What makes a game replayable?

Now define "replay value" because I'm going to assume you're saying why I always come back to a game, and why I always come back to The Binding Of Isaac is because there's always something to collect or unlock, even how BULL:red: IT MIGHT BE. But since you're probably talking about why you play after you beat the game I won't go on.

For me, it's different classes or characters. The reason I still want to play Skyrim after so many hours is because all I've ever played was a Thief, and I never really got a Mage run going.


Another reason I might wanna play a game after I beat it is because it's hard as :red: and I'll probably never do that again, so why not try?

I keep playing Terraria because it still gets updates.

I keep playing Hotline Miami to practice for HLM2 and because there's always new methods to find out how to beat a level, or how fast or how good of a score you can get on it.

Now I reason I don't play Saints Row IV after I completed it is because the sidequests suck :red:.

I play BattleBlock Theater every now and again because it has fun multiplayer.
 
Replay value is, simply, inarguably, how much a game makes you want to play it again after you finished it.

No, this isn't code for "post game content."

No, it's not code for "Multiplayer."

No, it's not code for "random generation."

It's simply the feeling of "Huh, that was a good ride. I should play it again!" I feel this way about a lot of games I play, like most 2D metroid games, a few Zelda games, and then several others.
 
When the game doesnt allow forced progression.
Starbound removed the need of having a random armor thats hard to get to get an armor thats easy to get.
They did a favor.
Terraria has gated progression, cuz WoF, mech bosses, and plantera.
I understand gated progression, some people compain about the need of being op from the start, when theres no fun from that.
 
For the most part, a game simply being fun can make it replayable. Some other factors that can increase the replayablilty are not limited to
  • New Game+
  • Difficulty Levels
  • Metroidvania- style exploration and progression
  • Multiple Endings
  • Random level/world generation similar to Minecraft and Terraria
  • Getting 100% completion
  • Doing self-imposed challenges like only using mage/melee
These features are what I think of generally when I think of what makes game replayable.
 
Really good question, and really appreciated as I want to make a mobile game one day. :)

What makes me replay a game typically involves the following things:

- Different styles of play (different characters, stats, fight style, strategy...)

- Different choices that ACTUALLY CHANGE THE GAME (Indigo Prophecy, I'm looking at you. Alternate story lines, pfft.)

- An interesting universe (Elder scrolls III: Morrowind did this best) with a lot to learn in it

- Interesting dungeons and loot (See Dragon Age II for failures at both), the sense that there's always the chance to get something worth fighting/exploring for

- Deep game mechanics and skills for people willing to put the time in (Dragon Age I, Diablo III, XCom, Romance of the Three Kingdoms...)


No game has ALL these qualities, but a mix of at least two of the above keeps me playing.
 
As Milky said, if the game's really :red:ing good, regardless of its genre, then you'll go back for more. Having said that, there are lots of games I've loved but never played more than once, so I think it goes beyond just being a great game. Take No One Lives Forever for example, a game I loved, it was very linear but riddled with genuinely hilarious jokes. Jokes aren't so funny the second time around though..

Historically for me, the games I've got the most longevity from are the sandboxes - and that is what I love in gaming - being creative. Conversely, games that are very restrictive and linear and have no room for any sort of differentiation bore me :red:less.

The other thing that has kept me in a game is PvP, whether it be a first person shooter (I only really play CS) or medieval combat (War of the Roses, Dark Souls, AOE, etc.). There's nothing more random than a human being.

Having said that, I find myself going back to Dark Souls frequently, which is not a creative (sandbox) game at all, nor is the multiplayer a big draw for me. And that's because it fulfills the first point: I love everything about; the difficulty, the exploration, the storytelling, the theme, the medieval armour sets - it's just an all round excellent experience. And unlike No One Lives Forever (gg, gg) it replaces slapstick humour with an almost impenetrable depth of mystery that you can swim in for aeons.

In conclusion, I don't think think you'll find a short answer to your question as gamers have different personalities. Some gamers will play Sonic Hedgehog ad infinitum, for others, like me, that would be hell. Others will find my creative games an absolute bore.

Is it important for a game to have longevity? What's wrong with a quick blast?
 
It's based on the addictiveness to you. There's a few ways to categorize what may and may not be replay value to specific people based on certain situations, but they're mainly just guidelines.

1) Does the game fall under a player's typical genre?
For some people, there are certain types of games they play more than anything else. It's not that the games themselves are overflowing with content, it's simply what appeals to them. A person might play game in a genre that person loves over and over again simply for the love of the playstyle. Some like RPGs, some like FPSs, it's just a personal preference.

2) Is the game memorable?
Many things add to whether or not a game has "made its mark" on people. Be it superb gameplay, amazing graphics, or perhaps the game is just so bad it's become famous. Some games even set milestones, being listed as "A breakthrough in the gaming industry" or "A game ahead of its time." When games become memorable like that, it sticks in peoples minds. Then later on, they think about that game again and want to play it.

3) Similar to above, is the game nostalgic?
Regardless of whether or not a game is famous, many you've played and loved when you were younger has replay value because it's a part of your history. Gameplay, graphics, milestone setters, it doesn't matter. The game may be the worst game from the year it was made but you still get that desire to play it for nostalgia sake.

4) Is the game built on repetitiveness?
There are games where in the grand scheme of things, you're basically doing the same thing over and over again. In essence, it's built to get you hooked on that one style of play and use it constantly. Most notable games like this are fighting games and hack'n'slashes, but a lot of games can fall into the category (to a certain extent). They're not necessarily replayable because they're amazing, but rather because replay is a part of the game regardless.

5) Does the game update?
With the increased popularity of online games and DLC, a game that would normally be a one-and-done game grows to get more and more content, causing people to come back to it again and again. While the vanilla of the game might not be the best, the continued introduction of content brings people back for more.

There's other factors that can be involved in determining how replayable a game really is, but a lot of the reasons can be identified by the above questions. Do note that a lot of it is placed on personal preference, so a game one considers replayable might not be considered replayable by another. In essence, play what you love and love it 'cause you can.
 
1. Interesting and unique artstyle (Hotline Miami, Loadout, Nuclear Throne come to mind)
2. Challenging and fair (Hotline Miami comes to mind)
3. Unique story and characters (Hotline Miami, again)
4. Unique weaponry and items to keep the game fresh (Nuclear Throne)
5. Having "Good" RNG (I.E Good worldgen/random level generation, games like Minecraft and Nuclear Throne come to mind)
6. Added achievements to keep yourself going. (Hotline Miami has these. Tons of hard achievements.)

Stuff like this. This is why I enjoy Nuclear Throne, which, while heavily reliant on RNG (YES IT HAS RNG AND I LIKE IT SOUND THE :red:ING ALARMS) does GUARANTEE you can get through it. Mostly.
 
for me it is randomly generated worlds and endgame content (such as pumpkin moon, julius from kh dream drop distance, etc)
or it just has to be a sandbox game.
 
Infinty Blade (the whole trilogy) has amazing replay value and amazing graphics.
Once you complete the game, the game becomes harder and harder. These layers of difficulty are called "Bloodlines" which make the levels of Titans and Deathless a bigger challenge. As the difficulty increases, so do the rewards. Even better, you could do "Deathless Mode" which, if you lose, you lose all your equipped items. But if you complete the whole story in Deathless, you get many rewards, and increase how many times you can upgrade an item. To me this is what makes its replay value so extravagant. This is how replay value works, the game gets challenging as you keep replaying it.
 
I belive its simplay having the matter of being almost completly different everytime. I guess the stone and grass could keep the same textures or get a colorchange, but what about randomly generated ore textures and names?
 
the only games that I play again over and over are (obivously not considering cs 1.6):
Diablo 2
Terraria
TES: morrowind (played completed 2 times only)

terraria and diablo 2 have something in common, after you get to the end (beat in D2), you can still do things, like improving something, or doing something else, start a new character whatever...

IMO replayability is subjective and depends on the player experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom