I can't speak for "most people", but for myself, I buy games on release date or pay the original full MSRP when the games are: 1) Multiplayer oriented. FPS or MMO, many of these games count on healthy population of players to make the games fun. With titles coming out so often now days, the life of the game's multiplayer aspect is sometimes limited to only the first few months. 2) Released when I don't have a backlog. This rarely happens as there are just so many titles out in the market, and online service like Steam makes purchasing so convenient. When I have 2 games in the backlog, I'm thinking to myself picking up a $60 game is wasteful. But when I have that itch to game and there is no backlog, I'm happy to pay that $60.
Developers should put effort into what counts most. If crowd interaction is critical part of the game, it makes sense. Otherwise, leave them 2D/low poly, and put development efforts on the main gameplay.
Specific name for specific market. Biohazard is easy to understand for Japanese gamers, but Resident Evil has better ring in English speaking country: US.
I experience games with poor ending more often than games that are too short. Maybe I'm not the type to blast through games, or maybe, I'm just not good at games, and it takes me more time. Most games, even the shortest ones, take 8+ hours, and that's plenty long for my taste. 8 hours of gaming is a long weekend, perfect for a working professional like myself.
Log in to comment