Game genres and value for money

[hian]

I think the original subject was more aimed to production costs based on trends within genres,


not about "how much fun did X person have?"

I'd say you'd be wrong in that evaluation seeing as the OP asks specifically


"In your opinion, what game genres would you say tend to be the best value for money and what, the worst?"


I.E in your opinion, what genres upon purchase, give you most value for money spent.


What other value factors does a game have on an individual basis, except fun-factor?

I'd definitely say Fighting and Shooter games are of the least value,


because what makes those good are idea-brought mechanics that don't "cost" money to think of.

I'm not sure what that word-salad even means. What mechanics are not "idea-brought", and what


ideas cost money to think of? Why is "cost" in quotation marks?

On the other hand, Sandbox games need a lot of resources, well made plots, toys to fiddle with,


a large environment, and much more, while the mechanics may be simple.

The problem inherent with sand-box games is usually that the scope of them makes them almost impossible


to debug and balance properly leading to annoying stuff like clipping issues, NPCs acting


wierdly, quests getting broken due to unforseen elements interfering with the natural game


progression etc. etc.


They're usually also so large in scope that it can feel intimidating to replay them knowing how


long the road from start to finish is.


Many of them also suffer from long load-times and aren't accessible in terms of letting players


jump straight in and out of game-play.


The good thing about simple shooters and fighting games is that you can pick up the controller,


or put it down again at any time, take large breaks without being dislodged from the narrative as a result


of having forgotten where you were, and the ability to jump in and instantly engage with the game-play.


If the game has good competitive online multi-player, the game just keeps on giving and giving,


as opposed to primarily single-player games.


I am pretty sure that as much as people play games like Assassin's Creed or GTA, people who're into


online play on games like Counter Strike, Call of Duty, Tekken, Street Fighter, Starcraft


or World of Warcraft, will have many, many more hours on the clock in comparison.


But, it's all subjective. If you don't like fighting games, sure, they're not going to give you


more value for your money.


This is all completely and utterly dependent on target demographics.

Take for instance Portal.


I can go through portal in 2 hours.


I enjoy the game a lot in those two hours.


I have played Recettear for 37 hours. Most of that felt like grinding.


The hours it takes to complete a game isn't necessarily the same number of hours you have fun playing that game.

That being said, there are games that are fun for tens upon tens of hours, so if I had a choice between


buying Portal 2, and say, The Witcher 3, I'd by The Witcher in a blink of an eye.