it is very subjective – the good thing is: lots of subjets do have lots of desires in common.
What keeps me in an game? Challenge, growing skills, variety, competition (even with myself,…)
What frustrates me? if i am stucked and can not find be any means a solution. (like within those games where it tells you that you have achieved 98% and you can not – NOT – find the missing 2%)
What trickles me? Easy start (so not long preloading of whatsoever)
How do i measure the value? developer skills. Give me a demo to judge.

In fact: I liked auditorium a lot (would say that also on other sites). Unplayed Multi-Sense- Experience. Wow!
Why did i stopped? If you had “all” levels (almost), then whats the news in playing again.

For my part, I dont judge, I just give my point of view, hope it could help : “paying” is not a question of time, fun, creativity, replayability, multiplayer, or any stuff than can be put in those kind of “categorized words”.
I pay for what I want to be left of humanity, if someday we should fall for whatever reason.

I dont pay for some games I played for thousand hours, or movies I see a hundred time, even if it brings me more fun and pleasure, mostly.
But some games, music, movies, or people, whatever… things that make me feel like… like it “counts” for something, like it’s worth… I dont know, worth the fact I pay for that, to help people being it understand they do something great, that bring humanity forward.

Yeah, I know, it’s kind of stupid, linking cold hard cash with that, but I dont care, I know money can be just a pain reliever in those days, so… if it could help.

Let’s just figure a world like the politics want us to believe in, where a single “downloading pirates of the web” can bring down huge society and organisation. What do you want to survive, if everything must crush down, even you ?
Auditorium, or the last “call of duty” ?
I dont even call it a “question”, it’s purely rethoric

A: I buy a game I know i play for many many hours. for the most part this are online-multiplayer games like battlefield2, diablo2, quake3, demigod etc.

B: a game, which has an amazing amount of creativity and therfore gives me an experience i´ve not seen in any other game so far. here i dont need to play 20+ hours

Certain games have appeal because you can sit down and play them for hours on end or pick up and play. Putting aside adventure games and the like, puzzle games are a good example of this. It is tricky to have something which fulfils this criteria.

Wipeout HD for example, in terms of gameplay is not a long game. However, the challenge to unlock trophies, online mode and perfecting your skills is not taken into account. You can have a quick session or spend time in Campaign or Racebox.

The DS, for example, is good for portable gaming but I’d rather sit down and enjoy playing games. Metroid Fusion and Golden Sun are two amazing GBA games which I enjoyed playing like I would a console title. I find that games, short or long, are best enjoyed if you are in an environment you can relax in rather than being on the train or whatever. The surrounding atmosphere can have an impact on your enjoyment of a game.

In general, games need to be engaging and this includes sequels. A sequel doesn’t mean you are limited in your creativity. Flower on the PSN is a short game, gameplay wise, and it’s value for money is questionable. This is not important because it is so creative and is something unique and it is something you can come back to. A short but amazing game is always preferred to 40+ of mediocre gameplay.

I think demos are helping because they allow people to try something new and they may not rely solely on a review. Good games will be talked about and even if it may not be a mainstream hit, much like movies, it will still be remembered and always have a loyal fanbase.

It’s like having a book, 300 pages plus, but you get bored or you muddle through it. It was ‘alright’ and you managed to get some enjoyment out of it. On the other hand, you can have a short story which takes you to another world and is one of the best things you will have read. You don’t read a book just for the number of pages it has or because it will take twice as long to read than another book, that would be silly

“For example, in boardgames (where you often are waiting for other people to take their turns) you can only count the times you were playing.”

I disagree. There is nothing to say that a board game can’t be fun during other peoples turns. Risk, for example, is (at least for me), still ‘fun’ during other peoples turns. There is talking, laughing, horror at the number of reinforcements other people are getting.

To quote Will: “Multiplayer games [can] really help a person enjoy and participate”

To only count the time you are playing is not neccessarily representative of the amount of fun you’ve had.

Having said that, the idea of comparing it to the amount of fun you’ve had, as opposed to time spent playing is a good idea.

Personally, I like to have played a game before I buy it. Mainly because this is normally at a friends, and therefore means I will be able to play multiplayer with them.

Is it worth it? Some form of satisfaction at the end of it is usually a good sign that its been worth the money.

As a developer, these are the kinds of games that are inspiring to me. But also, I enjoy them because they are challenging and thought-provoking. So many games start out with a 3D world that tries to mimic reality. If I wanted reality, I wouldn’t be playing a game. Games, like mathematics or painting, can be the medium where we ask questions like, “what if reality were different?”

That said, I did enjoy Rock Band for the social aspect of it. That’s the kind of thing that is universal — non-gamers will pick that up without a 2nd thought. Wii Sports and Wii Fit have entire families playing together. Anything that can bring people together like that is something special.

For example, in boardgames (where you often are waiting for other people to take their turns) you can only count the times you were playing. In those moments, how many of them were you entertained? Say four players play a game for two hours, you were personally probably only playing for 30 minutes. Were you having fun for ALL 30 of those minutes? Say you were only having fun for half that time, That works out to 15 minutes of entertainment for 2 hours of play. So, for a $50 game you need to end up playing it at least 40 hours (in your lifetime) to get a net zero value of cost to fun. When considering whether to buy that game, you now have to think “will I get together with my friends and play this game that much?”