Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
I'm guilty of replaying games several times. I've lost count of the number of times i've beaten some of my favorite RPG's lol.
Same reason why people re-watch TV shows or movies.
Yet average playtime on Steam is not the same as average time to complete a game. So as said, it's not accurate.
Remember, Steam only sees the program is open, not what you're doing, how far into the game you are or that it's the 6th time someone replays it.
And games which have both singleplayer and multiplayer would have both modes lumped together in the Steam playtime, so you'd never see the average playtime for the single player campaign.
Remember, Steam doesn't see what you do in-game.
And we should put times for
-Just main story
-Main story and all side tasks
-Story and all story DLCs
-Story and side tasks from main game and all DLCs
-Everything 100%
-With mods
Everyone adds their times based on what they finished and steam shows
-Average time
-Minimum time (based 10% with lowest playtime)
-Maximum time (based on 10% with highest playtime)
If game is multiplayer only without any story mode then there's no need for this.
And if game doesn't have playable DLCs, side tasks, mods, etc. then there's no need to put time to beat in those categories.
Also consider that people complain just as much about single player campaigns being overlong, padded and drawn out.
What's to stop people from lying?
Also how is that different from www.howlongtobeat.com
It would be just user generated estimated playtime.
Game ratings based on user reviews can't accurately tell you which game is better and which is worse.
But it still helps.
It would be the same with estimated playtime.
And nothing can stop users to add false tags to games. When you take that in consideration, we have games with good user generated tags.
Just because some people will post false information, it won't make big effect because most of the people will post correct informations.
Steam should either use data from howlongtobeat or make their own way to get that data.
There is a framework for reporting unsuitable reviews.
Just having that data on Steam store page would be much more convenient than having to go to howlongtobeat.com every time (especially when you're searching for games on phone)
And a lot of people don't even know that howlongtobeat.com exists.
I'd disagree, for one its wrong and can get them sued if they start pulling data from a 3rd party site without their permission.
Secondly it makes no sense to duplicate the work and require people to enter data into both sites to help compile a good listing.
Howlongtobeat is platform independent and would be superior to having it on steam and has already done the work. There is no benefit to steam to recreate the wheel and try to recapture inferior data that is already available freely.
That's pretty much what howlongtobeat does.
The problem of adding something like this to the store page is once again liability. Store pages *are* advertisements. If you put "avg time to beat: 8 hours" on it and someone beats the game in four, they have a claim for false advertising as you can reasonably expect to not differ by factor 0.5. (At least over here there are cases with life-expectancy for electronic devices and such. Key word is "reasonable" and courts outside of the US are more likely to side with consumers.)
To avoid that, if even possible, you have to add a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ of small print in the gist of "mileage can vary" which makes the stat quite useless again.
One example are role-playing games. There are people just following the quest markers and people who read everything. With a game like Dragon Age or - even worse - Planescape: Torment, that can easily reach novel levels of text there is huge gap between both extremes.
Lastly you cannot cover "just jerking around" in games like GTA or Skyrim that people will do in-between. It might take you 80 hours to 100 % the game according to Steam playtime or ingame statistics, yet nowhere does it keep track of you just wasting your time with some meaningless fun.
And if they get permission to use data from HLTB, then they could put it on Store pages.
Exactly. Average playtime of RDR2 is 78 hours. I'm at 150 and I'm still only halfway the game.
Hey HLTB we want to take all your work and just steal it and put it on our store so we can benefit from it and you get nothing out of the deal.
That cool?
That's not going to end well............