LordOfTheJig
HistoryWak
LordOfTheJig
HistoryWak
If a game is too long the replay value may not be as high either.
That's not what I'm saying.
I wasn't stating all/most long/short games have high/low replay value.
If I spend $50 on a game, I want to get a lot of time out of it. If it's short, and the replay value is low, it's a waste of money to me.
If a lengthy game has a low replay value, it doesn't really matter. I already got 40+ hours out of it.
I think replay value is one of the very important factors in what makes a great game. Whether the game is short or long if there is no or little replay value than the game isn't that good. A game should have elements that draw you back to play it again. If a game don't have that then what's that say for the game? Lengthy games in a sense cover that up because of the length of the time playing it. That can be good or bad.
All games have some sort of replay value.... but that doesn't determine if the game was good.
There's plenty of really good games I'm never going to play again.
Lengthy games don't "cover up" s**t. Replay value is replay value. It doesn't have anything to do with how long it takes to play through it.
Language please? No one else is using any.
I meant to say 'make up' for and it makes the price more justifiable.
A game can't really be said to be good with little or no replay value. That's part of what makes a game good. It gets you to come back. I would never call a game good that I never want to play again. You wouldn't call a movie good that you'd never watch again would you?
