Non-RPG General News - Why do we spend Time playing Games we don’t like?

Rjshae spotted an older interesting article on Rock, Paper, Shotgun:

Why do we spend time playing games we don’t like?

We spend a lot of time playing games we don’t like. Remember The War Z, renamed to Infestation: Survivor Stories after receiving overwhelmingly negative reviews all around? On Steam, it has nearly 14,000 negative reviews which total 507,837 played hours of absolute garbage. Or what about Duke Nukem Forever, which is somehow sitting at ‘Mostly Positive’ at the moment? The 1500-odd Steam reviews that rightly acknowledge it as a flaming trash pile account for 10,013 hours those poor souls will never get back.

I’m fascinated by the lifetimes we cumulatively waste on games we end up hating, and so I decided to dig a little deeper. How long do we typically spend with a game before we decide it’s no good? Do we have to finish it, or do we make up our minds before the credits roll? Does it take us longer to nail down our feelings on a popular game versus an unpopular one? Why on earth don’t we just do something else?



To answer these questions, I took a look at the Steam reviews for a number of big games with ‘mixed’ reception – the kinds of games that defy a simple and immediate classification as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. By averaging out the hour counts of both positive and negative reviews, we can see a consistent trend between the two, with players spending on average two to three times as long with a game they enjoy than a game that leaves them disappointed. Not too surprising, but things get more interesting when we compare the average hour counts with the time it takes to beat these games, as estimated by howlongtobeat.com. Contrasting these values reveals that we often spend enough time with games we don’t recommend to see their credits roll – though whether we actually do reach the end or not is significantly harder to quantify. Judging from sampled review text, though, we push through as far as we can, even when crashes, bugs, and low framerates conspire against us.

[…]

More information.

I tend to stop playing shortly after I begin to not enjoy a game, it does not take me long. Early on while playing a game I am learning about the game -- the setting and lore, the gameplay, the inventory system, combat, etc. -- and that is almost always a fun process for a game I am looking forward to playing. So even if the game ends up being not to my liking, I am enjoying the learning and discovery process.

At some point if I am not enjoying the game after the learning process has mostly been completed, I won't stick with it for long. Three recent examples for me are Divinity Original Sin, Dragon's Dogma on PC, and Torment: Tides of Numenera. For each of these quite different games, I enjoyed the process of learning how things work and I enjoyed the game overall early on but at some point it became not fun and I was not looking forward to continuing. I did continue for another hour or so, but then stopped because I did not have much hope for improvement.

I usually do not give negative reviews, though (except in a post like this in which I feel examples apply). I would prefer to just give positive reviews for games I like.

I only review a game if I absolutely love it and even then it is rare. For me, I sometimes play a game I don't like overall, because I enjoy one aspect quite a bit.

For instance, I don't really like multi-character games at all. However, I love creating/assembling the party. So I'll roll up a bunch of parties, maybe play a couple areas with them and get bored. Some recent-ish examples Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, and Divinity: Original Sin.

Occasionally I'll actually finish a game, mostly if it's turn-based. I finished Might and Magic 10, for example.

So, only one of those 4 games would get a positive review from me, but I played all of them quite a bit.

Originally Posted by crpgnut
I only review a game if I absolutely love it and even then it is rare. For me, I sometimes play a game I don't like overall, because I enjoy one aspect quite a bit.

For instance, I don't really like multi-character games at all. However, I love creating/assembling the party. So I'll roll up a bunch of parties, maybe play a couple areas with them and get bored. Some recent-ish examples Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, and Divinity: Original Sin.

Occasionally I'll actually finish a game, mostly if it's turn-based. I finished Might and Magic 10, for example.

So, only one of those 4 games would get a positive review from me, but I played all of them quite a bit.

I wouldn't review a game if it's a type that I don't really like at all. I don't consider that fair to the game or its devs.

I like to think that I can almost immediately determine whether or not a game is for me. There may be some exceptions, but I can usually tell from watching gameplay videos first.

My time is limited in contrast to my younger years, and I'm much more picky about games I invest my time into. As a result, I tend to do a fair bit of research on a game before taking the plunge (typically 2-5 hours of investigation). However, if something does catch my attention, the first two hours are typically the most crucial. If I'm not intrigued or hooked in some way, it's unlikely I'll continue and I will never return.

If I'm unsure about a game after a bit of investment, I'll meditate on my experience for a few days, then decide if I'd like to resume my progress. If a game does have my attention and I'm enthralled within those two hours (usually this is difficult as I highly appreciate a good soundtrack, atmosphere, dialogue, etc), it's almost guaranteed that I'll become addicted.

There was a point in my life where I self reflected on games I used to play in the past and enjoyed as a lad, and I eventually came to the conclusion that there were a few titles I spent hours on simply to avoid being bored. I arrived at a point where I began to eliminate games I no longer saw as "fun".

In that sense, I did play games I didn't necessarily enjoy, so I can understand where the author is coming from completely.

I really just play games to relax, and if a game isn't good enough to draw me in and divert my attention, I don't have much use for it. So, I pretty much only play what I consider the really good stuff. I'm not the sort of enthusiast that will play all examples of my favorite genres, even the slightly mediocre ones. I'm more that way with music, where I'll go to gigs and sit through the less-than-stellar evenings, too.

Originally Posted by Ragnaris
However, if something does catch my attention, the first two hours are typically the most crucial.

The industry says you are not alone. Between the time crunch for gamers and the way reviews are structured it forces an overdone first hour followed by an unfinished game. Games that have a fantastic second half are demolished in reviews and sales because of the lackluster starts.

Which…. leads to scripted rpg killing massive badasses, dragons, saving the world… in the first ten minutes then what? How do you go up from there?

I probably invest more time in games I don't like than most of the other responders here. I know sometimes I have an off day, or that many games have slow passages, so If I end playing a game and feel unhappy, I give it a 3-4 day pause (I play multiple games concurrently) and then give it another try. Since I've played games over many years, like JDR, I also feel like I know what I like, and its rare I really dislike anything I buy, so its mostly games which I find only mildly entertaining, and even these I'll give 3-4 gaming sessions before quitting. Most games I invest a good 5 hours in. Some game have slow starts, and pick up as they go, so that's why I tend to try to give games a fair try before quitting. Other games have a great start but are thin of material in the middle or the end, these usually get 5 hours after my boredom starts to kick in too.

Originally Posted by Wisdom
The industry says you are not alone. Between the time crunch for gamers and the way reviews are structured it forces an overdone first hour followed by an unfinished game. Games that have a fantastic second half are demolished in reviews and sales because of the lackluster starts.

Which…. leads to scripted rpg killing massive badasses, dragons, saving the world… in the first ten minutes then what? How do you go up from there?

Lately, I'm finding that fewer and fewer games have an ascent, or in other words, they have me intrigued during those first two hours and as I progress it continuously gets better. Similarly, I've had difficulty finding games where my journey is enjoyable the entire way through.

Agree with NFLed, I usually give a couple of hours max from the point I feel the game isn't very interesting. The only time I persist is when I know I'm very close to the end - if I came this far, might as well put couple mor hours to say I actually finished the game.

I only review games I enjoyed and finished at least twice otherwise I feel that I don't know the game well enough to review it (sharing impression is a different story, of course).

If I'm not at least marginally intrigued (story, gameplay, etc) within the first 10-20 min, I have no problem dropping a game forever. Examples are: Torment- Tide of Numenara (and I was a backer!), Mount & Blade, Two Worlds II, State of Decay, Kingdoms of Amalure, Firewatch… Granted, I get most of these on steep discount, so I can afford to be blase'.

There are too many potentially enjoyable games out there for me to waste my time on meh.

I don't anymore. If I don't like the gameplay, story, controls, bugs I stop.

I always used to be compelled to finish every game I started. Not anymore. Life IS too short.

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
There are too many potentially enjoyable games out there for me to waste my time on meh.

Scrolling fast on a phone I read that last word as meth. So much better

My playing time is limited. It is rare that I have a few hours (like two or perhaps three) in a day and that for multiple days in a row. I only play one game at a time and it takes quite a long time for me to finish it, with the result that I hardly ever do. I have a lot of unfinished games. Not because they were really bad, but because I've lost interest. I don't recall having put a lot of hours in a game that I don't like. I usually stop playing them rather quickly. Dark Souls comes to mind. It probably is not a bad game, but it is not a game I like.

It's an interesting article. I usually play everything. I even try stuff I know I won't like such as Andromeda, Pillars or Tyranny. Hell I finished the last two.

I tried reading it but it was clearly overcomplicating a relatively simple question.

People generally don't spend time playing games they don't like.

They do, however, sometimes spend a lot of time making up their minds about games - and they might spend time on something they eventually decide was not worth it.

Certain games are very long-term by design - and they do require a level of investment that might not be rewarding or feel rewarding right away.

Obviously, you can spend time doing something you don't like for the sake of others, but that's hardly what this is about.

However, people don't spend time on games they're absolutely sure they don't like - or won't reward them in one way or the other.

For some reason I tend to play the game till it's end even if I don't like it. I guess I'm a kind of person who likes to finish what was started.

A few games I ditched before finishing - the most recent one is the disappointing Earthlock. I mean… Stop annoying me with mushroomcenered UI on PC already.

But there is something else I just can't understand. Why are people playing MMOs they don't like? Don't tell me they all love to grind, I cannot imagine that being possible.

Originally Posted by NFLed
I tend to stop playing shortly after I begin to not enjoy a game, it does not take me long. Early on while playing a game I am learning about the game -- the setting and lore, the gameplay, the inventory system, combat, etc. -- and that is almost always a fun process for a game I am looking forward to playing. So even if the game ends up being not to my liking, I am enjoying the learning and discovery process.

At some point if I am not enjoying the game after the learning process has mostly been completed, I won't stick with it for long. Three recent examples for me are Divinity Original Sin, Dragon's Dogma on PC, and Torment: Tides of Numenera. For each of these quite different games, I enjoyed the process of learning how things work and I enjoyed the game overall early on but at some point it became not fun and I was not looking forward to continuing. I did continue for another hour or so, but then stopped because I did not have much hope for improvement.

I usually do not give negative reviews, though (except in a post like this in which I feel examples apply). I would prefer to just give positive reviews for games I like.

This is me in a nutshell. The funny thing is that I've hade the exact same experience with Divinity Original Sin, Dragons Dogma and Torment: Tides of Numenera as you have.

First of all, i think most people are not in sync with their intuition. meaning, they think they like/dislike X, but they dont really.
consider every product has a big equation, with many variables, an individual who does not understand these variables, is very prone to overestimating some of them, and blaming others .. basically being of the mark.

Second, the scene is full of products now, so the standards should rise. unfortunately though, just like the ancient greeks and their philosophy, it seems like we are still recovering from a slump and have not yet surpassed our predecessors .

and third, what am i doing with my time? well, first of all i tweak constantly my awareness and value system so i can better manage time ivnestment and emotional involvement.

bottom line. i never spend time playing games i dont like , nobody does, its just a matter of people being aware of what they specifically like.
its just like saying people do things without logic. thats never true. theres always a need behind their actions, they just dont understand.

Basing assumptions on Steam review system… Solid ground.

These days, products labelled as games can even not be games. Some time ago, people could review a product and its quality as a game. It is no longer done. It is all about liking/not liking.

So the work of investigation that is no longer done falls on players.
It is not about liking/not liking, it is about determining what the product is.
Time must be spent on that stuff.

At the end of the day, it is not possible to like a game until you know it is a game. Of course, people can like other products than games. Playing a product that is not a game and liking it.