Do you ever not finish games you like?

I personally find the method odd but I can understand some people not wanting the fun to end so reset before the climax.

Getting stuck and not finding a solution though beats the purpose of the game. Games tend to be very on the nose how it handles progression. NPCs give hints. Tutorials hint at obtuse progression, etc. Dark Souls is a great example because it teaches people the concept of illusion walls and gestures early into the first game.

In my honest opinion all the well made games I've played can be beaten easily without guides, so long as one pays attention to what the game was teaching the player at least.

Usually it's pretty rare for me. I can't remember the last game I had done that with.

Maybe Pokemon Crystal? Ended up releasing a Pokemon holding EXP share. Though, I know you're able to get another one through some mini game but I couldn't be bothered.

Yeah, Sekiro. Because I'd rather watch three episodes of The Sopranos or nine episodes of Samurai Jack or watch a good movie than spend three hours fighting the last boss. No, I am not getting gud.

Sometimes, typically if I enjoy a game I will play it through to the end and if I stop its because I am no longer enjoying it, there have been random times I'll just quit a game I'm enjoying, but it is rare and I couldn't tell you why.

Happens every now and then. I generally don't like it when I get stuck and have to consult guides/videos/forums for answers.

Also, some games just lose their appeal after awhile - like Skyrim for instance.

Rarely. Happens mostly with huge games. I've never finished any Elder Scrolls game, for example. The main quest usually doesn't interest me.

@ezekiel43: You could just cheese him. But that might go against your honor.

It used to be be the older GTA games I'd get to a flying mission and just couldn't prevail through it.

Some games I just put down. It's not that they're necessarily bad games. I just find myself wanting something else or something new.

- Infamous: Second Son

- Tales of Symphonia

- Tales of Zestiria

- Star Ocean: The Last Hope

- Valkyria Chronicles

- Skyrim (I never play the main quest. I always just do my own thing.)

A lot of games, as good as they may be, run out of fun content, especially game mechanics, way before you have experienced the sum of their story ARC / have gotten to the "Good stuff".

There's a lot of games to play out there. As a result, i don't always have time to fit in the extra 30-40 hours to either complete all side quests or to get the "Real" ending, especially if i'm repeating the same mechanics, over and over again.

@lucidique: The hour angle is another odd one for me.

Would personally play less games and indulge the ones I get the most enjoyment from.

I mean no one is telling people to play as many games as possible in quick bursts and dislike the majority of time spent. Rather, it's better to find a preference, dedicate that time towards those experiences. And have fun with it.

Variety may very well be the spice of life; but comfort-food is for the soul ツ

Just to add to my previous post I'd say that I generally end up liking open world games but become bored of them very quickly. So that's something as well.

I always finish games I like but... that wasn't the case in the Blockbuster video era.

Uh... sure I guess.

Back in the day, the Genesis and NES IMO the most the SNES less so but both those systems had a ton of games which were fun and itneresting but just way too hard.

So I never finished tons of those games.

/generally a lot of action games with jumping etc would just give you too few lives and stuff and just be too hard for a number of reasons.

Nowadays I find there's a different issue, RPGs have become way t more opopular or at least games with statistics/leveling etc.

So now I know I can eventually beat it but I don't want to spend time that way, I feel like it's a repetitive process on some level and just makes me go eh er I don't know about this.

Like borrowing from the poster above I can't remember the last time I finished a Tales game... they're great and awesome and fun and everything but they're just pretty long I'd say.

Going back a good ten years, I would have agreed, but games are getting bigger. They tend to be filled with what I would consider filler at this point.

Take Assassin's Creed Origins for example, This is a 20 - 30 hours game that has been stretched, allowing for up to a hundred hours, provided you are willing to repeat the same mechanics, over and over.

I was done with the game by hour 20, but the game kept throwing quests and stuff to do my way, so here we are at hour 51.

By that time, I was sick and tired. The game did not have 50 hours worth of content. It just threw the same stuff at me, non-stop.

It became a drag after a while, but hey, I wanted to see the end.

Sometimes.

I enjoyed The Witcher 3, but its length outstayed its welcome. Once I got to the island I lost all motivation. I’ve replayed it three times and always have to force myself to continue. When I find myself doing that, I immediately stop playing.

A game either needs to continually keep me engaged with new and interesting mechanics (such as Ori and the Blind Forest) or keep the narrative interesting supported by good mechanics (TLoU) for me to continue until the end. The Witcher 3 is a prime example of too much where the foundation wasn’t strong enough to compel me to see it to the end. More isn’t necessarily better.

@lucidique:

Going back a good ten years, I would have agreed, but games are getting bigger. They tend to be filled with what I would consider filler at this point.

Take Assassin's Creed Origins for example

And maybe that's the issue. You like sandbox level design, known to have padded-out content. Year of release makes little difference. Old classics like Morrowind and Daggerfall require an absurd amount of hours. I would argue longer than the game you mentioned_

Length of game varies from genre and title. I would state if it's becoming a hassle for you? avoid sandbox and RPG games.

Don't really play a lot of those sandbox games myself because I find them poorly designed and for a player-base that favor scale immersion over mechanical depth. Also more into games that have bursts of gameplay then let players take a rest.

I can say my last new game was Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night. And my first playthrough I beat it in just over five hours on the clock. Wouldn't call that a long game. Cleaning up the map for 100% took an extra two.

If I think of games from a completionist angle and ignore the bonus content (endings, loot, modes, NG+, etc) most the games I play could be beaten in a day.

*I assume this thread and conversation is about single-player games however. A lot of games I do play are multiplayer. Sunk lots of time overall into them but they contribute 10-20 minute bursts and not sure that's relevant here.

Only extremely rarely for me. I am more likely to stop playing a game I'm in love with. When I feel like I'm getting close to the end, I sometimes put the end off and then never get around to finishing it because I don't want it to end. I quit the Starfy game on the DS because it was too generic and the levels and game play were uninteresting to me.

I dont finish open world games no matter how much I like them

If I like the game, I'll beat it. I think my only experience of game I wanted to beat, that I bought, started, but couldn't get into, was Shadow of War.