The Value of Your Saved Game

N'Gai and the LevelUp blog take on an interesting thought experiment: which is more valuable, the $60 game you bought at the store, or the save-game file sitting on your console's hard drive? The article explores the various ways save-games can be backed up, and calculates how much the average saved game is worth based on your age and income. "Our back of the envelope calculations clearly demonstrate that in all but one of the categories, the save file is more valuable than the game itself, and ought to be backed up regularly in recognition of that value. And that's without even attempting to figure out the worth of any intangibles: the frustration of having to replay familiar levels and challenges just to get back to the halfway mark; the attachment that you may have built up to the character; any customization and personalization you did the first time through; the loss of unlocks, user-generated content and other valuable elements." I have a massive save-game file for Oblivion that I would be very distraught to lose. Any saved-games you've been carting around or protecting over the months/years?

Comments

Used to back up savegames

[El_Muerte_TDS]

But I no longer see the point. I usually complete the game. When I don't complete a game it's probably because the game annoyed the hell out of me. And what use is a savegame of a game I already completed. Next time I play the game I would probably start a new game.
For games that don't really end (like sim city or elder scroll games), why would I continue with the same instance, there was a reason I stopped playing that instance.

Re:Used to back up savegames

[Anonymous Coward]

If we follow the reasoning of the article, the half-empty bucket of stale popcorn that I'll take home from the movie theatre tonight will be worth $50, simply because I've been eating out of it for 90 minutes.

Re:Used to back up savegames

[tepples]

For games that don't really end (like sim city or elder scroll games), why would I continue with the same instance, there was a reason I stopped playing that instance. Even if it's that you got more responsibilities in your life? A new job was the big reason that I quit Animal Crossing, though I still have the town of Chadonn on a GameCube memory card and the town of Picken on the DS game card. Not all simulators are intended to run for a few real-world days like SimCity; in particular, an AC town is supposed to last for at least a year. But then the GameCube version of AC used an uncommon feature of the GameCube OS that allows the file to be moved but not copied.

My Content Vendor Software

[EXTomar]

Like other software, the data I create is more valuable (to me) than the software I bought from the store. During the days I played Disgaea religiously, at the point where I had more than 20 hours of play, lots of bills/areas passed, many characters at least transmigrated once, the amount of time and energy put into that game alone was far more valuable than the disk itself. Far more valuable. The disk could be stolen (or exploded) by Prinnies at that point and I could go out and find a new disk. If the memory card the save game was stolen (or exploded), there is not much I could do because the only way to "replace" it would be to play the game from the start.

You see this all over technology though. The 10 million piece model is more valuable than the CAD tool program that created it. The 500 million row database with years of collected data is more valuable than the software used to serve it up. This is why backups are so important to any IT infrastructure. You want to capture and safe guard the created content, not necessarily the software that runs it.

Why place a price on it?

[TheGreatHegemon]

Did we forget games are for fun, not for work? You can equate the "value" of your time as if it was work to playing games. If you lose a saved game, then the game should still be fun if you play it again. If not, you stop playing. Not like you're being forced to.

Re:Depends on where you are in the game.

[LithiumX]

"Even Oblivion never 'ends' because you can continue doing minor quests after you beat the game."

I enjoyed Oblivion. I didn't think I would, but I derived a few weeks of significant enjoyment from that game. It was the first and only full RPG I have actually considered worthy since the Ultima series. The dialogue scripting came out far better than the usual anime soap opera styles that have taken over RPG's (Lucien in particularly had some memorable lines). It was a fairly flexible system, and a truly open game world that managed to wrangle you into the story.

But... the continued gameplay after the "end" ended up backfiring, at least on me. I love side-quests, and I love having enough warning before committing to the end-game to be able to finish my exploring. However... there is something to be said for a definitive end to a game. It's more satisfying - you feel you have now "completed" the game, rather than having simply seen the main plot through to the end. In the case of Oblivion, I tell people I finished it, but I never really felt that the game was completed - I just got tired of it after a while - which simply isn't fair for a game of that caliber.

Imagine how you would perceive the end of 1984 if the book had continued after Winston's story was done? If it had gone on for another 50 pages, rambling on with what's happening to others in the story, or the continued strengthening of the Party? It went into quite a bit more, over the course of the story, than Winston's own situation, but it started with him, and it had a clear and definitive end with the moment of his total defeat - which gave a satisfying ending.

To underscore my point - I can remember the end of most of the games I have played - especially my favorites. Oblivion was definitely a favorite of mine, but I honestly cannot remember how it ended. I remember how the Brotherhood missions ended, as well as the Thieves missions, but the actual end of the main game eludes me completely. I can remember the final events of Thief, Generals, Warcraft 1/2/3, Starcraft, etc... but I don't remember how the main story of Oblivion ended - and I think that is in part due to the fact that the game did not end with the story.

The only game that's worse is Pac Man. I have played that game, in total, for hundreds of hours, but I never managed to reach the end. I've talked to others, and no one has reached the end of Pac Man. What's the point in making a game so difficult that no one can beat it? It drives me nuts, keeps me up at night, and has kept me in a state of frustration for the past 27 years. *sob*

Re: There is always an End.

[trdrstv]

The only game that's worse is Pac Man. I have played that game, in total, for hundreds of hours, but I never managed to reach the end. I've talked to others, and no one has reached the end of Pac Man. What's the point in making a game so difficult that no one can beat it?

You did reach the end. You died. Many games simply get progressively harder until you simply can't continue and die. In that regard, it's a lot like life.

Re:Depends on where you are in the game.

[Joe Mucchiello]

Did you see the Lord of the Rings movies? The finale of the trilogy did exactly that. After Frodo was done, they spent a good 15-20 minutes on everybody going home, celebrating, saying goodbye. I was expecting the credits to roll, but it just went on and on.

How is that worse than the book which went on for (100+ pages) hundreds of years after Frodo's departure to tell you various mini-tales of the various kings who follow Aragon?

Re: There is always an End.

[jollyreaper]

You did reach the end. You died. Many games simply get progressively harder until you simply can't continue and die. In that regard, it's a lot like life. Fuck. That. Shit. Gimme the cheat codes.