How do you consume games? (Gaming)

by CruelLEGACEY , Toronto, Monday, April 11, 2016, 13:47 (2949 days ago) @ cheapLEY

If left completely to my own devices, I tend to be the kind of person who plays very few games each year, but puts loads of hours into the games I do play. I have the most fun with a game when I am really able to dig deeply into it, get better over time, see all that it has to offer. However, I do listen to a lot of gaming podcasts, and I follow a lot of game journalists on twitter, which can cause me to feel like I'm "missing out" from time to time. So I'll go through these phases where I'll buy loads of games over a 6 month period because 'everybody' is talking about them. But every time I do this, I end up feeling like I've wasted a whole bunch of time and money.

This whole process has caused me to re-evaluate the way I allow games coverage to effect me.

Besides differences in personal taste, I've come to realize that the nature of the job for those in games media puts them into a drastically different situation than the one I'm in. They have to play a ton of games. And because they have to play so many freaking games, they often see similar themes, stories, and gameplay mechanics over and over and over. Because of this, any game that stands out as being just a little bit "unique" or "different" is very exciting for them. But for me, that's just not the case. Most of the games media might not be excited about another Gears of War, for example, because they play a million 3rd person cover shooters every year. But I don't, and Gears is still the best 3rd person cover shooter (mechanically speaking), so I'm totally looking forward to the next one. I think that's why we see so much crying from the media for "new IP! new IP!" where as I personally am far more excited about the average sequel because I know that sequels are a) usually built on a great foundation (crappy games don't often get sequels), and b) sequels usually iterate and improve on the original, leading to a more refined final product.

Besides that, I've come to realize that the entire process of covering and reviewing games can completely change the way someone experiences it. I get review codes for a fair number of games these days, but I refuse to force myself into the typical review/embargo loop because it destroys the experience for me. For example, I played AC4 Black Flag that way, and it nearly ruined the game for me. Being in such a hurry to play through a game like that runs completely counter to the fun that it offers. I rushed through the "critical path" so I could finish the game in time to write a review before the embargo lifted, and came away feeling exhausted and off-put. A month later, I decided to replay the game at my own pace, and it became one of my all-time favorite games. I still had the same criticisms, but I was able to tap into the real joy of the game (pointing your ship in a random direction and exploring the open waters) in a way that simply wasn't possible during the crunch of the review cycle. It hit me: this is how every single video game gets reviewed. I basically stopped reading reviews at that point, and have not gone back to them.

I much prefer listening to podcasts like the Bombcast or Rebel FM because I find them to be far more natural. You get several people who are all in the middle of playing a game just talking about their experiences so far, without the pressure to put an authoritative stamp on it. If I hear enough people talking about a game in a way that makes it sound particularly interesting or exciting, then I might check it out (that's what lead me to play Journey and The Last of Us).