PC Gaming

For sure. Easily half (likely more) of my unplayed games are Bundle games from a bundle I got primarily for something else. There's a few gems I'm sure.

There are a few games I bought on sale to play later as well (I'll get to you!) but the other glaring flaw I see is a selection bias. The people who use this service or similar services are going to be the heavier Steam users with collections in the hundreds.

So heavier users, with lots of bundle games and sales. I'd divide that total by 10 at least

They don’t list their methodology, so it’s pretty much a made up number.

And yeah, back when you had to add the entire bundle to your account, you’d get a ton of crap bundle games that you’d never play. These days you can generally list the code for others to use.

Like H3AFF-I28Q2-AF4AV

It's definitely inflated but I'd say the real number has to be at the very least within 10% of that estimate (probably a lot more, but I've seen some AAA games at a 90% discount in the past) which is still in the billions of dollars, which is still kind of nuts

yup this is me. When Humble Bundles were insanely good I just bought them all the time. I'd say half my library, if not more, are from those bundles and I haven't touched most of them. And I even ended up giving away a lot of keys from the bundles too. Like for a couple years there I used them has christmas presents for friends only if they were really good games that I either already owned or had no intention of playing.

Fuck do I ever relate to this. I probably have over 200 titles in my Steam library that I redeemed from Humble Bundles and have never installed. Insane.

I have also bought a bundle from the spiffing brit, which was 85 games valued at €1500 for like €40. I bought it mostly for the charity and a couple of games, so it's very misrepresented to say I haven't played €1500 worth of games

That doesn't mean I have "$400 value of games I've never played."

I'd argue that what you pay for a game and the market value are two different things. The statistic is definitely misleading. The headline should read:

Steam users purchased games they haven't played valued at $19b.

I'd say it's pretty rare for people to pay full value for loads of games, i.e. I agree most unplayed games came in bundles, or were gifted/purchased at massive discount.

Thanks for doing the critical thinking for me

I'm in this comment and I'm indifferent about it.

I have over 500 titles in my backlog of shame (loads of freebies, but still shameful). If I play a new game every week, it'll take me 10 years to get through it.

What if some are absolute bangers and I sink 300+ hours in? I'll never be finished!

But what if none of them are? For 10 years I'd have slogged through a quagmire of mediocrity for nothing other than to tick a series of boxes.

It also helps that Steam sales are nowhere near as good as they used to be. I don't even remember the last time I saw a 90+% discount, but there was a time when they'd pop up regularly during the winter sale.

But yeah, these days my standard for even considering a purchase is "will I play it right now?"