3 ms·
No, all you need to disprove this is to look at the achievement rates for beating a game. When barely 1/4 of people finish the game, which ideally is what a dev
by Noos 7y ago
No, all you need to disprove this is to look at the achievement rates for beating a game. When barely 1/4 of people finish the game, which ideally is what a developer wants, the idea that players muddle through is a bit much.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoI think I've finished like 5% of the games I played with. Even counting ones on which I spent more than 10 hours, I don't think it would be more than 10%. Hell, I'm 241 hours into Stellaris and haven't even won one game yet; my Kerbal Space Program hour count is four digit and you can't even win that game :). Point being, people don't finish games because they get their fill of enjoyment before then. Many games I know start to feel like a chore after a time; some early on, others near the end. Unless there's a story you desperately want to see resolved - and many games these days ship without one - there's little reason to play a game once you mastered all the different mechanics it offered and seen most of the variety it featured. And then there's multiplayer, which wouldn't even count under this metric. I propose a different one: people who play a game with nontrivial UI for more than 2 hours are evidence in favor. If the UI was a problem, they'd drop out sooner. After all, unlike software used at work, nobody forces you to play a game.