Xbox 360 Biggest Factor in buying a Game?

Fan blogs (not the mainstream gaming ones) are a huge help in checking out new games. I usually go by those and whatever gameplay footage is available. Never look at a cinematic trailer and go "I'm getting this."
 
Longevity is the biggest factor for me. If I buy a new game for my son or husband to play and I spend $60 or more on it, I want it to last longer than a week. I want to be able to say that i got my money's worth and that they got some enjoyment out of it. I hate it when I buy a game and one of them brings it back to me three days later and says, I beat it...can we buy...? So I want the game to be solid in terms of gameplay and graphics, but also well thought out and full of options so that it lasts awhile.
 
When it comes to full price games, longevity. I will not pay full price for a game that I don't expect to get at least 20-30 hours of quality time out of. Of course, it's not the only factor but it seems to be the one with all the veto power.
 
I always watch a bunch of gameplay footage first, its the only way to really tell what the game is like before dishing out 40-60 bucks on a new game. If I absolutely know I'm gonna love the game, sure, ill preorder it. But there are very few games like that.
 
novasparker said:
Longevity is the biggest factor for me. If I buy a new game for my son or husband to play and I spend $60 or more on it, I want it to last longer than a week. I want to be able to say that i got my money's worth and that they got some enjoyment out of it. I hate it when I buy a game and one of them brings it back to me three days later and says, I beat it...can we buy...? So I want the game to be solid in terms of gameplay and graphics, but also well thought out and full of options so that it lasts awhile.
Click to expand...

I would say that to my mom when I was younger. Boy did she hate it. I often got "Play it again."
 
Remember games would advertise how many hours of gameplay was inside on the box? Then it just got to "hours of gameplay"? Like 20 doesn't seem like a lot compared to what I usually play.
 
Another factor for me would be my the reviews of my friends. I do have a lot of stock in what they have to say, and it's fun to own the same games anyway.
 
I would be more inclined to take the opinion or review of a friend into account on games than a publication or blog really. Especially a friend who is hard to impress when it comes to gaming.
 
I always do a bit of research. Ask friends, read reviews, play demos if I can. Wait until after the day of release to see if there are any glitches.

Then once I am confident it's a game I'll get some good mileage out of...then I buy.
 
There are so many different factors, but the biggest if it is a must buy $60 game? it has to be re-playability or some type of reason for me not to put this game down!
Either solid multiplayer, enticing future DLC, or even collectibles.
 
Oh yeah DLC is a bonus, but I like that you put "enticing future DLC". That's very important because DLC is going to be there period, you need quality DLC.
 
The balance between extra content (DLC) and the fullness of the game. Like if I pay $60 for a new game, I want to feel that I've bought a full game and not one that needs or screams for DLC. That just comes off as an incomplete game.
 
Outrun said:
Oh yeah DLC is a bonus, but I like that you put "enticing future DLC". That's very important because DLC is going to be there period, you need quality DLC.
Click to expand...

Exactly! You and Street Shark said it best. Honestly even if the game is good, but ends abruptly to push DLC in the future that could put my buying decision in jeopardy. Why award the devs for crippling a game for their financial gain?
 
You mean it puts your DLC buying decision in jeopardy or the game decision? Like if you hear about it the game requiring you to get DLC?

I also agree with Outrun and Street Shark, how full the game is a major factor. DLC in games that have heavy single player campaigns should just be a side adventure or further continuing their adventures. It should be "Damn that was short ass game. I need this DLC." You basically bought a $60 that can't stand on its own with the SP campaign when online MP is in a secondary role as opposed to getting a $60 that has legs.
 
Replaybility is a big factor for me. Lets take an example. I paid 15$ for Counter Strike Global Offensive. I have gotten over 500 hours of entertainment off that game. On the other hand, I paid 60$ for Metro Last Light and only got about 14 hours from it.
 
Counter Strike is a game largely meant to be played on online so you're going to rack up hundreds of hours of gameplay if you regularly play online. Metro just had the single player mode and unless its a game that allows for a large amount of modding you're not going to get too much out of a single player campaign.
 
I consider two main factors. The first is how much do I get out of it? Is it a 15+ hour game, or does it have an active multi-player community? If it has neither, than I'm probably not interested, at least if it is a 60 dollar game.

I also consider reviews and what my friends have to say about it. If a game has bad reviews, it's probably a bad game. This isn't a main factor, but it helps if it's in a genre of games I like.
 
I've noticed that 15 hours seems to be the sweet spot on duration for many. That seems a little short to me, but I'm use to playing RPGs, open world games, and strategy/sims.
 
The quality of the gameplay is what I look at. Before i buy a game, I find about all the characters n the game, the levels, etc. That way i can decide if the game is worth playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top