Do you replay your favorite video games? I seem to do it often and make the same choices..=D
I replay my favorites with extreme frequency. But then, most of them are roguelikes, shmups, or things like retro 2600 games and stuff like that. All are designed from the ground up (and actually have enough content) to be replayed numerous times in a single day (though, for many shmups and roguelikes, good luck getting an actual WIN during any of those playthroughs). Those tend to have the potential for hundreds or even thousands of hours of quality fun and challenge.
Other things that are more story based? Very rare. It depends on the nature of the game though. Like, what few JRPGs I've played, I'd never even think of going back to. They're far too easy to hold my attention and I've no bloody clue how I managed to snooze my way towards the ending of any of them to begin with. I have some vaguely fond memories of them... and by "them" I mean "Super Mario RPG" as I have mostly either "meh" or negative memories of any of the others (particularly Final Fantasy 4 and 6, bleh). But that's about it.
The sorts of smaller, concise story-focused games I might do these days? Those are a bit different. They usually arent very challenging... some having none whatsoever... but they're COMPACT and tell their stories in a very different way. Indies, as a rule (no AAA company would even consider making something like these). Two that I played over the last year were Lily's Well, and At Home Alone Final. Each took about 4-6 hours to complete (as in, do absolutely everything, including achievements). But both absolutely stuck with me. At Home Alone in particular, that one really got me, I cant stop thinking about it. What an experience that one was. I'll replay both sooner or later. There was also Angels of Death, come to think of it, that was also brilliant. That ending though, I hope someone got punched for that.
And then there's things like Factorio or Satisfactory. The factory must grow... that's all I even need to say about those. Anyone that's played either knows exactly what I mean, likely.
I see there has been a term in the games industry in recent years: "Replay value." Of course people want their moneys worth from a game. But for some reason, the term "value" seems to upset some game journalists, one of the reasons I stopped reading reviews and instead switched to watching YouTubers and streamers. It highlighted a divide between journalists and gamers. They called all the side quests, unlockables, collectables and easter eggs "pointless busywork" while the people who play the games really enjoyed all the extra content, plenty of value for money. Arrogantly forgetting that they get all their games for free to review, while the rest of us have to pay for them.
To be fair though, game journalists are usually sorta forced to do their reviews in bulk... quantity over quality regardless of what the reviewer wants. That's the bit that most people dont think about whenever they're berating said journalists.
Heck, I've experienced it. I typically write reviews on Steam, because I feel like it, and my reviews usually get a good amount of attention. Particularly that Isaac one (for the big Repentance expansion), what a tornado of ridiculousness THAT caused. Mine was the #1 review on that game's store page for a full month (I still cant believe that) so... it did well, and that's putting it very mildly. That's definitely not the only time that happened, either.
But, I also was able to approach it my way, and write the final result my way. I didnt have to format things to someone else's standards... indeed, when I review something, I talk just as I do here. And I review only when I bloody well feel like it. So that's why it, and my others, do well.
Awhile ago though, I was approached by a group that does more "professional" reviews on a site that is, well, all about reviews and such. These were more traditional reviews, like you see on any typical gaming site. They needed to be written much faster, because there was always new stuff, always a backlog, AND they required WAY more formatting, which drove me up the bloody wall. It was very irritating and the quality of what I was putting out dropped heavily because of it. I didnt stay all that long before leaving.
And that bit there is what full-on gaming journalists go through, BUT, they usually go through worse, as typically there's some big company behind them (whereas the one I was dealing with was a smaller group) and of course, Corporate always knows best... says Corporate. When you've got abusive, uncaring execs breathing down your neck, well... good luck putting out ANYTHING of real quality. But also, it's MUCH harder to actually enjoy any of it.
Not that there arent some genuine duds out there, of course, like the Cuphead guy... but still.
