The Joy of Not Finishing Games to 100%

When it comes to video games there is a never-ending discussion about when you’ve actually finished a game. Is it when you’ve beaten the main story? When you’ve explored every nook and cranny? When the game clearly states “100%” on the screen? Or is it, which was first introduced last console generation, when you’ve unlocked all achievements?

Personally, this does not matter in the slightest to me. If I dislike a game I simply don’t play more than necessary, which typically means beating the main story. If I like it? Then I’ll dance a little victory dance before completing everything possible. As long as it’s fun, that is.

Or… rather, this is actually what I wish I did.

You see, I suffer from a “Gotta complete ‘em all!” disorder when we talk about games. “OF COURSE you should do everything!” is what I often wind up thinking, even if it’s not all that fun. Usually this ends up working somewhat well, since there is some sort of satisfaction from finishing games to 100%. To be able to see everything the game developers have spent their time on creating is enjoyable in itself. It is not always – luckily – I bother with this, but more often than not I commit myself to this tedious tak.

Until recently.

It is hard to put my finger on why this change in behavior has occurred, but all of a sudden my interest in finishing games to 100% is all but gone unless the game is absolutely fantastic. Most likely the reason is a lack of time. Plus, I have now learned to value what is, and what is not, worth putting my time on.

Why would I waste countless of hours on some meager virtual numbers that don’t give me anything in return, when I instead could start up a completely new game and experience something fresh?

This realization has freed me from the chains of completion.

Today I appreciate games in an entirely new way. Gone is the obsession with exploring a game’s all corners for secrets.

The game “Snapshot (PC)” became a million times better thanks to this. No longer did I care about collecting all of the superfluous stars and bonus statues scattered throughout the stages. Not to mention the godforsaken time trial which requires such precision and speed – in a game about the complete opposite – that only madmen would attempt at it.

The same could be applied to many other games. I found “inMomentum (PC)” dreadful and as such didn’t even beat all the stages. We also have “Psychonauts (PC)”, in which I wanted to experience the story rather than collecting various items. This list could be made long!

Naturally, there are games where the strive towards 100% actually enhances the journey. Such an example would be “Dishonored (PC)”. Trying to collect all of the upgrades was so much fun due to me loving stealth. It forces you to be more alert of your surroundings as you traverse more places than you normally would've had to.

Another example would be “Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)”, wherein a higher completion rate equals more wonderful platforming levels.

Still, I often wonder why game developers take their time to artificially extend the game length with these exceedingly dull ideas. Instead of improving the core experience they tend to be nothing more than padding and in worst cases game-breaking. Is two or three hours more content worth it if detracts from an otherwise lovely game?

Not finishing games to 100% feels great.

Try it you too.

Perhaps gaming will become a little more fun.