The fans are fine with a $40 always online game with kernel level anti-cheat, a battle pass and micro-transactions. Somehow I think they will suck it up as usual and keep playing the game. Gamers are absolute pushovers and negative attention like in this case, is entirely random. If they would have enforced this from day 1, none of these people would have cared.
If they enforced it from day 1 then you’re right, no one would have cared. At day 1 it would be upfront and everyone would know what they’re getting and far fewer people would have bought it. Enforcing it at day 40 or whatever is not cool. I, along with many others by the sounds of it, was looking forward to finally buying this game and now I won’t be. In general I am so fucking sick of good-sounding games coming along just for them to be fucked in one way or another, i.e., missing content, under developed/tested, broken promises, “we’ll patch it later”, etc.
I think the people who live in the 100+ countries that the game just got delisted, are not supported by PSN, and Sony, the publisher, failed to region lock the game from being sold into, are rightfully pissed a game they bought up to 3 months ago is suddenly bricked because a corporation lied and wants to force a ‘feature’ onto an exsisting game just so they can get better internal metrics on people playing the game to bombard them with more advertising.
I haven’t tried the account linking process yet but I wanted first to log in to PSN through their website and I can’t, not even from different devices.
It’s not in the EULA at all. A major problem with this change is that PSN is only available in about 66 countries. Locking out the rest of the world from playing without fear of repercussions due to falsified account info.
Also just the shitty problem of having to give your personal info to yet another third party. One who has a long history of losing personal data of its users.
Parrot. You misread that there are 66 countries locked out, probably in this very thread, and just repeated it. Do your own reading and learning. You are choosing to be angry with no evidence.
Perhaps I misremembered what I read from other sources. My memory isn’t infallible. The thing I’m angry about has evidence and I made it clear why that upsets me. I also clearly stated that there are only about 66 countries WITH access. Meaning over 130 other nations without access. Including the entirety of the Bulkan states.
Idk about other places than Steam, but I’m surprised more people haven’t gone at Steam for allowing the game to be sold in countries that will get essentially blocked from playing. I feel like they should’ve had some kind of cross referencing going on there.
I partially agree, but would you expect to be able to return a sandwich if you’re nonlojnger hungry by the time you finish it? Not really the same, but I haven’t played this game in weeks. This annoys me, but not really because I’m playing the game and more because it’s a dick move. If they let me refund I would, but it’d be a little fucked up if I did because I’ve already had my fill of the game.
I would expect to be able to return a sandwich if halfway through eating it, the owner came up to my table and put cheese on it after specifically asking for no cheese because I’m lactose intolerant.
Or in the case of discontinued online games, it would like eating half the sandwich and having it taken away.
This is a good analogy if you think of video games as a consumable product.
It’s not a good analogy if you see video games as art. Like if you buy a portrait from a painter and two weeks later they come to your house and paint over it to be a stick figure. Especially if it’s just because they want more money from you.
It’s also not a good analogy if you see video games as rented or leased goods, like most game studios execs want video games to be. Imagine renting a car for your trip across the country and half way there, you wake up at your hotel, look out the window, and the rental company swapped it out for a tractor in the middle of the night. Hope that works for you!
Sure, it’s in the contract that they can do that. And maybe you finished the trip so it doesn’t really affect you. But it’s happening to other people, and we shouldn’t trust the company going forward because one day it could be you that’s screwed out of what you paid for.
If you bought an electric car and the company recalled it and changed it to a petrol motor, would you be a Tesla owner and just roll over and lube up your sphincter?
The analogy applies perfectly well to people like me who have stopped playing the game. If they let me refund it’d be pretty stupid. It doesn’t matter what they do, I would choose more money.
You are applying a standard to the game that applies to YOU. Other players who are currently playing a game do not care that you are finished playing the game. They are not. The game did not ship with a 3 month subscription plan. It shipped as a sold product. Your analogy is like an all-you-can-eat buffet where after twenty minutes they close it down and make everyone stop eating, and your argument is, “Well, I’M full. It’s fine.”
Sure. I agree. I never said it applied to everyone. However, how do you identify people who have left the buffet and come back and those who are still there? There’s no good way to do that with a game.
It’d be horrible business to give refunds to people every time a game changes, especially if you include people who aren’t even effected by it.
Be mad about it, especially at Sony, but don’t expect a refund. That’s not coming.
This is Sony’s decision. It is a material change to the product that was sold. It is not the same as a patch or a nerf. It has rendered the product unplayable. Yes, you can make the argument that it was listed on the page from the beginning that an account was required, but it is also the case that EULAs are actually not legally binding contracts. Sony has made a unilateral decision, and as a result it does not matter whether a person is finished with the game or not. This is a change to the actual contract, which was the purchase of a game to use in perpetuity for the length of time that it is available on steam. Sony has made this decision, customers don’t have to justify the reason that they don’t like the change. It is a change. They are counting on people letting it slide, because most of the time that is how businesses do business.
Also, you should really stop standing up for giant corporations. Sony doesn’t need your help. They have teams of lawyers whose job it is to argue with valve over whether they need to give refunds. They may also end up having to deal with class action lawsuits, and potential legal issues with 177 countries which may have completely different laws of consumer protection than the US. That is not your responsibility.
Besides, one of the pillars of capitalism is rational self-interest, and that goes both ways, not just in the business side. If you can get a refund for something because a company has made a bad decision about how they do their business, why do you care about whether it’s fair or not to the company? They sure don’t care about whether it’s fair to you. Are you a Sony lawyer? Are you the “be nice to big companies police”? Let Sony and Valve, and possibly the court system, worry about what their legal obligations are, and you worry about your personal decision of whether you are going to take advantage of your legal rights. Don’t start judging whether others should or shouldn’t do the same.
Also, you should really stop standing up for giant corporations. Sony doesn’t need your help.
Yeah… That’s not what I’m doing. I’m just trying to explain to people why their demand of a refund just is not going to happen. It’s not a defence of the actions. It’s a response to people expecting something unreasonable.
Sure, it’s a material change to the product. If you buy a smart device and they stop support, do you expect a refund? That’s not how this works ever. It’s not going to happen. Maybe people living in regions that don’t have PSN support will, but not everyone else. I don’t have a PSN account even, and I won’t be making one no matter what. I recognize that there’s no way Sony or Valve are going to take a tens of millions (probably) dollar loss.
Besides, one of the pillars of capitalism is rational self-interest, and that goes both ways, not just in the business side. If you can get a refund for something because a company has made a bad decision about how they do their business, why do you care about whether it’s fair or not to the company?
I don’t care if it’s “fair”. I said I would take it. I don’t give a shit about Sony or Valves bottom line. I just know it’s not going to happen because there are plenty of reasons it wouldn’t be offered.
Let Sony and Valve, and possibly the court system, worry about what their legal obligations are.
There is absolutely zero legal obligation here. You purchased a product and agreed to a license. They can add a requirement for an account at any time. Plenty of games get sold to a different company and require an account with that new company. No one has ever reasonably argued they should be refunded for that. It’d be ridiculous. There’s no refund coming.
They fund game development where the studio can’t afford to, and advertising which makes the difference between being an overnight success, and disappearing onto page 37 of an app store where it will never be seen again.
Like, sure, you don’t need them, but the big indie games who made it without them are the exception to the rule.
I personally promoted a subreddit to 8.5m subscribers. If you can’t do that with some kind of actual value in hand, you kinda suck. Stuff that’s good will definitely make the rounds.
Sure. Because you were able to find success, that means everyone should also be able to do it, no matter how different their circumstances are (like the fact that a game genre may be more niche, or that you actually have to pay for games).
You seem like the type that unironically tells people to just pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
you genuinely made me chuckle. I don’t know if you were trying to be funny, or are that insane/deluded, or what, but that was absurd enough to be funny.
They find funds and provide marketing, which is astonishingly expensive. I’m not in games, but I do work in a marketing adjacent function. The budgets needed even to do very small marketing exercises are really unbelievable. Campaigns exceed my yearly salary regularly, and we are not doing anything like consumer marketing which I imagine is significantly worse.
Not to justify publisbers’ behaviour, but this is partially why they have such stringent demands, I suspect. I assume they are getting some kind of funding or something from the PSN connection, which funds both the game and the marketing needed to make it a success.
Visibility bias. Bad news makes headlines faster then good news or “everything’s fine” news. New Blood hasn’t done anything fucked and everyone seems fine with them for instance.
I see no downside, only upsides, mainly not having to be subjected to the bile spewed by company propagandists who manipulate people in search of unsustainable growth and profit at the expense of humanity
No marketing people, no marketing materials, no marketing budget, no influencers. I don’t mean not using the term and switching the practise to some other title or having it so there are loopholes that allow the propaganda machine to continue making the world a worse place.
Do I think this will happen? No, it is but a dream due to the greed of humanity. Those on top thinking their entitled to be mega wealthy, those on the bottom hoping they’ll be on top one day.
I sort of work in the industry so I feel like publishers are pretty important in getting your game out there. You, as a developer, want to focus your energies in making the best game possible. To make a game successful, there is a whole gamut of tasks which are necessary but are a pain to do such as finding a QA team, finding someone to do localisation, porting your game to other platforms if needed, marketing, and in a good bunch of cases providing funding.
The last part is where things get ugly. Because publishers are the ones who are giving you the money to complete your game, you are naturally beholden to the timelines and goals that they set. Good publishers listen to the developers because good games make good money. Then there are fucks like Sony management here and whoever was at embracer group who have never played a game in the last ten years and are in the position because of their MBA degree. There are a bunch of decent publishers out there like Devolver but naturally they are going to be picky with their titles. For the vast majority, going with whoever is going to give you the money and support is the way forward.
QA team, finding someone to do localisation, porting your game to other platforms if needed, marketing
All of this will be done for free by fans of the game if it’s a good game and there isn’t a publisher to slap on DRM. Otherwise, how am I playing Seiken Densetsu 3?
I don’t know if you meant it with a /s or not but I would like to point out the entire rage around early access or alpha releases.
Other than that, having fans do things like these is something I don’t think any developer would want to do primarily because contracts ensure accountability. As a developer, I have no way of knowing if the Spanish dub you made of my game is full of racial slurs or not. Similarly, if I launch my PS game on switch in the future, and it’s absolutely abysmal, I would be the one on the firing block and rightfully so because I am the one who is bound to make money off of it. Shouldn’t that mean I go with someone who has expertise in doing these things?
I personally am not aware of the mana series so I might not fully understand your argument, so you should feel free to educate me, but I believe it might be more of an exception with things going right instead of the countless ways it could go wrong.
I would also like to disclaim that I have no love for publishers and more often than not, they are despicable suits. However, this is the reality of the video games industry which isn’t changing in the near future (but I sure hope it does further down the line).
They don’t need to be connected to their audience. Dumbass people continue to buy loot crates, battle passes, unfinished early access games, overprices skins, etc…
I don’t know when you grew up, but game publishers have a long history of fucking things up. Rushing development, buying studios and firing the core staff were and are frequent stories.
I still love Arrowhead. It’s not like their intention was to fuck over their players. I’m sure they’re not super happy about the situation. Though the team being who they are, they’re not exactly ones to take shit in any form lol. Which honestly makes them more enduring to me. Having suffered being a core BF5 player those devs these are not, DICE had bent over backwards to whoever screamed loudest on the subreddit which did nothing but damage the game and its lifespan. Granted this situation isn’t totally comparable, but the parallels are there.
A lot of people linked their PSN account in the early few days while it was integrated before it was taken down (it stopped working like most things under the extreme network stress). I know my entire static did. We had ps4s in college.
I suspect since it hasn’t gone into effect yet people are still playing the game as normal, some hoping they change their mind, some not realizing it’s even happening and some getting the last bit of the game before quitting.
Once it goes into effect, that’s when the dive will happen.
I feel sorry for the Arrowhead devs. They made a spectacular game that was revered across the entire industry and loved by its fans, and their overlords at Sony went and caused so much damage to their reputation overnight. Literally just 24 hours ago people were writing articles about how Helldivers 2 is the right way to make a game and should be an example for the rest of the industry, and then Sony calls in a hellbomb on the reviews.
After seeing a community manager on Discord mistreating on people who voice their concerns with this change, I certainly do not feel sorry for the Arrowhead devs.
I assume they’re talking about player names, not usernames - steam usernames are unique, but steam player names can be whatever you want and are often duplicates.
Except for the fact that there are ways to differentiate accounts uniquely, like SteamID. Games have access to it, obviously. Hell, even external websites do, like trading bots. You log in through steam and they know who they need to trade with.
I love dude. He’s made a fan. He didn’t make the decision and he can’t fix it for you. So he’s really just saying to leave him tf alone about it lol. Nut up or shutup.
Why can’t they make a unique username when you create a character the first time that is just your “account name”? That would give you the samw powers as a psn username when it comes to banning. Edit:spelling
I don’t even own the game. Im just saying, if their argument is unique identifiers, there are more ways than a third party solution. It’s not like they don’t have options. They chose this over any other solution. If they did a unique identifier ingame, no one would complain. So the reason they chose this is something else then being the only solution.
But a unique identifier in game doesn’t actually enforce bans, because what’s stopping someone from creating a new one? VS if you create a PSN account, you need some sort of verification (e.g. email address).
They could’ve done something similar with a non PSN login, though people would’ve probably still complained. And for them, it’s not 3rd party because it’s published by Sony IIRC, so it’s actually an in house system.
I also don’t own the game, but I just wanted to point out the reason in their argument isn’t entirely invalid.
What’s stopping someone from creating a new one. The devs? “Please select a username for your account” when creating your first character. After that you cannot change it, and is linked to all your characters. If you get reported, the report would include the account name = unique “John1836q83” getting banned.
This enforces band the same way as PSN linked email would do, but is all ingame and accessible to 100% of players that own the game.
If it is a simple popup that has 0 implications and is only visible when reporting, no one would care, and definitely not enough to boycott the entire game.
They obviously want to force psn account for other reasons.
Bro, Bungie is owned by PlayStation and even they have made cross-platform, Bungie-specific accounts the norm. I don’t see why Arrowhead couldn’t go with Arrowhead accounts, unless it’s a cost issue. Otherwise there really isn’t an excuse
Future prospect then, if Arrowhead get to that point.
My point: it is possible to do independent, dev-based account tracking. Sony could have invested in Arrowhead to do that, but instead are clamping down and introducing exclusivity which will eventually hurt Helldivers 2’s bottom line - something we might see starting with these community choices.
Add comment