I prefer playing a game in one sitting, that way everything that is happening is still fresh in my mind. It's annoying leaving a game half finished then coming back to it, to find you dont know what's going on, like who's this character I'm role-playing as and am I even interested playing as them still. I'm almost guaranteed to start a new game because of that.
If the story/content is captivating enough, whether it be a game, novel, tv show or whatever, we're not going to feel burnt out, we'll feel excited and energized for what's to come. I was initially very excited when I got to Baldur's gate, didn't feel burnt out at all, until I started roaming around in it. I suddenly lost all that excitement and it became a chore finishing it. Seems others here have had a similar experience too. According to steam, currently only 35% of players have left act 2 and 50% left act 1, so we'll see how many share this experience too, once they get to act 3.
The problem with all these 10/10 though is that they're mostly based on act 1 and some in act 2, so it's not representative of the whole game. I would give act 1 and 2 a 10/10 as well, but act 3 takes a nose dive in quality.
I think ppl should have to finish a games main story and prove it, before they can rate/review it on metacritic etc, that way it's more accurate and honest. With the way it is now, reviews clearly aren't to be trusted, so then there's no point of even having them then. Calling something a masterpiece, without experiencing the whole piece yet, is ridiculous. In contrast, sometimes somethings get better further into them and we end up glad we stuck with it, if given the chance. But reviews/ratings come across as dishonest, kind of like false advertising, if they aren't based on the game as a whole.
