>>12021594
Ask mass effect

Because the game is ass, playing it once is ass enough, but imagine having to play it a shit ton of times.

>>12021594
It's a bit more complicated than that.

>multiple playthroughs that take you through new levels and give different weapons and abilities?
Good
>multiple playthroughs that are all the same shit but you picked a couple of different dialogue options and got a slightly different ending reel
Bad

File: e3a89d876132c8e6c9ba4d51e(...).png (392 KB, 594x395)

392 KB PNG

>>12021594
it's only on when nintendo does it.

File: 8932e87b3995fe717ff682e8e(...).png (210 KB, 1597x1635)

210 KB PNG

>>12021594
It doesn't have to be, but it depends on certain factors such as replay value (like >>12022045
explained), the game's structure (as >>12022052
said) and IMO the game's base length (i.e. how long is the game playing normally as opposed to a completionist run/doing all the sidequests etc).

Good games that are short (for the typical length of their subgenre. E.g. If it's an arcade game not more than an hour) can be very fun to replay, even if they give you little (or no) extra content.
Otherwise it'll probably not be most people's cup of tea.

multiple playthroughs wasn't really the issue, just that the kill all enemies and destroy all bombs missions sucked balls
and the main reason the enemy hunting missions sucked was because of the very small distance they spawned in at, it was very easy to miss that one flying enemy that was slightly to the side of the road in westopolis and teleport all over looking for enemies before you realized it