Return fire -
June 24, 2001 - Nich Maragos
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed
within this column are those of the participants and the
moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the
GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive
material afoot.
This column contains great vengeance and furious anger.
Don't say we didn't warn you.
I'm not this mean by nature, honest. It just leapt out of me.
| The great Dreamcast games of never |
| In response to all this, I have to say I agree. Sure, complaining is all
consumers feel obligated to do, so no one should be shocked. For instance,
I've complained quite a bit about Sonic Adventure 2, and what I feel is good
reason. But, my complaints remain within my circle of friends instead of
harassing Sega or Sonic Team directly. The main reason is that I have not
finished Sonic Adventure 2 yet, so complaining now would be premature.
Complaints should be made, if ever they should be, after the game is at
least played, but more appropriately after finishing.
About PSO, they should've charged for it from the beginning, this is their
mistake. But, since going system agnostic, Sega has been making lots of
mistakes which is basically killing the Dreamcast completely. Worse than
this, it is depriving all of us Dreamcast gamers lots of good games. Sega
should've decided on a more subtle approach, first just the Gameboy Advance
(since this is the only system they've released a game for in their new
system agnostic approach so far). Sometime this month, they should have
dropped the ball, stated releases for PS2, NGC and XBOX later this
year/early next year and allowed the Dreamcast to die then. Now we are
robbed a chance for Half Life on Dreamcast, domestic release of either
Capcom vs SNKs, a real reason to waste our time with PSOv2, and most
important of all: Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo (ok, in my opinion). That's
just a few of the countless games we could've enjoyed in this lull in good
game releases. And I will not forget the indignity of quietly excluding
Samba 2000. Bastards.
Your main point on Saturday, however, was complaining. Since none of what
I've said could be seen as anything other than venting, true customer
support at any video game company probably has to deal with venting
constantly. However, many companies wish to hear feedback, which includes
compliments as well as complaints. I could complain to Sonic Team now
concerning camera control problems, but I should also compliment them on the
enjoyment and sheer awe I'm in while playing Sonic's stages. Feedback is
still important, despite your personal regards, because they do still depend
on customer support. In fact, properly delivered feedback is not just for
customer benefit, in fact, the video game companies deserve it. Obviously,
not every game sells billions like Final Fantasy or a Tony Hawk so these
companies deserve to know what we like, what we don't like, and, most
importantly, what we want. Apathy obviously isn't getting us SPF2T on DC, nor did it get us the Matching Service.
-Ryu, who thinks Konami should take feedback once in a while and maybe Ring
of Red wouldn't have been slaughtered and made completely devoid of value.
|
Well, as far as Puzzle Fighter goes, nobody ever said it wasn't coming here. Plenty of Matching Service games arrived stripped of their online capabilities. Why you'd want a version identical to the PlayStation and Saturn release is beyond me, especially since it's still two-player only, but there you go.
But as far as the Matching Service, that's a pay-to-play deal, and you all know what American gamers think about that. Small wonder they never tried to launch it here.
| Getting what you pay for |
| Your rant reminds me quite a bit of the episode of the Simpsons regarding
Poochie the Dog. After the Comic Book Store Guy trashes the show, Bart
asks him "They've given you thousands of hours of entertainment for
free! What could they possibly owe you? If anything, you owe them!"
I would agree with this, except for one small issue.
We ARE paying for them.
Your sports analogy does not quite work out either. People can play
football any place where there's a bunch of guys willing to play, a ball
and a field. Video games, without the industry, would die a horrible
death, as very few programmers want to spend hours upon hours writing code
without getting any payoff.
To get off on a small tangent (temporarily), I am one of the numerous
people frustrated at American companies that refuse to bring any number of
video games out in America because some demographics suggest that we
aren't ready for them. Granted, the situation has improved exponentially
over the past couple years, what with Square actually becoming quite the
big power here in America, plus the greater market of the PSX allowing for
several more niche games.
Yet I still can't get out of my mind the numerous petitions and e-mails I
made to get Konami to bring out Policenauts in America a few years
back. The whole situation had bothered me so much, that the game had
actually launched my study of the Japanese language, while the CDs gather
dust on my shelf, awaiting the day I can understand it.
People wanted the game. Maybe not a lot of people, by any stretch of the
imagination, but customers willing to plunk down cash. Konami is a
business. They actually do have a business reputation to uphold, even if
the average gamer does not care about it. At the same time though, Konami
wants to make money. If Konami does not make fans happy, then Konami has
no people to buy their games. Thus, they die off.
This would never, ever happen in the case of a singular game (boycotting a
whole company for not bringing out one game is pretty preposterous, IMO -
Konami still DID give us Symphony of the Night and Metal Gear Solid) but
in the large scale, it makes sense.
What all of that is saying is that many gamers don't want a bunch of
people in suits (who may or may not know anything about the video game
market, we don't really know) telling them what games they can and cannot
play. We want to be catered to, because we keep them alive, or at least
we'd like to think we do. And it frustrates us when we aren't being
listened to, even if in the end, it doesn't really make a difference.
-Kurt
|
Well, in my defense, while my rant might have reminded you of the Simpsons episode, I never said games were free the way TV is. The sports analogy is perfectly reasonable.
But I think you're vastly overestimating the audience for things like Policenauts. While I'd certainly be the first in line if it ever came out here, given my general Kojima-worship, I think it was just an unfortunate victim of circumstance. In the early days of the PSX, there wasn't enough of an audience to support it, and in the later days a port of the Sega CD game doesn't stand up to the current crop of titles available. (Not that this has stopped Working Designs ... )
| Filth |
| "They owe us nothing. We have no right to videogames. A "right" is
something given to every citizen in the country, and the ability to play
games just doesn't fall under that category. Companies release the games,
we pay money for them ...and the transaction ends there. "
As the licensors of Sega's products, (not the owners, mind you.) we do have
certain rights that are covered by our contract with Sega:
1) We have a right to software that works properly
and
2) If said software does NOT work properly, we have a right to a
replacement or patches for the software for free.
PSO v.2 is a patch. It is a patch that has a few extras attached to it in
an attempt to suck more money out of Sega's loyal fans.
You say later on, regarding the pricing scheme:
..."most of the complaints I've read have more to do with the $3/month fee
than the retail pricing. Which seems odd to me, since that's about how much
I pay to follow just one comic book every month."
Really? Do you pay an additional $50 Dollars for the first issue of that
comic book? How about another 20-40 dollars a month just to read that
comic book? And would you pay, on discovering that the comic book
vaporizes every so often, causing you to reboot the comic so you can read
it again, another $20 dollars just to get it fixed? Oh, and then it will
cost you just 3 dollars a month to follow that comic.
But then again, I must agree. Show your support with your wallet. Sell
your Dreamcast and get a Gameboy Advance or put the money down on a
Gamecube or PS2. That way, you'll never have to rely on Sega for your fix
again.
-IronTetra
|
It's all I can do not to fall over laughing when you say you have a "contract" with Sega. Can I hear some quotations from this contract? The exact language, please?
And PSO v2 is not a patch. A patch is a bit of software that goes over an existing program to correct errors. There is nothing wrong with PSO v1 to fix, and indeed as you and every other self-righteous prig seldom gets tired of pointing out, PSO v2 barely offers anything that the first doesn't. So don't buy it. Don't get so aggrieved that Sega is charging too much for a game you had no intention to play, don't act like they're committing some sort of moral transgression. As near as I can figure it, the big reason to buy v2 is if you weren't that interested in buying the first one, but some aspect of the new version intrigues you.
A far better analogy to use on PSO v2 isn't a game patch but a director's cut. It's got a little bit extra, it runs a little truer to the creator's vision, but no one's going to argue (except in extreme cases such as Universal's cut of Touch of Evil) that the original released version was incomplete or wrong. And you didn't see me angrily petition Touchstone for a rebate on my movie-only copy of Rushmore when the Criterion edition was released. If it incenses you that much, go ahead and do what I did in that situation: sell your copy of the original version. There are ways around problems like this that do not require one to make an ass of oneself.
I'm not even going to touch your comics remarks, given the spurious, nonexistent additional charges you've tacked onto the one-time purchase and subsequent monthly fee. I was purely comparing the fee to my comics habits, anyway. Read a little more carefully.
| What's best for me is best for everyone |
| Voting with one's wallet and knowing that an opinion is just that are all
fine and good. I understand these things. I don't truly believe that what
I say to a company will make a difference. Sometimes though, things
companies do just piss me off, and without any ulterior logic about someone
owing me something, or real intent to change anything, I want my
pissed-off-ed-ness to be known. I'm the kind of snob who is genuinely
angered by a company which sells speakers and snack food and movie tickets,
and devotes 98% of it's development resources to graphical flair, putting
one of the most brilliant game designers in the industry to work on an
installment of it's prized franchise that won't even be out until relatively
late in the ps2's lifespan, rather than allow him to create another game as
innovative as tactics ogre or vagrant story, even though it would never sell
as well as said franchise. It matters to me that both the GIA and EGM named
a game as generic and utterly uninspired as FFIX "rpg of the year," even if
the supposed honor is arbitrary and meaningless. It matters to me that the
total combined box office earnings of Requiem for a Dream and Memento would
be less than a quarter of the money whatever drek happens to be "opening
nationwide" this weekend will make. I'm just that kind of asshole. And
when things like this piss me off, it matters that people know about it.
I'm going to single-handedly alter the tastes and opinions of everyone.
Nothing can stop me now.
-Van Veen
|
Speaking personally, I'd be more likely to be influenced by you or even to pay more attention if you'd break up your paragraphs a little more. Other than that, I'm just printing this letter to demonstrate how sad it looks when someone believes their opinions are the only valid ones in the world.
| Auctorial intent |
| Mch argues that "companies would not be here if we weren't buying their
games." While this argument has a certain degree of validity, in that
companies whose products fail to sell usually don't survive, it is
showing only one piece of the picture.
The other piece, which is at least as important, is that we wouldn't be
buying their games if the companies didn't Do Their Own Thing. Sure,
Final Fantasy may have multiple sequels, selling primarily on reputation
of the series, but what made the first a success was that it was
different, and in a good way. The sequels are allowed to be somewhat
less different because they're sequels; but my observation is that the
gaming public as a whole does not look kindly upon other companies
making knock-offs of a popular game. And even within a series, there is
usually a strong cry for innovation.
The problem is that fans often *don't* really know what they want. The
author Terry Pratchett once remarked that he always listened to fans'
advice, but that if he actually heeded it, he'd have written 30 books
about Rincewind. As it is, he's written several books with different
characters and different plotlines, and the fans -- the same ones who
requested more Rincewind -- have bought them and enjoyed them. You have
to trust the creator to know what's best for his creation.
If the artists, authors, and game companies of the world owe their fans
anything, it is integrity. The integrity to create as they will,
without caving to outside influences. After all, that's what made us
buy their product to begin with. If you happen to not like a given
product that they have created... don't buy it. Nobody's forcing you
to; you're under no obligation to buy something just because someone
wants to sell it. But neither are they under any obligation to sell
something merely because you want to buy it.
-Chaomancer Omega
|
Well spoken. Another example from literature would be the snarky passages near the end of the Hitchiker's series mocking fans who demand nothing but Marvin. As you can see just from reading this letters column all the way through, there are some people who demand that their favorite series never changed because "it was perfect the way it was." If that was really true, it seems to me there's no point in continuing it--once you've reached perfection, where else is there to go?
| Sophist Nation |
| I noticed throughout yesterday's column that a few of the letters written
were erroneous in their presumptions. No, not "everyone" wants FF Tactics
2. Not "everyone" wanted the GBA Castlevania. Hell, not even "everyone"
wants Sonic Adventure 2, as evidenced by its early poor sales. Now tell
me, if SA2 isn't selling, who's to say FFT2 will?
Don't forget, FFT was pulled off the shelves early and had cancelled
reproduction because it sold less than pet rocks. Tell me, does that
really tell Square that we want an FF Tactics 2? Konami even took a huge
risk with developing the GBA Castlevania after Symphony of the Night's
poor sales almost killed the Castlevania series entirely.
As much as hardcore gamers seem to be of the mind that "Company X owes us
Game Y" and wait impatiently for the sequel to the game that only
hardcore gamers bought, the mainstream gamers are still purchasing Army
Men games faster than 3DO can say "What's this? Money?" Square, on the
other hand, is nearly bankrupt. The Dreamcast is dead and Sega is finally
seeing profits go up for the first time in 5 years. SNK is bankrupt after
the Neo Geo Pocket Color, the handheld darling of the hardcore community,
fell flat on its face. Skies of Arcadia was recently on clearance at my
local Target for nine dollars... and the five copies are still resting
there 2 months later. I guess that's what companies get for giving us
what "we" want.
-Eric Stibbons
|
For heaven's sake, where does everyone get the impression that Symphony of the Night sold poorly? It made the Greatest Hits line here in the US as well as the Japanese equivalent, known as the Best series. I know that quality in games is so seldom rewarded (no one knows that better than a Samba fan) but SotN just ain't an example of the phenomenon.
But apart from that, you're right. Gamers do tend to think "I want a sequel to <game x>" and assume that the rest of the world must too. Much as I loved Skies of Arcadia, I'm not holding my breath for a second game given the tepid sales. And once again, I can't overstate the importance of letting companies know what games you want by buying them. If hundreds of thousands of people had bought Skies, Sega would get Overworks on the horn and say "More, please!" But they didn't, and that's just how it goes.
| And now for something completely different |
| Okay, here's my latest problem : I have a 10-hour, non-stop flight back to
the States next week, and I'm seriously wondering if buying a GBA for the
trip wouldn't be such a bad idea, despite a lack of funds. Is the Lil' Game
Machine worth it?
-Negative Creep
|
I'd say yes, conditionally. Do you already own a GBC? Have you played some of the classic games on that? The reason I ask is because if you don't have a handheld at the moment, you could offset the cost of buying a new system by picking up two or three great used regular GB games like FF Adventure, Metal Gear Solid, or Zelda DX for roughly the amount you'd pay for one regular Game Boy Advance game. Then, when you had a bit more money, you could try proper GBA games and see how they grab you. Sound good?
| Droll, indeed |
| Well, I see that DA is as popular as ever.
But if you really think you're as good as you say, explain THIS!
Next to my right-hand shift key (you know, the one under the enter key, not
under caps), is a button labelled simply as "super"
It is rougly the size of a normal letter key, and is very mysterious. Does
it summon a super hero? Does it detonate a super bomb? Does it release the
super RPG? WHAT DOES IT DO?
-Confused in CA
Shane Lile
|
The trick to making that button work requires thinking back to your youth. It's vaguely block-shaped, and marked "super," so what should you do with it? That's right--suspend it over your head, and jump so as to punch the underside of your keyboard where the key is. An orange-red mushroom will pop up and attempt to flee. Give chase, and next thing you know you'll be trying out for center on the Lakers. Best of luck.
| You say tomato |
| Hey Double A,
FFX keeps looking better and ever. What strikes me most is how Square
has the guts in tinkering with a known money maker. Just look at the
Sphere
System. Personally, I am rather excited at the thought and possibilities
of
the system. This is one of the reasons why I enjoy the FF series more
than
any other series. Especially with Dragon Quest because each game in that
series has the same exact system. While the new Job system in 6 and 7 is
interesting, it is STILL the same battle system that has been used since
DQ1.
But Square is not afraid to take their #1 money maker ( What happened to
Saga Frontier 3 (their #2 money making series), Square?)and create an all
new
and original growth system. This new sphere system sounds great. Being
able
to customize the growth of the characters gives FFX a more pen and paper
RPG
feeling. I just hope that the game will have rare spheres like HP Plus,
MP
plus, Str Up, etc that are hidden in towns and dungeons. Finding these
to
help boost your characters gives more meaning to combing the dungeons and
towns for elusive treasure. Just one question. Do you think that once
you
reach a certain tile, you can use as many stat boosting spheres as you
want
until you move onto another tile? This idea could force a character to
use
strategy in deciding how many HP Plus or Str Up Tidus gets and how many
Yuna
willl get. Man this system sounds great. I love you Square:)
Anywho, what are your thoughts on Square rewriting the RPG genre over and
over again with their new ideas and systems?
-Rye, the floppish PSO jester
PS I bet mastering the Blitzball game will net you some good Spheres....
|
| And I say tomahto |
| Hey Nich,
Let me enlighten you on my situation. The last game I have bought was
Final Fantasy IX, the last game I beat was Xenogears. My Dreamcast sits
in
shame under my bed next to the SNES and N64. The only gaming system I
have
hooked up STILL is my PSX, in case one day, I feel like trying to finish
FF9.
I like reading about the gaming industry more then participating in it,
so my
input is as good as anyone's.
Square is a whore, of sorts. The name Final Fantasy is mainstream, and
is
becoming more generic to me. My first RPG was FFIV, and it still is my
favorite game ever. FF6 was great as well, so yea! Go Square, as a young
gamer I was very satisfied with the Final Fantasy Series. FF7, quality
gaming! Another great RPG, new look new feel, dawning of a new era? YES,
an
era of cheese. FF8 was bad, very baD. FF9 was boring, very boring. And
FF10
looks to be as mainstream as ever. Why has the series changed so much?
Its
like you said, they make games that we will buy. And the majority of
RPG'ers
are fine with the Tom Cruise hero of FF10. Where's the fantasy? Wheres
the
drama? The struggle? I dont feel that anymore, not from a guy with a tail
or
from some pop-culture hero. I felt it in FFT, I felt it in titles that
arent
getting the budget from Square. I still feel it, but those are dead
series.
Final Fantasy Tactics was a shot in the barrel, don't expect a sequel.
Xenogears, it takes another company for any continuation of this story.
Square is making products that will definitely sell, and two cult
favorites
like XG and FFT arent making that cut. Square will never make my heart
race
again, I can tell. And for FF11? Online gaming on a console is not only
impracticle, it's foolish. I own Starcraft and Diablo, pay for the GREAT
game, PLAY THE GREAT GAME, then go online, and play a whole other type of
the
same GREAT game for free. Why would I want FF11, when there are already
PROVEN great online RPGs? The answer is online console gaming is going to
lose everyone alot of money, and further cheese up the FF name. They
don't
owe me shit, they dont owe me a sequel to FFT, they dont owe me a XG
sequel.
But it goes both ways, They dont make the titles I want, and I dont owe
them
a damn thing either.
-Mephtik
|
Well, they can't both be right. What do you think?
Closing Comments:
Lots of new FFX information out, and we now know the basic personality sketch for every party member as well as a few generalities on the game's major "system" goes. Has your opinion of the game changed in light of these revelations? Tell Chris all about it.
-Nich Maragos, chilling out
|
