Gentlemen's Rule: If you want to play it, at least play it until you reach the end

[delete12345]

There was this unspoken rule back in the late 2000's, a rule where the players playing the game must at least complete or finish it in order to discuss about the game and the game's gameplay elements.

But now, with the power of the Internet, no one seemed to care about this anymore, and now games are "played once halfway through, never again" sort of thing.

So, no matter if you're playing the game to enjoy it, or otherwise, would you care to at least finish the game, to appreciate the game? Or you would rather abolish this gentlemen's rule?

Edit: Ok, it's late 90's.

 

[pedro702]

There was this unspoken rule back in the late 2000's, a rule where the players playing the game must at least complete or finish it in order to discuss about the game and the game's gameplay elements.

But now, with the power of the Internet, no one seemed to care about this anymore, and now games are "played once halfway through, never again" sort of thing.

So, no matter if you're playing the game to enjoy it, or otherwise, would you care to at least finish the game, to appreciate the game? Or you would rather abolish this gentlemen's rule?

some games i just dislike them so much i couldnt even finish them or are just too hard.

games i disliked and never finished
lego worlds
binding of isaac(yes i didnt like the gameplay your free to disagree)
puty squad


games that were meh for me but i went to the end for the sake of ending
lumo


so far there isnt an hard game on switch i own that i gave up because of that reason yet.

 

[Clydefrosch]

there never was any such rule and games have been played for 40 minutes, criticized and never looked at again since games have been invented

 

[GameSystem]

I know there is a 3-episode rule before dropping anime, and those people almost never leave reviews, but I haven't heard anything about video games.
I did kind of force a rule on my nephew that he must complete a game prior to asking me to download a new one, but that's because I don't feel like catering to his whims whenever he feels like trying a new game. I also want to try to teach him commitment by forcing him to complete something he asked me to get for him. In my mind, it builds character.

 

[hippy dave]

I'm not going to invest gog knows how many hours finishing a game I don't enjoy playing, that would be dumb.

 

[osaka35]

If a game requires the last half of the game to capture your attention, then it is in need of critiquing.

Though I do agree, at least play it long enough to get a feel for the game. If a fundamental mechanism bothers the crap out of you, give it a little bit and see if it's something you can get used to. Then you can talk about how it's absolute crap, but you get used to it, rather than just saying it's absolute crap.

The game that pops into mind is shadow of the colossus. The camera is just terrible, and half the difficulty of the game is figuring out where the camera is going to automatically swerve. But the game is so enjoyable *despite* the camera, it's almost always recommended whole-heartedly. If the camera made you quit the game before even fighting the first colossus, you're missing out. But if you're half-way through the game and can't get over the camera, then that's a deal breaker for you and no respect lost for stopping.

So, kind of agree, but not really.

 

[Hoozah123]

Sadly, I have broken this rule. There also work, anime, and other games as well. For example, when I come home from work, I wanna play my newest game I bought, but I end up either watching anime, or netflix, or the older video games. I couldn't get myself to play the new game I purchase. I have so many new games, some of them haven't even left the wrapper. That how bad it is.

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

Hm? First I've heard of this apparent "rule." I think message boards would be a barren waste if such a thing was mandated. After all, do you really need to play all 60-100 hours of that big RPG to understand its fundamental gameplay loop and systems? There may be exceptions, but for the vast majority of titles, no. Obviously, you can't talk very well about plot if you haven't seen all of the plot, but it only takes a few hours tops for someone to be able to talk about a game's gameplay. If this rule ever did exist, I'm glad it's dead because you really don't need to play a game to completion to appreciate it.

 

[Deleted User]

And here I thought this would be dating advice.

 

[Taleweaver]

Late 2000's? Shouldn't that be late 90's?

The attitude has certainly changed, but I wouldn't attribute this to the power of the internet (at least not directly), but more in terms of supply and demand. I remember a time when wanting to play a certain game meant saving up for it and/or doing chores to be able to buy it. While that is most likely still true for AAA-games today, it's easy enough to fill up a library with decent games that cost less than a coffee. Take also in account that old games are still playable (through emulators and/or online stores) and there's so much abundance that it's only obvious that people give up on games when they get bored.

there never was any such rule and games have been played for 40 minutes, criticized and never looked at again since games have been invented

...you just made that up, right?

Truth is: in the early days of video games, they were played so long it got to cult-like status. Spacewar, the first known video game, was known for people queuing up in all-night tournaments.

 

[SnAQ]

Well, I'm sure as hell ain't gonna continue playing a game i don't like.

Screw that "rule"

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S9 via Tapatalk

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

If such an unspoken rule did exist (which it didn't), it wouldn't be "late 2000s", it'd be "late 80s". And the only reason the "rule" might be true is because gaming in the 80s-90s was still extremely young in practice and (as Talewaver said) more down to supply and demand rather than some "gentlemanly rule". You didn't have a choice of millions of different titles, you had a choice of the 20 or 30 sitting in your local mega mart at any one time, and the ones you picked were the ones you were stuck playing with until something new happened to pop in the store you might like the look of...which might've taken weeks, if not months, back in the day. So you had a fair while to play XYZ games, even if you hated them, to the point where it ended.

Nowadays it's much different. We have mass market appeal, with thousands and thousands of games from different genres to pick from rather than the paltry few sitting on some shelf in a store. Interests have shifted from "whatever is on the shelf and looks neat" to "XYZ Genre that I prefer", and if we don't like a game we don't have to sit and wait for a restock at the local Toys R Us with nothing better to do, we can just fuck off to some other game we might enjoy.

If a game doesn't hook you after the first hour and you have to force yourself to play it, then it's probably not worth playing through at all. Why should I force myself to play a 50 hour RPG I don't like? Seems less like enjoying a hobby and more like torturing yourself for some BS "unspoken gentlemen's rule" that never existed in the first place.

 

[pedro702]

If such an unspoken rule did exist (which it didn't), it wouldn't be "late 2000s", it'd be "late 80s". And the only reason the "rule" might be true is because gaming in the 80s-90s was still extremely young in practice and (as Talewaver said) more down to supply and demand rather than some "gentlemanly rule". You didn't have a choice of millions of different titles, you had a choice of the 20 or 30 sitting in your local mega mart at any one time, and the ones you picked were the ones you were stuck playing with until something new happened to pop in the store you might like the look of...which might've taken weeks, if not months, back in the day. So you had a fair while to play XYZ games, even if you hated them, to the point where it ended.

Nowadays it's much different. We have mass market appeal, with thousands and thousands of games from different genres to pick from rather than the paltry few sitting on some shelf in a store. Interests have shifted from "whatever is on the shelf and looks neat" to "XYZ Genre that I prefer", and if we don't like a game we don't have to sit and wait for a restock at the local Toys R Us with nothing better to do, we can just fuck off to some other game we might enjoy.

If a game doesn't hook you after the first hour and you have to force yourself to play it, then it's probably not worth playing through at all. Why should I force myself to play a 50 hour RPG I don't like? Seems less like enjoying a hobby and more like torturing yourself for some BS "unspoken gentlemen's rule" that never existed in the first place.

to be fair on 80s and 90s some games were extremely hard like ghost goblins, ninja gaiden and so on, so beating them would take you hours and hours of replays and frustration lol.

 

[Taleweaver]

Come to think of it: I haven't exactly answered it: I think the gentlemen's agreement is a thing of the past. I also think it was mostly something for professional reviewers. As individual gamer, it wasn't something you really bragged about to begin with (assuming you played games with an ending to begin with...games like tetris or sim city were always there). And like there were games with a tacked on multiplayer, there were (and still are) also games with had only a single player campaign just to check off some boxes. Heck...I've played UT2004 for years before I bothered to finish the singleplayer campaign (the final boss was just incredibly BORING).

to be fair on 80s and 90s some games were extremely hard like ghost goblins, ninja gaiden and so on, so beating them would take you hours and hours of replays and frustration lol.

Yes...that as well. The first commercial successes were in arcades, so a majority of games weren't as much aimed at entertaining you as giving you a challenge (or more cynical: to suck you out of your coins). When home consoles came around, it took a while before the industry adapted to reflect that change. Also due to artificial intelligence being aimed at the former (rubberbanding, for example: some race games were literally unwinnable because the opponents just went faster if you drove faster).