Many players feel the need to finish a game, even if they're no longer enjoying it, because they believe the time they've previously put into the game will have been wasted otherwise.
Basically, the sunk cost fallacy at work. It's a hard cycle to break out of, but once you do, it's a great feeling.
I don't complete games that I stop having fun in.
My time is worth too much to do something I don't enjoy in it.
Personally I know myself pretty well so each games I buy I know I'll like and end up 100%ing (or Plat-ing) most of them because I really like them and want the most ot it.
I finish almost no game that I buy. Mostly play them for 10 hours max.
Just can't concentrate long enough to finish a game that I don't really really really like.
I prefer playing fewer games and completing them, sometimes 100% if it can be done in a reasonable amount of time, than playing a lot of games and abandoning them part-way through. But I get what you're saying.
It certainly helps that my taste in games are rather narrow, and even then there's more games than I'll ever have time to play.
I wouldn't feel too bad about that. A lot has been said about how great the transition from super linear short games to open world and super long 30 plus hour "rpgs", but most of them maintain the same mechanical depth as those 5-10 hour games they're just stretched out over a longer period of time via design tricks.
I think it's good to force yourself to finish games too an extent. There are so many good games these days, I'd never finish anything if I didn't force myself. And by doing so, I end up having much more fun than if I stopped playing every game at the first sign of frustration or just because another game just came out.
I finish my games.
I like finishing games. Leaving a game unfinished agitates me.
I complete every game that I buy.
Finishing movies is overrated.
Many players feel the need to finish a game, even if they're no longer enjoying it, because they believe the time they've previously put into the game will have been wasted otherwise.
Basically, the sunk cost fallacy at work. It's a hard cycle to break out of, but once you do, it's a great feeling.
If a game is not able to apply its core mechanics to different situations for at least just a couple hours before becoming rote, it definitely sounds like a bad game that you should move on from. At the same time though, if you find yourself constantly in the company of these kinds of games, it's probably time to start branching out from your typical selection. I find that going in-depth with a certain system and experiencing the many different ways it makes you powerful, vulnerable, and critically thinking is some of the best stuff of the medium. So sure, if you're not enjoying stuff, move on, but if you're finding it hard to stick with much of anything, that's equally problematic IMO.
I tend to not want to even talk about the story aspect of things since seeing the breadth of mechanics is probably more universally appealing than seeing the breadth of the narrative.
I probably finish fewer movies than games to be honest.
I branch out A LOT with games. That's honestly why I don't finish every game I play. There are so many interesting experiences out there that there's really no reason to invest too much time into a particular game once it becomes stale.
Now, before we begin, I want to say that this doesn't apply to every game. Some games are absolutely worth finishing.
I find that a lot of the time the conversation around a game puts a lot of emphasis on finishing it. I don't think this is necessarily the best way to think about a game. For me, I play a game as long as I enjoy it, then I drop it. If that point is before the end of the game, so be it. I don't mind.
There are a few reasons why this is applicable. A lot of games stop introducing new ideas and mechanics or challenges throughout their course. After a while, they become rather rote. Applying the same mechanics to a different variant of the same situation. Sometimes the mechanics are fun enough in themselves to keep going, but many times I find that once a game stops introducing new elements, it stops being interesting. It just becomes a chore, a waste of time, and I could be playing something else instead. I'm not obsessed with maximizing the value I get out of a purchase, I care more about maximizing the enjoyment I get within the time I spend in the game. There are enough games out there that I don't have to commit to finishing one game.
Another minor reason is that most game stories are pretty average and not worth following to the end. If a game has compelling characters and a story, that can take me through even if the mechanics are repetitive. Conversely, interesting and developing mechanics can take me through a slog of a story. But if both of those are uninteresting, I just can't do it. And I feel no obligation to.
How do you feel about the need to complete a game? Are you driven by the desire, or do you have another viewpoint?
I usually never pay attention, or stop reading/ watching, any review which implies or clearly shows the reviewer hasn't finished the game.
This comes from me being a reviewer in the past, and me being a jrpg/ wrpg player who can totally tell if a guy/ girl has finished a game or not.
As a player I can get where you come from, mostly because right now the go-to design for every single game is open-world. The plots are so thin and watered-down and the games so easy there's no point in pushing forward. I agree.
Still this is a problem the industry should tackle or avoid, and not a fashion gamers should just flat-out accept as the status of game design.
man, I just don't get this.I finish my games.
Can't allow those hours invested be wasted.
Our relationships are reversed. I'm the one who has a hard time moving on (and buying something new) without finishing a game while my boyfriend is more like you.It's OK to stop playing a game without seeing the credits and move on to another. I wish my boyfriend could understand that... but instead his backlog is 300+ games big. Sigh.
I've been trying to make peace with my ridiculous backlog as a new parent. What I really need to work on is tampering my need to clear side content, I don't know if I've ever main-lined a game but the way I tend to play has left me half-way through Fallout, Witcher & Horizon, always meaning to g
I agree with the OP. I don't feel the need to finish a game if later on i get bored of it. Because then it becomes like work. I play for fun.
Playing 1000 different games to 10% completion is more overrated
There are so many damn games, I really became a lot happier when I realized that I don't need to play everything.
I gave myself a little rule where I have to finish a game to buy a new one, but I just bought Horizon because of the sale and will def get Crash next week.
I def try to finish the games Im having fun with but I def will check out on something average because there is way too much out there to play mediocre games.
Even if you no longer enjoy playing the game? That just seems like a poor use of one's time. I understand the compulsion, but still.
Finishing games is fine. Earn trophies is overrated.
I finish my games.
Can't allow those hours invested be wasted.
Now, before we begin, I want to say that this doesn't apply to every game. Some games are absolutely worth finishing.
I find that a lot of the time the conversation around a game puts a lot of emphasis on finishing it. I don't think this is necessarily the best way to think about a game. For me, I play a game as long as I enjoy it, then I drop it. If that point is before the end of the game, so be it. I don't mind...