Hello,

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this matter. The aspect of replay value, in terms of typical "one-time" experiences. By this i mean games similar to or in the same genre as for example Limbo. How important (if at all) is it with replay value in a game like this?

Have you played games like this, and craved to return only to play through it again? If so, why? I think its an interesting question, as many polished, high quality games i've played dont seem to actively encoruage to play the game all over again.

So basically, how important is replay value in this genre for you?

I think replay value is essential to a lasting appeal.
I've played "Flight" (flash game) a year back, and beat the game rather quickly. It was a nice polished experience, one of the rare that gave me the will to play through it again.
After 3 playthroughs, I had unlocked all of the achievements, etc. There simply wasn't anything anymore that could surprise me, yet, I wanted more out of that game because it had great production value and a great core gameplay mechanic.
A sandbox mode for something else than score would've definitely helped.

They've re-released the game for iOS with a few extras, but I haven't played it yet. I sure hope it packs more replayability modes.

To start, I think it's hard to categorize Limbo very easily, at least when talking about the full experience of playing it. As for the gameplay itself, Limbo is just a puzzle platformer. The one thing that ties games across this genre together, and makes it reasonable to compare a game like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time to Limbo, is that they all rely on the thrill a player gets when they discover something organically by playing the game. There a lot of memorable moments like that in Limbo, like when you have to jump on a dead kid's body to get from one side of a pool of water to the other. There's no tutorial that says "Dead people make awesome lily pads! Give it a try!" It just comes to you. The latest Prince of Persia, based on the movie, had its own incredible realization moment, when you first realize you can use your ability to freeze water on a waterfall, and climb the waterfall like any other wall.

The point is, these moments of discovery are like punch lines in a standup routine: They aren't as good the second time around. The designer employs subtle cues in the environment that guide the player gently to the solution of the puzzle, or even the realization that the player is in a puzzle (sometimes you don't even know that yet). As a result, the player thinks "OH! That's it! I figured it out!" and somewhere else in the world the designer is saying "Yeah! You suuuuuure did *wink!*" One bad side effect is that when the player starts his second playthrough, he tries to play from memory, because he thinks he already knows the answers to the puzzles. He has it tougher the second time around because he ignores the subtle cues and hints, and just screws around until he finally remembers. It's not as fun, and it's not what the designer wanted. Nobody wins.

So when I played through limbo the second time, I did it as a speed run because I thought I knew all the puzzles by heart. I finished it in an hour, but I hadn't had as much fun the second time and, as is to be expected, I kept constantly thinking to myself "How the hell did I figure this out the first time?" I didn't know, but it was just the excellent design. Since I kept focusing on trying to remember the solution the second time, I ignored a lot of the hints the designer had thrown at me, so I was completely stumped. Ultimately, I think Limbo really nailed it in terms of subtle design cues and flow of gameplay. But, it's also a perfect case study of what can and will go wrong with that design style when you play through it multiple times.

I prize replay value above all. When I look back at great one-off games like Portal, I have fond memories (and a catchy song to sing) but I'm unlikely to play it again. It gave me on the order of... what, maybe ten hours of entertainment? Quality entertainment, certainly, but it isn't enough bang for my buck. I only recently bought Portal 2 during a Steam sale for that reason.

Games that offer the chance for changing experience, on the other hand, keep me coming back for more. Strategy games like Civ 5 or Europa Universalis have dominated more of my time than I care to make public. Shooters like Crysis and Far Cry are my kind of fare in that genre - big world, lots of exploring, lots of options.

In other words, quality of the game itself isn't enough to generate replay value. It needs choice and variety.

In think the lack of replay value is just inherent to puzzles in general. Jigsaw puzzles or rubik's cubes lack replay value to most people, still you have people that like to do them over and over again. Sometimes inventing their own rules, or trying to beat their best time.

I rarely replay games, for the same reason I rarely reread books. I like games that are novel-like, and like Shaquil says, they are made out of moments of discovery that won't be surprising the second time, that's just the nature of story. Similarly the strategy of how to play a game is like a puzzle to me - one that inevitably gets solved even before the end of the first playthrough, leaving little intellectual challenge to interest me in trying again. The only two reasons I'd replay an rpg or adventure game are if I know there will be significant story differences, especially a different ending, or if it's been enough years since I've played it that I've forgotten everything except that I liked it.

Now, there are games I replay like crazy. But they are storyless speedpuzzle games like Vasebreaker, Freaky Factory, Tetris-likes, Breakout-likes, Match-three-likes, and solitaire card and tile games, though those don't have the speed aspect going for them.

Thanks for the replies, these are well reflected answers and i appreciate your input!

To start, I think it's hard to categorize Limbo very easily, at least when talking about the full experience of playing it. As for the gameplay itself, Limbo is just a puzzle platformer. The one thing that ties games across this genre together, and makes it reasonable to compare a game like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time to Limbo, is that they all rely on the thrill a player gets when they discover something organically by playing the game. There a lot of memorable moments like that in Limbo, like when you have to jump on a dead kid's body to get from one side of a pool of water to the other. There's no tutorial that says "Dead people make awesome lily pads! Give it a try!" It just comes to you. The latest Prince of Persia, based on the movie, had its own incredible realization moment, when you first realize you can use your ability to freeze water on a waterfall, and climb the waterfall like any other wall.
The point is, these moments of discovery are like punch lines in a standup routine: They aren't as good the second time around. The designer employs subtle cues in the environment that guide the player gently to the solution of the puzzle, or even the realization that the player is in a puzzle (sometimes you don't even know that yet). As a result, the player thinks "OH! That's it! I figured it out!" and somewhere else in the world the designer is saying "Yeah! You suuuuuure did *wink!*" One bad side effect is that when the player starts his second playthrough, he tries to play from memory, because he thinks he already knows the answers to the puzzles. He has it tougher the second time around because he ignores the subtle cues and hints, and just screws around until he finally remembers. It's not as fun, and it's not what the designer wanted. Nobody wins.
So when I played through limbo the second time, I did it as a speed run because I thought I knew all the puzzles by heart. I finished it in an hour, but I hadn't had as much fun the second time and, as is to be expected, I kept constantly thinking to myself "How the hell did I figure this out the first time?" I didn't know, but it was just the excellent design. Since I kept focusing on trying to remember the solution the second time, I ignored a lot of the hints the designer had thrown at me, so I was completely stumped. Ultimately, I think Limbo really nailed it in terms of subtle design cues and flow of gameplay. But, it's also a perfect case study of what can and will go wrong with that design style when you play through it multiple times.

This was very informative, and really made me more aware of an aspect of games i've well, underestimated. Thanks you for the input!