Poll: I'm going to buy Mortal Kombat Used just out of Spite.

[AgentBJ09]

Ok, well did you just skip all of my reasons as to why this was worth a purchase? "There's no Survival/Time Attack!" is a pretty weak reason as to why I'm just wrong.

I've pointed out plenty of reasons why this game warranted another purchase, perhaps not from your viewpoint, but from the viewpoint of a tournament/competitive player. They re-balanced the game, added ten more characters, gave everyone a second ultra combo, added a few more costumes, new trials, new stages, new bonus stages, etc...

Most importantly, they've re-balanced the game and added characters. Do you realise how major a change that is? That completely changes how characters are played, both casually and competitively. And it was at half the price of the original.

Fans asked for these changes, and Capcom gave it to them. I fail to see the evil intentions behind this.

(Replaced with Editor's Note from Destructoid article: We're not just a (rad) news site -- we also publish opinions/editorials from our community & employees like this one, though be aware it may not jive the opinions of Destructoid as a whole,...)

Obviously, you didn't read my post. Plus, that was an opinion piece you linked, which although I read, doesn't help your case with the content nor the STFU title. Classy.

My argument, once again, is this: If someone is spending money for a second go around for a fighting game, which Super SF IV is, do not remove content in exchange for new stuff, especially not single player content. Not everyone plays fighting games online or in tournaments.

Then, as I said before, Capcom has a history of re-releases with their recent and old games. So whenever they announce something, I am skeptical of the product, even though I am not a customer of theirs.

[hr]

Now, looking at MK9, which this thread is about, they're giving you a Story Mode, Training Mode, and the Challenge Tower for Single Player, along with the Krypt. Next comes a number of online modes, one of which I'm sure will be Test Your Luck, coupled with a voting and style system for earning achievements in some modes. It may be a reboot, but that's good, rounded content for a fighting game.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

Ok, well did you just skip all of my reasons as to why this was worth a purchase? "There's no Survival/Time Attack!" is a pretty weak reason as to why I'm just wrong.

I've pointed out plenty of reasons why this game warranted another purchase, perhaps not from your viewpoint, but from the viewpoint of a tournament/competitive player. They re-balanced the game, added ten more characters, gave everyone a second ultra combo, added a few more costumes, new trials, new stages, new bonus stages, etc...

Most importantly, they've re-balanced the game and added characters. Do you realise how major a change that is? That completely changes how characters are played, both casually and competitively. And it was at half the price of the original.

Fans asked for these changes, and Capcom gave it to them. I fail to see the evil intentions behind this.

(Replaced with Editor's Note from Destructoid article: We're not just a (rad) news site -- we also publish opinions/editorials from our community & employees like this one, though be aware it may not jive the opinions of Destructoid as a whole,...)

Obviously, you didn't read my post. Plus, that was an opinion piece you linked, which although I read, doesn't help your case with the content nor the STFU title. Classy.

My argument, once again, is this: If someone is spending money for a second go around for a fighting game, which Super SF IV is, do not remove content in exchange for new stuff, especially not single player content. Not everyone plays fighting games online or in tournaments.

Then, as I said before, Capcom has a history of re-releases with their recent and old games. So whenever they announce something, I am skeptical of the product, even though I am not a customer of theirs.

[hr]

Now, looking at MK9, which this thread is about, they're giving you a Story Mode, Training Mode, and the Challenge Tower for Single Player, along with the Krypt. Next comes a number of online modes, one of which I'm sure will be Test Your Luck, coupled with a voting and style system for earning achievements in some modes. It may be a reboot, but that's good, rounded content for a fighting game.

No, not everyone plays fighting games in tournaments or online. Yet Capcom, knowing this fact more than anyone, released this game, feature light but change heavy, to a very large sector of the gaming community, and they all bought it. People who this game didn't apply to (e.g. you) didn't.
Really, you statement of "If someone is spending money for a second go around for a fighting game, which Super SF IV is, do not remove content in exchange for new stuff, especially not single player content." doesn't really apply if "someone" isn't interested in single player content.

Your original question a few posts back (which is what I originally quoted) asked:

Otherwise, I support MK over other fighting games, especially Super Street Fighter 4 and MvC 3 considering how much Capcom seems to want to gouge us for stuff these days. Speaking of, why is another version of many of Capcom's recent games OK with people on this site, while a 10$ online pass for one game isn't? That sounds like hypocrisy to me.

Where you seemed to be comparing project 10 dollar to a Capcom re-release. And I very much answered that.

As for the Destructoid article, if you look past the usual Destructoid condescension, they make some good points.

 

[RuralGamer]

I have this great idea. We'll lock down the multiplayer mode so that people won't want to get the game at all! PROFIT!

I do believe that has been referred to as the "Umbrella Corporation approach" on this site before; Yahtzee during his critical review of a Resident Evil game, noting that the Umbrella Corporation seem to have a really bad business model, yet they always seem to succeed/go ahead with their plans anyway.

So in this case it is;

Really controversial idea + angry fans + something else = profit

 

[Frylock72]

Most of my games come through Steam or Amazon, I can't really stand GameStop. Granted I've been hearing from more than a few employees who come through my place of business that have gotten royally screwed by them. And then there was the former GameStop manager who was on waitstaff.

Besides, when I buy games, I want to keep them. Maybe I'm an odd minority, but then, I don't feel the need to play every single Call of Duty clone ever, either.

Yeah, no company is perfect. I've got a rather massive list of complaints of the company myself. You think your experience is bad? Try working for them See, customers may see themselves as being ripped off and voice their opinions about it, but I get to hear those complaints, and THEN I get to hear GameStop corporate making excuses about why it's justified! You should see the emails I send to the various offices when I'm at work. I'm surprised I've been promoted as far as I have, some of them were really sarcastic and downright vicious.

I'd like to think our store is better than most. In our area at least, we're the store that people come to BECAUSE they had horrible service/fed a line of BS/bad juju from another store. That being said, most GS employees don't like their jobs, and I swear some of them go out of their way to make people's lives miserable.

Then again, maybe it's GameStop themselves that are trying to make everyone's lives miserable? Wouldn't surprise me any

Seriously, is this really an issue? Buy it used and pay for content and the price of the used game will all of a sudden be the same as the price for the new game. They need money to make games, they need a game to sell well to create new games, they're aware of the problems with used games and do this. It's quite reasonable if you ask me. This might be because I've seen the prices GameStop charges for used game... they're not that cheap when you compare it to the prices you can get online for a new game. Often I've seen cheaper new games than their used games.
Stop whining for crying out loud.

Also truth. People go to GameStop because it's convenient, not because it's cheap. They're paying the price for the ease of just heading over to a store, rather than putting some info online. On the flipside however, it can go the other way. For instance a copy of My Japanese Coach for the DS goes for as much as $80new/$50used online. Or, you know, you could go to GameStop, request one from another store, and have it in your pocket in a week for $25, tax included.

And now we're back around at the "shop smarter" quip.

I like you, I think we can be friends. I agree with your statement about being a smarter shopper. I think people are just unused to thinking in terms of, say, grocery shopping or buying for a business, where you look for sales and other discounts. I'm out here in DeLand, FL, and we have a Gamestop here that has a few guys who are really cool. I actually went there to unload some old stuff to recoup buying a DS Lite and Pokemon Black, and managed to get enough store credit (though I got it on a gift card) to cover the game. I also made friends with the guy who helped me, and made a deal with him for my FF8 PS1 game.

On topic, I probably won't buy the game just because I stopped being into Mortal Kombat a few years ago, and online multiplayer is just stupid. The X-Box Live community is all the justification I need for never, ever touching anything online in a random setting ever again. If I ever get into a place where I can hang out with friends and play games, I'll play offline multiplayer, or I'll play online with friends I know and not random people who love to grief.

I'll put it out there that I buy from Gamestop a lot. I got my refurbished 360 and DS Lite from there, but I also bought Pokemon Black brand new from there. I also have that gift card I can use to buy something else. It's a good company, but someone said before that if there's little difference in the price of a used and new game, how is it is not hurting the developers to buy the used one, even if it is only $5 cheaper? That's a good point.

 

[Rex Fallout]

Why have spite torwards it? Developers are trying to make more money than the used copies that most people buy. Get over it. If I buy a game I like from a developer I like, no matter the exctra $10 it costs, I buy new. Why you may ask? Because I want them to keep making good games, and if I dont buy their product, they wont.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

I think the online pass thing is fair and square, provided it functions on a basic technical level and doesn't lock legitimate customers out of playing the multiplayer.

So, no. I don't see the point to what you're doing.

 

[AgentBJ09]

No, not everyone plays fighting games in tournaments or online. Yet Capcom, knowing this fact more than anyone, released this game, feature light but change heavy, to a very large sector of the gaming community, and they all bought it. People who this game didn't apply to (e.g. you) didn't.

Right there, you showcased my grievances about the game. From my experience working at Gamestop, a lot of my customers who bought this game, for 39.99 mind you, also bought the first one, either regular or CE, at 59.99/79.99.

So, if Capcom knew not everyone plays in tournaments or online, why would so many of my regulars who play this game via LANs or offline, and who did not have issues with balance when I spoke to them about this, buy this game? They had no reason to buy a new version or upgrade, and yet they did.

That's why I am not a fan of re-releases from Capcom like this, much less their angle on what qualifies as DLC or patches: Because many of their fans will buy their stuff without question these days, no matter how much or little has changed between releases.

Street Fighter IV is one of the games that suffers from this, as well as Resident Evil 5 and Resident Evil 4. These are two of their biggest gaming franchises, and frankly, I would not be surprised if they did this with Marvel vs. Capcom 3 down the road for things other than characters because the game was so lacking in content from my experience with it.

Sure, other companies may charge what seems like too much for DLC content and patch things when situations arise, but they do not have a history of re-releases of their most popular games like Capcom does.

(I am not bemoaning Netherrealm Studios for the same actions of DLC characters because in MK canon, three of the characters in the 26 player roster were not in the games before MK3/Ultimate, or are new ones. Quan Chi, Cyborg Sub-Zero, and Human Sektor)

Really, you statement of "If someone is spending money for a second go around for a fighting game, which Super SF IV is, do not remove content in exchange for new stuff, especially not single player content." doesn't really apply if "someone" isn't interested in single player content.

Where you seemed to be comparing project 10 dollar to a Capcom re-release. And I very much answered that....

The 10$ online pass is still a rumor, and while I have heard that WB is quietly e-mailing retailers about it, thus far, my old co-workers have shown me that this is not the case.

And, as for answering my statement, I disagree. You instead justified the idea of making a new version of the game. As a response, here's how I would have fixed the issues from IV to Super IV if I was in charge of Capcom's R&D department.

1. - Patch the balance issue for existing fighters.
2. - Run beta tests for new kinds of online matches to let word of mouth spread before inputting the new modes to all who participated, and charging 3.00$ for anyone who wants all the new modes later.
3. - Charge for the new characters. Say 15$ for five characters.
4. - Drop the plans for new Supers/Ultras, as well as stages. Those are too minor to charge for unless it's a mass download.
5. - Patch in Story Mode special stages.

That's how I would do it. The total charge for the content would be about 35$, but in this case, you do not have to choose between versions to get the whole experience.

Or, better yet, have Capcom do what Bethesda, Gearbox, and a number of other companies have done before: Release a Game of the Year Edition of SF IV, with all the DLC on another disk. This idea I support more than re-releasing a game with slight to major changes.

 

[Chibz]

Know what's fun? Going into Gamestop with 6 games, getting $10 in credit, and watching them put those games back on the shelf for $60 each.

The used game industry is a scaaaaaam.

Hey now brown cow, not EVERY game shop scam people like EB/Gamestop. The smalltime "local" used game stores tend to do the 50-100 model. They buy the game off you for approximately one half of what they sell it for on shelf. One half, CASH. Unless you're trading in, in which case they usually give you discount in the form of cutting the tax.

So don't paint the ENTIRE used game industry with the same brush you do GS/EB Mkay?

 

[Chelsea O'shea]

Well I'm buying it new, because it won't make a difference? Oh, and my shiny pass will be included.

I think the game looks great, so I want to reward those who made it by seeing them recieve their monies.

thank you,why should gamestop get the money for this game instead of nether realm?

i am sorry but locking the good part is a damn good idea,i don't buy used cause only the developers and other involved with its making deserve the money for it.

 

[ThatDaveDude1]

They're doing this because people buy games used.
You're not fucking helping.

 

[Don't taze me bro]

I worked for EB / Gamestop for 5 years. There is no way in good conscience I will ever support their pre-owned business again.

I always buy new now.

In just about all cases, you can find it cheaper new than pre-owned if you shop around for specials.

 

[Steve Fidler]

These actions, taken by publishers/developers as a method of recuperating loses due to the Used Game business model are not an act of aggression against the consumer, but a result of desperation.

The money earned by a publisher/developer through a Used Game Sale is the equivalent of the money earned through piracy of the product. If you want to support the Developer/Publisher, buy the game new. If you plan on buying it used, be sure it costs at least (in this case) $10 less than the price of a New copy, so that you aren't being ripped off.

This is a positive thing for developers and publishers and will aid in the continued development of Triple A titles and enjoyable experiences for everyone.

 

[Traun]

Yes, I mean, how dare people MAKE money out of their products. I mean, how come the developers try to make any money, everything should go to Gamestop, yay!

 

[A Weakgeek]

The publishers are doing whatever they can to increase sales and not lose out to the used gaming market. I don't see a problem with this strategy of adding extra content for the people willing to shelf out an additional 10 dollars for the new game. As a publisher I don't see why they should be rewarding people who are not contributing to the success of the game by buying the game used. I say, if you buy the game used then you should be prepared to miss out on certain exclusive content. You really have to think about this from a business standpoint. If the game doesn't sell well (and used game contribute to that) then we won't see a sequel to the game. Promoting the sales of new games by giving the gamer the option to shelf out the extra money for extra content is a good strategy.

ADDING EXTRA CONTENT?? So teh MULTIPLAYER IN MK is EXTRA CONTENT? I think not! If devs would actually finish the game first, and then start making extra content for the new copy buyers that would be fine. But do you really think thats the case? No! BFBC2 for example the devs made it right from the start so that they made a decent map roster, But locked 60% if them from those who bought it used. This is getting out of hands really, one day all games are just demos, before you put in the DAMN CODE to actually play the contents of the DISK YOU JUST BOUGHT!

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

I have this great idea. We'll lock down the multiplayer mode so that people won't want to get the game at all! PROFIT!

That's kinda the problem though. Gamers are like British People. We moan constantly about issues within the industry, but we never protest or act on them.

People want this game badly enough that they'll bend over for the publishers to get their hands on it. If there was a boycott and a reason was given, it'd make them revise their RDM plans. I'm not trying to start a boycott by the way, I don't care for MK, but still, we don't do anything about problems like this. We just take it.

 

[krazykidd]

You guys are missing one thing, for a game to be 'used' it has to be bought 'new' and returned. Thus For every Used game thats on the shelf,the developpers got the money equivalent of 1 game, so the developpers aren't technically losing anything.

People that Buy used in general wouldn't buy the game new.Meaning that if there were NO USED GAMES they still wouldn't buy it ( unless it was like 20$ new ). So again developpers technically aren't Losing anything.

Basic Mathematics.

 

[Verlander]

I'd rather buy the game than feed the cling on industries, while the actual industry receives no money for their work.