How Quickly We Lose Interest In Video Games
from the a-quick-hit dept
While folks are fretting about the impact of video games on aggressive thoughts and behaviors, Clive Thompson is taking an interesting look at how many gamers suddenly get sick of a game they've obsessed over for weeks. His theory is that once you've uncovered all the "layers" of how a game works, it loses much of its excitement. And, often, that happens well before you've actually played out the entire storyline in a game. He even points out that the more you play a game, the less you may like it, because you begin to notice the flaws and limitations built into the game.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
uh....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: uh....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: uh....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
no.. really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
umm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
all too true
I'm playing F.E.A.R now which is pretty decent. It's not HL2 by any stretch, but still good. Also playing Quake 4, which pretty much sucks, but I've been playing Quake games since qtest.exe came out (bout 10 years). Makes me feel nostalgic for the days when shooters were basically new. I'm shocked at how much Q4 reminds me of DOOM3, and even appears to use many of the DOOM 3 art assets. id needs to forget about making games, and just concentrate on building game engines and technology. I know they are working with 3rd party developers now on games like Q4, but if they were up to the task, these games would be much better.
I'm looking forward to Enemy Territory: Quake Wars though, since I'm a hardcore Battlefield 2 player who loves large outdoor battles.
As for MMORPGs, I played Star Wars Galaxies as my first MMORPG ever. I played it for about a year, which was how long it took me to get sick of it. I would have stayed for a lot longer had they found a way to create more dynamic content. This is a problem for all games, and the subscription model in general. Once we explore all there is to explore, the game gets old.
Game companies either need to crank out new content faster, or find a way to make dynamic content if they want to keep people around paying to play their MMORPG longer. I can put up with game bugs, as long as they aren't show stoppers. It's the lack of fresh content that makes me leave an otherwise fun game.
There aer some serious Dungeons and Dragons dork game developers who need to step out of their Tolkien roots, and make some more MMO's that are not Fantasy based. I prefer sci-fi themes myself, but would be willing ot try ANYTHING other than fantasy. Last time I looked online, there are about 40 new fantast based MMOs in various stages of dev. I know I'm not alone in this. Yes, there are a few other-than-fantasy MMOs out there, but VERY few, and they are aging. No good new MMO's for Xmas 2005??
I was going to bite my lip and check out Guild Wars, but I hear it's mostly instanced. No thanks, I like thew social aspect of true MMOs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Xbox Live
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
I do agree that gamers are tending to loose interest faster because we have seen so much but we also must consider the high developments costs of games now adays too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: uh....
one would think that there needs to be a change in entertainment -- possibly some innovation; something new perhaps?
FPS (First Person Shooters) get old after a while -- especially after doing it for 10 years now. Same goes for redundant platformers and those driving games where everything in one game is identical to another (except the scenery & rear/cockpit of the vehicle you've chosen)
Entertainment should be stimulating. If i play a game and its the same repetitive stuff that has been done some place else -- since 10 years ago -- I'm going to get bored quickly. Same goes for movies who have no actual stimulating content.
The reason there is more hype about Game systems and less about the actual games is purely due to the lack of innovation on the programmers part -- consumers want to see NEW stuff.
A 1991 automobile with a new paint job may be nice and may be easy to sell... But it's still the same 1991 automobile it was before the new paint job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: all too true
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
- hey, this is one reason I like the whole "mod" thing but not just limited to the look, but game play and engine as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
Mods were the main reasons games like the original Half Life, Unreal, Quake, etc continued to sell copies for years, even if they were "bargain bin" copies. Without the mod community these games don't last more than a year or so before they are considered old. There were so many mods for Quake 3 over the years that I had to re-purchase it 3-4 times for various reasons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
Hopefully there comes a point when even the average read-no-reviews joe will realise that the next Doom (likely XXVI by this point) isn't worth buying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Old games are still cool!
A single game these days takes up more information than virtually the entire history of games up to a point. But, that history has far more variety than any new game today. Why don't more game developers take time to add more intricacies to their games? Older games are more attractive for what they suggest than what they are.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not just games
[ link to this | view in thread ]