Fuck that noise. If a game advertises itself on having 60 hours of gameplay, then that tells me it's a laboriously drawn out slog killing time that could be better spent on, like, eight other games.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Do you follow the 1 hour / dollar rule?
- Thread starter Lant_War
- Start date
That's the dumbest rule I've ever heard. If a game takes 60 hours to beat I don't even want to play it because it's most likely filled with repetitive content.
I'm glad this is overwhelmingly no. That's just crazy. Maybe when I was 16 and had way more time than money. Now I'm happy to pay more for short experiences if they're well crafted. Bloated games trying to add pointless fluff just to drag out an hour count is a way greater sin to me.
I find myself seldom paying full price for games. And I generally look for games with a fair amount of content. So I think I loosely follow this rule.
Hahaha, I'll never forget one of my coworkers arguing that No Man's Sky was going to be the greatest value for money game of all time because it has near-infinite playability.
He rushed out and bought it day one and I think he probably played it for no more than 5 hours.
He rushed out and bought it day one and I think he probably played it for no more than 5 hours.
They're worth the price if they're fun, I don't particularly care about the length. I played great 10 hrs games and great 100 hrs games and I don't prefer one over the other as long as it's fun.
In general I don't care about the price at all. If I think the game is good and I have time to play it I will buy it.
In general I don't care about the price at all. If I think the game is good and I have time to play it I will buy it.
No, I even prefer a great 8 hour game to a good 50 hour game. And would pay 60 bucks for it.
I didn't want to buy AC Odyssey because of its length and just bought it because I found it for a really cheap price.
Generally, I wait most of the time and rarely buy games at launch because I have so god damn many games to play. So my range is mostly up to 40 bucks, depending on the game, not its length.
I didn't want to buy AC Odyssey because of its length and just bought it because I found it for a really cheap price.
Generally, I wait most of the time and rarely buy games at launch because I have so god damn many games to play. So my range is mostly up to 40 bucks, depending on the game, not its length.
To be fair this is the only game I bought for 4 platforms simply because I felt like I was cheating them somehow at that price. And I still think I owe them a lot of money...
I don't follow the rule, but I do calculate how many dollars per hour played a game was worth for me. Just for curiosity, really.
For example, Picross S was worth 14 cents an hour (I played 55 hours of it, an $8 game), while Super Mario odyssey was basically a dollar per hour. I prefer SMO, nothing changes that, but it is a fun little statistic.
For example, Picross S was worth 14 cents an hour (I played 55 hours of it, an $8 game), while Super Mario odyssey was basically a dollar per hour. I prefer SMO, nothing changes that, but it is a fun little statistic.
Nah, that's like saying never mind the quality feel the width.
One of my greatest gaming memories was playing Journey on PS3. I tihnk that was around £13 at launch and took less than 2 hours to complete. In terms of time vs cost it's probably one of the most expensive games I've purchased but it was worth every penny. On the flip side I've paid £20 for a huge games and felt they weren't worth the price.
One of my greatest gaming memories was playing Journey on PS3. I tihnk that was around £13 at launch and took less than 2 hours to complete. In terms of time vs cost it's probably one of the most expensive games I've purchased but it was worth every penny. On the flip side I've paid £20 for a huge games and felt they weren't worth the price.
Nah that seems a little silly and extreme.
However I will take into account value for money (like Hollow Knight, which is ridiculously cheap for how long it is).
Skyrim I guess falls under that too. If you like the kind of game it is, even at full price you will get a lot out of it, especially if you can mod it.
However I will take into account value for money (like Hollow Knight, which is ridiculously cheap for how long it is).
Skyrim I guess falls under that too. If you like the kind of game it is, even at full price you will get a lot out of it, especially if you can mod it.
I do this after I finish a game that was like $15 or $20 in a couple hours but just for fun.
I never use it as an actual metric for buying or deciding purchases lol
I never use it as an actual metric for buying or deciding purchases lol
OP
OP
Just to be clear: I'm talking about full priced games for the digital games. On sales everything is much cheaper.
No and this awful logic is why so many games suffer from bad pacing and feature bloat, especially open world games.
I think I used to jokingly follow this rule back in middle/high school when I was tight on cash. Nowadays it just seems silly. Especially when I can't apply that logic to other entertainment.
I'll more quickly buy a game that I know I'll get a ton of play time out of, sure.
But I have so little gaming time at this point in my life that I now actively seek out shorter games. I also now sometimes buy games with no intention of playing them, simply to support the developer. So there's no way I can follow that anymore.
But I have so little gaming time at this point in my life that I now actively seek out shorter games. I also now sometimes buy games with no intention of playing them, simply to support the developer. So there's no way I can follow that anymore.
Not at all. Quality over quantity all the time. I'm currently finishing up Horizon Zero Dawn and looking at what to play next of my backlog. Almost all of the games are 40 - 60 hour experiences. Games are too long, too bloated these days. Give me a nice 5-15 hour game over a 60 hour slog any time of the day.
I don't even bother with metrics for justifying video game purchases because every time I try to apply one I just end up contradicting myself and have no logical justification for if a game is worth it or not. I used to pay $50 back in the early 90s for 8 hour games like Mega Man X. And then 25 years later that same $50 would be about $88 today, so pretty much any game is worth whatever price to me as long as I enjoy it.
The obsession with length of a game is ridiculous. I'm in my 30s. I have a house to maintain and other hobbies that need taken care of. I don't care about price anymore. I can afford whatever. I care about how much I'm enjoying the time I spend in game because I can only get in maybe 6 games a year these days and don't need useless side quest filler to eat up my time.
The obsession with length of a game is ridiculous. I'm in my 30s. I have a house to maintain and other hobbies that need taken care of. I don't care about price anymore. I can afford whatever. I care about how much I'm enjoying the time I spend in game because I can only get in maybe 6 games a year these days and don't need useless side quest filler to eat up my time.
It a rule that makes sense when you don't have must money to spend on games, so when I had little free money I was always looking at how long a game would last me.
Now I have money it I can join of the rest of you and scoff at those who put value for money first.
Now I have money it I can join of the rest of you and scoff at those who put value for money first.
Absolutely not. This would make sandbox games worth hundreds to thousands for some people. They're great, but they're not that great. Certainly this should be considered a quality of quantity. That said, some games really are worth more than others and the value should always be considered before buying.
If you're worried about saving money, look at ways entertainment budgets overlap and cut back elsewhere. Cut cable. Cut subscriptions you barely use, etc.
If you're worried about saving money, look at ways entertainment budgets overlap and cut back elsewhere. Cut cable. Cut subscriptions you barely use, etc.
Was this "Internet genious" a shut in? Games are not expensive, a single night out with friends can easily reach $100 😯
If it's 1 dollar per hour it's most likely a big waste of my time. Like what kind of entertainment costs 1 dollar per hour? Watching grass grow costs more because at some point I might get thirsty and buy a coke.
10 dollars per hour sounds like a higher quality experience. Even then a bit on the cheap side.
10 dollars per hour sounds like a higher quality experience. Even then a bit on the cheap side.