Do you buy to play? Or do you buy to collect?

[Blade]

Just a question that popped in my head from observing the shmups community for a while. Lots of discussion, lots of debate on this I think.

This poll is just to determine what the ratio of collectors/gamers is.

[Turrican]

Play them.

In most cases.

[Rob]

I've collected about 10 so far.

[ROBOTRON]

I love to play them...but I am the master of none...so I have lean toward collector.

I have a huge collection of classic/new games/systems.

Shmups are my fav genre hands down.

[neorichieb1971]

You have to start by playing them surely.

One day I sat with RSG in my hand and said to myself, is this here because its sought after or because I want to play it. Eventually I sold it for $200USD because I never played it. I played Game paradise, I played Batsugun, I played Bomberman, but I didn't play RSG.

In those days I had probably 10-55 games per system, now I have about 10-15 games per system based the very poll we have in this thread.

I would liquidize all my gaming assets for a dozen PCB's, to me that would be worth it because I would play the **** out of them.

If the internet didn't exist and you couldn't find like minded people who wanted the same things as you.. Most collections (in the gaming world) would not even exist. (imo).

[boagman]

Play. Owning a game without playing it makes for one unhappy, unfulfilled game. It's like buying a Ferrari and never driving it, but garaging it instead, to protect its "value." That will be one *pissed* Ferrari. No one respects a "fan" of something that won't participate in the actual activity itself.

[BulletMagnet]

I never buy something unless I plan to play it, though I have gotten a bit pickier over condition and that sort of thing as time has gone on, so I do have a little bit of "collector mentality" in me someplace.

[Turrican]

Play. Owning a game without playing it makes for one unhappy, unfulfilled game. It's like buying a Ferrari and never driving it, but garaging it instead, to protect its "value." That will be one *pissed* Ferrari. No one respects a "fan" of something that won't participate in the actual activity itself.

True, and I guess this logic pretty much invalidates the meaning of this poll - 99% will answer play because it's very rare to have a collector which spends money on something just to have it on its shelf, or worse without having any interest into it.

Also the concept of "playing" doesn't relate at all with the concept of "master" - in this sense I think even ROBOTRON would change its vote, 'cause even if you don't master them I'm sure you play them all.

[Frederik]

I remember that someone made following theory:
When you were younger, you had way less money for games (unless you were some spoiled brat), but much time, and therefore you tried to get the maximum out of every game.

Now that most of us are adults and have significantly more money, we can afford new games more frequently, but have less time to play them - so games pile up, with heavily decreased playtime on them. (Unless you are a pretty poor student with still lots of time on your hands like me.)

I tend to buy games after the estimated replayability; for instance, Castlevania PoR has modes I COULD pratice till I grow old (Old Axe Amour Lev1 cap - does anyone has THIS many balls?), Mariokart Time Trials - I like to approach games with a oldschool-gamer mindstate.

So, yeah, I buy games to play them. I also stopped hoarding MAME roms.

[Turrican]

I remember that someone made following theory:
When you were younger, you had way less money for games (unless you were some spoiled brat), but much time, and therefore you tried to get the maximum out of every game.

Now that most of us are adults and have significantly more money, we can afford new games more frequently, but have less time to play them - so games pile up, with heavily decreased playtime on them. (Unless you are a pretty poor student with still lots of time on your hands like me.)

I think it's pretty flawed as a theory. Less money but more time in the youth might also mean more time dedicated into getting really skilled at an hadful of games.

Likewise, more money and less time in the adulthood could be seen as more money for else than gaming and less time to practice properly.

In short, it doesn't matter how little money or little time one does have - there will always be people than try to "play casual" two games and people who specialize into one single game. I don't think it's especially related to money or time.

[it290]

I think many of us are a little spoiled by choice. I know I am. I am no collector, and I always feel a little bit guilty when I buy a new shooter without having maximized my potential in the last, but the thing is, these games often aren't available and affordable indefinitely, so sometimes I stockpile stuff so that I'll have the chance to play it down the road.

[neorichieb1971]

What is the definition of the word "collection" anyway?

To me, collections only have value if you have a "complete set" of something. If I got acquainted with someone and they took me round their house and said "this is my DVD collection", I would think "so how many more are you going to collect?"

[ROBOTRON]

Also the concept of "playing" doesn't relate at all with the concept of "master" - in this sense I think even ROBOTRON would change its vote, 'cause even if you don't master them I'm sure you play them all.

I never said I didn't play games in my collection.

I've beat just about every shmup in my collection, I pull them out often and replay them...but there are those exceptions like Viewpoint that I have never beaten in one sitting. Strange as it may sound, Viewpoint is one of the most valued games in my collection.

I'm probably older than most of you...I have an increased amount of responsibilities that don't allow me to play video games like I used to...that coupled with the fact that I have been quite ill lately only complicates the matter...however if something new comes out (and interest me) I buy it and play it later (Under Defeat was one for example) when I have time.

I collect first...play later. That is the way of things in the Henderson household.

That is the logic behind my vote.

[Turrican]

I never said I didn't play games in my collection.

I, too, never said that, either. Didn't want to delegitimate your vote anyway

I think many of us are a little spoiled by choice. I know I am. I am no collector, and I always feel a little bit guilty when I buy a new shooter without having maximized my potential in the last, but the thing is, these games often aren't available and affordable indefinitely, so sometimes I stockpile stuff so that I'll have the chance to play it down the road.

I too feel like this sometimes. As a countermeasure, try to think that no all those games are really worthy of your dedication, regardless how much praise they get, and how undeniably well made they are.

Of course one could say "hey, if you feel they aren't worth of your time don't buy them!" but that too is a little too radical - it's perfectly fine to think that some of these shmups are worthy my enjoyement for a couple of weeks, but not a practice of years to "master" them. In the end it's the amount of fun they are able to trigger in you that determine how much time you will spend on them, imho.

[Daigoro]

maybe we need to clarify the difference between purchasing games to collect vs. buying them to play.

i voted Play because i would never buy a game and just leave it sitting on the shelf unwrapped and i sell off games that i wont ever play again.

i dont think the poll was meant to consider people collecting games with the intention of playing them. (maybe wrong)

[sven666]

i play alot.. but hell yes i think i collect even more.

i always have as intention to play stuff when i buy it, but some stuff just gets pushed away, no harm, i enjoy just watching my stuff too.

[Super Laydock]

i always have as intention to play stuff when i buy it, but some stuff just gets pushed away, no harm, i enjoy just watching my stuff too.

Same here! I usually end up playing the same games and have the rest on the shelf waiting to get picked out once in a blue moon.

Also have quite some doubles too, which may seem like collecting or hording for making a buck later, but of some games I just NEED to have a back up copy in case something horrible happens to the playing copy. That and I like the look of sealed, pristine copies on the shelf.

But voted "play".

[Ganelon]

Sometimes, you feel as if you must purchase an item before it gets too hard to find or unwieldingly expensive. It's not that you don't want it; you certainly do, but you have other stuff to go through as well that will never get as much time as it deserves (until the day certain games stop getting released).

I play games, although it's undoubtedly true that the collector influence has rubbed off on me as well. When I started getting games, getting spine cards was a nice bonus treat; now, I specifically look for them when purchasing certain games. Of course, that's also a result of trying to get as much value as possible. And some people just want to keep all their stuff in good shape, so I can certainly understand treating games right.

[ROBOTRON]

i play alot.. but hell yes i think i collect even more.

i always have as intention to play stuff when i buy it, but some stuff just gets pushed away, no harm, i enjoy just watching my stuff too.

Yeah...sometimes I get a kick out of buying a game like Radiant Silvergun or Zanac X Zanac when it first comes out at the regular price, and watching it double and triple in value (BTW...I still play RSG and ZXZ they are among my favs).

I can't believe the majority of you out there buy a game, play it till you 1cc it...then get rid of it. There might be a small percentage of that have sold a rare game when you were done with it...but its fun to have a rare game and keep it, right? Doesn't make you a bad person...but a collector.

Collector is a tricky word, but I think I'm using it in the right context. For example...if one of you folks came over to my home and saw all my games/systems I had...and commented: "Thats quite an impressive collection of shmups you have there"...I'm not gonna stop you and say "no, its not a collection because I don't have every single shmup ever made yet, but thanx anyway" NO. I'm going to be gracious and say: "Thank you for the compliment" or something like that.

I play shmups. I collect shmups. I have a collection of shmups.

[Brian]

I buy them to play them, but through the process of accumulation and diminishing time, I have become a collector.

[howmuchkeefe]

Both. Used to be that I prided myself on never leaving a game "unbeaten", only bought games to play them, but then I became able to buy games faster than I could "beat" them.

If you miss out on buying a game when it's fresh, you face the possibility of having to do crap like pay $80 to replace your copy of SOTN, or $100 to pick up a copy of Disgaea (less than a week before Atlus went on a Disgaea reprinting spree, even). So, I've become a bit of a collector.

[Turrican]

I can't believe the majority of you out there buy a game, play it till you 1cc it...then get rid of it. There might be a small percentage of that have sold a rare game when you were done with it...but its fun to have a rare game and keep it, right? Doesn't make you a bad person...but a collector.

I hadn't thought to this. It's true that I almost never sold my games even after completion - so by this logic, I'd have to vote a third "both" option as well.

[Ceph]

You forgot to add the option "both", which I would vote for. And I don't collect games that suck.

[iatneH]

I buy.
Then I open the packaging.
Then I play.
I discover that I suck at the game.
I shelf it, as part of the collection of "I'll get around to these when I don't suck as much".
Then I play something I'm a bit better at, or is feasible for me to make some progress with some practice.

[ROBOTRON]

You forgot to add the option "both", which I would vote for. And I don't collect games that suck.

lol...unfortunately...I do.

Trizeal...have it, but didn't care for it much.
Chaos Field was fun for about 2 minutes...collects dust.
Ikaruga DC, same thing.

heh...

a few others, but I try not to make it a habit to buy losers.

[Ceph]

You forgot to add the option "both", which I would vote for. And I don't collect games that suck.

lol...unfortunately...I do.

Trizeal...have it, but didn't care for it much.
Chaos Field was fun for about 2 minutes...collects dust.
Ikaruga DC, same thing.

heh...

a few others, but I try not to make it a habit to buy losers.

I'm keeping Ikaruga because who knows, maybe one day it will klick with me. And I do like Trizeal, it's old-schoolish in a way. I think you should give it another chance.

[Strider77]

I actually enjoyed chaos field, it gets ragged on so hard but I thought it was way more fun than alot of other low production value games that get talked about (trizeal ect).

Especially out of the current crop LH, THE, and I'm still on the fence on Karous.

[Monk 0 Nuggets]

Both. Used to be that I prided myself on never leaving a game "unbeaten", only bought games to play them, but then I became able to buy games faster than I could "beat" them.

If you miss out on buying a game when it's fresh, you face the possibility of having to do crap like pay $80 to replace your copy of SOTN, or $100 to pick up a copy of Disgaea (less than a week before Atlus went on a Disgaea reprinting spree, even). So, I've become a bit of a collector.

Totally.

[Limbrooke]

I buy games I like or feel I'd like. If I end up not liking the game, goodbye charlie. I have not gotten rid of a game I like so I suppose in the longer run I might be slighted to a collector, but I'd say it's 50/50 as of now.

[boagman]

lol...unfortunately...I do.

Trizeal...have it, but didn't care for it much.
Chaos Field was fun for about 2 minutes...collects dust.
Ikaruga DC, same thing.

heh...

a few others, but I try not to make it a habit to buy losers.

Even to this very hour, as I sit here writing this, I can't believe that Ikaruga didn't click with you. Trizeal and Chaos Field? Well, I can certainly see why those wouldn't, but your love of RSG is so (rightfully so) pronounced, that I can't for the life of me understand why Ikaruga didn't "click" with you. It sure clicked with me.

I think one of the few problems I have with Ikaruga is that, especially with Stage 4, it became more of a credit-pumper than a test of skill for me. When the satellite is shooting white and black in a constant tight reversed rotation, along with enemy ships to boot, I'm meat. I can't keep up, visually. That's what drives me absolutely *nuts* about some of the replays I've seen, though I've never seen someone do a Stage 4 replay.

Other than the visual-overload-impossibility factor, I stinking *love* that game. Treasure sure "gets it." Treasure stinking *cares*. They may not hit the ball out of the park on every single at-bat, but darned if they don't swing for the fences and make it exciting. Their effort shows. Their talent shows. Their individuality shows.

The fact that their games kick my butt with regularity bothers me *not at all*.