"YOU CAN PLAY IT FOREVER!"

Why is this such an effective marketing tool? Everyone knows it's a fucking lie. On top of that games that you can "play forever" are never as good as games that have a solid ending, just look at Skyrim, you create 1 character and you can get every perk, max out every skill, etc… now look at Fallout New Vegas, say what you will about love it or hate it, but it has a full stop ending, you beat it, you're done, you can only get 25 perks (with the DLC level cap increases), and you maybe can max out every skill if you have a lot of intelligence points, and Fallout New Vegas is in every way imaginable better than Skyrim except for visuals. So why do people still fall for this shitty marketing slogan?

Casuals hate living with consequences.

Better question - is there a game that you can play forever? Like from the start of it. Not repetitive skirmish or deathmatch, but in a campaign?

The only games this can really apply to are ones with shitloads of community made content like Doom and Quake, and even then after you put maybe 1000+ hours in you'll have played most of the good stuff.

Why do I see people asking questions that can easily be answered with "normalfags are retarded" so often?

Because it's a statement that creates a whole lot of implications about the game's quality. That the game has lots of content, that the content is good enough that you will "play forever", that the game will offer plenty of different experiences throughout, thus needing to spend less money on other games. Of course, it's all a lie, but it's a lie that customers have a natural bias to believe.

Because replayability is one of the biggest points of value in a videogame.
If you make a game that's only really good to play once you've basically failed the one prerequisite to making a good game.
It's why nobody fucking talks about any SJW shit a week after it comes out, because by then, everyone has played it once and got LITERALLY EVERYTHING you could get out of such a shitty game.

No Man's Sky :^)

Because casuals don't actually care about quality and just want something with endless padding to sink hours on since their lives are worthless and they must constantly keep themselves amused so they don't commit suicide

But games like Skyrim and Fallout 4 are very difficult to be replayed because it always feels the same because of shitty gameplay mechanics designed to let the played do what ever the fuck they want FOREVER, where as in a game like Fallout New Vegas or really any other "open" (not necessarily open world) RPG you can replay it and play it differently every single time

It's not a statement about the particular value of replayability in any particular title, it's a statement about replayability as it relates to gaming in general.

People those games are marketed to don't replay games. They play them once, then never touch them again.

YOU MEAN MARKETING LIES AND CAN'T BE TRUSTED??? OH MY GOD YOU GUYS

you are all mental midgets, enjoy your 10 millionth circle jerk about how refined your tastes are all while ignoring the fact that video game marketing is just as shit and full of lies as all other marketing and always has been, but hey lets feign shock at this for the millionth time and repeat the same 7 posts about how pleb everything but your personal tastes are

Metal Gear Rising. I replay that game at least once a year on revegence difficulty and enjoy the next 8 hours.

No u

Oh yes thank you Mx. I can post in header format.
Thank you for gracing us plebians by letting us all know how much better you are than everyone else.
BRAVO

...

Dwarf Fortress?

That is what kills Skyrim and Elder Scrolls for me, you can max everything with a single character and be at the top of EVERY faction, but people will still treat you like shit and it has no consequence or impact in the game whatsoever, it's one of the shallowest games i have ever played.

that is mostly true save for some rare exceptions like Mount & Blade or 4X games.

Well, when the game has no ending, it's not a lie.

That's a subjective perception bro. Some people just want to play a game where they can wander around doing stuff. They just want experience rather than mind blowing gameplay or complicated story.

That's the selling point of Skyrim though? Open ended exploration, decent visuals, decent NPC, being able to do quite a bunch of stuff, those are the selling points of skyrim, not complex RPG with deep gameplay and hundreds of consequences.

Normalfags don't play RPGs like we do. We'll buckle down and quickly beat the shit out of a game. After that we're either done with it, or we mod it if applicable. Meanwhile they'll take a game like Skyrim or Fallout 4 and play it off and on for months on the same character without ever completing the game.

since when can you get all the perks in Skyrim?

Minecraft and other sandboxes could be considered infinite, assuming you have the autism/creativity.

Sid Meier games, semi-rogue likes, like Binding of Isaac, FTL, most round-based games like a MOBA or RTS games.

You want an RPG that's infinite, but until we get a proper AI that can actually create content properly instead of just having 3 verbs and an adjective randomly put together and made into a quest, you're out of luck.

Update adds Legendary skills. You reset a level 100 skill to 15 and can grind it back, getting more XP. It removes the level cap.

What's even more jarring about that marketing tool is that the people that fall for it are usually those that will only pick up games for a few hours than drop it for the next flavor of the month product, rarely ever revisiting it. I mean look at this shit.

I think the interpretation that makes people fall for it is something along the lines of "this game has so much stuff in it could seemingly go on forever", which one could say means the product has good value for its price.

user, you don't use steam obviously. When you install mods achievements get blocked.

Because objectively, it's true.

Random objectives on a big map that just change the placing by very small random chances, it's not a lie. Where's the fun in that, I don't know.

...

That's the beauty of Steam kikery and backlog. All those sales, adn people might not even play what they bought. Add to that how many people these days might first pirate, then buy on Steam as support but don't play it, or buy it first for console and then PC etc.

You are an idiot.

Despite what you think, some people don't know better. And the lie only work on those people, anyone who understand how computers work will see those "features" as instant warning signs that the game has nothing to offer but promises.

Video games are always about working within the limitation of hardware, but also within the limitations of resources (how many people will work on it, and for how long). It's always been about make-believe and cheating.

Show them a bunch of big blocks textured to look like buildings and pretend they will be able to visit everything in the city and they will believe it. Promise that those idle animations show advanced AI and NPCs are not "scripted", they will believe it. Swear their choices and actions have consequences that will change the rest of the game and they will believe it (even when you get one of those fancy "compare your game to the rest of the world" where you can see everybody got to do the exact same choices as you; even the final one)…

Not even close. Once you got dwarf fortress figured out it dries up really fast.

Which can easily be turned back on, retarded. Not only that, most people do a vanilla run first.

I think you're projecting. Most casuals have lives outside of video games. They usually go for games that don't consume hours of their lives, like most phone games.

People think hours invested compared to price of game = relative quality. If it costs $60 buts lasts an eternity, it must have infinite quality right?

It's a bullshit argument even on the semantic level. Provided you were immortal in a universe that would never end Any game or activity could last forever, the content just gets stretched infinitely thin as you approach infinity. You could play Mario forever. Why would you? Why in the fuck would anyone do one thing forever? What's the point?

I like games that end. I have shit to do. I want it finished so I can move on after getting something out of my monetary and temporal investment.

So No Man's Sky really is the best game ever made?

At last I truly see…

GSGs, especially the good ones. When I played EU3 for the first time, I gave it four playthroughs one after another (each one taking about a week), and I return to it periodically.

This applies to many adventure and horror games though. The only replay value some of those have is costumes. Other than that most playthroughs will be the same or very close to it.

He's right though, the entire thread is basically just virtue signalling and small tangentially related arguments. Normalfags being retarded plebs and marketing being complete fluff are basically logical axioms for anyone posting here.

Any sandbox or simulator game. You can load up your flight simulator of choice and fly around the world until the end of the universe.

That doesn't mean you won't eventually get bored of it.

Gotcha Force. I could waste too much time playing that so I stopped but I've beaten the story 8 times, many times were back to back. It's a sweet game. Shame we'll never get a sequel.

If the engine and modding tools weren't broken as shit, it would almost be true.

Falcon 4, Dwarf Fort, any tycoon game.

The sad thing is… I really think with proper design and a deep procedural base that a game you can play forever would be possible.