That's News!



  • Did we know before that this would cost money? People seem upset about it, which is understandable when the game was supposed to be a free bonus for online subscribers.

    Edit: Apparently there's more modes coming that they'll be rolling out, and the $10 purchase entitles you to all of those.



  • @mbun Will the stuff that they originally released remain free? Why is charging for DLC bad? Are people legit getting mad over this? Jesus.



  • @el-shmiablo Online is free, but basically playing with bots offline plus the marathon mode costs $10. Someone said something about having to buy the online sub to even be able to buy the offline DLC, but I can't believe that's right. Maybe someone who doesn't have online can confirm it. Just added to my post though that the press release for this mentions these are only the first 2 new modes of many they're adding, and the $10 purchase nets you all of them as they roll out. I just think this was communicated very poorly. People see what's being released now as an offline training mode, and the idea of paying to play with bots on a game that was entirely an incentive for buying the online before seems a little ridiculous when you don't know about the other modes coming too.



  • I agree that it may not be the best communication, but it seems like a pretty good idea and a good way of adding to the game to me. Considering it was 'free' from the beginning with the core aspect of the game, adding dlc for more modes for those interested looks pretty good to me, I'm all for this tbh, though I'm not sure that I'll buy it myself, even though it could be my chance to finally win a match.



  • Yeah. If people are genuinely mad over this, I can't help but call entitlement.
    They got a game for free. How else do they expect the devs to make money?
    This reminds me of when scrubby lil bitches get to the endgame of Path of Exile and are suddenly OUTRAGED that they have to spend a few bucks on stash tabs.



  • Woo.



  • @capnbobamous
    Not sure why people thought that would change, and honestly it kinda makes sense. Possibly.
    This whole remake trilogy (Yes i'm calling it a trilogy) is going to flesh out FF7 to a scale undreamed of back in 97. Fleshing out the events of everything up to leaving Midgard could probably get a 20-30 hour ARPG out of it.
    It's also very likely that this will be a cross gen title either having a enhanced PS5 version or launching the same day as the PS5. In which case it makes even more sense, essentially get the most liner portion of FF7 out to the public, while leaving a fully open world Midgard up to the sequels to flesh out and explore.

    Granted as of this time there is no telling how things will be changed or fleshed out, and what could possibly act as the beginning and end of the 2nd and 3rd parts of the trilogy.



  • @bard91 said:

    I agree that it may not be the best communication, but it seems like a pretty good idea and a good way of adding to the game to me.

    As long as people can purchase it without being subscribed to the online, then yeah, it is good to offer a way to purchase the game for people not usually around internet. Although, as many have said in the comments, why would you buy this over games like Puyo Puyo Tetris with more presentation, depth, and modes. I think they're even releasing a new game with this same price point.

    @el-shmiablo said:

    Yeah. If people are genuinely mad over this, I can't help but call entitlement.
    They got a game for free. How else do they expect the devs to make money?

    The "free" game was incentive for buying paid online though. It wasn't a paid game that was then given away as incentive for the online. It was created around the online. It would be like the NES Online games suddenly having Paid DLC added to them. It isn't entitlement every time people get upset over something. Try to actually see it from their perspective.

    Anyways, that's the last I'll say on this topic until the new modes come out.



  • @mbun we can leave it here, but I do not agree with either of your points tbh, just because there's a better option doesn't invalidate this being available for purchase and I don't think it is a big fault to not make it available to others.



  • @mbun Getting upset over luxuries like videogames is inherently entitled.

    But Anyhoo...

    AYY I heard you like counting down the seconds to Death Stranding so we created a device that literally counts seconds for Death Stranding.

    0_1557522549246_KojiWatch-1024x445.jpg

    Ludens/10 would wear on wrist







  • @dmcmaster

    The developers are working on an unannounced game that feature sexy elements, but they had to be removed. Moreover, the company says that it lowered the game’s sales forecast following the change.

    Gee, I wonder what platform that unannounced game is releasing on.

    I think it's really telling that they projected lower sales as a result. These developers know this constant censorship of their titles is only hurting them in the long run.



  • I really feel that now is the time to embrace the Adults Only rating the ESRB seems to forget exists.
    What with retail dying a quick and painful death and digital sales skyrocketing year over year, I don't think it would really adversely effect Senran Kagura: Super Tiddy Ninja Backgammon sales not being sold at Wally World.
    I mean, I really don't think Sony and Steam are going to bend the knee to all the sexy kosuge, at least until they start making a dent in their bottom line, so something else will need to change.



  • @el-shmiablo I don't see why they need to be AO in the first place considering every single time I've heard issues involving games having content cut or changed for international releases, it's been due to the localizing company or the console publisher having an issue rather than the ESRB itself.



  • If I recall correctly all pretty much console manufacturer and digital store front has basically sworn off of selling AO games, mostly due (originally to fear of Walmart and other Box retailers not carrying the game)



  • Somehow missed this one yesterday
    https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/05/12/payday-2-publisher-starbreeze-may-not-last-another-year
    Hopefully Adult Swim pick's up publishing on Psychonauts 2



  • @dmcmaster yeah I'm concerned about what will happen with Psychonauts 2, I'm hoping that in the worse case scenario it will just be an easy pickup for some other publisher, since it should be close to done.

    Aside from that it is funny to think that the first game was also published by a dying publisher.



  • @bard91
    What would be really funny is if THQ picks up Psychonauts, as if I recall correctly they were originally offered up the chance to publish the PS2 (and supposedly a Gamecube) version of the original