Wine, donuts, and sex
In an irresistibly-titled post, Peter Berger writes about why games that aren’t fun right away are going to have a harder and harder time getting interest:
I have finally come to peace with the fact that I no longer have any interest in playing games that require as much effort as my job. So, sorry, no Sims 3 for me. … This feeling of spite has been compounded by the fact that I’ve been playing (and buying) tons of iPhone games recently, and then also bought a Windows game for $30.
Jul 3 2009
10:49 am
My thoughts exactly. I expressed the same feelings just a few days ago about the game and those like it on my blog. I was worried for a moment that I was just some tightly coiled ball of hate.
Aug 30 2009
3:41 pm
There is something that bothers me about this. While all that may be valid in making a game good…since when has speed dictated quality? I understand if a game is of bad quality in terms of gameplay or story, but this seems more about people judging things by how the game pertains to their own lifestyle choices. Its nice to have a bit of both, but one’s own impatience should not be one of the factors to decide if a game is good or not. I’m not going to decide a movie was bad because halfway through it I had to leave for work.
Aug 30 2009
3:56 pm
I think the point you’re missing, Vitcent, is that if a game isn’t fun, it’s bad. If playing a game feels like work, or is frustrating because you’re spending too much of your time waiting and not enough time playing, it’s not going to be fun.
You make the analogy of movies. If a movie was 6 hours long, I would indeed decide it was bad because I had to leave halfway through.