Does anyone else give up more easily when you didn't spend any money on a game?

[sacrificengineer]

The perceived value of a free or rented game is mostly diminished in comparison to the one specifically picked and purchased. It's a psychological thing and, unsurprisingly, a lot of people confirm this in this very thread, myself included.

While it's good that today the games are very accessible in terms of distribution, I personally remain quite selective of what I play and purchase. I prefer not to accumulate backlog and purchase the games that I'm most confident in physically. But that is for selected titles, I certainly more explorative with digital distribution or a subscription. Yet I still prefer to give any game I play a proper chance.

 

[Issen]

Yes but only because I was much less interested in those games to begin with or I would've spent the money on them.

Game Pass is the exception and I don't seem to give up any earlier on games I was interested in regardless of their XGP availability. Beat Doom Eternal in no time flat, XGP be damned.

 

[Sprat]

Yes. If I have investment and the game doesn't grab me in the first half hour it gets deleted

 

[Abaddonn]

I definately think thats true for me as well, if I get a free game I'm much more likely to drop it way faster than if I had paid full price, then I would definately give it more time before giving up on it.

 

[Wispmetas]

Definitely. If I payed for it I normally try to stick with it (even if I ultimately don't), if I didn't I give up way sooner and easier.

 

[shaneo632]

Absolutely. I rent a lot of my games so if I'm not having fun after a few hours I sent it back and move on. But if I've paid for it I'm far more likely to slog it out.

 

[Dennis8K]

Yes. If I get a game for cheap or free I am willing to toss it if it doesn't grab me.

If I paid $60 I am going to will myself into getting some damn fun for my money.

 

[Sha_96]

If I paid for a game I'm way more likely to stick with it and give it a bigger chance

 

[John Caboose]

Commitment bias, value attribution and sunk cost fallacy all point to the answer being yes.

 

[Redcrayon]

With regard to game subscription services, when I only get through half a dozen games a year these days, out of hundreds released every year, I don't see the point in anything giving me up to half a dozen random ones a month. I barely get to finish the literal handful of games I really want to play, let alone a random selection. I remember when I used to collect the Ps+ games years ago but I didn't even touch 95% of them, even though they are technically in genres I like. Same goes for books and films, the amount of available media exceeds my spare time to experience them, so it's easier to just be extremely picky than curate libraries of hundreds of things just because they are free.

 

[CortexVortex]

Doesn't matter if it was for free or I paid 60€ for it, as soon as a Game bores me to to death or annoys me I'm out

 

[GranularCement]

I do but it's mostly because I'm going to try out games that I don't have as much, if any, interest in when they are free. If I'm going to spend money, I also will do a bit more research and reading about a game before I do, which has helped me mostly stay away from games that I don't enjoy.

 

[Muitnorts]

Yeah it's odd. There are a few ps+ games that I was looking to buy but then barely played when I got them free.
With Gamepass I rarely seem to stick with anything.
Meanwhile all the new gen games I actually bought like Demon's Souls I've invested plenty of time in and platinumed.