EDIT: Apparently, this error was introduced by the HN submission! The title of the article on the website is: "Most people who buy your game won’t play it". This matches the data presented by the article.
People are buying these games knowing they're adding to their backlog and likely won't get through the whole thing, but the price is so low that the chance they'll want to play the game someday is enough.
I'm one of these (apparently rather typical) consumers and will buy almost any modern-class AAA game if it's $5.
You’re not “buying it and then not using it”.
This will be interesting news to the insurance company I co-founded :) :) :)
> You’re not “buying it and then not using it”.
This boils down to semantics, but most consumers feel like they're "using" their insurance plan only when they file a claim.
Unused games in my Steam library are basically insurance against being bored.
So in that vein, it doesn't matter if there will be another identical sale. The psychological things "in the way" to complete a purchase are virtually non-existent if you had even a minor passing interest in the title the first time you see it at that fire sale price.
By purchasing a bunch of different game cheaply, yoh have the choice of what kind of story/mechanic to play when you do want to play a new game.
You're speculating on your future desires, and you might as well get a selection when it's cheap.
A game pass subscription sort of scratches the same itch, but you don't own the games. So can't replay a few years later if you aren't presently subscribed.
It's not about being stupid with your money, it's actually a cheap way to give yourself choice in the future.
That's not super common on steam though.
Edit: You may not want to know if your steam account is old enough to drink...
but usually I'm buying the bundle for one or two things, and the rest is just window dressing. maybe I'll get to em, maybe not...
(I'll get to you someday, Mass Effect)
The real headline would be “Most games people buy are never played” or something. Which can mean a lot of things like do people often buy games that nobody else has ever played?
Instead of focusing on folks who actually do invest time into your product, even if the % is low.
I prefer casual games because of this.
It’s not automatic, sometimes I just don’t feel like buying a game anymore even when it’s on sale, and I’ll drop them when if they go on sale and I don’t want them enough to pay.
But I do end up with a few games in my library I haven’t played yet.
What I got is: people buy games and they don't play most of them. Is it wrong?
I wouldn't be surprised if someone's interpretation of the title tended toward their own experience, or lack thereof, with Steam.
A single person who "collects" games or buys them because it seems like good value can have thousands of titles in their steam library. Someone who actually plays all of them will have a much smaller number.
If each game was bought by a different person, then both most games bought and most people never play the games.
However, it’s very likely a small minority of people take advantage of the insane sales Steam has sometimes - like if 50 people bought a game each and played it, and one person bought 50 separate $1 arcade games and never touched them.
You get the same statistics in both cases of number of games played, but it’s two very different scenarios in terms of how humans use steam.
For me I imagine it’s a third case, that people like me often take advantage of the $1 deals and never end up playing most of those old or arcade titles?
Pretty bad of HN to edit a good title into a dishonest one like this.