I always have mixed feelings about a game that is good, but cost $15 for less than 3.5 hours of play (and that's counting letting all the credits play in case it triggered something).

There's no real replay value, the game is very linear and while moody and _almost_ emotional, a second play-through will be identical to the first.

But it _was_ a good 3.5 hours, I enjoyed it. I felt like it ended about the time it was getting started, though.

· · Web · 3 · 0 · 3

@CarlCravens Sounds like Monument Valley but I don’t remember that being fifteen bucks


I always think of those as "Interactive Movies." My first was a disk-based game called "Gadget" and it wasn't bad.

We'd drop about $15 for latest Hollywood Inc. product; in this case, you didn't even have to put pants on to enjoy it.

@Benhm3 This really gets into the "value of entertainment" and what we expect for our money in different contexts. If this were a streaming movie I'll see only once, I'd expect to pay $3, not $15. Same movie, different contexts, vastly different price expectations.

So games like this confuse my expectations, and I'm left trying to figure out if I got good value. I could have spent that same money on a 15 hour game that was even more enjoyable, or had more replayability.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!