The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Mass Effect 3'.
Over the past year or two there's been a trend emerging of penalizing people who buy second hand copies of games. Typically this involves giving people bonus downloadable content if they buy a game new, via redemption of a code. Or - and this is a bit more unethical - withholding the multiplayer portion of a game unless you buy a new copy or spend extra money to buy a multiplayer code.
However, EA - who coincidentally have been nominated for The Consumerist's 'Worst Company' award - have taken things a step further with Mass Effect 3. Mass Effect 2 gave you a bunch of extra bits and bats if you bought the game new or purchased a 'Cerberus Pass'. Mass Effect 3 doesn't have this option - instead, if you buy the game second hand you have to pay extra to get access to the game's online features of the game.
So how is that new? After all, Mass Effect is largely a single player experience. The difference is that to get the best ending in Mass Effect 3 - although I could make a separate post about how poor the endings are - you need to have an in-game military strength of 5000. This means completing a bunch of side quests etc to raise your military strength to this level. But your ending is also affected by the in-game 'galactic readiness' stat. If you don't play the online portion of the game, this is set at 50% which means that your military strength is halved.
What this really means is that if you buy the game second hand, it's twice as hard to get the best ending. Having a new purchase only multiplayer portion isn't all that new, but Mass Effect 3 actively penalizes people who bought the game second hand, making it harder to properly 'win' the game. Which given that, either way, you've paid money for the game, is a hell of a thing to do.
However, EA - who coincidentally have been nominated for The Consumerist's 'Worst Company' award - have taken things a step further with Mass Effect 3. Mass Effect 2 gave you a bunch of extra bits and bats if you bought the game new or purchased a 'Cerberus Pass'. Mass Effect 3 doesn't have this option - instead, if you buy the game second hand you have to pay extra to get access to the game's online features of the game.
So how is that new? After all, Mass Effect is largely a single player experience. The difference is that to get the best ending in Mass Effect 3 - although I could make a separate post about how poor the endings are - you need to have an in-game military strength of 5000. This means completing a bunch of side quests etc to raise your military strength to this level. But your ending is also affected by the in-game 'galactic readiness' stat. If you don't play the online portion of the game, this is set at 50% which means that your military strength is halved.
What this really means is that if you buy the game second hand, it's twice as hard to get the best ending. Having a new purchase only multiplayer portion isn't all that new, but Mass Effect 3 actively penalizes people who bought the game second hand, making it harder to properly 'win' the game. Which given that, either way, you've paid money for the game, is a hell of a thing to do.
Page:
pete_21 wrote:
chasfh wrote:
[i]Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
Oh, I quite agree, it's nothing new at all. What I have noticed recently though is people on other forums stating that due to the amount of additional content on certain titles (and obviously the cost of it) they are quite willing to wait for the special edition (even if there hasn't been one actually announced!).[/i]
Which, oddly, is what I have done for years with many titles.
Perceived value is a peculiar thing though, partly personal opinion, partly created by outside influences...
So maybe Garin is right! (you little rogue, you, with all your discontent...)
chasfh wrote:
[i]Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
Oh, I quite agree, it's nothing new at all. What I have noticed recently though is people on other forums stating that due to the amount of additional content on certain titles (and obviously the cost of it) they are quite willing to wait for the special edition (even if there hasn't been one actually announced!).[/i]
Which, oddly, is what I have done for years with many titles.
Perceived value is a peculiar thing though, partly personal opinion, partly created by outside influences...
So maybe Garin is right! (you little rogue, you, with all your discontent...)
chasfh wrote:
Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
Oh, I quite agree, it's nothing new at all. What I have noticed recently though is people on other forums stating that due to the amount of additional content on certain titles (and obviously the cost of it) they are quite willing to wait for the special edition (even if there hasn't been one actually announced!).
Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
Oh, I quite agree, it's nothing new at all. What I have noticed recently though is people on other forums stating that due to the amount of additional content on certain titles (and obviously the cost of it) they are quite willing to wait for the special edition (even if there hasn't been one actually announced!).
I suspect that some kind of 'Limited Complete Edition' of Streetfighter X Tekken will be out pretty soon with all of these 'extra' characters already in it, that's usually what Capcom do. Perhaps customers who bought Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfigher IV: Arcade Edition and then Marvel Vs Capcom 3 and then Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 have noticed some kind of pattern emerging?...
"...pattern emerging?"
I can't be alone in thinking that this has been going on for years, commonly with a number of publishers. What about all of the "Game of the Year" Editions, "Complete Collection" boxed sets, "Collector's Edition" packages....
Fallout 3 for example?
Fallout NV?
ANY Total War game?
The Witcher?
Sims and Sims 2?
Rollercoaster Tycoon? (one for the "retro" gamers there...)
Age of Empires?(and another for the "even more retro"...)
F.E.A.R.?
Okay, some of these are collections of discs, but truly, does it make a difference if the additional content is physical or digital originally?
Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
"...pattern emerging?"
I can't be alone in thinking that this has been going on for years, commonly with a number of publishers. What about all of the "Game of the Year" Editions, "Complete Collection" boxed sets, "Collector's Edition" packages....
Fallout 3 for example?
Fallout NV?
ANY Total War game?
The Witcher?
Sims and Sims 2?
Rollercoaster Tycoon? (one for the "retro" gamers there...)
Age of Empires?(and another for the "even more retro"...)
F.E.A.R.?
Okay, some of these are collections of discs, but truly, does it make a difference if the additional content is physical or digital originally?
Can't really see this as out of the ordinary, or new in any way.
Dr. Garin wrote:
Of course it was after your internet campaign against Capcom!
I think you are giving me way too much credit there Garin!
Capcom only have themselves to blame for the disappointing sales of Streetfighter X Tekken. They put a product out into the marketplace which most people percieved offered poor value for money, in the middle of a worldwide recession with their competition offering more attractive alternatives. What did they honestly expect to happen?
What we don't know is how profitable this title was? By that I mean did the people who did buy it also shell out for the DLC?
What will be very interesting is to see is if Namco do the same thing with their forthcoming Tekken X Streetfighter? For those who didn't know Namco & Capcom basically did a swap to allow each other to mix characters from 2 of the biggest fighting game series in video game history. As Namco were already working on Soul Calibur V I believe that they decided to postpone the development of their game. In theory Capcom had a huge open goal here by having their title out a full year earlier than their rivals, it would appear that they have failed to capitalise on it?
I suspect that some kind of 'Limited Complete Edition' of Streetfighter X Tekken will be out pretty soon with all of these 'extra' characters already in it, that's usually what Capcom do. Perhaps customers who bought Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfigher IV: Arcade Edition and then Marvel Vs Capcom 3 and then Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 have noticed some kind of pattern emerging?...
Of course it was after your internet campaign against Capcom!
I think you are giving me way too much credit there Garin!
Capcom only have themselves to blame for the disappointing sales of Streetfighter X Tekken. They put a product out into the marketplace which most people percieved offered poor value for money, in the middle of a worldwide recession with their competition offering more attractive alternatives. What did they honestly expect to happen?
What we don't know is how profitable this title was? By that I mean did the people who did buy it also shell out for the DLC?
What will be very interesting is to see is if Namco do the same thing with their forthcoming Tekken X Streetfighter? For those who didn't know Namco & Capcom basically did a swap to allow each other to mix characters from 2 of the biggest fighting game series in video game history. As Namco were already working on Soul Calibur V I believe that they decided to postpone the development of their game. In theory Capcom had a huge open goal here by having their title out a full year earlier than their rivals, it would appear that they have failed to capitalise on it?
I suspect that some kind of 'Limited Complete Edition' of Streetfighter X Tekken will be out pretty soon with all of these 'extra' characters already in it, that's usually what Capcom do. Perhaps customers who bought Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfighter IV and then Super Streetfigher IV: Arcade Edition and then Marvel Vs Capcom 3 and then Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 have noticed some kind of pattern emerging?...
pete_21 wrote:
Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations
Capcom predicts Resident Evil 6 will sell 7 million copies.
Sounds pretty big, but going on wiki figures thats 1.2m higher than Resident Evil 5 sales, so it could happen.
I suppose I'm being off topic, but this thread is about Capcom now :p
Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations
Capcom predicts Resident Evil 6 will sell 7 million copies.
Sounds pretty big, but going on wiki figures thats 1.2m higher than Resident Evil 5 sales, so it could happen.
I suppose I'm being off topic, but this thread is about Capcom now :p
pete_21 wrote:
Well that was always going to happen wasn't it?
Perhaps that should read:
''Street Fighter X Tekken sales fall short of Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations''
;P
ALL expectations are unrealistic...
Particularly those related to games.
Well that was always going to happen wasn't it?
Perhaps that should read:
''Street Fighter X Tekken sales fall short of Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations''
;P
ALL expectations are unrealistic...
Particularly those related to games.
Of course it was after your internet campaign against Capcom!
Well that was always going to happen wasn't it?
Perhaps that should read:
''Street Fighter X Tekken sales fall short of Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations''
;P
Perhaps that should read:
''Street Fighter X Tekken sales fall short of Capcom's 'unrealistic' expectations''
;P
Street Fighter X Tekken sales fall short of Capcom expectations
Well I hope you're satisfied Pete, look at the destruction you've wrought.
Well I hope you're satisfied Pete, look at the destruction you've wrought.
Well there you go ... we'll all now jump up and down with glee ;¬)
Page: