Forever Games: Like 'em, Hate 'em, meh

[FireHazard51 | 2,052]

Forever games are kind of a new thing.  Games that will have DLC to constantly continue the story so they effectively never have an ending.  What do you  think of these types of games being made.  Is this the new fade game like shooters were for the PS3 and Xbox360 era?  

[Sumez | 2,994]

Fwiw I do want to play a game forever, but because it's a good game that's worth playing over and over. Doesn't matter if it has an "ending" or not. 

Not the sort of game I'm assuming this thread is addressing. That's just a gross marketing strategy and not one I'd ever support. 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,584]

Like, live service games? Or MMOs?

I played a lot of WoW, but that was the end of the line for this sort of thing for me.  I'd rather play through 50 games than 1 neverending one.

[DefaultGen | 5,432]

Games are too long. My favorite movie is 3 hours long but I wouldn’t want to watch it for 200 hours while the actors stretched out and repeated scenes over and over for the sake of “content” to churn through.

My ideal game is like 5 hours long to beat it once, then 20-60 minutes to beat it once I know what I’m doing. I almost never look at these modern games and say “Can’t wait to play through that again!”

[FireHazard51 | 2,052]

I've played a couple of these kinds of games.  I ended up enjoying them for a while but actually never even get to the current "endstory" before I loose interest and stop.  Since I know there is no end I don't feel the urge to keep playing to "complete" the game.

[FireHazard51 | 2,052]

17 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said:

Like, live service games? Or MMOs?

I played a lot of WoW, but that was the end of the line for this sort of thing for me.  I'd rather play through 50 games than 1 neverending one.

MMO's may be considered by some as OG' of forever games.   But current games that fit this naming convention would be like Destiny 2, PUBG, Fortnite, etc.  So not always "story" but content that is constantly released.  MMO's I would say are sub-category as they do make new content all the time to keep you playing.

[The Count | 531]

I enjoy these types of games. They're like comfort food for gaming, it's familiar and I don't have to learn all over again. I also very appreciate developers still committed to new content for old games even after the bulk of the profit is long gone. If I don't want to continue playing a game, I'm not forced to anyways.

[Tabonga | 2,337]

In some ways the Mercenaries series of games by Rideon are very  much in this vein.  There are seven in the series so far and gameplay mechanics only vary slightly from game to game so once you have played one it is easy to get into any of the others - you don't need to play all of them or in any particular order.  Each one has a similar plot with characters of similar capabilities - their skill sets will vary though which will effect game play.  Characters will eventually each get their full skill sets so the advancement tree is not super important. The games each usually have three game paths with each offering somewhat different characters and battles.  So replaying offers something new - in addtiton you can carry over equipment -which is important because you can enhance skills by imbedding qualities in up to six types of equipment - resources are limited in the first play so you can only do so much - but carrying over equipment allows you to continue to enhance it.  

In addition there are some challenging (optional) dungeons towards the end of each game - there is a real challenging one called the "dungeon of trials" with ten levels (found in each game) that you have to take on one after another with no chance to go to the shop and restock on things - in addition if a character (you have eight) dies you  can't use him/her any more in the dungeon.  You only take six into any of the levels so you aren't totally out of luck - but you lose use of whatever skills whoever died had,  And replaying that dungeon is fun as you grow stronger and can  try different strategies.

So while it is not really DLC each time they crank out one of these  puppies it might as well be.  If you like SRPGs you might want to give this series a try.

Edited July 2, 2023 by Tabonga

[fox | 1,673]

I like having a good reason to replay games and having some dlc is a good reason to return and be excited again.  But it is also important to have some closure, to finish the story, watch the credits roll, and close the book after a long journey.  I don’t want to feel stuck on the tilt a whirl.  

[Andy_Bogomil | 815]

Depends on the game. I actually like online multiplayer stuff that's 'forever', especial when it's free   Beats paying $80-$100 for a new shooter every year that is very similar to the year before (Call of Duty).

For single or story mode stuff, I typically like getting a complete file. I don't mind DLC that adds some side content or characters.

I don't really play any games like WoW.  

[JamesRobot | 5,825]

Fortnite sucks.  My kid likes it though.

[AstralSoul | 502]

I generally prefer having games that end but I also like having a few endless games to play when I'm bored or don't feel like getting invested in a story. It's a good balance. These days I actually lean more towards games I can play in quick 30 min sessions like Mario Kart or Smash Bros just because I can't get invested in a big story game in that amount of time. Very rarely do I get more than an hour to play at any given time these days.

[Kguillemette | 1,547]

I wouldn't say I hate them, but I definetly prefer a completed story. I never knew endless soap operas came in video game form these days...

[wongojack | 221]

On 7/2/2023 at 2:38 PM, FireHazard51 said:

MMO's may be considered by some as OG' of forever games.   But current games that fit this naming convention would be like Destiny 2, PUBG, Fortnite, etc.  So not always "story" but content that is constantly released.  MMO's I would say are sub-category as they do make new content all the time to keep you playing.

I needed these examples to connect to these online multi-player FPS games.  I am very aware of all of those examples, but Forever Game doesn't quite tell me enough.  I would lable these as FPS "chat with your friends" games. but I've never played any of them.  I don't have friends who play them.

I'll probably go back and play several games I love until I die and never master them.  That was the original format back when you plunked a quarter into a machine.  Galaga is a forever game (for me anyway).

[FireHazard51 | 2,052]

32 minutes ago, wongojack said:

I needed these examples to connect to these online multi-player FPS games.  I am very aware of all of those examples, but Forever Game doesn't quite tell me enough.  I would lable these as FPS "chat with your friends" games. but I've never played any of them.  I don't have friends who play them.

I'll probably go back and play several games I love until I die and never master them.  That was the original format back when you plunked a quarter into a machine.  Galaga is a forever game (for me anyway).

Yeah, I've heard the term a few times.  I think it's an "industry term" that is used for games.  Last one that failed was the MultiVersus.  Basically ever major game publisher is looking to make one game that keeps getting people to pay money for content that is stupid cheap to make while raking in a ton of cash because of the "huge player bases".  They call them forever games because they want you not just play them forever but constantly pay for new content forever.  And that is the key thing, you have to pay multiple times through the "life" of the game.  Any game with a one time/limited time cost wouldn't fit the industry term of a forever game.

I'd say Destiny 2 is the "best" example of a forever game for a player's perspective.  They actually give you new story expansion like MMO's do unlike the shooters that just give you a new skin and a couple of new maps.  But yeah, a key component to these forever games is they all have multiplayer as the key playing style.  And unlike COD & Battlefield, they don't release a whole new game ever year/couple of years.

[SNESNESCUBE64 | 552]

The thing about these is that many are just a job disguised as a video game. Games like Destiny 2, just to name one, are constantly adding in content but the game overall feels like one big grindfest. In order to get the new weapons and whatnot, you gotta grind through boring missions for a chance to get it. These types of games also like doing limited of time types of content to invoke a fear of missing out kind of feeling in order to get you to play the game or purchase their content.

Overall I think it is fine to extend the life of a game if you are adding engaging content. It is much more expensive now for these AAA game titles to start from scratch. I guess it's an eye of the beholder kinda deal. It's dependent on whether or not it feels like it's being dragged out. Several years is too long in my opinion to complete the story.

Edited July 5, 2023 by SNESNESCUBE64

[FireHazard51 | 2,052]

53 minutes ago, SNESNESCUBE64 said:

The thing about these is that many are just a job disguised as a video game. Games like Destiny 2, just to name one, are constantly adding in content but the game overall feels like one big grindfest. In order to get the new weapons and whatnot, you gotta grind through boring missions for a chance to get it. These types of games also like doing limited of time types of content to invoke a fear of missing out kind of feeling in order to get you to play the game or purchase their content.

Overall I think it is fine to extend the life of a game if you are adding engaging content. It is much more expensive now for these AAA game titles to start from scratch. I guess it's an eye of the beholder kinda deal. It's dependent on whether or not it feels like it's being dragged out. Several years is too long in my opinion to complete the story.

Hit it right on the head.  FOMO and grinding seem to be key aspects of these kinds of games.  Don't get me wrong, sometimes I just like to grind.  But when the grind feels like a chore/work then I bail.  Unless there is a foreseeable end and I don't need to spent a shit ton more time to get there.  This what JRPGs are for me.  If the grind isn't bad then they are for sure playable.  If grinding is a bare to do then I'll skip the game.  KHII I put in a STUPID amount of time playing/grinding because I just liked doing it and I didn't have a massive game backlog to entice me to play another game instead.  Now I have so many games to play I value my game time and have to make very hard choices when taking on a long game to play.  I have to remind myself it's OK to play one game a long time so long as I enjoy it.  It's not a goal to play as many games as possible.  The goal is to have fun and try new things.  But not limiting myself from playing old games I've played before entirely.

[SNESNESCUBE64 | 552]

29 minutes ago, FireHazard51 said:

But when the grind feels like a chore/work then I bail.  Unless there is a foreseeable end and I don't need to spent a shit ton more time to get there.  This what JRPGs are for me.

But that's the thing, they just add that to artificially extend the game. It's inconsiderate of people's time and just makes me think the game isn't very good. I'm at a point now where I'd rather not finish a game if it is wasting my time since I have so little of it to actually play games.

The other thing that I forgot to mention is that with all this grinding you have to do for digital content in online games is that it is just going to have been for nothing when servers go offline. Same with buying all these cosmetics and battle passes.

[spacepup | 2,412]

At least, the beauty of gaming now is that there is so much content, and so many options, that you can pretty much get whatever you are personally interested in.  There are tons of specified-end games coming out every year, both first-party / third party titles - not to mention the giant indie scene.

Yes, we have that segment of "seasons" and "dlc" games, that are popular especially with young people now, but I don't think it is remotely close to exclusively covering new content or necessarily heading that direction.  I suppose time will tell how things change.

There is also the option of playing a game until completion and not going back to it if you don't want to.  If you want to play DLC or extended content, you can do so, but it isn't like it's a requirement.  Sometimes I get DLC for a game, and sometimes I don't - it really just depends on the game and how much I enjoy it.

[PII | 1,897]

Game = fun, temporary diversion from reality.

 

ForeverGame = life/reality replacement/the latest stop along the way to "soul sucking" virtual reality.

[CMR | 522]

I want forever games without the story.  The last two zelda games have kind of been this way for me.  I'll get to the end, but won't go to the last boss and beat it.  I just pick it up whenever I feel like running around in it.

[AirVillain | 491]

Just thinking about it is too much for me.

Give me 20 minutes on Contra and I'm good.

I'll play SMB3 all the way through if I want an extended gaming experience. 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,584]

Is there something ironic about this community's disdain for "forever games", yet many of us spend forever playing the same 20-minute-long NES games over and over and over again 

[Sumez | 2,994]

On 7/13/2023 at 8:10 PM, Reed Rothchild said:

Is there something ironic about this community's disdain for "forever games", yet many of us spend forever playing the same 20-minute-long NES games over and over and over again 

Well, I get that this was a joke, but no. It's not ironic, because those are two extremely different things.  

A simple and super condensed game being so enjoyable that you want to play the same thing over and over again? Amazing, the game has proven its longevity through quality alone, and you get to be the conductor of your own time with the game and devote as much of your life to it as you want.

A game specifically designed to stretch a thin amount of comtent out over as long time as possibly by always dangling a carrot in front of the player at increasing distances and employing FOMO for not "checking in" to get higher numbers in some tedious thing once per day, etc? Pure trash if you ask me.

Tetris is my "forever game", and like I said in my first post, I'm pretty sure that's not what the thread was addressing.

Edited July 17, 2023 by Sumez