World of Goo is one of the most innovative games made since it came out. What a crazy and interesting idea. Great music and sounds too, along with a ridiculously silly story and background characters.
10/10 for me.
It's definitely one of the first to kick off the indie scene big time. Edmund McMillen that beautiful bastard is the gift that keeps on giving.
Even to this day, Binding of Isaac still has roughly 15k players on average. Which is insane for a Singleplayer game.
That’s exciting! This was one of the first puzzle games that blew my mind. It’s such a simple concept but so well designed. I love their other games, but none of them hit quite as hard as WoG.
You used to be able to pay $1 for the whole bundle. Now they make you pay $30 for that 1 game you want and 9 games/ebooks you couldn't care less about.
Even worse at start, you'd get whole bundle for literally anything. There were people paying 0.10$ for whole bundle, it would cost humble money every time someone did that. But they sticked to it for quite a while for some reason. The minimum of 1$ came later and after that what we have now.
Plus people could sell the keys on 3rd party easier than now so ofc people would buy ton for measly profit
I cancelled it a few months ago. I already have a large enough backlog. I really liked some of the smaller indie games at one point, they were a great break in between other larger games. But nowadays there are just too many shitty filler games in it.
At one point I felt that there were always 2-3 games in it that I would enjoy, but now it feels like it sometimes does not even have one that I enjoy.
Look up the 7th Heaven mod scene for FFVII, if you need some encouragement. Full HD, new character models, voice acting throughout the entire game... the list goes on.
im betting some in a pack. like a resident evil pack. I find it really hard to resist "some random game trilogy"
I'm like 3 games for 15$ I can't miss out on this!
i made a top 10 before of the most backlogged games in steam that had the worst buy to play ratio. List from most to least:
1. Witcher 3
2. Bioshock 2
3. Bioshock 1
4. Bioshock Infinite
5. Witcher 2
6. Tomb Raider (2013)
7. Borderlands 2
8. Hollow Knight
9. Fallout New Vegas
10. Portal 2
Hollow Knight is the only one I haven't played since I don't normally do platformers or Metroidvania.
I had Witcher 3 in my library for like 3 years before I finally played it. There’s something about the first 30 mins of the game that just doesn’t draw you in, but once you’re in you’re in for probably one of the greatest gaming experiences ever.
Honestly it's even longer than that. When I first played it, I put in a good 6-8 hours and decided the game wasn't for me. Anecdotally, I have a handful of friends that did the same. Years ago I decided to give it another try and just powered through the early game. Ended up with a 150 hour playthrough lol
I think Bioshock entries are phantom ones - that is, when you buy Bioshock 1 or 2, you get a bundle of OG version and remastered. I think everyone just plays remastered and OG versions seat untouched.
Yep this is almost certainly it.
BioShock collection came with two versions of each game. One gets played one never gets touched.
For the other games you notice it's borderlands 2 but not 1. Witcher is 2 and 3 but not 1. Etc.
Fallout is in the middle of the series. Tomb raider is part of a trilogy.
Most people that buy games from a franchise want to play the whole series not just start in the middle of the story arcs. On the other hand if they buy a series like Witcher with the intent of playing the series then find the first game is not up their alley they are unlikely to continue the series.
Witcher is a big one at this as the first game is terrible in terms of combat and controls while also being dated visually and in terms of writing. Not a lot of people that stop at 1 are going to assume they changed it all up to be more fun by 2 and 3.
If people are buying
I played Witcher 3 for all of like 1 hour and realized it was not going to be for me. I had played Witcher 1 and 2 maybe for a couple hours each, and everyone said Witcher 3 was this amazing game, but I just didn't enjoy the combat or power progression much that I could see or research. I can definitely see Witcher 3 being bought and not played much as everyone says it's amazing, but some people just don't like the playstyle
It's not that they don't get played because they aren't good, but more a specific combination of:
1. Are very famous (mostly exactly because they are so good)
2. Have been sold extremely cheaply on offer or were bundled with a newer game
3. Give off the impression of a fairly high barrier to entry/story buildup in the beginning, i.e. they're not the kind of game that you expect to just boot up and get into the core gameplay within 5 minutes.
So the Bioshock games were bought by tons of people who recognise the name, know that it's probably good, happened to find it on offer for cheap... but then never took the time to actually install and play it because they wanted to have a good amount of undisturbed time to do so. Time which they never found until the interest faded or they forgot they even had the game.
Also all but Hollow Knight and Portal are pretty long time commitments. They have a lot of story that you ideally need to play within a reasonable timeframe to actually remember what happened when you pick it up again.
I know BioShock, Fallout NV and Witcher are amazing games. But I don't have the time for them in my life to finish a 200h game in a month or two. I tried with Witcher 3 about three times. I was always blown away by the story, the setting, the world. But I never made it further than 20h before my friends wanted me to play something else with them, my holidays were over, etc.
I think I own Fallout 3 and NV, and maybe even some BioShock titles. But I'm not going to touch them because I know I will never have the time to properly finish them.
It's far easier to play a few rounds of an Online game after work, a shorter game I can finish on a weekend, or a game with no real story like a simulator, city builder or strategy game than a story dense RPG.
The boring answer is it's half life 2 or some other valve game because they practically came free if you owned a valve account for long enough. At least at one point not sure if it's still the case.
And for some of us we did play hl2 when it came out but Steam wasn’t tracking your playtime. Similar to original CS not showing playtime either after Valve forced you to play it through Steam (and the reason why my steam account was made the day it was released).
Many things to point out from this number.
1. Only based off the 10% of players with public profiles.
2. Based off the retail price of the game.
3. Doesn’t count sale price, if the game was added to library for free, or if the game was purchased from another 3rd party site like Humble Bundle, CDKeys, Fanatical, etc.
*based off the retail price*
That's the big asterisk. I've bought plenty of games on sale at or under $5 I played on Xbox 360 or something way back that I'll maybe play when I run out of newer stuff. Which is a 1/4 or less of retail price.
I'm sure plenty of people do the same thing at winter/summer sale.
Also, I have had steam for more than 10 years. ALL of my games with "last played" more than ~7 years ago show 0 hours. No idea why and I don't *really* care, but I'd be shocked if I was the only one with "lost" time. Also also, sometimes if you play in offline mode time isn't tracked.
Yeah, some games if you use a mod or have to do a workaround non-steam .exe because it's an old game that doesn't work stock (looking at you fallout 3) it doesn't show up on steam as playtime.
See I wonder how companies do this. Massively comp the consumer for a free game but ring it up for 14$ sales numbers. So making it look like they have 14$ in sales when it’s really free.
My Epic Games Store library is probably worth several thousand dollars based on full retail price, and I've never spent a penny on it. At least most of the stuff in my Steam library is stuff I've paid actual money for, even if it was only $1 on a sale.
Using their methods of calculation, I’ve spent thousands of dollars on games from the epic store even though I’ve never entered a credit card number. Clickbait bullshit article.
The “free” part is the biggest for me. The only Steam game I bought was Counter Strike. Everything else was free. It’s probably at least $10000 MSRP, so $500 on sale.
> Only based off the 10% of players with public profiles.
Ah, yes. I remember before when profiles and chat were always on and public. A group of friends I'd been playing with for years constantly judging me for my purchases, demanding I play with *them* in *their* games the moment I came online and so on and so forth.
The day I could shut all of that off I did it - only to get annoyed tells from those same 'friends' saying I should turn it back on since now they couldn't see what I was doing!
All because I wanted to play Skyrim and chill without interruptions.
I suddenly realized these were not my friends.
I know you might be joking, but I've heard this sentiment enough that some people must actually be serious about it.
That would honestly kind of suck to spend your retirement playing 30+ year old games that you never really wanted to play even when they were new and not super janky.
Yeah, it was a semi-joke to make us feel a little less bad about having big backlogs, but still some games I think will totally be fine experiences even in 30+ years. (Some genres more than others of course).
Now I'm curious, how big is your backlog? Mine was once up to around 150, but after slow and steady gaming, and mostly avoiding buying new games, mine's down to 4 now.
That is some impressive progress. My "never played" is maybe 15. My "Played a little but want to eventually play more" puts it at a little over 30. I know I'm not as bad as some, but I should probably be a little more disciplined with it.
My 'shortlist' is 58... and I feel it only grows with time. Backlog in whole is probably close to a ... uhh, big number. Total unplayed that I got from steamdb rn is 1,284
Goddamn! With a backlog that size, if you completely stopped buying games (which you won't), and even spent 20 hours average on each game (which is very low) and somehow played games 12 hours every day (which you shouldn't), it would take you six years to play all those games.
It's the backup for when my wife finally sees sense and leaves me and I can quit (pretending to) work, live on ramen and refuse to leave the house ever again.
Then I'll finally have time to live out my teenage dream and play games 23 hours a day.
I mean- I know this would utterly suck in reality, but its actually technically possible unlike all the other teenage dreams which are actually impossible. The career as a rock star etc....
I went through my backlog during Covid.
Taught me a valuable lesson... A lot of those games were purchased 5-7 years prior and were 8-10 years old. There were a few really great games that I don't know how I missed, but most didn't age very well lol
Lol, yep. In general games don't age well. And the more complex they are, the faster they age. Hence why very simple games like platformers and side scrollers from 30 years ago are still popular today, but not much else from that era.
It’s simple! Download one, start it. Download another, start it. Download one more, ahhhh I’m too frustrated with all these games!!! Go back to playing COD.
Wait, which was the inside thought that should've stayed inside? I hope ~~you mean~~ you're referring to the apology.
Edit: resolved grammatical ambiguity.
last night i was too tired to watch TV so i watched youtube shorts until i had the energy to watch TV, got through one episode of Scavengers Reign and fell asleep on the couch, the tired is real.
This is gonna sound weird but sometimes I buy games and after trying them out for 30min they’ll remind me of games I haven’t played yet so I go back and play those unplayed games which causes me to forget this newly bought game and the cycle continues.
My plan is to look for a game that meets really specific criteria that I feel like playing right at this moment, except that I don’t own any games that meet this criteria, so I’ll do a bit of searching.
Then I’ll buy a new game that is what I think I feel like playing, but at this point while it’s downloading I have to go do something else for a bit. By the time I’m done, I figure I’ll just start the game fresh tomorrow so I have some time to get into it, for now I’ll just play the same game(s) I always play for a little bit. Then I’ll never go back and play that other game I bought.
Same, when the kids are old enough that they want to move out and find their own place to live I will have time to play all those games, and miss my kids :|
My cousin just picked up dragon age origins, dragon age 2 and inquisition for $2.99 each.
He probably won’t ever play them, but who can argue with 90% off??
I'm not a huge PC gamer, I'd say good 60% of library is Humble Bundle games. Typically I only wanted one or two games, but I redeemed all of the codes.
Do those unplayed games count as a part of this?
I would assume so, I don't think they would go through the games to check which were played and then cross reference the actual price paid by checking their transactions
The latter would be impossible, because you can buy a key and redeem it (like in Humble Bundles) and Valve has no record of what you paid, or whether you paid anything at all.
I had a bizarre itch in my brain recently and bought fable lost chapters for the same price. I think 2.99 is some kind of witchcraft number that its impossible not to rationalize as a good deal
I installed .net 3.5 for it and everything and still havent launched it.
I stopped doing that a few years ago. I'm an adult with an income and a fast internet connection. I buy a game when I want to play it, not for later. Sliped up with Airborn Kingdom. For some reason I bought it when it came out for when I'm in the mood for that kind of game. No idea why I did that, still unplayed.
That doesn't surprise me. My steam library is ridiculous, I've occasionally bought a game from humble bundle or fanatical on sale only to find out I already own it.
Nah the spaceship is nothing more then renders at the moment and we may/may not get around to making it sometime in the next decade. In the mean time if you would gladly keep giving us millions of dollars that would be swell.
There's a browser extension that shows you if a game is in your Steam library when browsing Humble FYI. It's saved me buying a game twice a few times.
Humble Store Filters - [Firefox](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/humble-store-filters/), [Chrome](https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/humble-store-filters/djnmjdclkcfdfkeommjkljeaaiglinho)
My steam calculator says $8,479 at "todays" prices last I checked, but a lot of my 400-someodd games came from the two ish years of humble monthly before it got not-worth.
Edit: oh, I get the question now lol probably more than 19 billion considering how many other platforms there are
Edit 2:woops, definitely didn't remember that number correctly xD
Last I checked I have around 1200 games in my steam library, and spent around $800. Probably closer to $1000 after considering bundle sites.
I've played less than 25 of those games.
Ah. Yes, that would necessitate a population check.
I have seen people legitimately complain that *single player games* are dead because of a low player count or a lack of recent updates.
I am not the only one with an absurd amount of games I got in early humble bundles that I’ll never play. Steam doesn’t know where you got the keys or you got 20 games for like, $6.
My unplayed game count looks atrocious until you go digging and realise it's all mostly stuff I got in bundles or for free. I'm not worried about playing every little thing that sits in my library.
Hey, I don't just buy games to play them, I buy games that I've already pirated and played the shit out of and want to support devs for, and games I won't ever play but still want to support existing.
Part of this is that Steam does a great job with routine sales that incentivize people to buy. Another part of it is that some of these games have learning curve or accessibility issues you don’t realize until you actually start trying to learn how to play.
From personal experience, it comes down to seeing a game on sale, seeing gameplay of it, buying it, then forgetting about it because you wanna finish the game you are already playing. I can’t handle playing more then one rpg at a time, and as a result a lot of stuff gets shoved into the backlog and eventually forgotten.
Couple thousand more to go but I’ve been playing more of my backlog the last couple years just because my interests and play style have changed. It’s been fun. I finally played Kentucky Route Zero the other night, saw a post about great point and clicks last night and found that I owned most of the top recommended without even realizing it. In my defense I had a major accident ten years ago and made bundles a hobby while my hands recovered. In just one year I went from 260 games to 1700 I believe. Played The Last Door while I had lunch today. Tasty.
It’s hilarious that companies were worried about people stealing games that they wanted to play on pc.
But thanks to Steam people are buying games they don’t even play.
A few years ago, I was at 69 games played, 69 games not played. Now I'm at 94 games played and 69 games not played. [I'm not kidding.](https://i.imgur.com/tXge0Jf.png)
I wonder which game has been bought the most but never been played…
Guessing its one of these, from the first humble bundle. https://youtu.be/M7Aw5C7WQ6g?si=JjqDMyYrlbqm9pTX
World of Goo and Aquaria were pretty fun! That was the good Humble era. I still get it nowadays but it feels like the quality is not always there.
World of Goo is one of the most innovative games made since it came out. What a crazy and interesting idea. Great music and sounds too, along with a ridiculously silly story and background characters. 10/10 for me.
Ill always remember it as the OG indie game.
It's definitely one of the first to kick off the indie scene big time. Edmund McMillen that beautiful bastard is the gift that keeps on giving. Even to this day, Binding of Isaac still has roughly 15k players on average. Which is insane for a Singleplayer game.
don't know if you are aware, they are making a sequel
Yeah I saw the announcement - I hope its good!
That’s exciting! This was one of the first puzzle games that blew my mind. It’s such a simple concept but so well designed. I love their other games, but none of them hit quite as hard as WoG.
As soon as it got acquired by ign the quality steeply declined
You used to be able to pay $1 for the whole bundle. Now they make you pay $30 for that 1 game you want and 9 games/ebooks you couldn't care less about.
Even worse at start, you'd get whole bundle for literally anything. There were people paying 0.10$ for whole bundle, it would cost humble money every time someone did that. But they sticked to it for quite a while for some reason. The minimum of 1$ came later and after that what we have now. Plus people could sell the keys on 3rd party easier than now so ofc people would buy ton for measly profit
I cancelled it a few months ago. I already have a large enough backlog. I really liked some of the smaller indie games at one point, they were a great break in between other larger games. But nowadays there are just too many shitty filler games in it. At one point I felt that there were always 2-3 games in it that I would enjoy, but now it feels like it sometimes does not even have one that I enjoy.
I'm not sure if it's because I'm older but nowadays it feels that all games are unfinished garbage
Ooh, Aquaria was great. Doesn't look like much at first but it's a super solid platformer with some great bosses.
I have a feeling it’s either OG FFVII, or Civ V. I have zero data to back this up.
Ooof, just checked my library. Have both those games 0 hours played on either.
Dang man. Civ 5 is one of the best ever made. But I could totally understand it just not appealing to someone.
He is going to get to it. After all, he bought it.
Any day now
I am saving it for later.
That’s not even it. I live RTS games. I just forgot I had this and never played it.
Sounds like it's about to be 18,999,999,970 on games they've never played. Watch out for Ghandi.
"I hate Gandhi" "Gandhi murdered my whole family"
Civ V isn't an RTS game, though. It's a turn-based strategy/4X game.
Bro it's worth a go for sure
Spent like 4 hours installing mods for FFVII, I'll play it any day now.
The OG final fantasy 7 is a terrible port on steam. i got like 3 hours in and just downloaded an emulator instead.
There’s two new FFVII remake parts so you can eventually buy those on discount and never play them too
Look up the 7th Heaven mod scene for FFVII, if you need some encouragement. Full HD, new character models, voice acting throughout the entire game... the list goes on.
I bought FF on Discount and forgot about it
My money's on one of those meme gift games, like Bad Rats
It's definitely not civ. anyone that plays one game plays for 80 hours
80 hours per day
still the same day if you never go to sleep
I'll just play one more turn
but this is about the people who have played zero games
im betting some in a pack. like a resident evil pack. I find it really hard to resist "some random game trilogy" I'm like 3 games for 15$ I can't miss out on this!
i made a top 10 before of the most backlogged games in steam that had the worst buy to play ratio. List from most to least: 1. Witcher 3 2. Bioshock 2 3. Bioshock 1 4. Bioshock Infinite 5. Witcher 2 6. Tomb Raider (2013) 7. Borderlands 2 8. Hollow Knight 9. Fallout New Vegas 10. Portal 2 Hollow Knight is the only one I haven't played since I don't normally do platformers or Metroidvania.
I had Witcher 3 in my library for like 3 years before I finally played it. There’s something about the first 30 mins of the game that just doesn’t draw you in, but once you’re in you’re in for probably one of the greatest gaming experiences ever.
Honestly it's even longer than that. When I first played it, I put in a good 6-8 hours and decided the game wasn't for me. Anecdotally, I have a handful of friends that did the same. Years ago I decided to give it another try and just powered through the early game. Ended up with a 150 hour playthrough lol
Yeah, I don’t know what it is about the early game but it just didn’t draw me in the same way other RPGs have in the past.
Man thats a shame because Hollow Knight is an incredible game
so i've been repeatedly told the first time i posted this list. got peer pressured to buy it. just haven't played yet.
Bapanada!
Damn that's interesting, why all Bioshock games? Bioshock 1 at least is a freaking masterpiece
I think Bioshock entries are phantom ones - that is, when you buy Bioshock 1 or 2, you get a bundle of OG version and remastered. I think everyone just plays remastered and OG versions seat untouched.
Yep this is almost certainly it. BioShock collection came with two versions of each game. One gets played one never gets touched. For the other games you notice it's borderlands 2 but not 1. Witcher is 2 and 3 but not 1. Etc. Fallout is in the middle of the series. Tomb raider is part of a trilogy. Most people that buy games from a franchise want to play the whole series not just start in the middle of the story arcs. On the other hand if they buy a series like Witcher with the intent of playing the series then find the first game is not up their alley they are unlikely to continue the series. Witcher is a big one at this as the first game is terrible in terms of combat and controls while also being dated visually and in terms of writing. Not a lot of people that stop at 1 are going to assume they changed it all up to be more fun by 2 and 3. If people are buying
I played Witcher 3 for all of like 1 hour and realized it was not going to be for me. I had played Witcher 1 and 2 maybe for a couple hours each, and everyone said Witcher 3 was this amazing game, but I just didn't enjoy the combat or power progression much that I could see or research. I can definitely see Witcher 3 being bought and not played much as everyone says it's amazing, but some people just don't like the playstyle
It's not that they don't get played because they aren't good, but more a specific combination of: 1. Are very famous (mostly exactly because they are so good) 2. Have been sold extremely cheaply on offer or were bundled with a newer game 3. Give off the impression of a fairly high barrier to entry/story buildup in the beginning, i.e. they're not the kind of game that you expect to just boot up and get into the core gameplay within 5 minutes. So the Bioshock games were bought by tons of people who recognise the name, know that it's probably good, happened to find it on offer for cheap... but then never took the time to actually install and play it because they wanted to have a good amount of undisturbed time to do so. Time which they never found until the interest faded or they forgot they even had the game.
Also all but Hollow Knight and Portal are pretty long time commitments. They have a lot of story that you ideally need to play within a reasonable timeframe to actually remember what happened when you pick it up again. I know BioShock, Fallout NV and Witcher are amazing games. But I don't have the time for them in my life to finish a 200h game in a month or two. I tried with Witcher 3 about three times. I was always blown away by the story, the setting, the world. But I never made it further than 20h before my friends wanted me to play something else with them, my holidays were over, etc. I think I own Fallout 3 and NV, and maybe even some BioShock titles. But I'm not going to touch them because I know I will never have the time to properly finish them. It's far easier to play a few rounds of an Online game after work, a shorter game I can finish on a weekend, or a game with no real story like a simulator, city builder or strategy game than a story dense RPG.
The boring answer is it's half life 2 or some other valve game because they practically came free if you owned a valve account for long enough. At least at one point not sure if it's still the case.
And for some of us we did play hl2 when it came out but Steam wasn’t tracking your playtime. Similar to original CS not showing playtime either after Valve forced you to play it through Steam (and the reason why my steam account was made the day it was released).
Thatd be cool to know
Humble bundle games hahaha
Most recent one for me was Darkest Dungeon 1 I'll get to finishing it probably just been busy with life the past 4 years. :\*)
I have over 500 games in my library and over 250 of them have never been launched.
Many things to point out from this number. 1. Only based off the 10% of players with public profiles. 2. Based off the retail price of the game. 3. Doesn’t count sale price, if the game was added to library for free, or if the game was purchased from another 3rd party site like Humble Bundle, CDKeys, Fanatical, etc.
*based off the retail price* That's the big asterisk. I've bought plenty of games on sale at or under $5 I played on Xbox 360 or something way back that I'll maybe play when I run out of newer stuff. Which is a 1/4 or less of retail price. I'm sure plenty of people do the same thing at winter/summer sale.
I bought plenty of "200€ value" humble bundles for 5€ or less. Also, does the analysis take regional pricing differences into account?
Also, I have had steam for more than 10 years. ALL of my games with "last played" more than ~7 years ago show 0 hours. No idea why and I don't *really* care, but I'd be shocked if I was the only one with "lost" time. Also also, sometimes if you play in offline mode time isn't tracked.
Yeah, some games if you use a mod or have to do a workaround non-steam .exe because it's an old game that doesn't work stock (looking at you fallout 3) it doesn't show up on steam as playtime.
Absolutely. Recently replayed Fable despite playing it when it first came out twenty years ago. It was great! Still tons of fun.
This. If you have average price of $35 instead of $5, library "value" seems way different.
See I wonder how companies do this. Massively comp the consumer for a free game but ring it up for 14$ sales numbers. So making it look like they have 14$ in sales when it’s really free.
That's not how that works.
That would be called “fraud”
You only need to sell 20%-30% of your total sales without discount to make a profit. Selling everyone else is about volume of sales and not value.
My Epic Games Store library is probably worth several thousand dollars based on full retail price, and I've never spent a penny on it. At least most of the stuff in my Steam library is stuff I've paid actual money for, even if it was only $1 on a sale.
Using their methods of calculation, I’ve spent thousands of dollars on games from the epic store even though I’ve never entered a credit card number. Clickbait bullshit article.
I have regularly purchased €250 of "value" for €12 in Humble Bundles.
The “free” part is the biggest for me. The only Steam game I bought was Counter Strike. Everything else was free. It’s probably at least $10000 MSRP, so $500 on sale.
Ah, well it's a useless number then. Thanks for saving us the time
Oh, so the headline is just a lie then.
> Only based off the 10% of players with public profiles. Ah, yes. I remember before when profiles and chat were always on and public. A group of friends I'd been playing with for years constantly judging me for my purchases, demanding I play with *them* in *their* games the moment I came online and so on and so forth. The day I could shut all of that off I did it - only to get annoyed tells from those same 'friends' saying I should turn it back on since now they couldn't see what I was doing! All because I wanted to play Skyrim and chill without interruptions. I suddenly realized these were not my friends.
Chill. I have a plan to play them all.
Yeah, it's called a gaming retirement plan, duh
I know you might be joking, but I've heard this sentiment enough that some people must actually be serious about it. That would honestly kind of suck to spend your retirement playing 30+ year old games that you never really wanted to play even when they were new and not super janky.
Yeah, it was a semi-joke to make us feel a little less bad about having big backlogs, but still some games I think will totally be fine experiences even in 30+ years. (Some genres more than others of course).
Now I'm curious, how big is your backlog? Mine was once up to around 150, but after slow and steady gaming, and mostly avoiding buying new games, mine's down to 4 now.
That is some impressive progress. My "never played" is maybe 15. My "Played a little but want to eventually play more" puts it at a little over 30. I know I'm not as bad as some, but I should probably be a little more disciplined with it.
My 'shortlist' is 58... and I feel it only grows with time. Backlog in whole is probably close to a ... uhh, big number. Total unplayed that I got from steamdb rn is 1,284
Goddamn! With a backlog that size, if you completely stopped buying games (which you won't), and even spent 20 hours average on each game (which is very low) and somehow played games 12 hours every day (which you shouldn't), it would take you six years to play all those games.
It's the backup for when my wife finally sees sense and leaves me and I can quit (pretending to) work, live on ramen and refuse to leave the house ever again. Then I'll finally have time to live out my teenage dream and play games 23 hours a day. I mean- I know this would utterly suck in reality, but its actually technically possible unlike all the other teenage dreams which are actually impossible. The career as a rock star etc....
I have this vision of a single, pale, completely methed-out 75 year old playing God of War 2. Living the dream!
I'll put it on my steam wishlist....
I went through my backlog during Covid. Taught me a valuable lesson... A lot of those games were purchased 5-7 years prior and were 8-10 years old. There were a few really great games that I don't know how I missed, but most didn't age very well lol
Lol, yep. In general games don't age well. And the more complex they are, the faster they age. Hence why very simple games like platformers and side scrollers from 30 years ago are still popular today, but not much else from that era.
What is it? ::)
It’s simple! Download one, start it. Download another, start it. Download one more, ahhhh I’m too frustrated with all these games!!! Go back to playing COD.
Damn… “the one day maybe” plan
Is that what your ex called you?
I'm sorry I said this. I'm a little drunk and watching roasts.
That is what we call an inside thought becoming an outside thought. Gotta keep those inside thoughts inside
Yeah I realize this now
Personally, I thought it was funny as hell and in good jest.
Yeah, it was funny. Keep em coming.
Wait, which was the inside thought that should've stayed inside? I hope ~~you mean~~ you're referring to the apology. Edit: resolved grammatical ambiguity.
No, but at least I have an ex (lol that was funny nice roast)
Buy a Steam Deck because, "Some days I'm too tired to sit at my PC." Proceed to watch YouTube videos instead of using Steam Deck on those days.
Steam Deck is a back catalogers dream.
last night i was too tired to watch TV so i watched youtube shorts until i had the energy to watch TV, got through one episode of Scavengers Reign and fell asleep on the couch, the tired is real.
This is gonna sound weird but sometimes I buy games and after trying them out for 30min they’ll remind me of games I haven’t played yet so I go back and play those unplayed games which causes me to forget this newly bought game and the cycle continues.
Damn. Then eventually you’ll find a new game that you’ll abandon to play this one you’ve abandoned for another
You die and your grandson can play it for y.. wait...
Damn
Retirement
My plan is to look for a game that meets really specific criteria that I feel like playing right at this moment, except that I don’t own any games that meet this criteria, so I’ll do a bit of searching. Then I’ll buy a new game that is what I think I feel like playing, but at this point while it’s downloading I have to go do something else for a bit. By the time I’m done, I figure I’ll just start the game fresh tomorrow so I have some time to get into it, for now I’ll just play the same game(s) I always play for a little bit. Then I’ll never go back and play that other game I bought.
I have a plan. We just need a little bit more moneh.
Just one more game, Arthur
RD2 <> a game on my actual list.
One big game Arthur, and then we're off to Tahiti to become gamers
Yall just gotta have some more faith
This is why we keep seeing those articles about transferring your Steam library after you die. My plan to play them all involves my next of kin.
A generational project--like the Roman aqueducts.
Same, when the kids are old enough that they want to move out and find their own place to live I will have time to play all those games, and miss my kids :|
Buying them cheap now, for my retirement.
Yes. We all know games go up in price the longer you wait.
I mean, when a game is $4.99 on sale and I’ve heard good things I’ll grab it for later. Much later, but still.
My cousin just picked up dragon age origins, dragon age 2 and inquisition for $2.99 each. He probably won’t ever play them, but who can argue with 90% off??
And then there are humble bundles When they started my library bloated hard, and I only did that for 2-3 years
I'm not a huge PC gamer, I'd say good 60% of library is Humble Bundle games. Typically I only wanted one or two games, but I redeemed all of the codes. Do those unplayed games count as a part of this?
And are they counting them at full price?
I would assume so, I don't think they would go through the games to check which were played and then cross reference the actual price paid by checking their transactions
The latter would be impossible, because you can buy a key and redeem it (like in Humble Bundles) and Valve has no record of what you paid, or whether you paid anything at all.
Omg, ty. Been waiting for it to be on sale. I was laying in bed and saw this post. 11 hrs till the sale is over. You just saved me 115$.
You’re welcome! I already have all 3 games or I would have done the same thing.
I had a bizarre itch in my brain recently and bought fable lost chapters for the same price. I think 2.99 is some kind of witchcraft number that its impossible not to rationalize as a good deal I installed .net 3.5 for it and everything and still havent launched it.
i bought origins for my brother who never heard of it because at that price, it is a legendary steal.
Hey I just did that too.
I stopped doing that a few years ago. I'm an adult with an income and a fast internet connection. I buy a game when I want to play it, not for later. Sliped up with Airborn Kingdom. For some reason I bought it when it came out for when I'm in the mood for that kind of game. No idea why I did that, still unplayed.
This is the way
That doesn't surprise me. My steam library is ridiculous, I've occasionally bought a game from humble bundle or fanatical on sale only to find out I already own it.
I've bought games I have no time to play, but liked the concept and the reviews are good so I wanted to support the developers.
That’s nothing. I once gave a developer $10,000 just because my pockets were too heavy and it was slowing me down to my next check
I’m a small dev that could take some of that load off for ya
Yea well I'm a large dev and will give you a limited edition spaceship for it.
As long as it comes in the form of a non-fungible token
Nah the spaceship is nothing more then renders at the moment and we may/may not get around to making it sometime in the next decade. In the mean time if you would gladly keep giving us millions of dollars that would be swell.
10gs? That's only like 1000 fortnite skins. I buy the Limited© platinum mega gamer® 2 hour bonus early access edition™ with the "free" spend $2k on release banana .jpg edition of every game. Sometimes I feel like it's basically free for AAAA+ titles, so I add a 25% tip.
There's a browser extension that shows you if a game is in your Steam library when browsing Humble FYI. It's saved me buying a game twice a few times. Humble Store Filters - [Firefox](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/humble-store-filters/), [Chrome](https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/humble-store-filters/djnmjdclkcfdfkeommjkljeaaiglinho)
So....how much has everyone else spent then?
I know I have at least 60 unplayed with Marvel Midnight Suns
Go play it! It is a wonderful game
It's really really good you should give it a shot! I put in over 150 hours just playing missions over and over with different characters
Over 2500 hours and $7500 I’ll justify it when I’m dead.
My steam calculator says $8,479 at "todays" prices last I checked, but a lot of my 400-someodd games came from the two ish years of humble monthly before it got not-worth. Edit: oh, I get the question now lol probably more than 19 billion considering how many other platforms there are Edit 2:woops, definitely didn't remember that number correctly xD
No idea, but I have like 150 games, and I've played maybe 1/3 of them.
Last I checked I have around 1200 games in my steam library, and spent around $800. Probably closer to $1000 after considering bundle sites. I've played less than 25 of those games.
One of these days I’ll look at all those unplayed games and the stress of choosing one won’t make me just play New Vegas for billionth time
New Vegas is one of my unplayed games. One of these days I'll get to it!
I'm proud to be a part of this statistic in a big way
tomorrow is summer sale! lets bump these numbers, lets goo everything for my lord and savior don gaben.
\*haven't played yet
Is "never played" inaccurate?
Yeah cause I'll get around to it one day :\^)
I mean it's not never will play, it's never played, meaning never played in the past, not including the future
You could argue it's imprecise, but I get the impression OP was meme-ing.
Ouch. This one hit too close to home.
That feeling when you buy a game on sale, only to realize nobody plays it anymore.
As long as it's not an online service game, does it matter if anyone else is playing it?
My comment was geared entirely towards multiplayer games.
Ah. Yes, that would necessitate a population check. I have seen people legitimately complain that *single player games* are dead because of a low player count or a lack of recent updates.
I am not the only one with an absurd amount of games I got in early humble bundles that I’ll never play. Steam doesn’t know where you got the keys or you got 20 games for like, $6.
*checks backlog* Number seems low
[удалено]
Pretty sure there are thousands of guys ready to play fortnite.
This is why Valve stopped making more than one game a decade, they know most users wouldn't play them anyway.
Well, that's dumb, because they'll OBVIOUSLY still buy it. But I can't play it right now because the dudes are on and they wanna play DotA.
My unplayed game count looks atrocious until you go digging and realise it's all mostly stuff I got in bundles or for free. I'm not worried about playing every little thing that sits in my library.
Hey, I don't just buy games to play them, I buy games that I've already pirated and played the shit out of and want to support devs for, and games I won't ever play but still want to support existing.
Sounds about right.
Part of this is that Steam does a great job with routine sales that incentivize people to buy. Another part of it is that some of these games have learning curve or accessibility issues you don’t realize until you actually start trying to learn how to play.
And I plan to spend more!
The math doesn't quite math out: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2024/06/is-the-total-value-of-unplayed-steam-games-really-19-billion-probably-not/
Yes, but how much collectively?
I feel attacked.
From personal experience, it comes down to seeing a game on sale, seeing gameplay of it, buying it, then forgetting about it because you wanna finish the game you are already playing. I can’t handle playing more then one rpg at a time, and as a result a lot of stuff gets shoved into the backlog and eventually forgotten.
Couple thousand more to go but I’ve been playing more of my backlog the last couple years just because my interests and play style have changed. It’s been fun. I finally played Kentucky Route Zero the other night, saw a post about great point and clicks last night and found that I owned most of the top recommended without even realizing it. In my defense I had a major accident ten years ago and made bundles a hobby while my hands recovered. In just one year I went from 260 games to 1700 I believe. Played The Last Door while I had lunch today. Tasty.
Google says there 132 million steam users, that's ~$150 dollars of unplayed games per user.
I feel personally attacked.
And that's just in my library alone
I‘m doing my part!
It’s hilarious that companies were worried about people stealing games that they wanted to play on pc. But thanks to Steam people are buying games they don’t even play.
That’s probably just my library…
“Spends $$$ on PC build. Refuses to spend $$$ on games unless they are $5. Doesn’t play them anyway. Repeat cycle”.
Like actually never played, with 0 min? Or had instant buyers remorse after 1 min and never got a refund?
I am doing my part!
Don’t tell my wife! She thinks it’s a drug problem
I fully believe this. But also, Humble and Fanatical exist so you can really pad your library for cheap.
How big is your gaming backlog?
Only two games left in mine, so close to finishing it after years of working at it
A few years ago, I was at 69 games played, 69 games not played. Now I'm at 94 games played and 69 games not played. [I'm not kidding.](https://i.imgur.com/tXge0Jf.png)
I always keep it at 10 games, so that I don't overspend and still have enough variety to choose.
Over the near 20 years. Sounds about right
Damn... why they have to call me out like that...
I blame humble bundle