Sorely disappointed in those complaining about replay value

[GREATGIDEON]

replay value is fun, it adds the ability to enjoy a game multiple times without it getting stale. i understand that much, but it does not have to apply to everything. 'lack of replay value' is not a criticism, it is a gameplay choice, as not every game has the budget, story length, or vision that fits that bill.

the reason i take a problem with this is because games like dredge get overlooked, bashed and critiqued relentlessly despite not having huge teams, corps or budgets to build them. this game isnt minecraft, it isnt elden ring, it isnt the legend of zelda. change your outlook on short and small games. this is a single novel, not an endless book series. the reason you should play it again is not so you can achieve some other variant of the story that's not there, but because this game is a work of art that deserves to be analysed. what about the atmosphere? what about the mystery? what about the collections? just because you dont have another game to push countless hours a day playing and not thinking about? what a shame to even compare it.

[Cocofang]

With the games structure being so clearly established and tightly designed I would be up for endless DLC, honestly.

All the various systems could be expanded upon (different fish, quests, maps, etc.) while leaving the core intact and I'd just keep coming back for an annual expansion. Maybe some interesting twists and innovations down the line

It's not something I would be willig to invest into every title but I like the core gameplay loop, atmosphere and overall design enough so that I could see myself repeatedly spending some money on 10 more hours of new content just to immerse myself in the exploration and experience some more.

[GREATGIDEON]

Originally posted by Count Cocofang:

With the games structure being so clearly established and tightly designed I would be up for endless DLC, honestly.

All the various systems could be expanded upon (different fish, quests, maps, etc.) while leaving the core intact and I'd just keep coming back for an annual expansion. Maybe some interesting twists and innovations down the line :dredge_wow:

It's not something I would be willig to invest into every title but I like the core gameplay loop, atmosphere and overall design enough so that I could see myself repeatedly spending some money on 10 more hours of new content just to immerse myself in the exploration and experience some more.

very fair, i understand your want for more content here. in an ideal world id also want this game to be endless and to immerse myself in how wonderful it is. maybe theyll come back with some more dlc, revisiting things is always fun and a great option for expansion. but im satisfied with the end if not and i hope the game is not judged too harshly for how compact it is. meanwhile, theres always the inspiration it gives others to make more content!

[HellSlayer]

Originally posted by Ceresberus:

replay value is fun, it adds the ability to enjoy a game multiple times without it getting stale. i understand that much, but it does not have to apply to everything. 'lack of replay value' is not a criticism, it is a gameplay choice, as not every game has the budget, story length, or vision that fits that bill.

the reason i take a problem with this is because games like dredge get overlooked, bashed and critiqued relentlessly despite not having huge teams, corps or budgets to build them. this game isnt minecraft, it isnt elden ring, it isnt the legend of zelda. change your outlook on short and small games. this is a single novel, not an endless book series. the reason you should play it again is not so you can achieve some other variant of the story that's not there, but because this game is a work of art that deserves to be analysed. what about the atmosphere? what about the mystery? what about the collections? just because you dont have another game to push countless hours a day playing and not thinking about? what a shame to even compare it.

Minecraft? it was made by one guy!
Replay value is important if you plan to replay the game once a year.. but im not bashing dredge, i dont have info about this game yet.

[GREATGIDEON]

Originally posted by HellSlayer:

Originally posted by Ceresberus:

replay value is fun, it adds the ability to enjoy a game multiple times without it getting stale. i understand that much, but it does not have to apply to everything. 'lack of replay value' is not a criticism, it is a gameplay choice, as not every game has the budget, story length, or vision that fits that bill.

the reason i take a problem with this is because games like dredge get overlooked, bashed and critiqued relentlessly despite not having huge teams, corps or budgets to build them. this game isnt minecraft, it isnt elden ring, it isnt the legend of zelda. change your outlook on short and small games. this is a single novel, not an endless book series. the reason you should play it again is not so you can achieve some other variant of the story that's not there, but because this game is a work of art that deserves to be analysed. what about the atmosphere? what about the mystery? what about the collections? just because you dont have another game to push countless hours a day playing and not thinking about? what a shame to even compare it.

Minecraft? it was made by one guy!
Replay value is important if you plan to replay the game once a year.. but im not bashing dredge, i dont have info about this game yet.

minecraft was STARTED by one guy, had a relatively simple design and is basically structured for updates because of how open ended it is. now it has a huge team of people that plan each update thoroughly. dredge is a story, not a sandbox game, it has an end and does not have to be drawn out. its the choice of the developers to add more dlc or not, but the game shouldnt be judged for its apparent 'lack of content' (the game has intuitive game mechanics, so much to collect, a compact design and a terrifyingly effective atmosphere. whats not to love) i understand why people like replay value, genuinely. but maybe if people treated artistic games like dredge like literary enthusiasts treated novellas then people would see how valuable this game is on its own. how unfair it is to expect writers to mutilate their already thought out stories to give people more content. replaying your favourite game once a year need not require more dlc.

besides, this thread isnt aimed at you, its aimed at people who have already played it and decided its trash because its just not long enough for them. im sure youre not judging the game harshly, and really its always down to personal opinion.

[Lancenig]

It's all about balance man...
If your single player game is too short than it better damn well have good replay value...
If it's a long game with enough to do to make people feel like they've gotten value out of one play through then replay value mean little...

So that's where this comes into question. Do more people feel like you or like the other guy that doesn't feel the game offered up enough value and lacks replay value? It could be subjective...or the game could be too short? I don't know that is what I'm here to find out!

[Noma]

The game offer 10 hours of gameplay for 25 euros. Even if it's a good experience, it has far insufficient content to be worth its price.
I don't ask for more content if the experience is good as it is. I wouldn't ask players for 25 euros for that, though. For that price, it is natural to expect more content, and not some paid DLC.

[GREATGIDEON]

Originally posted by Noma:

The game offer 10 hours of gameplay for 25 euros. Even if it's a good experience, it has far insufficient content to be worth its price.
I don't ask for more content if the experience is good as it is. I wouldn't ask players for 25 euros for that, though. For that price, it is natural to expect more content, and not some paid DLC.

i dont know where everyone is getting 10 hours of gameplay only. i played the game completely blind and appreciated every moment of it, til i finished it at 30 hours. not every game is a speedrun and a game with this quality of art may as well be a gallery piece. do you understand what i mean when i compare this game to a book or art piece? i would pay 15 pounds for a good print of a sketch, i would pay 15 pounds for a good book, and for a game that lasted 15 times longer than the average film for me? i think its pretty damn worth 20 pounds. 20 pounds is fair. once again, this is not made by a big studio. it was developed by 'a small indie game dev studio' and is comparable to games like Journey. what dyou think is fair, 3.99? the game only launched recently.

from an artists perspective this becomes upsetting. the more and more mass produced games become, the more people undervalue the art and effort that goes into indie games. replay value becomes an unfair and invalid critique when youre holding an indie studio to the same standards of big corporations.

[Cocofang]

Originally posted by Ceresberus:

from an artists perspective this becomes upsetting. the more and more mass produced games become, the more people undervalue the art and effort that goes into indie games. replay value becomes an unfair and invalid critique when youre holding an indie studio to the same standards of big corporations.

Especially since the modus operandi of many big studios is often to just dump nebulous """content""" into their games to artificially inflate a purely theoretical gameplay time with repetitive, unoriginal tasks. In some cases you are still left with roughly 30 hours if you just can't be arsed with the fluff. But for the proud price of 70 bucks.

The price is definitely on the elevated side for an indie title but the overall experience is long enough, plus extremely well put together. You can see and feel the care in every corner of the game.

[Strexxin]

Originally posted by Count Cocofang:

The price is definitely on the elevated side for an indie title but the overall experience is long enough, plus extremely well put together. You can see and feel the care in every corner of the game.

Can you? The story is barebones, the map looks unfinished, you quickly realise that most things meant to scare you mean nothing, only the first town has any character, the fishing mini games get boring after an hour.

The game is massively front loaded to get people over that 2 hour refund window.

[Cocofang]

What an unnecessarily cynical way to imply underhanded intentions on part of the people that created it. There is really nothing indicating that this was a consideration.

If anything, you are disproving your own point by stating that you can grow bored of the minigames after one hour. Because the game simply shows you what you can expect right off the bat. Meaning you can make your decision very quickly.

[Strexxin]

Originally posted by Count Cocofang:

What an unnecessarily cynical way to imply underhanded intentions on part of the people that created it. There is really nothing indicating that this was a consideration.

If anything, you are disproving your own point by stating that you can grow bored of the minigames after one hour. Because the game simply shows you what you can expect right off the bat. Meaning you can make your decision very quickly.

It doesn't disprove anything just because you can get bored of one mechanic after 1 hour. It might be cynical but when you have a game where the first town you get to is the only one that is fully fleshed out, what else can you say other than "it's front loaded".

[Cocofang]

It is important in this case because the fishing minigames are essential part of the core gameplay loop. If you immediately notice that they are not to your liking then the argument that the game is padding to get past the 2h mark doesn't hold.

Also, why are you arbitrarily picking "towns" as the bar to live up to? The other islands offer things, including character interactions, that the first town doesn't.

[Strexxin]

Of course my argument holds, the problem is here is you're making it seem like the fishing mechanics is all there is. As I said you can not like a single mechanic but still stick with the game to see what else it has in store for you.

It is only after you finish the first town that you realise the rest of the game hasn't had anywhere near the same level of attention. To the point that hardly anything at night is actually a threat, which is pretty poor as the developers made it seem like this was one of the biggest aspects of the game.

Also, why are you arbitrarily picking "towns" as the bar to live up to? The other islands offer things, including character interactions, that the first town doesn't.

Because the game is focused around visiting towns and speaking to people? Getting requests etc?

[Cocofang]

I mean, if someone starts to dislike a core mechanic at the 1h mark and still sticks with the game, which is obviously going to continue to use that mechanic, then that's on the user.

[Strexxin]

Originally posted by Count Cocofang:

I mean, if someone starts to dislike a core mechanic at the 1h mark and still sticks with the game, which is obviously going to continue to use that mechanic, then that's on the user.

Not at all, take Skyrim for example. The combat was awful but people stuck with it to see what the story and world had in store for it.

You can dislike a single mechanic but stick with a game, that might be hard to believe.