How many hours do you think would be worth $60?
60 hours.
>>321696257
At least 60 hours
>>321696257
Thirty.
>>321696257
60-100 hours
6000 hours
It depends on the game, but usually at least 30 hours. If I can't get immersed, it's a no deal.
>>321696257
30 hours probably but there are some really short games that are worth it because they're just more condensed fun
22 hours with replayability.
It depends how interesting the hours are. Bethesda games have hundreds of hours of content but none of it is compelling enough that their games are worth $60.
>>321696257
>paying RRP for anything ever
only retards do this
>>321696257
about tree fiddy
15-20
of course the game has to actually be good, but if I spend like 10 hours or less with it then there is something wrong
If its an story based RPG around 30.
If its a game like Bayoneta around 12 hours.
>>321696257
1 dollar per hour of fun.
60 minimum for $60.
50hrs is the perfect cut-off point.
>>321696257
If i buy at or next to release: 30h
From that to 1 year: 60h
1 year+ 100h
If the game doesn't have an instant 50 hour play time, no matter how I get to the 50 hour mark, it's not worth 60 dollars and never will be.
Fuck it, no game is worth 60 dollars, nevermind.
I've spent over 100 hours on games I bought for less than $5.
It really disgusts me that someone could spend $60 on a game and only spend 10 hours playing it.
If I ever spent any more than $0.50/hour, I'd feel ripped off.
As long I enjoy it and it has at least an 8 hour campaign I'm happy.
>>321696257
15-20h for a single-player game, I hate it when single-player games are bloated with samey missions.
100h for multiplayer game.
>>321696257
1 dollar per hour of entertainmdnt, usually.
Though if it's 10/10 entertainment, I'll settle for less.
If I buy something for 60 dollars I intend to spend at least 40 hours replayable with it. Think every hour you sat is like 1.25 or whatever you just spent.
>>321696257
>high schoolers these days would pay 60 bucks for 10 hours of cutscenes and qte
What happened?
About 30 realistically. But obviously it has to be a fun 30 hours. Bad games aren't worth $60 even if they have 300 hours worth of content.
$1 for 1 hour is always at the very least acceptable, if I played the game for that long and kept playing it I think it'd be really worth it
Otherwise anything over maybe 15 or 20 is definitely worth it if its really fun but nowadays I prefer having replayability of games that I like rather than just one offs.
>>321696257
20 hours or so seems about right,
Trick question.
Only a retard would pay $60 for a video game.
At least 40-ish hours of actual game play. Anything that seems to be short or a 'movie', I'll hold off on until it's on sale.
>>321696257
Depends on the quality of those hours. I've spent more than I care to admit playing Elite Dangerous but I look back on each one of those hours with regret as it was a complete waste of my time.
>mfw the standard price for games will eventually reach 100 dollar range
>mfw the standard playtime for games will eventually be below double digits during this time
>mfw the majority will blindly accept this eventually
Hopefully I will be done with video games before shit gets that bad.
whether a game is 1 hour or 1000 hours it doesn't affect its value. it needs to be a quality game to get money from me
>>321696257
.003 hours because that's how long it takes me to make $60.
>Paying $60 for a video game
>In the age of keysites, sales, and pirating
I never spend $60 on a game. It doesn't make sense to pay full price when prices of PC games drop so fast. People who buy $60 games are paying a pretty huge premium just to play the game sooner than the guy who buys the same game for $20 a year later.
Maybe it's different with consoles. Do console games stay at $60 permanently or something?
Depends on how much fun I get per hour.
>>321696257
Honestly upwards of 70+ hours
I don't buy games full price for that reason. I think a lot more games should be around the 20-30 mark, but I do understand cost of production and all that. It's just not worth it to me.
>>321697537
This. Most shmups are only 30~ minutes long, but they're still better than the vast majority of shit released.
Certainly more than 2 hours ya fucking indie shit.
>>321697673
Only sought after Nintendo games are for sure almost always max price.
>>321697673
Console games stay at max price a lot longer, especially if the game sells a lot. GT
>>321697773
How many indies ask for 60 bucks for less than two hours?
Around 30
>>321696257
Time and money are both costs. A game that takes a lot of time to complete is not worth more money than a game that can be completed quickly.
>>321696257
I'm not sure, since my most played game is f2p.
60 hours at a minimum
I don't base it on hours. Whether it's a long game like Nier or Xenoblade, or something short like Bayonetta 2, it's more about the amount of enjoyment I get out of it.
That said, I still think $60 is too much for anything, but I'm a cheap ass.
Depends on the game and genre.
A major RPG? No.
A action game ALA God of War? It is OK.
A racing game? Sure
A Zelda game? No
A fighting game story? Yes
A MMO? Fuck no
Etc. Then again, I rarely spend $60 unless it is a game I really, REALLY want at launch.
40-50
i think the last single player game i got the most value for money out of was xcom
Depends on the quality of the game. I don't have a lot of free time unlike most of /v/ so I'd actually prefer a super polished 10-15 hour game to a "good" 80 hour game for the same price.
depends. usually at least 30 hours would make it worth it.
>>321698243
XCOM enemy within is worth full price honestly. I'm almost at 100 hour mark.
Shit's so good.
>>321696343
>>321696357
>>321696438
>>321696630
>>321696680
>>321697251
>>321697336
>1 dollar per hour of entertainment
What other fucking comparable entertainment medium is even CLOSE to this cheap?
Masturbating is free
>>321698496
I too enjoy slot machine mechanics in my strategy games
>>321698505
A good book.
>>321696257
I would say 30-40 at the least
>>321698505
$5 Tuesdays at the movie theater I go to
Humble Bundle has been kind to me.
>bought AC NL for $15 during a sale
>300+ hours
>>321698505
>measuring their value by hours of entertainment
That kind of shit logic would justify buying a rubik cube for 5,000 dollars
>>321698505
i know, isn't it great?
60-100 hours.
Because spending 60$ at once is more significant then spending 10$ on a cinema ticket, at least where I live.
>>321696257
I'm 24 and if there's one thing that I've learned from gaming all these years is that if I don't see myself playing a game for at least 200 hours, I shouldn't get it
games that don't take long to complete or get stale quickly are always forgotten in months time and they become useless experiences that just took your time
only play games that you absolutely love and ignore all the pressure to play the latest and greatest
>>321698505
music
>>321697837
No
Only first party Nintendo games retain a high price
This is because they are produced in small numbers and made to a standard that attracts collectors and enthusiasts
Most xbox/ps games are worth nothing
>>321698505
A Netflix subscription.
Let me guess, you think $13 for a movie ticket is acceptable.
12 hours
>>321696257
60 hours
>>321698505
Music and books. If you have a theater that shows old classics for cheap then that would also work.
>>321698505
Butthurt indie dev with a one-hour-long $10 game detected.
For 60 dollars, I expect
>60 hours
or
>10-20 hours main game, 40+ hours of online replayability
Splatoon fits that criteria. Bloodborne does not.
Scale accordingly to game cost. I expect 1 dollar per hour of entertainment.
>>321696257
Doesn't matter, never pay more than $30 for any vidya.
At least 25-30
If its 10 hours i buy it when its 20 on sale
>>321698505
plenty of board and card games, lad.
you can buy a decent chess set for $20
>>321697748
why is Yuugi a Naruto?
>>321696257
40+
>>321698123
That isn't gookclick you retard.
Its PeruClick or RusClick
>>321698601
>>321698647
>>321698849
>>321698995
>>321699146
>music and books being comparable to video games
Not even close. Video games contain visuals, music, dialogue(most of the time, at least menu text and such at the very least), and are often fully translated into multiple languages. And there's the whole part where YOU CONTROL THE ENTIRE EXPERIENCE.
The fact that people are willing to pay 13 bucks for a 2 hour movie, but think 60 bucks for a 20 hour video game is fucking mind boggling.
>>321699248
>That frame with little girl titties
lel
I would only spend that much money on a (non-digital) 3DS game these days, and I don't really think about it in terms of hours.
For PC, I haven't bought a game on steam at more than 15$ in a long time.
>>321696257
How much I make an hour divided by the cost of the game.
>>321698505
>this retard actually thought no one would have an answer
>mfw >>321698601 and >>321698849 and >>321698995 and >>321699146 and >>321699320
![CJvUMIU[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/04G1ObV.png "CJvUMIU[1].png")
>>321698505
Nearly any form of home media. A move rental, a book, and an album can all be reasonably expected to hit and even exceed this ratio.
That being said, I'd value it at about 20 hours, but that's based on my income. Different people have different realtionships to money and videogames are known as a medium with steep upfront but long, long time returns for the best experiences.
>>321696257
Why would you want a game longer than 10 hours?
Games dont offer enough variety to justify it being any longer.
>>321698505
Literally everything before the advent of film.
>>321699509
300+ for a console, or 500+ for a reasonably good computer
$60 for a 20 hour game
Fuck off if you think I'm paying $360 for 20 hours of entertainment.
>>321696257
40-45 hours but it depends pretty heavily on the game.
>>321698808
How can you be sure you'll love a game for hundreds of hours before purchase?
Not to mention a person could stumble upon a game, in a genre they usually don't enjoy, that happens to click with them in all the right places. Kind of hard to guess that as well.
The older I get, the more I realize that not many games are worth 60 dollars, and I also find game prices to be a little bullshit sometimes.
There are games that I play 10 years after I purchase, those games are definitely worth 60 bucks. There are games that I can play for hundreds of hours, those games are also worth 60 bucks in my opinion.
Then there is bullshit that is hardly 20 hours long and they charge you 60 bucks.
depends on how good those hours are
I'd rather have a really good, polished 5 hour game over a 100 hour game filled with padding
>>321699685
That console can be used for multiple titles, and if you're into video games at all a half-decent PC should just be something you have since a computer can be used for a billion things outside of vidya.
>>321699509
Depending on usage, PC and Consoles
I got thousands of hours out of the wiiu thanks to the gamepad letting me listen to shit so I can fall asleep and watching shit all day in bed
Are we including replayability into the hours played? Because if so then I'd say 30 hours at least.
>>321699509
>YOU CONTROL THE ENTIRE EXPERIENCE
This is exactly why any decent video game should have enough replay value to hit the one-hour-per-dollar mark.
If a game in which "YOU CONTROL THE EXPERIENCE" isn't worth playing several times, then there isn't much of an experience to control and the game probably sucks.
>>321696257
for $60 it better provide me with months of entertainment
>>321699685
who buys a console for one game? Buy that logic you spend 560 for 20 hours of entertainment as well if you go the pc route instead
>>321699860
That doesn't excuse 20 hour vidya for $60 bucks. At the very least, I should get 1 hour for every $1.50 I spend.
100 hours
>>321699828
would you really pay 60 burgerbucks to play a 5 hour game?
The fact that people who play games measure their 'value' on how much time they waste instead of the actual qualitative enjoyment that they get says a lot about the demographic
Threads like these are why games aren't allowed to be short anymore. Now even Mario is a 40 hour game to collect all the stars.
And games were MORE expensive in the old days, an SNES cart was generally 70 bucks if you were lucky.
>>321696257
I don't consider any game worth $60, mostly because the vast majority of the best games I've played and actually finished in the last 2 years have been less than £20 on launch. DaS is the only full priced game I've found any profound enjoyment out of in the last 2 years that I can think of (and I got it on sale for £5).
>spending 60 bucks on one game
>>321700205
I liked Revengeance, so yes.
>Buying games at release
I have a backlog that will extend for the next decade more, I'm not in a rush.
tfw spent around 850 on league of legends
I've played it nearly every day for 2 years, and it's not like I spent it all at once, 5 dollars here, 10 dollars there, over time it added up
Don't really feed bad about it, and if I did feel bad nothing could change
Depends how good or replayable or memorable they are. I dont really buy new games anymore. I mostly just buy sequels or spinoffs of stuff I played years ago/familar with. Sometimes I make a random odd purchase, like Danganronpa, and end up just loving it but thats pretty rare.
I find Chaos Rings series on my phone a lot better than AAA stuff coming out on consoles and pc because it reminds me of an old PS1 jrpg but with modern production values
>>321696257
That's not how you price a product.
requiring games to be long is what ruined the industry
I used to think that way. Theb I had less and less free time. If a game is fun I don't give a shit how long it is.
>>321700589
Most new games are extremely short
I wouldn't buy a game full price unless I REALLY wanted it senpai.
Quality of quantity but I'm not dropping 60 for 10 hours
>>321697673
Playstation game plummet in price faster than Steam, Steam is cheaper for sales but third party games on Sony consoles are cheap as fuck after like 6 months second hand. I'm speaking mostly for PS3 since I don't have a PS4 but it seems like mostly the same thing these days. Nintendo games stay full price pretty much forever becuase they don't print that many.
>>321696257
More than 20 + story.
Just the playtime isn't enough to go on, most people will say 60 hours but if the game is basically 10 good hours split up by a collective 50 mediocre hours I'm going to feel ripped off. Whereas I feel much more satisfied with a 10 hour game when 9 or all of the time is really good.
>>321696257
Irrelevant, game enjoyment and value is not and should never be measured in hours.
I've gotten quite a lot of hours out of 4chan on PC. It's actually damn entertaining. /v/ doesn't really play vidya, but it is a fucking text-based nonadventure game.
>>321699509
>YOU CONTROL THE ENTIRE EXPERIENCE.
That's not true at all unless we're talking about interactivity. Games are designed for you to follow a path. Even if it's open world like Fallout 4, but you still follow a path, except FO4 has multiple paths that can be separate or together. That's the difference, you control what you experience first.
It's really not quantifiable in numbers, if you feel a game was too short than you saw potential that wasn't reached. If it feels too long, it's overstaying it's welcome and is padded out or that's the moment you've realized you don't like the game very much given your entire experience up to that point.
>>321699731
you just need to look deeply into why you enjoy the games that you have played the most
I know how "philosophical" that sounds but its' true
me for example, I enjoyed quake 3 arena, battlefield 2, and halo 3 the most.
was it the guns? was it the devs? no. it was the active and fun community
so I looked for other games with that and I found M&B: Warband and now that's all I play
find your calling, man
>>321698505
other video games. yakuza 5 is looking like it will beat that number
>>321696257
I don't play this little game because I know that everyone will eventually just weasel their way into wanting the game for free or getting it for free. There's no reasoning with these people, they'll always move the goalposts and look for any way out to claim the price should have been lower.
Just to entertain the idea of cost per hour for a moment, anyone could easily clock over 100 hours on Call of Duty's online multiplayer. But you'd never pay $100 for the game because you know that there are other shooters with higher skill ceilings and better mechanics.
A game's value should come from the mechanics and how replayable it is. RPGs should have an open-ended design that encourage you to play through the game again in ways that you play differently or limit yourself to make something more challenging. Fighting games should keep being patched to keep things balanced and to introduce new characters as DLC AFTER the game's production and release and if it's been received positively. Arcade games aren't as resource-intensive so they should have a lot of options concerning gameplay such as characters who play differently, etc.
>>321698505
posting on 4chan.
>>321696257
More than 50 maybe? I can't remember the last time I spent $60 on a game though.
>>321700402
Do you buy every skin or something? Rank?
>>321700929
what games do this padding thing that "overstay the welcome"? I cant think of any game that does that except bethesda games, but those are shovelware trash anyway since theyre just unity made piles of shit with random generated trees, houses, and quests everywhere
>>321698808
>only play games that you absolutely love and ignore all the pressure to play the latest and greatest
I agree with this but disagree with your arbitrary time limit.
40+
>>321701041
Bravely Default
>>321700589
This.
>>321700643
All of the old classics are extremely short. FEAR, Half Life, Max Payne and so on, I really don't want to make a huge list - all of them are 5-7 hours long. Older games like SNES era are even shorter.
Problem is that with new generation, a ton of normalfags/kids with no money who only buy one game and of course virgins like you people who like to grind want to spend hundreds of hours on one game. And that's just wrong. NO GAME whatsoever can be entertaining for the entirety of 20, 30 let alone 60 or 100 hours.
This is why we're getting so many generic open world games with 2 mission types you need to do over and over. This is why we're getting shitty fetch quests and fillers in most RPGs and Zelda games, for example.
I'd take a short, memorable game like Shadow of the Colossus or Max Payne over any open world 100 hour garbage released this year. It's like preferring a family sized PC that's undercooked, 5 days old and has only 10% covered with ingredients over a small, 10 cm pizza that is amazing and really tasty.
>>321701025
>>321701041
>>321701025
>>321700847
>4chan
>/v/
>fun
I thought fun is a dirty word and you're not allowed to admit that fun things are fun here. Fun is so taboo a word that Leddit refers to fun as euphoria.
>>321701268
You're the one saying fun though
>>321701120
>>321700789
>>321700160
>>321700067
>>321699998
>>321699706
>>321699685
>>321699473
>>321699307
>>321699106
>>321698243
>>321697852
>>321697851
>>321697773
>>321697439
>>321696343
>poorfag detected
>quantity over quality
Would you rather pay 60 bucks for a fat, disgusting, smelly hooker but you could fuck her for 2 months?
Or would you pay 60 bucks for the most amazingly beautiful creature that ever existed, but can be yours for only a day?
>>321701523
I'd rather pay $60 for the beautiful creature for 2 months.
This is the shittiest question I've ever read.
>>321701253
>>321701169
Oh i see. Square enix also makes nothing but shit and I dont have a 3DS. I mostly play arcade style/old school sega games that are short but have tons to master. I actually have a house of the dead 4 and time crisis 2 arcade cabinet in my garage and always find myself replaying score based genesis or saturn games. Probably have spent over 500 hours just playing Nights throughout all the years
I feel sorry for you kids who need garbage like open worlds otherwise you cant have fun. Try some arcade or old school sega games sometime.
>>321701523
You technically get more value and cumshots out of the ugly hooker but the hot one is better
>>321696257
I don't know. Any game priced $60 in today's world is probably scrub tier shit like Call of Faggotry.
>>321701523
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make here.
>>321701523
pink is pink nigga
Measuring video games based on hours alone is retarded - the quality of those hours is more important.
I of course can't speak for everyone, but while I enjoy the MMO I play I wouldn't equate the fun of the amount of hours I spend in it to the fun I get from playing Mario Kart with my friends.
Not to mention my sixty bucks may be worth more or less money to me than someone else's. Money tends to be an incredibly subjective scale.
>>321701523
>/v/ analogies
I'm surprised it wasn't "Food vs. Shit on a plate" again
>>321701523
>but can be yours for only a day
thats a lot
>>321701651
That's not possible.
>>321701652
>You technically get more value and cumshots out of the ugly hooker but the hot one is better
Theeeere we go.
>>321701826
If the game sucks you won't be doing a full play through.
>>321701867
Well, most short games are about 5-6 hours long. Considering that most people are not NEETs and have a job/school, they have about that much time to play their new 60 buck game.
If it's fun It doesn't matter.
If it's short I'll probably go back and play it some other time, if it's long I'll get my worth in the first play through.
I don't know where people get this conception the long=better
>>321697656
this desu
Well I mostly play games that you can sink a lot of hours into, so 30 hours at least.
>>321697656
Hey not everyone has ascended to the master race yet.
>>321702154
>I don't know where people get this conception the long=better
>poor people
>young people/NEETs with too much time
>people with no taste
>>321701523
>fat, smelly
fix it with mods tbqhafter you got it for free obvs
>>321699509
What? I pay like what, 9 dollars for netflix a month? It replaced cable for me and I watch it almost daily.
Netflix is a pretty huge fucking value compared to a 60 dollar video game.
About 500 hours minimum. Which is why i only really fuck with fighting gamesand Smashnowadays. mostly because i just prefer a game that has competitive value and depth so i can feel as if im getting better every time i play and optimize and try new shit. i like to spend about 2 hours a day getting gud or playing online and GGXRD, SFIV, SCV, and even Smash 4 still feel pretty fresh every time i play. Cant see why people blow $60 to play through a fucking interactive movie and put it on the shelf to never be played again
As much as i used to like my weeb RPGs i don't even buy those anymore
>>321702709
>Cant see why people blow $60 to play through a fucking interactive movie and put it on the shelf to never be played again
I can. Its because they can't git gud enough to play a competitive game. RPGs give people the false image that they are good at games.
>ITT: People confusing time to beat a game once with time you enjoy playing it
If a game takes 10 hours to beat and you think it was good enough to play through two more times, that's 30 hours you idiots.
>Paying $60 USD for videogames
No, just, no.
8 hours single player campaign.
>>321703596
>spiral knights
Are you autistic?
Hmmm.
I'm not really sure.
For £10 I'd expect a game to be at least 5 hours long.
For £30, I'd expect it to be 10-15 hours long.
However, if the game is a RPG, I expect at least 30 or more if the game is full price.
>>321703596
>i bought the orange box at full price
>portal is free
>tf2 is free
>and i hate HL
at least they gave me a hat
60
Doesn't have to be from a single playthrough.
I make a fairly okay wage about the national average of $50/hr so I guess about 1.2 hours of gameplay for $60 sounds fair.
All these same people saying 100 hours also buy 2 hour movies on blu ray for 25. Especially their favorite movie ever, the dark knight starring heath ledger
>>321704201
>the national average of $50/hr
Where the hell are you from, because it certainly isn't the states.
>>321696257
Personally I like it when a game keeps me entertained for at least 2 hours per dollar I've spent on it. A $60 game should therefore keep me entertained for at least 120 hours, which given the amount of time I spend playing video games means it should keep me entertained for at least three weeks. A game that keeps me entertained for 10 hours is worth maybe $5, so if it's a $60 game it's garbage.
>>321696257
I care more about the quality of the fun than the quantity of it, so number of hours doesn't factor into the value of a game.
>>321704201
>national average of $50/hr
There's not a single country in the world where the average is even 60% of that.
>>321704323
But I am from the states. Who makes less than that? I'm hoping to be making at least $90/hr in the next couple of years. Anything less would be slumming it hardcore.
>>321703596
fucking this
i got 300+ hours out of vindictus and it's a f2p game, why do people bitch about time for money when f2p games are the biggest timesinks out there?
>>321704578
Thank you anon, I needed a laugh.
I usually put it at a dollar-to-hour ration, so $60 is good.
And if I stuck with it that long, then they were probably mostly good hours.
I fucking hate this meme that games are valued by how long you play them
If I play a 10 hour game that was $60 and I really enjoyed it, money well spent.
>This thread
>>321704771
Who cares about quality of time? I prefer quantity. That's why I play mmos.
It's worth the raw physical media it's "printed" on, and nothing more. 1s and 0s hold no value.
>>321704959
>It's worth the raw physical media it's "printed" on, and nothing more. 1s and 0s hold no value.
So a sword is only worth the steel it was forged from?
>>321704071
Wait, Portal is free?
>>321698505
Music is cheaper and has even more replay value.
>>321699609
Why is Dany Trejo so good
>>321704951
>prefer mmos
kek
>>321696257
I've played short games that I greatly enjoyed so it's hard to say. I'd be fine playing a game for 20-30 hours if it was fucking great instead of one for 50-70 hours that dragged on and made me hate it.
>>321696257
>How many hours do you think would be worth $60?
Depends how much you make an hour. For a $60 game I would want at least 20 hours+
>>321704959
getta loada this pretentious faggot
>>321705554
Is Joostposting still a thing?
>>321705747
No, that's why she's in disguise.
>>321705878
and still as disgusting as always
>>321701175
maybe in single-player games, multiplayer can give practically infinite hours of entertainment.
And besides, a good game can be finished in 8 hours, a great game gives you a reason to play more than that. Goldeneye is a good example, you replay the missions to try and get the time trials completed and unlock the cheats. Alternatively, there are score attack games which also never stop being fun if you enjoy them in the first place.
What you're talking about is more story-oriented scene-by-scene affairs which have little variation in the experience each time you play them. Those I'd argue are actually bad games because there's no impetus to replay them again unless you get into speedrunning, which is fine but is more of a self-imposed challenge. Nothing wrong with that, but a really great game gives you a reason in itself to replay it, instead of leaving it up to you to create a reason to replay it.
>>321705207
I think he meant that Portal was free for a while on Steam a while back
Unlimited, you fat sack of fuck. If it has an expiration date and I can't eat it, get it the fuck out of my house.
>>321705554
>dressed like P4 brotag
>have foxhound patch
what?
>>321696257
Usually 30, but if it's really good I won't be mad if it' shorter. Anything less that 10 is unacceptable for a non indie game. I almost never buy games at $60 though, I wait until they're $20 or less.
>>321699208
>Bloodborne does not.
Say that to my 500 hour savefile
The cancerous faggots saying 100+ need to kill themselves. They are the reason almost every game this year was open world trash. An average movie is 10 bucks for 2 hours. So an average game only needs to give me like 12 hours IMO. A godlike game can be as short as 2, but I have only played a couple of games that fun/good. You kids need to get jobs.
At least 300. I usually buy games around $20-30, and get at least 130-160 hours out of each.
Minimum 60 hours with ZERO padding.
Then and only then is it worth a $60 pricetag.
>>321701523
>calls people poorfags
>can't afford beautiful hookers all the time
>>321696257
the day I buy a game full price is the day the game comes with a daily blowjob for the following month
>>321709087
Another poor analogy. When you go to see a movie, you're expecting it to only last you a couple of hours, but when you pay $60 for a game, you expect it to last you and provide you with a lot more entertainment.
>>321703593
I have never replayed a game.
Years ago I would've said something like 60, but looking back at my favorite games from the last generation I'd have to actually say 12-20, if I'm going to actually walk away from the game with a positive opinion. Games like MGS V and GTA V wear out their welcome pretty quickly, but Revengeance and Max Payne 3 are games that I look back on as actually fun experiences.
>>321710468
How does that make sense? I go into a game expecting a good time, I go into a movie expecting a good time. Who goes into a movie expecting 2 hours on the dot, you would have to be autistic.
>>321699509
But books do. I'm rereading a saga, which in total will take me about 300 hours to finish. Of those, about 230 had a cost of 99 USD. Could be cheaper if I'd bought digital copies, but the ones I got were hard cover.
>>321701523
Neither. For $60 she probably has Super-AIDS or something.
>>321700067
Where the fuck are you seeing movies for $3?
Anywhere from 5 hours onwards. I think price should depend on the quality of a title, and if a short 5 hour game is absolutely fantastic, I'd say its worth paying such a price for it. On the other hand, if a game has 100+ hours of content but is shit, It might hardly be worth $10.
Pic related is a game I'd say is well worth as much as $80. Fortunately its either free or much much cheaper depending on which version you play, but I stand by my quality>length argument and that this game could be as much as $80 and I'd still pay for it.
>>321701880
Why is that not possible? I can pirate that hooker and keep her in my basement as a sex slave for the rest if her life without paying her a single penny.
Minimum wage ~$8
2 week paycheck is ~640 minus %33 taxes = 428.8
60 dollar game is about 14% of a 2 week paycheck
336 total hours per 2 weeks minus 80 work hours = 256 'life hours'
Assertion: A minimum wage employee's earnings should be proportionally adequate to completely sustain the employee's life hours
Therefor: game should be worth 14% of the 256 'life hours'
Total game hours expected ~35.84
You can't argue against math
>>321701523
Thanks anon, I hadn't laughed that hard in a long while.
>>321696257
For 60$, at-least 30 hours of high quality content, no filler.
At least 5 gameplay hours of pure enjoyment. This disqualifoes a lot of games with bullshit padding like Final Fantasy or WoW and games that are just cutscenes like Final Fantasy.
>>321712935
Doesn't exist unless you count multiplayer replayability.
>>321713763
Have you only played FFXIII?
>>321713870
It took me 100 hours to get through Dark Souls the first time. There was no padding in that.
>>321696257
>>321714214
Played and dropped the SNES games (4, fantranslated 5, and 6) when I broke my arm and tried 7 and 8. Boring as fuck
80+ hours.
Thank god for patience and sales.
>>321698694
>Megaman Legacy Collection
Is it worth getting if you own all the games? I saw from a demo that the only challenges in said demo were existing levels stitched together. Is there anything more than that, original levels or mixing weapons from different games, Wily Tower-tier shit? I thought it would be a huge waste to not include shit like that.
Length isn't as important to me as the actual gameplay mechanics and pacing. I put 88 hours into MGSV but it sure as fuck doesn't feel like I played a game with 88 hours worth of great content because the game drags damn near everything out for as long as humanly possible.
>>321696257
40 minimum
>>321698505
drawing
you can spend no money at all on hours of entertainment if you draw in the dirt with a stick
>>321699509
thats extremly objective anon, I find books much more enjoyable than video games usually
that and they are free from my local library
>>321696257
Anyone who gauges it like this is stupid. You could just spend a certain amount of time with any game, even a shitty one, just to justify your purchase.
If I enjoy a game it was worth the money I paid for it, because I am happier as a person because I played the video game. That's worth $60 for me. At that price I'd also like some replay value for sure, but I still wouldn't measure that in terms of hours, I'd measure it in enjoyable content that keeps me coming back.
>>321696257
"Number of hours" is not the right way to think about it. Simply adding a crude RPG progression system to a game will be enough for some people to sink way more hours into the game than they otherwise would have, but it doesn't make the game better.
Then you have games like Disgaea where all they have to do to add another 10+ hours to the play time is add another superboss with hugely inflated stats that the player will have to grind a lot to have a chance again. This stuff takes almost no effort from the developers, it's not a well-crafted or memorable gameplay experience.
>>321699208
I got more than 60 hours out of bloodborne.
Most "gamers" are jobless faggots that thinks 60$ USD is a lot of money
>>321696257
People having expectations for game length is the reason why we now have soulless open world games filled with copy-pasted side activities.
Many of the greatest games of all time fall somewhere between 10-20 hours in length. Assassin's Creed 19 is not going to be a good game just because it contains 50 hours of tedious chores.
whatre some good steam games that i can leak a few hundred hours on?
Buy a sandbox
10 hours is barely enough time for me to get acquainted with a game. 10-60 is usually when I actually git gud and actually enjoy it.
