[the_af]

Some pushback to this: I understand MMORPGS are addictive, but for some reason I was never hooked, so their "repetitive" aspect is a negative to me.

For Assassin's Creed, it was so repetitive even within the same game (the first one) I couldn't even finish it once I noticed the grind. It drove me nuts.

A lot of games then followed that pattern (e.g. Shadow of Mordor, Mad Max, and I'm sure countless others -- I just mention the ones I tried). I find some of their mechanics interesting but once the grind kicks in (which is fairly soon, since these sandbox games are all grind-based) I despair and abandon them.

They feel like repetitive work rather than entertaining to me.

But hear this: Papers, Please, a game that is literally a bureaucracy simulator, engages me in a way Assassin's Creed never could. I wonder why! (Random guess: I think it's because PP, for all its repetitiveness, feels like a small game, while Assassin's Creed and its like feel like endless games you could spend your life within... and I have better things to do with my life).

[teamonkey]

Variety is very important.

In the case of the first Assassin’s Creed, I’d argue that the “toy” (running around, climbing buildings, challenging yourself to seamless parkour runs, stabbing guards etc.) is a lot of fun, but to progress the game forces you to do those fun things in a series of very rigid, repetitive, arbitrary challenges that can be difficult without adding anything new, and which block the story progression behind a checklist.

Papers Please has simple mechanics, but makes the player balance a lot of different factors while offering a steady stream of surprises and new situations to consider.

There’s an element of personal preference too, of course.

[mawadev]

For me... Assassins creed gives me fomo. I move 100m and I probably missed something... very unpleasant. I can't describe it. That world and activity doesnt fit in my head.