Konami Offers Exchanges on 360 Silent Hill HD Collection

[Trishbot]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

A small company like Atlus just patched their newest game as fast as they could. A big company like Konami could afford any price Microsoft asks.

I don't know. I just know Konami has pretty much run Silent Hill into the ground, destroyed its once-good name, and botched the HD collection on an unheard of level. This should have been a celebration of one of the greatest horror games, and one of the greatest games in general, of all time, given as much love, effort, and attention as the most sacred of video games.

I say often that if video games were a museum, Silent Hill 2 would be its Mona Lisa. The fact that Konami cares so little that they couldn't be bothered to re-release a 10-year-old game on modern systems without making it massively inferior in nearly every way, and then couldn't be bothered to fix all its brokenness upon release, says how much they care about the brand and its passionate fans.

 

[Mumorpuger]

I see it more as

PS3 = Japanese system, patch it. Xbox = American system, eh who cares?

For the Japanese Konami.

 

[Something Amyss]

While nice of them to be forthcoming with it, exchanging faulty goods that don't perform as could be reasonably expected is law in many countries.

As it is here, but the contents of a video game are treated differently because ponies. Really, all software is treated differently because ponies. but then, these days expecting functional hardware is becoming unrealistic, because consumers don't give a damn anymore and many will actually defend the horrendous practice of releasing broken crap. Ha. You thought I was going to say ponies, didn't you?

In other words:

Stand up guys. Other companies would tell people to suck it up.

Sad that that's my perception of most game companies.

You don't have to step forward to look good if the other guys are all stepping back.

WHAT? A full scale product recall and exchange is cheaper than making a patch?

what is wrong with this world?

Before you get too stressed out, it's not a full scale product recall. The restrictions here are gamed in such a way to grossly reduce the number of people.

 

[w9496]

Trade-in for another Konami title? How many of those are on the Xbox? The only one I can think of is the Metal Gear collection.

 

[Something Amyss]

A small company like Atlus just patched their newest game as fast as they could. A big company like Konami could afford any price Microsoft asks.

A lot of smaller companies do it. Which always makes me wonder why people jump on these stories so eagerly. I wonder if it's all just "MICRO$OFT IS TEH DEVIL!" Or what.

 

[Doom972]

So, they'd rather give free games than pay Microsoft to distribute a patch? Understandable, but not excusable. I doubt Konami would lose many customers, though.

 

[Kopikatsu]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

 

[lithiumvocals]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

 

[Kopikatsu]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

They're both being dicks.

 

[lithiumvocals]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

They're both being dicks.

Good thing I already have these for the PS2, otherwise I'd be mad at these companies for dickery.

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

So instead of patching a game which many people have been looking forward to play, they instead ignore the pleas of their customers and offer a different game which they actually give a shit about...

 

[TJC]

huh, so Konami released a crappy product, knowing perfectly well that it's bugged up the butt but shut their eyes and ears until the outcry was too loud to ignore and now they don't grant refunds OR fixes but allow to trade in for a game customers don't want?

That's like a multi-dimensional cock-up. Yeah, it might've been a bit expensive to patch the game but really, that would've been an investment well worth considering that it would put the brand Silent Hill back into a good light, create more loyal customers and allow future SH games to sell.

But yeah, short-term savings are SO much more worth than long-term profit.

 

[WaysideMaze]

They should be offering full refunds. You release a product that doesn't work then you should be footing the bill.

my original point is that this type of business practice is bad, retarding and stupid and whoever came up with it is stupid, and therefore should be shot and their family should pay for the bullet. it might be business savy to save a few buck but its stupid to alienate ur customer base no matter what business ur in and thats exactly what they're doing.

understand????????????

I don't know about anyone else, but I was a little confused at first.
Luckily by the 10th question mark it sank it. Thanks.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Its a disgrace. They admit to releasing a crappy version of the game and then wont do anything to rectify it. Some people wont be able to get there money back or swap it. Most shops normally have a 1 week return policy or something. Konami can't do anything about it. Its a disgrace, it really is.

 

[saintdane05]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

They're both being dicks.

EVERYONE IS A DICK!

 

[faefrost]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

I'm thinking it is more a reaction to the process involved with patching on the XBox as opposed to the costs. We hear more than enough stories about how pointlessly onerous the XBox certification process is. I mean to patch it they would have to retest and re-certify it with the Rock Band drum kit among other things. Really?

 

[karloss01]

So they have admitted that the product is unfit for sale? Time to call up UK Trading Standards!


(at least thats what i'd be saying if i'd bought it...)

 

[lithiumvocals]

I can understand the outrage. But there is still something weirder going on behind the scenes here. I mean why fix the problem on the PS3 but not the XBox 360? Can we reasonably suspect that there is something in the rules, policies, certification testing or business agreements with MS that discourage Konami from actually fixing the problem?

Microsoft charges obscene amounts of money for the privilege to patch games on their system, remember?

But this is Konami. I figure that if anyone has enough disposable income to pay for a patch, it's them.

It's not a matter of ability to pay, but willingness.


I would even go as far as to say that the more able a company is to pay the fine, the less willing they'd be.

So they're just being dicks.

I'm thinking it is more a reaction to the process involved with patching on the XBox as opposed to the costs. We hear more than enough stories about how pointlessly onerous the XBox certification process is. I mean to patch it they would have to retest and re-certify it with the Rock Band drum kit among other things. Really?

Konami doesn't seem like a company that is worried with protesting shitty business practices.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

dear god Konami has fallen as a quality developer as of late. In terms of incompetent Japanese developers they're only surpassed by Square-Enix.