Reorganizing the Collection by What I Want to Play

[Lago | 221]

After the epiphany of @Gloves about “not buying infinite games” and my attempt at The Backlog Challenge I thought I would arrange my games by either A) I bought for the purpose of playing B) Really want to play C) have played and will probably play again.

Right now I have limited shelf space and tend to rotate stuff in and out that I don’t really play.  So, I thought get the games out I really enjoy or really want to play and focus on them.

It’s odd but I find this exercise refreshing.  I’ve got a long way to go.  I’ve packed up two medium size tubs so far.  I’m not saying I’ll never play the games I put away.  They are lower on the priority list right now, though.

I just wanted to share and figure you all would appreciate it.

[Tanooki | 4,934]

Smart.  In the last decade but more aggressively just in the last few years I've done the A-B-C pile of things similarly but in a different way, actually two A-B-C styles.

The #1 is the already owned stuff.  A are nostalgia always owned them(80s/90s/GC+GBA 2000s), they'll die with me or my interest, B are the re-acquired category A stuff I may re-do again, and C are the buy to play.  If they don't rank in A-B-C, they're up for sale because they've aged terribly or I'm over it.

And #2 this A-B-C is easier...it's non-ownership facing. A = Buy to play B = Buy to trade/flip if it's that cheap or a friend request, and C = walk away

That has helped wonders both on inside and outside management of things making it far easier to scale back to what matters and to stop most stuff from even coming in in the first place which saves much on money and lost time.

[portabello | 99]

I think you've got a smart idea there... I've come to realize that I will be long dead before finishing every game I want to play. We only live about 4,000 weeks. Dark, yes... but it made me get my priorities straight.

 

 

[T-Pac | 7,550]

On 7/8/2023 at 7:01 PM, portabello said:

I think you've got a smart idea there... I've come to realize that I will be long dead before finishing every game I want to play. We only live about 4,000 weeks. Dark, yes... but it made me get my priorities straight.

So true. I'm looking to purge a significant portion of my collection this summer, and I'm much less hesitant (and happier) to do so when I consider that, if I were to play one game from my collection every 2-3 weeks, it would take me nearly 20 years to get through them all. 

[T-Pac]

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

32 minutes ago, T-Pac said:

it would take me nearly 20 years to get through them all. 

So you DO have enough time.  

[Gloves | 11,783]

1 minute ago, CodysGameRoom said:

So you DO have enough time.  

He is young, yet! 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,533]

Join the backlog challenge.  Prioritize your 2023 or 2024 by only playing the games you truly want to play the most. 

Waste no more time diddling around in some mediocre piece of crap because it was on sale on Steam for $.99. 

Don't play through Super Mario Bros. for the millionth time because the thought of playing something new and learning new play mechanics sounds too hard for your aging, beer-addled brain.

Don't spend all night watching cat videos on YouTube because you're too lazy to hold a controller and concentrate.

Overwhelmed by your stacks of game tapes?  Gripped by analysis paralysis?  Well shut up already and prioritize.  You're never gonna play through that copy of Shining in the Darkness, so stop fooling yourself.  Grab that Metroid Prime instead.

This message brought to you by the Backlog Challenge.  Remember, every game you play but shouldn't play, is another game you'll never play, but should.  Have played.

[fcgamer | 4,725]

39 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said:

Join the backlog challenge.  Prioritize your 2023 or 2024 by only playing the games you truly want to play the most. 

Or maybe just get gud and do both. Tell the wife you're taking a second job, but instead rent a studio and play through three or four games a week. 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,533]

27 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

Or maybe just get gud and do both. Tell the wife you're taking a second job, but instead rent a studio and play through three or four games a week. 

Wife looking at balance sheet:

"Something is not quite adding up here"

Me:

"Forget about that.  Let me tell you about the entire Yakuza franchise."

[Tanooki | 4,934]

Says the guy with the wife that uses a litter box.

 

I've been offloading too and continue to do so, less and less comes in, and it has to be something I'm actually interested in playing or I don't care how fun it looks, and with the way pricing is now slim to none being so cheap I can turn it for a profit on something I do want though trade is an option...but that is a non factor as it would not be added to the collection.

[fcgamer | 4,725]

47 minutes ago, Tanooki said:

Says the guy with the wife that uses a litter box.

 

I've been offloading too and continue to do so, less and less comes in, and it has to be something I'm actually interested in playing or I don't care how fun it looks, and with the way pricing is now slim to none being so cheap I can turn it for a profit on something I do want though trade is an option...but that is a non factor as it would not be added to the collection.

Full set or bust!

[Ferris Bueller | 495]

I guess it looks as if you're reorganizing your games. What is this though? Chronological? No... Not alphabetical... Autobiographical? No fucking way.

[ConfusedCollector | 36]

Agreed, I get overwhelmed by the number of games I have. Prioritizing is the way to go.