quote:

---

Original post by krez
fighting games can be replayed more times by default, because a match lasts, what, a minute or two? RPGs last much much longer than that, so the two cannot be compared that way.

---

They absolutely can be compared that way. If you want to know which of the two genre's you are more likely to "replay" you can answer that question. It doesn't matter if you think it's comparing apples and oranges. Apples and oranges both have a color, and i can still ask which is more red, correct? Just like both fighting games and rpg's are both games, i can ask which type has more replay value.

quote:

---

do not take this as a personal attack, but i think the problem is you. it is not necessary to find every secret in every game. it is a bonus or reward for exploring carefully. if you are playing an RPG for the story alone, why do you even care if you found the best sword? the story is the same anyway.

---

That depends. Sometimes these one-time only secrets are characters. And because i'm playing for the story, i really don't want to miss that. This is my main beef.

As for the sword or a spell or something like that, keep in mind that the MAIN reason i play a RPG is for the story. But there are distinct reasons why i would choose a RPG over a novel in certain situations. I like how RPGs are interactive and i like a good battle system just like everyone else.

I donno if you're read this thread from start to finish but i am more specific about one-time only secrets i dislike than what i typically say. I don't care if i miss something like a decent treasure or a really strong weapon. I just don't want to be missing the "best of" anything. If i missed the best sword for my main character, i feel that a good game will let me go back to where that secret is and get it.

And contrary to what most people are saying, just because it's not a one time secret doesn't mean it has to be easy to find. The emphasis of this whole topic is on the term one time not on the word secret . Secrets are great. And just because the best ones are always available doesn't mean they're being spoon-fed to you.

[edited by - tieTYT on April 12, 2004 3:59:17 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by tieTYT

quote:

---

Original post by Way Walker

quote:

---

tieTYT
You want to make a billion hidden things throughout the game that the player can only get once, that's fine by me. But if you make any of them the coolest spell or weapon or a playable character, then you piss off a lot of people that only have enough time to play the game one time.

---

Only if it's something time consuming and/or arbitrary (see most of the crap you have to do for the ultimate weapons in FFX).

---

The FFX weapons can still be found at the end of the game i think.

Also, having to go through the entire game again because you missed a one time only secret IS time consuming. That is why it pisses people off.

---

If you read my post, you'd note that I don't replay through the game because I missed a one time only secret (I don't have the "gotta catch 'em all" disease). If you understand my position, then you would understand why I enjoy one time only secrets, but in case you missed it (and it seems you did) I'll make that point more explicit later in this post.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Um... basically any quality I'd like to see in an RPG is directly related to giving it more replay value. Some examples

---

If you would permit me to summarize your comments: You list things that make a RPG fun . Things like a good battle system, good characters, interesting map... But when you look at one time only secrets, all it is, is a crappy way to affect the replay value. It gives the player an ultimatum: either you get yourself a strategy guide or expect to play it more than once. Now what would you rather have: A little more of an interesting world or a little more one time only secrets? A little more interesting characters or a little more one time only secrets? A little more engaging battle system or a little more one time only secrets?

---

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Why can't I have my cake (a little more of an interesting world, characters, and battle system) and eat it, too (one time only secrets)? Because you don't like to eat it? But what if I do?

quote:

---

Like i've been trying to say in every reply: There's a way to satisfy both of us. I don't see many people on this thread saying "Oh hell yes, one time only secrets are the best part of RPGs". That in combination with the fact that there are ways to improve replay value (that you just mentioned below) that both you and I would enjoy, how much would you really care if a game had no one time only secrets? Again, why piss off one group when you can please both of them?

---

There are ways to improve replay value that both you and I would enjoy. However, there is at least one way to improve the replay value for me that would not increase the replay value for you. That is adding one time only secrets. How does this improve the replay value for me? It makes the game new again. Not only do I get to enjoy the same world, characters, and/or story (again, in that order) but I also get to enjoy new aspects of that world, those characters, and/or side stories. While the former is enough to get me to replay a game, the latter is the icing on the cake. (Perhaps you'ved noticed, I like cake )

quote:

---

So i just wasted 30 hours and already know what happened in those 30 past hours. Now i'm going to have to play for another 30 more hours and each step along the way i've already seen what is going to happen. I think by definition that is a waste of time. That is why i don't like missing important crap like an entire character.

---

If you hadn't missed the character, would you have felt the 30 hours wasted? Probably not, then I wouldn't consider those 30 hours wasted.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

What are you more likely to play a 4th time all the way through than FF?

A sports game

---

Not my cup 'o tea. Why not go outside for The Real Deal?

---

Come on man, look at it from a different perspective. Obviously you'll end up playing a sports game more than an RPG. It only takes 20 minutes of time to play through a basketball game.

---

Read what I said. Now read it again. Now read it really carefully. I cannot re play a sports game because I do not play sports games. So, obviously, I'll end up playing an RPG more than a sports game.

quote:

---

[ In reference to fighting games ]
It doesn't matter if you're playing through or not. What matters is if you're re-playing it. And you're going to be re-playing a fighting game almost every time you turn it on. A RPG on the other hand, you're usually starting at your last save point. Hence, RPGs have some of the worst replay value of any genre.

---

Um... could you provide the reasoning by which "a genre where you start at your last save point" implies "that genre having some of the worst replay value of any genre"?

quote:

---

I've been playing Tekken 4 for over 3 years and Soul Calibur 2 for over 2 years. Do you think a single RPG could hold my interest that long?

---

Yours? Probably not. Mine? Sure, I still play FFI.

quote:

---

So you're saying i'm right? Adventure's do have more replay value?

---

I said nothing of the sort, I said they have replay value. I'll decide on a case by case basis whether a given Adventure game has more/less/same replay value as a given RPG. It also depends on how you measure replay value. Do you measure it in hours? in number of times through? (in daylights? in sunsets? in midnights? in cups of coffee? in inches? in miles? in laughter? in strife? )

quote:

---

quote:

---

Really, this whole thing is about replay value. You're saying the replay value of the game is less than the value of your time that would be spent on that game (or, at least less than the value of whatever else you would be doing with that time). To put it more bluntly, if the replay value were high enough, you wouldn't mind replaying the game to get the secret weapons you missed.

---

If that statement were in a vacuum, i might agree with you. But looking at other things such as good story, it makes that statement false (for me i mean).

---

For you? Good, you're accepting we enjoy different things.

quote:

---

No matter how good a RPG is you're going to end up going through the same thing for another 70+ hours the second time you play through it. Even if you get the new stuff, you still have to see Cecil change into a paladin and Aeris die and Squall do boring shit.

---

While I do loathe Squall (does he get any better after the first disc? don't know that I'll finish VIII) I wouldn't mind seeing Cecil triumph over his past and become a paladin or feel the pain of the death of a character I liked. In another post you mentioned that you watch movies more than once. But, by your definition of "waste of time" given above (go ahead, check it out) that is, by definition, a waste of time. We can discuss the "rewatch" value of a movie just as we discuss the "replay" value of a game. I replay an RPG for many of the same reasons I'll rewatch a movie or reread a book.

quote:

---

So my point is, even with a RPG that has great qualities that you consider to add to replay value, i will still mind playing it again all the way through.

---

Because, as you mention, you play RPG's for a different reason than I do. What it comes down to, is that I'm more likely to pay for a game with one time only secrets. Thus, if two games are equal in all respects (which, admittedly, is near impossible) but one has one time only secrets, that'd tip the balance in its favor and that company is getting my money.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I don't understand why there are people that disagree. There are people out there that consider the ability to shoot yourself in the foot a beneficial feature of a game?

---

This one is out of sequence, but that's because my comment isn't necessarily relevant to the issues at hand. Why would you make a post to a forum if you only wanted responses along the lines of "AMEN! Preach on brother tieTYT!"? Please don't just dismiss what others say like that. Also, I hardly consider "missing the ultimate, but ultimately unnecessary, item" equivalent to "shooting yourself in the foot", unless you take games way too seriously and have made a vow to shoot yourself in the foot every time you miss an ultimate weapon. However, I think that means you have greater problems than missing a secret in a video game (In other words, your one-line strawman argument doesn't work)

---

I donno man. Just because what i said was extreme, it was more of an analogy than something to be thought of literally. One time only secrets allow you to screw yourself over. Even if you WANT to play the game over again, missing something really good in the current game makes the current game incomplete in a big way. It lets you shoot yourself in the foot.

---

The problem is that it's a poor analogy. You are not screwed by not getting the "ultimate, but ultimately unnecessary , item". And it's only incomplete in so far as I failed to "catch 'em all", which doesn't bother me (I'm not that hardcore about games).

EDIT: It was bound to happen, I screwed up some quote tags.

[edited by - Way Walker on April 12, 2004 8:05:42 PM]

I feel like I'm intruding, but...

quote:

---

Original Post by Way Walker
While I do loathe Squall (does he get any better after the first disc? don't know that I'll finish VIII) I wouldn't mind seeing Cecil triumph over his past and become a paladin or feel the pain of the death of a character I liked. In another post you mentioned that you watch movies more than once. But, by your definition of "waste of time" given above (go ahead, check it out) that is, by definition, a waste of time. We can discuss the "rewatch" value of a movie just as we discuss the "replay" value of a game. I replay an RPG for many of the same reasons I'll rewatch a movie or reread a book.

---

The problem with comparing rewatching a movie to replaying a game is that a game takes about twenty times as long as a movie to go through again. Sure, I'd watch Boondock Saints twice if there was a point where I had to choose between one course of the story and another. But would I do that with a whole season of "24"? Hell, no.

Even with movies, that's what the "Special Features" are for. Alternate endings and deleted scenes are right there at your fingertips. Maybe you get some kind of satisfaction out of going all the way to the bottom of the mountain and starting over just to try that really nice foot-hold fifty feet from the summit, but as far as I'm concerned, I don't have anything to prove. Even if I did, I don't have another forty hours to dedicate to the game.

What's worse is when the secrets are mutually exclusive, so that if I really want to see them all I'd have to go through as many as six times. No, thank-you.

Edit: The Chrono Trigger reference got me thinking. If you're going to fill the game with one-off secrets, then how about you add in a feature that lets you start the game over with all your end-game stats? Face it, a fifty-hour FF RPG takes about six hours when you start off at level 75, and about two if you can skip the FMV sequences.

Let the player put characters from other plays into their party at the outset of a new one. It would add replay by letting players put in a few "chaperone" characters in the party to help the newer character gain XP and fine-tune skills, and it would smooth out the secret-hunting portions of the game, since they'd be less concerned with the HP conservation end of things.

It would be like a "free-play" mode, where you could roam the game world with near-impunity and spend time exploring every little crevice or collecting monster pelts or whatever you do, but the flying city would still be in the air, the Eternal Night won't have ended, and the Primordial Ocean would still have water in it. Also, all those one-off secrets would still be unfound.

[edited by - Iron Chef Carnage on April 12, 2004 9:03:25 PM]

quote:

---

quote:

---

Now what would you rather have: A little more of an interesting world or a little more one time only secrets? A little more interesting characters or a little more one time only secrets? A little more engaging battle system or a little more one time only secrets?

---

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Why can't I have my cake (a little more of an interesting world, characters, and battle system) and eat it, too (one time only secrets)? Because you don't like to eat it? But what if I do?

---

For the sake of having a conversation, can you at least answer my question? I didn't ask if you would rather have A or B or Both. I asked if you would rather have A or B. Now if you want to ask me why you can't have both, that's fine. I would gladly answer, if you would give me the same respect...

quote:

---

quote:

---

Like i've been trying to say in every reply: There's a way to satisfy both of us. I don't see many people on this thread saying "Oh hell yes, one time only secrets are the best part of RPGs". That in combination with the fact that there are ways to improve replay value (that you just mentioned below) that both you and I would enjoy, how much would you really care if a game had no one time only secrets? Again, why piss off one group when you can please both of them?

---

There are ways to improve replay value that both you and I would enjoy. However, there is at least one way to improve the replay value for me that would not increase the replay value for you. That is adding one time only secrets. How does this improve the replay value for me? It makes the game new again. Not only do I get to enjoy the same world, characters, and/or story (again, in that order) but I also get to enjoy new aspects of that world, those characters, and/or side stories. While the former is enough to get me to replay a game, the latter is the icing on the cake. (Perhaps you'ved noticed, I like cake )

---

Yes, that's clear to me. We wouldn't be having this conversation if you didn't like one-time only secrets. Fortunately for you (and everyone else except for rune lancer apparently), it is merely the icing on the cake. Like, i played FF2us and it's my favorite game. Then i played FF4j and saw that almost every character has an extra special attack. Now for me, that is extra icing on the cake. But FF2us was still my favorite game before that. Using my own experience as an example (which perhaps is a mistake), i doubt you would SERIOUSLY mind a lack of one-time only secrets if you could exchange it for an overall better game. And with the bonus that doing so would make people like me happy too, i really think that's the way to go.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So i just wasted 30 hours and already know what happened in those 30 past hours. Now i'm going to have to play for another 30 more hours and each step along the way i've already seen what is going to happen. I think by definition that is a waste of time. That is why i don't like missing important crap like an entire character.

---

If you hadn't missed the character, would you have felt the 30 hours wasted? Probably not, then I wouldn't consider those 30 hours wasted.

---

A little misunderstanding, i'm saying the 30 hours i would have to replay would be the wasted 30 hours.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

What are you more likely to play a 4th time all the way through than FF?

A sports game

---

Not my cup 'o tea. Why not go outside for The Real Deal?

---

Come on man, look at it from a different perspective . Obviously you'll end up playing a sports game more than an RPG. It only takes 20 minutes of time to play through a basketball game.

---

Read what I said. Now read it again. Now read it really carefully. I cannot re play a sports game because I do not play sports games. So, obviously, I'll end up playing an RPG more than a sports game.

---

LOL. Now i want you to reread what I said, ok? Notice how i used the words "from a different perspective "? Go ahead, read it again.

quote:

---

quote:

---

[ In reference to fighting games ]
It doesn't matter if you're playing through or not. What matters is if you're re-playing it. And you're going to be re-playing a fighting game almost every time you turn it on. A RPG on the other hand, you're usually starting at your last save point. Hence, RPGs have some of the worst replay value of any genre.

---

Um... could you provide the reasoning by which "a genre where you start at your last save point" implies "that genre having some of the worst replay value of any genre"?

---

Yeah i think i could. To replay a game means to start over again. You can look at www.dictionary.com and confirm that for yourself. That being said, most of the time you play a RPG you'll be loading a save and not starting over again. On the other hand, every time you play a fighting game, you will be almost always be re-starting. Now if you put equal hours into both of these games, you'll end up RE-PLAYING the fighting game much more than the RPG. This is what makes RPGs have some of the worst replay value of any genre. It's just a simple, natural consequence of them being so long to play through.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I've been playing Tekken 4 for over 3 years and Soul Calibur 2 for over 2 years. Do you think a single RPG could hold my interest that long?

---

Yours? Probably not. Mine? Sure, I still play FFI.

---

Really? Every 4 days at least like i do?

quote:

---

quote:

---

So you're saying i'm right? Adventure's do have more replay value?

---

I said nothing of the sort, I said they have replay value. I'll decide on a case by case basis whether a given Adventure game has more/less/same replay value as a given RPG. It also depends on how you measure replay value. Do you measure it in hours? in number of times through? (in daylights? in sunsets? in midnights? in cups of coffee? in inches? in miles? in laughter? in strife? )

---

Replay value is measured in how many times you replay the game. So the answer to every one of your questions is no. It is measured in how many times you replay the game from the start.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I don't understand why there are people that disagree. There are people out there that consider the ability to shoot yourself in the foot a beneficial feature of a game?

---

The problem is that it's a poor analogy. You are not screwed by not getting the "ultimate, but ultimately unnecessary , item". And it's only incomplete in so far as I failed to "catch 'em all", which doesn't bother me (I'm not that hardcore about games).

---

It really isn't a poor analogy. You will live if you shoot yourself in the foot, you could still even walk sometimes. So in some respects, your foot is ultimately unnecessary. I'd still say you're screwed if you shoot yourself in the foot though. And i'd also say you're screwed in your current game if you miss a one-time only secret. In both cases you won't be functioning at optimal strength.

[edited by - tieTYT on April 12, 2004 9:46:39 PM]

[edited by - tieTYT on April 12, 2004 9:53:34 PM]

[edited by - tieTYT on April 12, 2004 9:55:46 PM]

GAMES THAT HAVE ONE-TIME SECRETS

Final Fantasy VI
Getting Shadow, viewing the dream sequences with him, getting certain pieces of equipment (Ragnarok (and conscequently, Illumina), Atma Weapon, etc..), getting certain Relics, getting Mog (you can trade him off for some gold hairpin or something; conscequently, this prevents you from getting the moogle charm AND Umaro), getting all bonuses from that banquet scene, fighting Itangir (iirc, that''s his name; Triangle Island, WoB), and a host of others...

Verdict: Viewed as one of, if not the, best FF by oldschool FF fans.



Final Fantasy VII
Getting (and more importantly, seeing) Aeris'' final limit break, seeing certain hidden scenes (the date scene with other characters, the various scenes in the honey bee inn, the various scenes if Don Corneo picks a different character in Wall Market, the Cloud/Zack cutscene, etc..), getting the Huge Materias, getting Vincent''s ultimate weapon (yes, you can miss that if you don''t do the right sequence of events), reviving Aeris (...no, just kidding), getting Cait Sith''s ultimate weapon (only accessible when you go back to Midgar; that parachute scene?), a host of others...

Verdict: Viewed as one of, if not the best FF by newschool FF fans.



Chrono Trigger
Pretty much all of the endings require you to replay through the game at least once (though you do get newgame+, you still have to view the *sigh* tedious and long and boring story *insert sarcastic rolling eyes here ---> . *); getting Magus (or not getting him, which locks and unlocks certain possible endings; make that playing through again at least twice, in fact), saving Lucca''s mother, getting the stuff in every dungeon/area which you eventually can''t go back to, winning/failing the trial, etc...

Verdict: Does it even need to be said? Many would die in CT''s name. Well, not literally...



Breath of Fire II
Building your village (for that matter, getting some of the townspeople), some of the shamans (such as the Earth shaman), getting the secret spells (chopchop and boombada), getting any of the three endings (and making Township fly), a couple of others.

Verdict: Loved by many. Gee, starting to notice how one-time only secrets don''t quite seem to bother people? :/ People actually get excited playing through the game just to find some of these things. Let''s have a look at a non-RPG now...



Terranigma
Getting all magirocks, unlocking Mu and Polynese (my bad, it''s not Atlantis), raising all villages to the max (and all associated bonuses), the programmer room, a host of secrets I''ve never found to date (I''ve seen a LOT of stuff; a sound test and a couple of debug options being the most interesting ones, as are certain suspicious strings. Anyone knows what "That letter... you don''t mean to... no! I''m not ready! Pardon me? ... A letter from people who survived a terrible fire?" comes from?)

Verdict: This game made me teary-eyed in the end. I''m not kidding. People I talk to actually nod and know what I mean when I say this.



So are any of these classics broken because of one-time only secrets? If anything, people who like these games end up getting thrilled at the thought of finding these secrets. I can support my argument, in fact: when I spoke about Atlantis (eh, Polynese, my bad), a fellow Terranigma fan ended up getting rather thrilled at finding it. Go back to page 3.

Here''s the interesting thing: none of these are vital to the game. Hence my first statement about these games not being broken by one-time only events and secrets. Yet, it adds tremendous replay value for those who love these games and doesn''t ruin the experience for those who love them but still don''t wish to play through them again.

And frankly, I''d love to see you find a solution to multiple endings.

quote:

---

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
The problem with comparing rewatching a movie to replaying a game is that a game takes about twenty times as long as a movie to go through again. Sure, I''d watch Boondock Saints twice if there was a point where I had to choose between one course of the story and another. But would I do that with a whole season of "24"? Hell, no.

---

I''ve never watched "24" so I can''t comment. But I do watch Simpsons reruns quite often, and would enjoy it if someone would play ST:DS9 from start to finish again. I know many people who watched Babylon 5 again after it appeared on the Sci Fi channel. The way I play games, this is very analogous to replaying an RPG.

quote:

---

Even with movies, that''s what the "Special Features" are for. Alternate endings and deleted scenes are right there at your fingertips. Maybe you get some kind of satisfaction out of going all the way to the bottom of the mountain and starting over just to try that really nice foot-hold fifty feet from the summit, but as far as I''m concerned, I don''t have anything to prove. Even if I did, I don''t have another forty hours to dedicate to the game.

---

But, see, I don''t replay it *FOR* the one time only secrets, I don''t care if my collection isn''t complete. I replay it because I feel the sacrifice made by Palom and Porom, because I mourn with Setzer as he tells how Daryll never came home, because I like helping Harold fix the power plant. However, it would be nice to discover something new every time I play the game. For your rock climbing analogy, I don''t reclimb the mountain to try that really nice foot-hold fifty feet from the summit, I climb it because I enjoy climbing that mountain. If there''s an interesting foot-hold I haven''t tried (where-ever it may be) I''d definitely like to try it the next go ''round.

quote:

---

[ New Game + is cool ]

---

Yeah, I liked that feature because it did help the second time through. However, third time through I just did a regular new game because it felt like playing with a Game Genie after a while. (Not that that game''s hard. Not buying any new equipment and just letting getting XP as it came was enough to make the battles fairly easy)

quote:

---

Original post by tieTYT

quote:

---

quote:

---

Now what would you rather have: A little more of an interesting world or a little more one time only secrets? A little more interesting characters or a little more one time only secrets? A little more engaging battle system or a little more one time only secrets?

---

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Why can''t I have my cake (a little more of an interesting world, characters, and battle system) and eat it, too (one time only secrets)? Because you don''t like to eat it? But what if I do?

---

For the sake of having a conversation, can you at least answer my question? I didn''t ask if you would rather have A or B or Both. I asked if you would rather have A or B. Now if you want to ask me why you can''t have both, that''s fine. I would gladly answer, if you would give me the same respect...

---

I am fully aware that you didn''t offer both, that is why I responded like I did. However, for the sake of conversation, without any information about the nature of the changes to be made, I feel the former, in each case, to be the safer choice.

quote:

---

Yes, that''s clear to me. We wouldn''t be having this conversation if you didn''t like one-time only secrets. Fortunately for you (and everyone else except for rune lancer apparently), it is merely the icing on the cake. Like, i played FF2us and it''s my favorite game. Then i played FF4j and saw that almost every character has an extra special attack. Now for me, that is extra icing on the cake. But FF2us was still my favorite game before that. Using my own experience as an example (which perhaps is a mistake), i doubt you would SERIOUSLY mind a lack of one-time only secrets if you could exchange it for an overall better game. And with the bonus that doing so would make people like me happy too, i really think that''s the way to go.

---

I have the choice between "game I will like" and "game I will like more". I think I''ll go with the second However, two points.

1) Lacking one-time only secrets, the other game will first have to make up for that, and then even be better than that to make the choice so cut-and-dried.

2) I feel no need for you to like the games I like. Nor do I feel the need for you to like one time only secrets. Why do you want to remove a feature I like from all games?

quote:

---

A little misunderstanding, i''m saying the 30 hours i would have to replay would be the wasted 30 hours.

---

I hope you can understand my confusion?

quote:

---

LOL. Now i want you to reread what I said, ok? Notice how i used the words "from a different perspective "? Go ahead, read it again.

---

By different perspective I thought you were talking about viewing how a game is "replayed" differently. However, viewed from the perspective of someone who enjoys sports games (i.e. not mine, as your use of pronouns suggested to me) they would probably play the sports game quite often, and would finish their 9 innings/4 quarters/what have you more often than they would defeat the final boss of a given RPG. However, this does not mean they''re playing the sports game more often than the RPG.

quote:

---

Yeah i think i could. To replay a game means to start over again. You can look at www.dictionary.com and confirm that for yourself. That being said, most of the time you play a RPG you''ll be loading a save and not starting over again. On the other hand, every time you play a fighting game, you will be almost always be re-starting. Now if you put equal hours into both of these games, you''ll end up RE-PLAYING the fighting game much more than the RPG. This is what makes RPGs have some of the worst replay value of any genre. It''s just a simple, natural consequence of them being so long to play through.

---

Ah, I see the problem, we''re using two different metrics to measure the replay value of a game. You''ve been considering how often a game is finished, I''ve been considering how often a game is played. Reading threads discussing how to add replay value, they seem more concerned with how many hours you spend playing a game (which is directly related to how often you play, and only more loosely related to how often the game is finished). Thus, I believe how often a game is played better reflects what most consider "replay value" (I am willing to be corrected by the community, though). However, using how often a game is finished, then I''ll admit that, almost by definition, an RPG has less replay value than nearly any other genre.

quote:

---

Really? Every 4 days at least like i do?

---

No, but considering how many video games I play, how many other things are competing for the same blocks of time as video games, and how those blocks of time are limited by both college and friends, it''s not really surprising. Really, it''s my fault, not the game''s.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I said nothing of the sort, I said they have replay value. I''ll decide on a case by case basis whether a given Adventure game has more/less/same replay value as a given RPG. It also depends on how you measure replay value. Do you measure it in hours? in number of times through? (in daylights? in sunsets? in midnights? in cups of coffee? in inches? in miles? in laughter? in strife? )

---

Replay value is measured in how many times you replay the game. So the answer to every one of your questions is no. It is measured in how many times you replay the game from the start.

---

You were supposed to suggest "How about love?"

Most of this was discussed above, but I''m curious why the second question isn''t "yes"?

Some secrets are good some are bad.

I liked some of the secrets to be found in "Secret of Mana". (snes). For example, in the instructions it showed that you could get 8 types of each weapon. However, after upgrding a weapon the 8th time the upgrade option was still available hinting that there were more weapon upgrade orbs to collect. Everything in the game made you think there were only 8 weapon upgrades but for this one hint. It turned out that you could get a 9th weapon orb for each weapon from the last area in the game. None of my friends believed this secret I discovered until I showed them how to do it. It didn''t make the weapons ''invincible'' but powered them up enough to make getting them worth while.

That is the kind of secret I like. Secrets where the game hints at something more and it is up to you to discover it. Who cares if you worked it out or stumbled on it by accident. The secret item/weapon etc didn''t make the game too easy though either. Just more interesting.

I have to also agree that games that don''t let you find secrets after a certain point can be annoying. It is alright as long as the game has replay value. A lot of the newer games just don''t make you want to play agin to find some crappy ulimate weapon.( which is usually the ''secret'' in these games). Wow. An ulitimate weapon. I''ve already completed the game so why bother? Maybe if the secret was something cool like complete Goldeneye with a headshot on everyone and 100% accuracy to unlock level edit mode( nb just an example, no Level edit in Goldeneye as far as I know). Then the game would be worth playing again to get the secret.

Anyway, you could dicuss this for ever. I feel that secrets are only good if you can get them in the game without too much diffuculty( ie at any time ), or they are difficult to get but add a lot to game replayability.

See ya
Pete

quote:

---

Original post by Way Walker
I am fully aware that you didn't offer both, that is why I responded like I did. However, for the sake of conversation, without any information about the nature of the changes to be made, I feel the former, in each case, to be the safer choice.

---

Alright, i'm glad you feel the way i thought you would feel. But i originally asked the question so long ago i forgot my point Anyway, my answer to "why not both" is the same as it's always been: Because there are people that don't like it. That may not seem evident because it's been 2 against 1 (me) at the moment.

quote:

---

1) Lacking one-time only secrets, the other game will first have to make up for that, and then even be better than that to make the choice so cut-and-dried.

---

Well i'd like to argue that that wouldn't be very difficult. FFT would still be a very decent game if it only had it's battle system to stand on. FF4 would still be very decent if it only had it's story to stand on. Ditto for xenogears. What game can you think of that would still be decent if it only had it's one-time secrets to stand on? One-time secrets will not make a bad game good. I think this implies that it wouldn't be extremely difficult to make up for having a complete lack of one-time only secrets.

quote:

---

2) I feel no need for you to like the games I like. Nor do I feel the need for you to like one time only secrets. Why do you want to remove a feature I like from all games?

---

I don't know what you're trying to get across. This is about RPGs, i'm not trying to steal your genre. I'm just arguing for my preference.

quote:

---

they would probably play the sports game quite often, and would finish their 9 innings/4 quarters/what have you more often than they would defeat the final boss of a given RPG. However, this does not mean they're playing the sports game more often than the RPG.

---

Yes, but you gotta admit that they would be REplaying the sports game more often than the RPG

quote:

---

Ah, I see the problem, we're using two different metrics to measure the replay value of a game. You've been considering how often a game is finished, I've been considering how often a game is played. Reading threads discussing how to add replay value, they seem more concerned with how many hours you spend playing a game (which is directly related to how often you play, and only more loosely related to how often the game is finished). Thus, I believe how often a game is played better reflects what most consider "replay value" (I am willing to be corrected by the community, though). However, using how often a game is finished, then I'll admit that, almost by definition, an RPG has less replay value than nearly any other genre.

---

I'm sure this is how a bunch of people think about replay value here, but they're wrong. Both the words replay and value come from the english dictionary. To use it your way, although probably very common and even accepted, is not the correct usage. Like i said, you can go to www.dictionary.com and check the true definition.

Now that that's out of the way:
1) I consider replay value to be the number of times you re-play a game from the beginning (not necessarily going all the way through).
2) I totally agree with you; looking at the hours played is a more accurate way to judge a game than the true meaning of replay value. It should become the standard. BUT that being said, i still think you could make an argument that you'll end up playing other genres for more hours.

I know for a fact this is true for fighting games the way i play them. You would have to be an idiot savant to play the same RPG for at LEAST an hour at LEAST every 4 days. Every time i go to a tournament (which sometimes is every week, always every month) they last from 4 to 8 hours. ~20 people show up to every one of these tournaments and that's only in my small area. Do you know ~20 people in your small area that put as much hours in FF6/FFX/FFX-2 as often as the ~20 people i know that play soul calibur 2? You go to www.soulcalibur.com, check the north american match finder forum, and you'll find hundreds of threads with hundreds of pages (i'm not exaggerating) with people posting every day about getting together to play and this is 2 years after it came out for arcade.

Now lets look at the FPS genre. CS is a great example. There are people that play this game hardcore since its come out. They're fucking addicted like it's crack. The phenomenom is amazing. I'm sure you're at least aware of this.

Now lets look at RTS games: Warcraft/Starcraft.... enough said

I think there are a couple more genre's out there that i could use similar arguments for. So, not only is it just a consequence of an RPGs length that it would have pretty bad replay value (the correct definition), but i also think that RPGs have less total hours played on them than a lot of other genres too (like the ones i mentioned above).

quote:

---

Most of this was discussed above, but I'm curious why the second question isn't "yes"?

---

The second question isn't yes because replay value is determined by how many times you play from the start not how many times you play from start to finish. If replay value were defined by the latter, this would mean playing a rpg all the way to the end but deciding to not kill to final boss would not count for anything: But clearly if you decide to do this, you've replayed the game even though you didn't finish the game.

[edited by - tieTYT on April 13, 2004 3:24:21 AM]

quote:

---

Original post by tieTYT
Alright, i''m glad you feel the way i thought you would feel. But i originally asked the question so long ago i forgot my point Anyway, my answer to "why not both" is the same as it''s always been: Because there are people that don''t like it. That may not seem evident because it''s been 2 against 1 (me) at the moment.

---

You forgot the one about your wife

Just kidding Anyway, I''m a little tired of this. We''ve both pretty much made our points and now we''re picking on each others'' details. Different strokes for different folks. I''ll keep playing games with one time only secrets and you can just keep me wondering why you play those games so much if you find them so annoying

The value of being able to have replay value is great, but to what extents? If someone were to have missed something such as something like an ultimate weapon and yet they managed fine without it, (but they got a killer 99% on their score) then would anyone really play the whole game over again to go back and get it? I wouldn''t thats for sure. We can''t keep focusing on the little things in games that get us that 100%, bit by bit. What i think is better (even though the game is old) is how street fighter used about 21 different endings altogether, depending on the player chosen. That creates a more interesting and new flavour to the game and gives a definate urge for replay. Games like FF don''t have good replay value unless your too stuborn to put the control down untill you get three digits on your end score. Even a game more on the lines of Metal Gear Solid defeats the replay value that of Final Fantasy. It gives the player a choice in which way to go about the game at a certain point and changes the ending. Even though it is small when put up against the length of the whole game, it definately needs some creditability for good replay value. Other games which dont have this are useless to replay unless you really liked it and you want to experience it all over again.
Don''t sit too close to the screen
-Piotr