How Much is Alan Wake Worth?

[Jesus Phish]

Someone else said it already and I back them up, games like Alan Wake and Heavy Rain should be episodic content releases. If not, they should have their value reduced. I always felt this way about any medium of entertainment.

CDs that are under 30 minutes, books that are wine list thin and games that don't have at least double digits of gameplay time.

The problem I see with Heavy Rain and Alan Wake also, is that unlike say, Fallour 3 or even Half Life is most of the fun of the first two is in the first play through, unraviling the mystery of the game, the same way you read a book. Now, if its a very good book, you'll probably come back to read it again, but since games are more interactive, it loses its magic in my view.

I'd be more inclined to rent out a game like Alan Wake, or get a loan off a friend. Or wait til it's dramtically reduced in price.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

Was one of these games a pokemon...blue, red, yellow and a remake?

I've bought Mirror's Edge 3 times...maybe I'm just sad

 

[AWAR]

"I've paid full price for game that I never even finished, yet still felt completely satisfied with."

Can anyone ever honestly say that they have finished a game like Obilivion?

Yeah,I've done all the quests and found almost all of the rarest gear (confirmed with TESwiki)

 

[Mantheron]

Was one of these games a pokemon...blue, red, yellow and a remake?

Pokémon seems like a safe bet; and silver, and gold, and cyan, and magenta...

Good article.

 

[Undead_David]

Chrono trigger and one of the final fantasy games I - VI IM guessing since they have been released as many times, mabey super mario borthers

 

[StriderShinryu]

The only game I can think of that I've purchased multiple times is FFIV.. I've had the SNES version, the GBA version, the PSX version and I will probably still buy the DS version at some point.

As to the topic at hand, I find myself in that same boat of seeing full price as a tough sell when it comes to a lot of games now a days. I, however, find the value question even harder because I also play an MMO (currently LOTRO). I only pay $10 a month to play LOTRO, and between all of my characters and all there is to see or do, I still find myself spending at least a couple hours a day online when I have the time to do so. Even if I only play an average of 2 hours per day in a month that's 60 hours of game time for $10. Very very few other games even come close to offering that kind of value, which is only enhanced by the multiplayer aspects. As such, it's extremely rare that I do buy "short" games even if I know I'll enjoy them. I'll either rent them or I'll wait until they go down to a price I'm more comfortable with.

It certainly must be difficult as a designer to create a game and then see it not sell because it's "too short" but the fact is, despite any personal player attached value, that is a known factor. You know if you're releasing a 10 hour game that it will be competing against the "infinitely replayable" or multiplayer enabled games that are going to be on the shelves right next to it. What's the solution? Honestly, I think it's being more realistic about the pricing of your product. It would never be easy to look at your game and put a price tag on it that's less than the other games that share it's shelf space, but if you're going to compete it's something you may have to do.

 

[Joabbuac]

Answer to 4 buys question

GTA 4 maybe, i got that on ps3 at first when traded it in for 360 version...


There are games like Fable 2 and Far cry 2 which i hated at first then bought for nothing after i had traded them in weirdly enjoyed them more when coming into them with no hype.


So my guess is something like fallout or GTA where it had exclusive downloadable content and you had the wrong version, maybe getting the PC version if you upgraded too.

 

[Irridium]

Pokemon and Mega-Man.

And nice article. But there is also one big thing to factor in, the almighty force of Nostalgia. I'm sure many of us have fond memories about the games of the past generation and beyond. For example, I'm sure many here have played countless hours of Goldeneye 007 for the N64. And people constantly say how games these days aren't as fun. But I played it recently, and to be honest, it kind of sucked. I've seen many people stack the games of today up against games of the past, and most of the time the games of the past win.

Is it because they are inherently better, or because of Nostalgia. Are we no longer able to enjoy games the way we used to?

Just a thought.

And I am aware that there are quite a few games of the past generation and beyond that are actually better than most games today. I have said and will continue to say Timesplitters 2 and Future Perfect are the best FPS games ever. And I am aware that everyone is different and has their own tastes and so on and so forth, but having recently played some of the "classics" everyone seems to praise, I can't help but think Nostalgia factors in a huge deal.

 

[ThisNewGuy]

I find it funny that people who are defending a 6 to 10 hour game now, are the exact same people who hated on Heavenly Sword for being 8-10 hour game.

Still, I understand the point that a 6 hours of one game is worth differently to a 6 hours of another game, which is why I don't really like it when reviewers hate on a game solely for its short play time.

 

[Mister Benoit]

Are you talking about Pokemon because they're basically always the same and we have 4 generations with at least 2 versions each, and you feel the absolute need to catch them all so you always pick up both versions =p ?

O god I need to go to sleep I just reread it and you said 2 games 4 times each, not 4 games 2 times each, good god i'm dyslexic.

 

[DYin01]

I'm guessing one of the two games is a Blizzard game. The kind you want to play later for the sake of nostalgia but you lost the original disc, so you buy it again. To be more specific, I'm guessing Starcraft and Warcraft 2 or 3.

The other.. I wouldn't know.

 

[Tirnor]

I will, of course, reveal the two games eventually. But I'd like to hear some other guesses first.

Final Fantasy (NES, PS1, GBA (or PSP), iPhone) and maybe... Orange Box, for you and 3 of your friends.

Personally, I've bought more copies of System Shock 2 than anything... I give them away to people that need "real game" education. Like I buy people the DVD set of Firefly when they need to watch "real TV".

- Tir

 

[Mr.Pandah]

World of Goo...with all these packs always having it bundled in. The other one...I really don't know =X

 

[Halo Fanboy]

You can't assume the amount expendable money of a consumer when reviewing. In the end you can only talk about the quality of the game itself and let people decide if its worth it.

I doubt a game would have much value for a starving person.

 

[The Random One]

Replayability is relative. People buy books and reread them over and over again even though they don't change. If I buy $60 worth of books, I don't expect them to last X hours of reading. Why should I think that about games?

Curiously, I don't buy movies because even though they're much cheaper I don't think they're worth it, as I rarely rewatch movies. I own zero movie DVDs.

Then again, I planned on buying Alan Wake only if my rental didn't have it, which they do. Sorry, they're not getting any money from me, at least directly.

 

[Mcface]

Nice article.

I for one would (and do) happily pay £35-£40 for a 6/7/8 hour game (singleplayer only), and I'm a penniless 16-year-old.

It irks me to see people leave comments about games saying "no mutliplayer no buy", as well as a "short" playing time generating a game tonnes of undeserved hate.

You are over paying then, and I'm assuming it's not your money you are spending?
Becuase I refuse to buy single player games that are not RPGs.
It's pointless. Why spend 60 dollars on a game I will play once or twice with no replay value? I can just rent it for 6 bucks.

I play a little game called mount and blade. I have over 200 hours into it. Guess how much i spent? 9 dollars. And it's a much more innovative and fun game than Alan Wake.

I paid 40 dollars for ArmA 2.
And have over 500 hours on it.

So tell me why should I pay more for less?

 

[SyphonX]

I think it is entirely worth it. First of all, it's rare that story-lovin' gamers like myself get a game like Alan Wake. They come out every so often whenever the stars align and someone sacrifices a goat.. etc. (It's a long and complicated process). So it's nice to be able to have Alan Wake.

The 'other' gamers, who think it's not worth it, can shove it, quite frankly. You people have had so many games released to you in the past 5 years, games with multiplayer, games that never end, games with insane replay value, and games that I don't always consider worth it. You've had so much, that you can sit back just this one time, and say.. "Not really my cup of tea, but I fully respect that some people enjoy this good game, even at full price." instead of whining.

 

[AllAdamB]

I bought multiple copies of Morrowind(XBox original, platinum hits, GOTY, PC) and Zelda:Link to the Past(SNES, GBA, VC). Perhaps you did the same?

 

[Loonerinoes]

I'd say there was a point at a recent Obsidian panel held at PAX East where they brought up Valve's tracking of Half Life 2 and how half of the people who got the game never even reached the ending. And for a game that's used as a sort of benchmark test of a good game really...as they put it very well: "This graph makes developers sad."

So with that knowledge of how jaded or easily distracted the general public is, why bother making a long game? In fact...would spending 60$ on a short game not be worth MORE than spending the same amount on a long game? After all...you'd probably finish the short game 100% of the way for sure, whilst you'd likely not make it to the end of the long one? Wouldn't that mean that you would, in fact, make the most of the 60$ of short gameplay than of the 60$ of the long gameplay?

Really, in the end it's down to how you play games and what you expect from them. If you're a hardcore gamer, that wants to see a game through to the end, then of course that price for Alan Wake is outrageous. But if you happen to be an easily distracted gamer, you might consider it money well spent! After all...the long game didn't get to the ending fast enough and made you waste your cash, while the short game was brief enough that you could get the gist of it for your full price!

It's just that part of being human really. Another little divide between casual and hardcore gamers I guess. In the end people have to make up their own choice based on what they know of their gaming habits rather than trusting graphs or numbers.