I was thinking about the concept of “replay value” when it comes to games. I was thinking about how there’s an idea that a game only retains replay value if each playthrough is slightly different in some way.
Then I was thinking about how we buy books and dvds, and how the narrative of each of these never changes, and yet we still reexperience them, or at least often hold onto them for the potential to do so. And when we do reexperience them, it’s often with a sense of dramatic irony- and suddenly the writer/director’s skill at foreshadowing comes to light.
I don’t believe that a game has to offer a new version of itself in order to be replayable. I replay adventure games in the same way as I would reread book. I may get a lot of booing and hissing from some people for this, but what’s the shame in aiming to make games that offer deeper meaning the second playthrough, instead of trying to recreate the initial play experience?
Ellen Jurik 