Konami charges extra for additional save game

[Okjoek]

I still think it's funny that you still can't have more than 1 save file in main series Pokemon Games. Atleast there's emulators to fix that though.

[Misanthrope]

30 minutes ago, Carclis said:

That seems to be quite debatable. There are plenty of examples out there of games that are capable of being successful without using shameful practices or even charging the standard full price for a game. One example is Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice which has proven that a $30 game can have a campaign as lengthy and of the same high standards as we have come to expect from the big budget games. The problem seems to be that publishers want games to be more and more profitable every year or rather, they want to make more money for doing less every year.

These might interest you.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Yep: we've been saying for years that the growth model for AAA games was basically unsustainable: The cost to develop the game, the assets, etc. Has grown exponentially. But has the quality grown exponentially as well?

 

Visually only and that's the issue: Just because you have the horse power to come with better and better visual quality assets doesn't means that every game should go that route: most games should stay on the lower definition end of the spectrum.

 

It's no coincidence that the most popular games today, except for PUBG, are actually fairly easy on resources and try things like stylized visuals to hide the fact that the assets are just of much lower visual fidelity.

 

More AAA games need to follow the lead of indie devs: develop games smarter not just bigger. Bigger != Better all of the time. Most single player gamers would be fine with a game that looked like Skyrim (the first version from 2011) if it had like 100x the size, content and a bit more complexity as an RPG.

 

A shooter doesn't needs to have super high quality graphics as seen in Overwatch, CS:GO, etc. You just need refreshing idea and a way to attract players through gameplay elements and not just dumping truckloads of money on 400+ people teams that's mostly artists and 3d modelers because it takes just so much more effort to take advantage of the extra horsepower.

 

Even using the available horsepower more intelligently would serve games better than just this endless arms race to see how can become the next GTA 5 when it comes to billions in sales: that's not going to happen and guess what? GTA 5 at launch didn't even looked as good as its contemporaries.

[Bananasplit_00]

If it's an entirely online save I could see them wanting you to pay for it I guess, it's not good or acceptable but that would be a reason at least, but it seems more like a fuck you your harddrive space is locked behind this pay wall because we are greedy shits

[dalekphalm]

4 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

If it's an entirely online save I could see them wanting you to pay for it I guess, it's not good or acceptable but that would be a reason at least, but it seems more like a fuck you your harddrive space is locked behind this pay wall because we are greedy shits

For the online portion of the game? Sure. But this affects single player too.

[Carclis]

7 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Yep: we've been saying for years that the growth model for AAA games was basically unsustainable: The cost to develop the game, the assets, etc. Has grown exponentially. But has the quality grown exponentially as well?

 

Visually only and that's the issue: Just because you have the horse power to come with better and better visual quality assets doesn't means that every game should go that route: most games should stay on the lower definition end of the spectrum.

 

It's no coincidence that the most popular games today, except for PUBG, are actually fairly easy on resources and try things like stylized visuals to hide the fact that the assets are just of much lower visual fidelity.

 

More AAA games need to follow the lead of indie devs: develop games smarter not just bigger. Bigger != Better all of the time. Most single player gamers would be fine with a game that looked like Skyrim (the first version from 2011) if it had like 100x the size, content and a bit more complexity as an RPG.

 

A shooter doesn't needs to have super high quality graphics as seen in Overwatch, CS:GO, etc. You just need refreshing idea and a way to attract players through gameplay elements and not just dumping truckloads of money on 400+ people teams that's mostly artists and 3d modelers because it takes just so much more effort to take advantage of the extra horsepower.

 

Even using the available horsepower more intelligently would serve games better than just this endless arms race to see how can become the next GTA 5 when it comes to billions in sales: that's not going to happen and guess what? GTA 5 at launch didn't even looked as good as its contemporaries.

I don't think the cost of games has necessarily gone up, especially when you consider some of the points Jim Sterling makes. Whilst higher quality assets and bigger games certainly add to the cost of development we've also seen significant areas of reduction such as the shift to digital distribution or even the outsourcing of game engines. The only real reason I have seen for these costs ballooning out of control is the ever increasing marketing budget but I don't think anybody would find that money to be spent wisely when it's always spent on games that were going to sell well to begin with.

I agree with the rest though. The only issue is that the big three publishers at least are no longer designing games to be profitable on the basis of them being good games in their own right. It's all about finding as many ways to convince players to part with their money as possible, which is seemingly only feasible with multiplayer games. I guess it comes as no surprise then that the big three are pushing "Live Services" as the next big thing and claiming that the age of single player games are coming to an end.

[Brooksie359]

12 hours ago, Tsuki said:

that fair, and ill change that in my post. its definitely not most.  but there are a good portion that are like that.

 

and while the situation is certainly not ideal, its nearly as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.  its not loot boxes/gambling, its not p2w.

as somebody who comes from primarily playing mmo's  and despises these kinds of practices in them,  this is a commonplace, and is not nearly as egregious as other practices. 

 

i just firmly believe that if you make as big of a deal out small things as you would actually serious things, then it kinda hurts your argument and people stop giving a shit.

 

@leadeater started out that way yes, but it hasnt been a real hardware limitation since 2006 when the DS came out.  thats now 12 years of only one save slot when it doesnt NEED to be. its officially been not a hardware limitation longer than it was one.

This is a big deal though. If they had limited you to one save slot that would be fine because it is part of the game design and determines how the game is meant to be played. Having to buy save slots is not limiting save slots but intentionally trying to make profit by limiting the base game. I mean it would be like comparing a company who makes a game with one difficulty level and a company who makes you pay for other difficulty levels other than the standard. There is a distinct difference there and the same goes with game save slots. With Pokemon it's a design choice while hear it is a means to make money and is very scumbaggy.

[Eaglerino]

9 hours ago, Sypran said:

Im pretty sure on PC with this game you could find the save file, and move it to another folder, and be able to start a new character. So I have to ask: Why are they making you pay for this?

Unless they made it like some of the Assassins Creed games where it's oddly impossible to find the save file for no good reason

[MoonSpot]

So what happens if a sibling or a mysterious stranger commandeers your rig and farts around in your game for shits and giggles?  Your just SOL cause you can't step back?  I don't buy limiting saves as a game mechanic at all, its a market mechanic or a display of ineptitude on part of the publishers/devs.  nothing more.

 

Anyways, this is actually a great thing for me.  Tells me straight up, do not bother buying this.  If they're looking to go this far, who knows how far they'll try to push other things that we've not discovered as of yet.  No point taking chances jumping into bed with scummy people like this.

[blu4]

This is absolute garbage. How is this not regulated? It's like theft.

[vanished]

On 2/23/2018 at 4:56 PM, Tsuki said:

im gonna be totally honest.  i dont see the problem.  most many single player games only have 1-3 save slots. if you want to start over, you delete it, and start over.  and looking at multiplayer games, paying 10 bucks for a new character slot isnt overly egregious, its pretty much standard.

 

if the game didnt give you the option to buy a new save slot, nobody would give a shit about having to delete the character to start over.

 

edit: edited cuz ashleyashes makes a fair point

In my mind there is a difference between just not offering more, and offering more but charging for it.  If they just don't offer it at all, it's clear the reason behind it is a) laziness, b) they don't think you need it, c) etc. - all more or less harmless things.  This shows that they intentionally designed this system to try to milk as much money as possible from people.  Honestly if they said tomorrow there will be a $5 addon to let you choose a custom installation location, or to turn anti-aliasing up beyond 2x, it wouldn't surprise me in the least since that is no different than this.

[vanished]

On 2/24/2018 at 8:31 AM, Sypran said:

Why does that limit even exist anymore though?
This isn't the days where we only had 1MB of save memory, and one save is 256KB. We have HDDs that can literally hold 20,000 game saves. I'd wager that 99% of game save files are under 50MB. - Heck my largest Skyrim and Fallout 4 save files are under 20MB.
Im pretty sure on PC with this game you could find the save file, and move it to another folder, and be able to start a new character. So I have to ask: Why are they making you pay for this?

Because they can, and if enough people fall for it, they will do it again, and they will make it worse, mark my words.

[Tsuki]

On 2/24/2018 at 7:31 AM, Sypran said:

Heck my largest Skyrim and Fallout 4 save files are under 20MB.

my smallest skyrim save file is almost 2GB lol