I think it has more to do with that they tried to gaslight people into thinking japanese people all agreed with their take on feudal japan and got called out for it.
@vits so now you change it from your first point, to Ragnarok is a corridor game so it's not impressive anyway? If you have problems with what the game is, critique the original. The studio that does the port had nothing they could have done on that part. Should they have made it a massive open world sandbox or what did you expect them to do, would you be happy and impressed then or blame them for changing the game?
so if I sue you, you did the thing I sue you for? what's of importance is the outcome of it, not if they got sued or not. You must be on Ninentdo's side then with them vs Palworld.
Diablo got less backlash over that because the rest of the game also sucked and it was way more popular to complain about that instead, but before it launched there was a lot of shittalking about that.
pc gamers also complained when blizzard did it with Diablo, and many times before and I will do it again. Stop acting like people are picking on Sony, it's been happening forever. Sony is one of the biggest companies so ofc a game like this gets more backlash than a game from a smaller dev
ok 6 years then, still abysmal development if this is all they could come up with. If i believed everyting said I would have said it would have cost them 400m. 2 levels and 2.5 characters per year for a 150+ man team. That screams massive problems and a money pit.
@porkChop, they lost one sale from me and there's one more pirate among the crew. I gladly support sony cause they make great games, but I won't support this.
yeah its really annoying to see that a big portion of players don't agree with their stupid bullshit and actually have a way to express their opinion. As we saw last time with Helldivers, if sony will lose money from it, they will change it, just gotta have a spine. The employee from Helldivers who leaked the info made it very clear what the only way for Sony is to listen.
actually blaming players for not wanting to deal with bullshit online logins for offline single pl...
@giodel that's not the point. There is just no need for it in a single player game. It doesn't benefit anyone except the company and even them it's hurting because now they can't sell it in some regions, so if you can explain to me why it's neccessary I might change my mind. You say people let it happen for MS but you're now saying the same thing. You're willing to let it happen because MS does it too, don't you want Sony to be better? I want them to at least. ...
the question should be how did they manage to only make that in 8 years, that already shows there are massive problems there, which often lead to loads of money lost. We will never know the number but I wouldn't be surprised if its pretty far over 200m.
it says 8 years everywhere. It could have been in preproduction somewhere and later created a new studio for it, wouldn't have been the first time and won't be the last. I think Sony even said it themselves
the game gave us no reason to play Concord instead of Overwatch or Valorant but then you combine it with awful character design and nonsene agendapushing, then my friend you get a dumpsterfire. It was 8 years in development, who thought it was a good idea to hold a beta 1 month before release? It wasn't a beta, it was a failed attempt at marketing, cause fuck all can get changed in that time.
@vits so now you change it from your first point, to Ragnarok is a corridor game so it's not impressive anyway? If you have problems with what the game is, critique the original. The studio that does the port had nothing they could have done on that part. Should they have made it a massive open world sandbox or what did you expect them to do, would you be happy and impressed then or blame them for changing the game?
yeah the in game cutscenes were pretty bad in the original and this looks way better.
Anyway a good excuse to play one of my fav games again.
you're an absolute genius for coming up with the idea that they would the same thing for one remaster as for another one. Absolutely mindblowing.
And no i don't remember it
I can't wait to play this again.
so if I sue you, you did the thing I sue you for? what's of importance is the outcome of it, not if they got sued or not. You must be on Ninentdo's side then with them vs Palworld.
also the more useless logings everywhere, the harder game preservation becomes
Diablo got less backlash over that because the rest of the game also sucked and it was way more popular to complain about that instead, but before it launched there was a lot of shittalking about that.
pc gamers also complained when blizzard did it with Diablo, and many times before and I will do it again. Stop acting like people are picking on Sony, it's been happening forever. Sony is one of the biggest companies so ofc a game like this gets more backlash than a game from a smaller dev
or just turn auto updates for that game off
ok 6 years then, still abysmal development if this is all they could come up with. If i believed everyting said I would have said it would have cost them 400m. 2 levels and 2.5 characters per year for a 150+ man team. That screams massive problems and a money pit.
@porkChop, they lost one sale from me and there's one more pirate among the crew. I gladly support sony cause they make great games, but I won't support this.
yeah its really annoying to see that a big portion of players don't agree with their stupid bullshit and actually have a way to express their opinion. As we saw last time with Helldivers, if sony will lose money from it, they will change it, just gotta have a spine. The employee from Helldivers who leaked the info made it very clear what the only way for Sony is to listen.
actually blaming players for not wanting to deal with bullshit online logins for offline single pl...
@zeke playstation will not add that cause steam already has achievements, which also work in offline modes.
fact is, if you pirate the game you have a better experience and I will never pay for a worse experience.
@giodel that's not the point. There is just no need for it in a single player game. It doesn't benefit anyone except the company and even them it's hurting because now they can't sell it in some regions, so if you can explain to me why it's neccessary I might change my mind. You say people let it happen for MS but you're now saying the same thing. You're willing to let it happen because MS does it too, don't you want Sony to be better? I want them to at least. ...
the question should be how did they manage to only make that in 8 years, that already shows there are massive problems there, which often lead to loads of money lost. We will never know the number but I wouldn't be surprised if its pretty far over 200m.
it says 8 years everywhere. It could have been in preproduction somewhere and later created a new studio for it, wouldn't have been the first time and won't be the last. I think Sony even said it themselves
overwatch released in 2016, they had the blueprint.
the game gave us no reason to play Concord instead of Overwatch or Valorant but then you combine it with awful character design and nonsene agendapushing, then my friend you get a dumpsterfire. It was 8 years in development, who thought it was a good idea to hold a beta 1 month before release? It wasn't a beta, it was a failed attempt at marketing, cause fuck all can get changed in that time.