Completionist?

[ynnaD]

Are you a completionist? Do you have to finish a game 100%, see everything there is to see? (within the realms of knowing that you've seen technically everything available, glitches and stuff don't count)

I ask because i've noticed among a few of my friends recently who used to be major completionists are now just happy enough finishing a game and playing whatever parts they like, not feeling the need to finish it to the max, which i think is quite nice.

I'd be leaning slightly towards completionist myself, but i will drop a game i'm not happy playing with if i find its a chore to play it or try to hit 100%.

[James]

No.

I complete what I see as the major challenges, the meaningful content of the videogame. Most platformer-esqe collectibles such as the GTA hidden packages are very poor. To 100% a videogame (especially in the case of jRPG ultimate bosses or skulltulas in OOT (sideplot aside) when compared to the very rewarding seashells in LA) is what I consider a waste of time if you're not being rewarded with a finale.

I applaud games that disallow you from getting '100%' in one playthrough or by normal means, such as the original Deus Ex. Most wRPG games are like this, your choices affect gameplay hence it is technically impossible to beat. Beating videogames on hardest difficulty (something I always do anyway if the option is avaliable) suffices too.

Continuing on from the finale reward, the last game I completed in its entirety was NIER, because that had an easy system in place and the final ending was obtainable through the method.

[Psychotic]

My first playthrough of a game tends to be on Easy/Normal, this is so I can get a feel for it and so I can enjoy the storyline. Any subsequent playthroughs, if any, is where I'd perform anything else. Unless the game has shit to do after the main campaign, such as Bethesda's titles, though these tend to have difficulty sliders (though I play Bethesda's games on Master simply because it's pathetically easy otherwise, and still easy anyway).

I'm not a completionist in the sense that I have to have everything completed. I like to do achievements, for example, but I'm not going to bother unless I consider the reward worth it. I did all of Human Revolution's achievements (not listed on my Steam account but whatever -- Steam blows) but this was because I was planning on replaying it anyway, and I wanted to try it in the hardest difficulty (hardest difficulty + Pacifist achievement + no setting off alarms achievement = a fun challenge, in my opinion, if not a bit too easy).

Essentially, if I like the gameplay enough to warrant playing again or continue playing after the initial campaign then yeah, I might shoot for some of the missed side-quests or unlockables like achievements, but if I probably won't play it again then I'm less likely to do so.

[Kaiden]

I'll do the main story, and sub stories till I get bored, i.e. GTA and whatever else I've played recently like that.

[Poor]

I 100% completed GTA:VC and all I got was a lousy T-shirt (and some other stuff).

[Siva]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

Once I've finished the game I usually leave it. 100% never comes with anything worthwhile to me, I don't really play on consoles so I don't care about achievements or trophies (I actually wrote a whole article about this on a gaming website).

However, there are rare exceptions to this rule for me. Bayonetta was one. No, I didn't bother finding all the umbran tears of blood, because to me that is a boring, boring task. I just repeated chapter 7 about 15 times to farm gold, went to a different level and used the telephone box to unlock everything. The secret weapons in Bayonetta make the game very replayable, as well as the new difficulty that is unlocked the second time round.

I have across all systems at least 400 hours clocked up playing SF4 and it's iterations. I have not bothered to finish all the trials, beat the challenges, nor do I ever think I have replayed the Arcade Mode with all the characters. So I didn't bother 100%'ing that either. If the aforementioned things gave me a set of new colours or costumes to play the characters with? You'd better believe I'd have 100%'d it.

too long; didn't read if devs made 100%'ing worthwhile then I would probably do it. I find Speedrunning a more fun alternative to squeeze extra replay value out of the game.

[ynnaD]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

This is something in the past year or two that i've started doing myself, it used to be i would run through a game in the easy or normal mode just to get a feel for it, then i would return to it in the harder modes if i felt like it was worth a shot, but i've started getting like you, starting off on the hard mode, it extends the length of the game and makes it more fun overall.

[Psychotic]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

The exact reason I can not play Skyrim on Normal, besides the fact the difficulty slider doesn't do much and it's pathetic easy even in Master.

[Siva]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

The exact reason I can not play Skyrim on Normal, besides the fact the difficulty slider doesn't do much and it's pathetic easy even in Master.

Ohh don't get me started about the retarded difficulty in Skyrim. For the first 20 levels or so you can quite easily kill a dragon but a random bear can one shot you on Master.

And Oblivion was even more ridiculous. I turned the slider all the way up and the first enemy you see (a rat) killed me about 40 times, then the rest of the game was a cakewalk

[Psychotic]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

The exact reason I can not play Skyrim on Normal, besides the fact the difficulty slider doesn't do much and it's pathetic easy even in Master.

Ohh don't get me started about the retarded difficulty in Skyrim. For the first 20 levels or so you can quite easily kill a dragon but a random bear can one shot you on Master.

And Oblivion was even more ridiculous. I turned the slider all the way up and the first enemy you see (a rat) killed me about 40 times, then the rest of the game was a cakewalk

I use Deadly Dragons, fixes the dragons a bit on Master. But still, if you're level 50+ you'll be still one-shotting all but the most powerful of the custom ones.

[Kaiden]

I played Skyrim on basically the highest difficulty at first, got bored of some generic skeleton group killing me over and over and put it a bit lower. Although now my destruction spells cost nothing and I have the best alteration armour spell (+300 armour or something if no +armour gear on) it's getting pretty easy.

[Aidan]

I always start on hard mode, because it artificially (usually, it's artificial) extends the length of the game I'm play, I also like a challenge, and it's becoming more and more common in videogames for them to create harder difficulties that can only be unlocked by playing hard mode. Every time I've tried to start on normal I always feel like I'm not playing the actual game properly so I have to start again.

The exact reason I can not play Skyrim on Normal, besides the fact the difficulty slider doesn't do much and it's pathetic easy even in Master.

Ohh don't get me started about the retarded difficulty in Skyrim. For the first 20 levels or so you can quite easily kill a dragon but a random bear can one shot you on Master.

And Oblivion was even more ridiculous. I turned the slider all the way up and the first enemy you see (a rat) killed me about 40 times, then the rest of the game was a cakewalk

My god, don't get me started on their either.

I'd still love to know why sabretooth are more powerful than dragons. Magic is the easiest path, because you don't even need an enemy to grind most spells.