• @Lifecoach5000
    link
    English
    82 months ago

    That’s mostly true, except for games made specifically harder so that you’d have to rent them multiple times

    Wait this was a thing game designers actually to into account? I’ve never heard this

    • NaibofTabr
      link
      fedilink
      English
      172 months ago

      Probably some games did after the home rental market got started, but a lot of older games were difficult specifically to extend the experience. Cartridge storage was small, so if it was too easy you’d get through all 10 levels in less than a day and then feel like you hadn’t got very much for your money.

      • @Lifecoach5000
        link
        English
        62 months ago

        Well I guess I am just wondering how more rentals from a video store would benefit the developers financially? I mean I’m sure I could research but surely game studios didn’t get any kind of percentage from the rental places based on how many times a title was rented right?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          92 months ago

          They didn’t want you to rent it multiple times. They wanted you to rent it once, be unable to beat it, but be intrigued enough that you purchased the game from a store. If you could play and beat a game in a single rental, there was little incentive to buy it (so the developers thought, and I imagine had some data to back it up).

        • NaibofTabr
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 months ago

          More rentals = more demand = more copies purchased by rental stores (I can’t rent you the game you want if someone else has it right now).

    • Aniki 🌱🌿
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 months ago

      There was definitely the occasional tom-foolery with publishers and designers here and there but it was also generally never at the expense of game play.