82 réponses à ce sujet

[Satyricon331]

Given all the attention DAO received for its share of gamers that never finished the game, I thought this CNN article on game completion might be interesting.  Completion rates are low ("Many games now have a 40% to 50% completion rate"), but apparently they're rising now that games are getting shorter.

And it's not just dull games that go unfinished. Critically acclaimed ones do, too. Take last year's "Red Dead Redemption." You might think Rockstar's gritty Western would be played more than others, given the praise it enjoyed, but you'd be wrong.

Only 10% of avid gamers completed the final mission, according to Raptr, which tracks more than 23 million gaming sessions.

Let that sink in for a minute: Of every 10 people who started playing the consensus "Game of the Year," only one of them finished it.

The article discusses how gamers are older now and have less free time, which seems to be driving it.

[Deathwurm]

To me, that says that most folks are over-spending on Games. Not due to the unit price, but because they're buying way more than they can finish...

Unless I find a Game truely pathetic in what it's trying to do, I can't imagine not playing through to the end of a Game with a Story...especially "Red Dead" because I hear it has a great ending.

[Chromie]

Deathwurm wrote...

To me, that says that most folks are over-spending on Games. Not due to the unit price, but because they're buying way more than they can finish...

True. I'm close to 200 unique games (Not counting dlc or expacs) and I've finished maybe 20 of them games. This is on Steam. My rpg's alway are played but a game like Splinter Cell or Battlefield I hardly play.

[Druss99]

I think another part of the problem is that most big AAA games get squeezed into the same release window. Its easy to get distracted then end up never going back to the game.

RDR: I imagine that alot of people didn't even know the last mission was there or were put off by the sudden "character development". Theres alot of stupid people about.

[naughty99]

I don't think it matters whether you finish the game or not. what matters is how many hours of enjoyable entertainment you get out of the game.

You could completely finish Portal 2 and only derive a few meager hours of entertainment.

On the other hand, you could play Oblivion for years and never finish the main quest, but derive hundreds of hours of enjoyable entertainment.

[ErichHartmann]

I don't think I'll ever conquer the entire map in every Total War game I play.

[Lord Phoebus]

Of all the video games I've played there are two I've failed to finish: Silver Surfer for the NES and Oblivion. I won't start playing another game until I've finished the one I've started, but then again I won't buy more than about 4-5 games a year (sometimes not even that much). I also fully expect to get at least 40 hours out of a game or it wasn't worth my purchase.

To a certain degree, with earlier games, I suspect the low completion rate was due to difficulty. They were harder and you had to invest time to learn the system and get to the end. Getting to the end of a 40 hour campaign might take 120 hours because of reloads and restarts.

These days I think it's attention span coupled with poor gameplay. Effectively the average gamer has the attention span of a hamster with a head injury, due to the affects of social media and information overload. It takes quite a lot to hold their attention for several sessions. While games look pretty, very few games are fun to play for more than a couple of hours. If I can master the gameplay in a couple of hours and I don't get any challenge from it, why would I keep playing?

I suspect you may also being seeing the effects of gameplay convergence. There isn't as much diversity in the market as there was 10 years ago. As developers slavishly hunt the CoD crowd, several genres of gaming are disappearing and being replaced by generic shooters. As storylines and gameplay converges, gamers get burned out on games and stop playing. I've long suspected that the gaming market is going to collapse and if this trend of short campaigns and convergent gameplay continues, I suspect gamers will stop supporting the industry.

What bothers me is that developers are seeing this as an excuse to make shorter games, instead of trying to make games that can hold a players interest for 40+ hours. For the developer this is good since they charge the same amount for a 40 hour game as they do for a 10 hour game and the sheep still buy it.

[Beocat]

naughty99 wrote...
On the other hand, you could play Oblivion for years and never finish the main quest, but derive hundreds of hours of enjoyable entertainment.

Exactly.  Some games are just fun to play.  When something's fun to play, it is more difficult to purposely finish it without a strong storyline that grabs your attention to the end.  I've had too many games that are like that.  I'll get distracted from the story while doing a side quest or something and just never actually finish the game.

I did work up a spreadsheet several years however to help me keep up with all my games and how I've been doing.  Apparently, out of the ~458 games I own (I need to update it actually), I've actually managed to complete over 17% and I have roughly the same percent that I'm working on too, which is actually better than a few years ago.  Still, I buy plenty of games with the intention of playing them and then because I'm caught up in an extremely time consuming, distracting side quest in another...never get around to the other games.  Some games I guess are just fun to play   I wouldn't say the amount of people having completed a game really is a true showing of the amount of people who enjoyed playing it.

[KenKenpachi]

Unless a game is bad I finish it, or if it turns into "My god end, please end." I just get sick of it and sell it. Such as Phantasy Star Universe. I had two chapters left, but got so tired of the endless repitition that I just stoped. Couldn't force it more. Also quilty of RDR myself. I hated his son's voice, his whole family pretty much, and was like "What the hell man" when the guy you've spent days playing as has no choice but to die.

I try not and buy too many games myself, maybe 10-20 in a years time. So I tend to finish them and am really picky. Out of 812 titles I've only owned or played about 87 or so, from when the system came out till now. And half if not slightly more of those in a year are used.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 18 août 2011 - 01:25 .

[Nerevar-as]

I usually finish games even if I must force myself to do it. On the other side I must have around 75 games yet to play.

Now I would like to see DA:O and DA2 completion rates compared to this. I think ME was around 50% from the imports to ME2.

[Cutlass Jack]

naughty99 wrote...

I don't think it matters whether you finish the game or not. what matters is how many hours of enjoyable entertainment you get out of the game.

You could completely finish Portal 2 and only derive a few meager hours of entertainment.

On the other hand, you could play Oblivion for years and never finish the main quest, but derive hundreds of hours of enjoyable entertainment.

Sounds like my Oblivion play experience. I never completed the thing despite playing it hundreds of hours on multiple playthroughs. Once I move too far on the main plot all those damn hellgates start popping up so frequently it makes it impossible to do sidequests and exploration.

Since I'm usually playing rogue types anyways, I just usually hold on to the valuable necklace the emperor gives me.

[Puzzlewell]

When I was younger, before I started working, I actually beat every game I got my paws on because they were the only games I could play. Ever since I got older and started earning my own income, my backlog of uncompleted games has skyrocketed. It's partially because I buy more than I beat, but also because I tend to keep going back to older games that I know I love instead of working on new titles. This year I've actually beat a good chunk of games which is pretty impressive to me.

[happy_daiz]

I've had the same experience with Oblivion. I had lots of playthroughs and hours invested into the game, but if I stop for some reason, I can't just pick up the game where I left off, because I don't know exactly where that is. Plus, it was fun to play as each race. But yes, once the Oblivion gates started popping up, and scamps, clannfears and atronachs were running around...it got a little more difficult to maintain.

I'll admit, I'm guilty of not finishing a lot of games. Red Dead Redemption is among them. It's not that I stop because I'm not enjoying the game - sometimes I stop because if I finish it, that's the end...and I don't want it to end! I know, you can always do another playthrough, but nah. On the flip side, though, there are games that I've finished lots of times - ME1 and ME2; DAO and DA2, Resident Evil 5, Resistance 1, etc. There aren't many others that I've played through more than once.

[LadyJaneGrey]

Another factor might be using rental services or borrowing a game.  If you have a 30-hour game for only a couple weeks,  you're more likely not to finish it by the time it goes back.

Sidenote: I'm one of the gamers that shut off Red Dead Redemption.  I was going along with Bonnie and her father, listening to their admittedly well-written dialogue, and thought "ya know, if I wanted to listen to people b**** about the government and how the world should be run, I'll go have dinner with my extended family or friends X, Y, and Z."  Haven't touched it since. 

[csfteeeer]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Given all the attention DAO received for its share of gamers that never finished the game, I thought this CNN article on game completion might be interesting.  Completion rates are low ("Many games now have a 40% to 50% completion rate"), but apparently they're rising now that games are getting shorter.

And it's not just dull games that go unfinished. Critically acclaimed ones do, too. Take last year's "Red Dead Redemption." You might think Rockstar's gritty Western would be played more than others, given the praise it enjoyed, but you'd be wrong.

Only 10% of avid gamers completed the final mission, according to Raptr, which tracks more than 23 million gaming sessions.

Let that sink in for a minute: Of every 10 people who started playing the consensus "Game of the Year," only one of them finished it.

The article discusses how gamers are older now and have less free time, which seems to be driving it.

Bad Example, RDR's final mission is hidden, what the game TELLS to be the Final Mission, it's not the Final Mission.

But anyway, i'm not surprised at all.

The Fact of the matter is, this is the rental age, people just don't have time to invest on these kinds of things, and some just don't have patience.

And that is yet another reason why DA2 pisses me off, because i am SURE that the guys from BW saw this, MISINTERPRETED, and simply thought that the people who bought DAO simply weren't interested, when they don't realize is normal(Hell, Mass Effect 2 has a 40 to 50 Percent completition rate!), and it also has not relation with Lenght, short games have this problem too (Portal, PORTAL, has a similar completition rate to Mass Effect 2, a bit higher, but not much.... Do you get that? a 4 hours long game (MAX), was only completed by 40 to 50 of the players!)

[Chromie]

naughty99 wrote...

I don't think it matters whether you finish the game or not. what matters is how many hours of enjoyable entertainment you get out of the game.

You could completely finish Portal 2 and only derive a few meager hours of entertainment.

On the other hand, you could play Oblivion for years and never finish the main quest, but derive hundreds of hours of enjoyable entertainment.

Or reverse!

[fightright2]

I completed Morrowind, but to me, it felt incomplete since I didn't get every single cave or tomb. I spent over 2 years on that. I got to a point that my character was so BA that I walked around naked and with no weapons and one punched everyone to death. I never got back to it since there was no challenge.

[naughty99]

Ringo12 wrote...

naughty99 wrote...

I don't think it matters whether you finish the game or not. what matters is how many hours of enjoyable entertainment you get out of the game.

You could completely finish Portal 2 and only derive a few meager hours of entertainment.

On the other hand, you could play Oblivion for years and never finish the main quest, but derive hundreds of hours of enjoyable entertainment.

Or reverse!

Sure, why not?

Although I guess it would have to be a pretty hardcore Portal fan who can play a 5 - 8 hour game for hundreds of hours.

[Cutlass Jack]

happy_daiz wrote...

I'll admit, I'm guilty of not finishing a lot of games. Red Dead Redemption is among them. It's not that I stop because I'm not enjoying the game - sometimes I stop because if I finish it, that's the end...and I don't want it to end! I know, you can always do another playthrough, but nah.

There were many games I didn't finish on that basis too. The closer I get to the end of a game I really enjoy the slower I get. To the point of taking a break from it. Of course if that break goes too long, when I pick it back up again, I forgot exactly where I left off, so I start over again and repeat the eternal cycle.


But ultimately what really matters to me is hours of enjoyment. If I get 100 hours from a game, completed or not, It was a great value. And that can be from a single playthrough or 100 one hour playthroughs. (If there ever were a one hour game interesting enough for me to play it that many times)

[Puzzlewell]

 Morrowind is one of those games that even the slightest bit of thinking about it and I pine to reinstall it.  Oblivion unfortunately only becomes truly worth it for me when it's modded to the teeth, but Morrowind is such a wonderful experience that I can restart it over and over and not mind one little bit. It's modded a little bit but I decided long ago that Oblivion wouldn't stay installed if it wasn't for mods, but Morrowind is a staple for me. :3

[fightright2]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

happy_daiz wrote...

I'll admit, I'm guilty of not finishing a lot of games. Red Dead Redemption is among them. It's not that I stop because I'm not enjoying the game - sometimes I stop because if I finish it, that's the end...and I don't want it to end! I know, you can always do another playthrough, but nah.

There were many games I didn't finish on that basis too. The closer I get to the end of a game I really enjoy the slower I get. To the point of taking a break from it. Of course if that break goes too long, when I pick it back up again, I forgot exactly where I left off, so I start over again and repeat the eternal cycle.


But ultimately what really matters to me is hours of enjoyment. If I get 100 hours from a game, completed or not, It was a great value. And that can be from a single playthrough or 100 one hour playthroughs. (If there ever were a one hour game interesting enough for me to play it that many times)

I tried to recently play Fable 2 and I got lost in it so I took another break and it looks like that I may just have to restart again.

But yes, I love logging in lots of hours in a game. That is a big winner for me.

[Andarthiel_Demigod]

ErichHartmann wrote...

I don't think I'll ever conquer the entire map in every Total War game I play.

Haha, true but you can at least pass the campaign objectives.
Well I don't know about others but usually if I like a game enough I take it to the end. There have been exceptions with older or more tedious games where I just lost interest but that doesn't happen often.

[OBakaSama]

I know I have more games I've yet to complete than I have ever completed. This is a habit that stretches back to gaming on an 8-bit computer. Part of that is because the game got tough and I never managed to suss out how to beat that boss or solve that puzzle; time restraints is another as most games I played had to be completed in one session: die, and you have to start from the very beginning; no save points. After a while the game sort of beats you; I give up and play something else.

Ignoring games I have yet to start (which outnumber the games I have played by a vast majority) I have managed to complete the games I do play in the recent generation of consoles. Price, finances, and save points contribute towards that.

[Addai]

Satyricon331 wrote...
The article discusses how gamers are older now and have less free time, which seems to be driving it.

I can see that.  I'm the same way- free time is so precious, I won't spend it on games (or TV shows or books) I'm not enjoying.

We do end up buying games I never finish or hardly play.  It's a risk you take buying software.

[KenKenpachi]

Pft Typical of people of today, never finishing, never prepaired to to carry out their threats!

Why in my day we took dead bodies or sick prisoners and launched them off of catapults to spread the black death. Good times, Good times.