes I go to an all you can eat buffet, pay for the meal, and eat nothing. But! I do have the option to eat when and what I want..if I so choose".

Buying a video game reminds me a lot of how and why I visit the library. I'll invest my time to pick out something I hopefully will like, and then invest more time in experiencing said product.

Your library analogy is apt, the buffet one is not.

It largely is about having a personal library to peruse and dip into as I see fit. I don't fill it with things I wouldn't want to play at some point, but I also know that I probably won't invest quality time in every game I ever pick up.

[Exhuminator]

then pick basically any arcade shooter, and I bet it would take the average player at least 40-60 hours of playtime

I beat Espgaluda, 19XX, UN Squadron, and Sexy Parodius without a sweat and hardly any quarters, and I'm by no means a shmup god. It damn sure didn't take me longer than an hour or two each.

I will try to broaden the definition to what else I'm thinking of. Take into account other games that fall into this territory outside just difficult obscure Japanese arcade scrolling shmups. FPS and cover shooters of the 360 generation for example (of which there are tons). Those games are quick to blow through compared to contemporary RPGs of the same era.

[dsheinem]

hardly any quarters

there's the rub

[mas]

I can't really have to much to say but if you look hard enough you can find deals. It took me 6-8 months to find a decent find like the tg16 I got and in the next few days I did find other great finds that I actually gave to a few friends here. But you can find them. I also have checked on threads like on other sites for games and bargins. Also point noted on the last 2 generations of used games. I didn't want to keep the oxbox but damn finding games for 2.00 is great. Also the 360 is getting so cheap now. I picked up last month for under 20.00 sf4, super sf4, mvc3, and DOA 4.
Plus at GameStop for 10.00 you can either get mass effect 1,2,3 or gears of war 1,2,3. Either way awesome.

[Exhuminator]

hardly any quarters

there's the rub

Are you implying one hasn't beat an arcade game unless one can beat the whole thing without ever continuing?

I guess no one can truly beat an RPG unless one never resurrects a single fallen party member either?

[Ack]

I think what is being argued here is the hundreds and hundreds of passes and attempts that some players make in a SHMUP or Run and Gun versus a single run in an RPG.

It's like comparing how many hundreds(or maybe thousands) of hours I spent in Team Fortress Classic across every mutliplayer match I ever was in and every practice run of when I would boot up a jump map and just train with conc jumping. A more accurate analogy would probably be with an MMORPG, since gameplay extends on.

[dunpeal2064]

A somewhat fair comparison, but in games like Team Fortress or WoW, you aren't really actively seeking the end of the game. You are just continuously playing it. But, yes, I am talking about making several attempts to clear the game on one credit, in which hundreds of hours of attempts/practice take place.

And Exhum... yeah, its pretty common among arcade players that you haven't beaten an arcade game if you continue at all, whatsoever. It seems elitist or w/e, but using continues makes the game nothing. You could never move or shoot once and still win by feeding coins.

And the analogy to not resing in an RPG is not accurate. You can die and come back to life in a shooter, you get extra lives. This is more like beating an RPG by putting an invincibility code on, which would obviously not count.

These "Obscure Japanese 2D Shooters" are designed to be cleared on one credit. Now I can see where the confusion comes in though, since it would obviously take no time at all to clear a shooter with continues. You can't really lose.

[Exhuminator]

At this point all that's left for us is to furiously rub our nerdly bits together until one of us starts bleeding.