 |
| |
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
Seems to me that for any given gamer theres one of four reasons you dont play more games
1. The games on the market
This is the thing that most often generates interesting threads on forums like this - on the lines of "i only play TBS games, and theres only X many TBS games published a year, and ive already bought and played my fill of the best 3 games, and the rest suck - cant wait till rise of orion dominions 4 (or whatever) comes out so i can play again
2. The computer
"the only game i really want to play is Shoot Em Up 4D With Instant Multisensory Rendering, but i my old rig wont run it, im waiting till i get a PC with the a P6, 5 GHZ CPU with Ultra Hyperthreading, 3 gig of RAM, and the HAL 9000 video chip. Cheap at only $4000.
3. Money
"cripes, im paying my own tuition, and i cant hardly afford to pay for games (and i dont pirate, etc) and ive already played out the bargain bin games i have any interest in - when will MOO3 be sold for five bucks?"
4. Time
This is what actually constrains me. (well primarily) Really between work, family, and non gaming leisure pursuits I really have only a limited time for gaming. Given that i mainly buy older games, which therefore have been pretty thoroughly reviewed, i rarely buy a game which doesnt give me a pretty considerable amount of gameplay. I really cant see needing to buy more than a half dozen to a dozen games a year, and that leaves plenty of old games available that i have at least some interest in. Im only beginning to be limited in certain subgenres.
So what constrains you - time, games in the market, your PC, or money? Or something else i havent thought of.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Standup
|
|
Mainly time. Being out the house 12 hours a day working/commuting. Finance isn't so bad mainly because my other half is quite understanding but also if i'm conquering the universe upstairs i'm not down the pub drinking my money away or (even worse) talking to strange women.
and perhaps for number 5 - apathy or laziness. I've got a stack of games that i put to one side for when i have time to read the rules, play the tutorial etc but its sometimes easier to play the games you already know ie another round of Civ or face the huge manual for Uncommon Vaour ?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
5. Replayability: I play games over and over and over (of course, I choose games that are highly replayable). Therefore, there is no need for me to get many games. |
well im with you, but i consider that really part of time.
Recently i went back and played a Civ2 scenario (Menelik) My latest acquisition, Panzer General 2, has lots of campaigns and scenarios. I've only played through the first day of Gettysburg on SMG. Ive never played through SMAC on transcend level, or played all the factions. If i get finished with my current wargames kick, ive got lots of RPG gaming to do - Ive got planescape torment which ive hardly touched, and ive only played through BG1 once  . And yeah, i even feel a slight craving to go back and play with simtower
But IF i had infinite time, i could do all of the above, and still have time left for new games. Of course time isnt infinite, neither is money, the games available on the market, health, etc.
So i see most of us as constrained by either time or money or the market. Those of us who either A. Have less time or B. Like replaying games tend to be constrained by time (or health)
Those who have lots of time and dont like to replay so much are more likely constrained by money or the games on the market. Either there are games they want, but they cant afford them (people with limited money and a relatively wide taste in games) or they can afford new games but cant find anything they want to buy (they have LOTS of Euros, or they have a relatively narrow taste in games)
Replayability and time of course indirectly affect the cost of games, etc. I spent a considerable period of time when the only game i played was civ2 - different maps, strategies, scenarios, etc. And we know how long it takes to play through Civ2. By the time i moved on there was huge backlog of games i was interested in but had never played. By the time i got around to them they were in the bargain bin. Im still working through them now.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bfg9000
Nothing does - that's the whole problem. |
to you and osweld - obviously something does.
there are 365 days a year, 24 hours a day.
Thats 8760 hours a year.
Do you spend, say 20000 hours a year gaming??
You cant spend more than 8760 hours a year gaming. So you are constrained by time.
I guess I need to restate this, or reexamine it somehow.
My assumption is that if you had enough money, time, etc youd play more games. If you have enough money and time, and you dont want to play more, its a sign that good games arent availble.
i suppose someone who buys and plays dozens of games a year isnt inclined to say that the lack of games is a constraint, even though they arent motivated to spend more time or money on gaming. I guess they would say that they have reached the point of zero return in utility on additional games, EVEN IF more brilliant games were released. And even they had more money, or more time. There just no way utility for game playing can be positive, beyond a certain number of hours per year.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-03-2004 02:15
|