Defecting SC players

[Kai_lombax]

I don't get why some people are getting so up in arms when this thread was asking if and why players who have defected or stopped playing chose to do so. If people are so annoyed at the comments on why people have chosen to stop playing the game, then stop reading the thread and move to a different one. It just seems pointless to drag on in a thread that you don't want to see or waste your time on. *shrugs*

Like many others have said, people have their own reasons for why they stopped playing the game or play it less. If that isn't the case for you, then keep playing the game. No one is saying your should stop playing sheesh.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

You know what keeps me playing this game? Constantly learning new characters!

Sc5 has both good and bad qualities IMO, so I completely understand why people defect.

Developers don't always know what they're doing. Just because they think sc1-4 were fatally flawed, doesn't automatically make it true.

And besides, quality game play or not, the ONLY criteria namco (and probably PS too) gives a shit about is money. I don't care how bad you think sc2 is, that game sold way more than any game that came after it, and that alone made it a success.

To say that developers thought sc1-4 were "fatally flawed", is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What kind of idiot would favor something that made them less money?

 

[IdleMind]

Look we can discuss with history and developer statements, or we can argue with YES SUH and NUH UH. No meaningful conversation ever happened from people saying THIS IS MY OPINION AND I WILL NOT BE SWAYED AND I AM ENTITLED TO IT. So do me a favor and stop dancing around the fact that developer statements hurt your nostalgia goggles. Nobody ever said you can't like SC1-4 because the developers consider it flawed; what I'm saying is, if you don't understand the REASONS why they consider it flawed, you will not understand why SC5 is the way it is.

tl;dr: when you know how and why something works, you come off like less of an ignoramus when you talk about it.

Side notes:

SC2 tanked in sales in Japan. TANKED. The game sold poorly in Arcades, and did not bring ARC ops the kind of return they were hoping for. This was cited primarily as GAMEPLAY FLAWS among the tournament players in JPN. In US/EUR it did well only on the gamecube console version. I can fill you guys in on the history of these things if you would just stop being so goddamn defensive. Maybe you will learn something.

Game designers are not publishers. A game designer is an artist, they make things because they want to make the best thing possible. Being in the field myself, I can tell you this is true. A game designer wants to constantly improve and innovate his product, and game designers who don't love what they do churn out terrible games.

A publisher is the one who cares about the money. Namco is the publisher. The publisher funds the project and expects a return on investment. PS was not paid in dividends, they are paid in salary. Namco controls things like release date windows, and can have influence on a product.

So, lets see if more pants-shitting NUH UH comes this way, or you children begin to sit down, shut up, and open your eyes.

 

[TsunamiBye]

Is that you, Idlemind? Seriously, there's no way I can like many posts that make sense.

 

[damn-I-Suck]

Based on that logic, why did sc4 sell better than sc5 if sc4 is "fatally flawed"?

The thing is, previous SC games had glitches, like seriously bad ones.

As for sc5, not only does it also have glitches (bad ones too), it also has a meter system that many people (including myself) didn't want, didn't ask for, and generally don't like it.

This is all a matter of personal preference. There is no such thing as "facts" in such an argument. Some people like meter, some hate it, it's just that simple.

You can come at me with facts until you're blue in the face, none of it matters. The only thing that matters is what YOU like, and this I bet is the primary reason people are defecting from sc5.

Whenever a game goes through drastic changes like this, you will always have defectors, and they all have their own reasons.

To say that a person is ignorant JUST because they don't like SC5, is itself both ignorant and arrogant.

 

[franman]

Look we can discuss with history and developer statements, or we can argue with YES SUH and NUH UH

Let's discuss about the developer statements.

Are any of the Japanese players petitioning for SC5 arcade release which they did for SC3?
I don't think there was any for SC4 since you posted that SC4 is nearly like SC2.

I remember Harrada was being asked if an arcade version were to be released and he address that they may do something about it. Did Namco actually do something about it?

 

[franman]

Based on that logic, why did sc4 sell better than sc5 if sc4 is "fatally flawed"?

To answer your question they use cover-ups like Star Wars to benefit profits.

Just because a game sells better than another doesn't always mean it's the better game it's really the marketting decision behind it. Why do you keep hearing things like sex sells because it is one of those marketting elements that benefit sales.

Also consider this why did Smash Bros sell so well? Because of the universal cameos again another marketting ploy not to mention the game play was very decent. There's another game like Smash Bros but utilizes 3D environment, Power Stone. They game play is also decent better than Smash Bros I'd say but the problem is the characters aren't as popular as the cameos in Smash Bros.

Even poorly designed games use marketting elements to strenghthen the sales of the game and sometimes it helps a lot.

 

[DrakeAldan]

Namco controls things like release date windows, and can have influence on a product.

And that's just terrible.

They could have made so much more money with just a few changes and some patience. It's about long-term ROI, not near-term profits... Isn't it??

Damned meddling shareholders...

 

[Malice]

All this thread is is just the same people complaining about the same shit that they've been complaining about since the game came out. How is this thread different from all the other grieving threads on this site?

 

[Wandrian]

Based on that logic, why did sc4 sell better than sc5 if sc4 is "fatally flawed"?

The thing is, previous SC games had glitches, like seriously bad ones.

As for sc5, not only does it also have glitches (bad ones too), it also has a meter system that many people (including myself) didn't want, didn't ask for, and generally don't like it.

Nah brah. What was stated is that SC1-4 are imbalanced and even the developers agree. You're stating that opinions and sales make games better. Based on this logic, Call of Duty is the best game ever made.

If you were using the logic presented to you instead of taking disagreement as a slight against you, you would most likely agree. Or at the very least, you wouldn't be moving to "I like this and it sold better so you're wrong about the balance" and be able to tolerate people having differing opinions instead of demanding they agree with you.

Like you said, we've all got different opinions on things and that's perfectly fine. But our opinions don't trump facts, no matter how much we relish them.

Oh hey, I think Tool makes incredibly awesome music. Doesn't change the fact that their concerts are all prerecorded.

You don't like SCV. Doesn't change the fact that's it's probably the most well-balanced game in the series.

 

[JDub]

LOL! Now this is a "free market" argument? Going by free market "logic" the NFL should keep it's replacement refs. Why? All the controversy has raised viewer-ship to an all time high and 8% over this time last year.

It wouldn't hurt to hold a mirror to the community either. How does the SC community compare to other game's communities? Do people enjoy the social experience and wish to remain a part of it? Or, do they end up saying fuck this game because I don't like the people it connects me to? Maybe, instead of arguing and complaining (two of my favorite things) - we could do our part in whatever areas we have the ability to affect the situation.

 

[IdleMind]

LOL! Now this is a "free market" argument? Going by free market "logic" the NFL should keep it's replacement refs. Why? All the controversy has raised viewer-ship to an all time high and 8% over this time last year.

It wouldn't hurt to hold a mirror to the community either. How does the SC community compare to other game's communities? Do people enjoy the social experience and wish to remain a part of it? Or, do they end up saying fuck this game because I don't like the people it connects me to? Maybe, instead of arguing and complaining (two of my favorite things) - we could do our part in whatever areas we have the ability to affect the situation.

I like this post. Thank you for having the common sense of the former half of post.

As to the latter half, I don't consider people who don't show up for events to be part of the community, merely consumers. With that distinction out of the way, I love this community dearly. Way more than any of the other communities I've been a part of (Tournament level MTG, SF, Tekken, as well as communities for other hobbies).
I find most of the rabble being roused is by people who don't even show up.

 

[JDub]

I like this post. Thank you for having the common sense of the former half of post.

As to the latter half, I don't consider people who don't show up for events to be part of the community, merely consumers. With that distinction out of the way, I love this community dearly. Way more than any of the other communities I've been a part of (Tournament level MTG, SF, Tekken, as well as communities for other hobbies).
I find most of the rabble being roused is by people who don't even show up.

Cool. I own a Yamaha. Don't go to events, clubs, or even Yamaha forums. Maybe I'm nit-picking but as far as being a rider you could call me just a consumer. But calling me merely, simply, or basically a consumer in the SC5 world seems...less than accurate. I could have been accurately called that in SC4 because I merely played and didn't even attempt social interaction. In a way, you only justified my statement with your exclusionary perspective on what the community is. I didn't intend for such an instant and dramatic example dropped at me feet. Thank you?

 

[SinsOfSalvation]

I want you to see the inherent conflict between this statement...



..and this one.

Most people in this thread have non-specific gripes, and a lack of understanding of why changes were made in SC5 to certain things, specifically, game-play aspects. Developer statements clarify those things. How am I not going to assume the people who willfully ignore them are ignorant/bad players. Seems like a logical claim to me.

sorry maw but your theory of defecting players is flawed. After talking to MANY players online, its only a minority of players that like the changes. During SC4 i dont remember any conversations about its "fatal flaws". Casual players usually griped about lows and throws but even that complaint could be remedied by spending more time playing the game. Even if the developer can cleary define his changes to the game, it doesnt reflect whats actually happening in reality. And in reality, people are defecting. its not an issue of people misunderstanding the vision of team Daishi, its the simple reality that peole like me dont like his vision. If SC5 had a different name other than SC5, then i would have never bought it.

 

[IdleMind]

Cool. I own a Yamaha. Don't go to events, clubs, or even Yamaha forums. Maybe I'm nit-picking but as far as being a rider you could call me just a consumer. But calling me merely, simply, or basically a consumer in the SC5 world seems...less than accurate. I could have been accurately called that in SC4 because I merely played and didn't even attempt social interaction. In a way, you only justified my statement with your exclusionary perspective on what the community is. I didn't intend for such an instant and dramatic example dropped at me feet. Thank you?

You say that as if it's a profound thing, or that I have miss-stepped in some fashion.

I mean exactly what I have said. You are infact, a consumer. Posting on a messageboard or playing online doesn't make you a part of a community. I am not doing the excluding here, you are excluding yourself by not showing up. Is it not natural to value the opinions of those who make effort over ones who do not, or are we gonna get back into the "subjective" debate again?

sorry maw but your theory of defecting players is flawed. After talking to MANY players online, its only a minority of players that like the changes. During SC4 i dont remember any conversations about its "fatal flaws". Casual players usually griped about lows and throws but even that complaint could be remedied by spending more time playing the game. Even if the developer can cleary define his changes to the game, it doesnt reflect whats actually happening in reality. And in reality, people are defecting. its not an issue of people misunderstanding the vision of team Daishi, its the simple reality that peole like me dont like his vision. If SC5 had a different name other than SC5, then i would have never bought it.

Bolded for hilarious emphasis. Look, we are arguing on two different levels here. I am using facts, and you are using weasel-words with no tangible backing or justification based on your own experience as though it represents the entire picture. Even *I* am not that arrogant.

Let me try it your way though, in the sake of fairness.

Many people I've talked to think you are talking out of your ass with actor-observer bias. I think the majority of people have to be right. Since that is unqualified data, and also my subjective opinion, I don't think it would be fair of you to challenge that assertion.

On a side note, SC4, lacking fatal flaws? Did you even play the game?

 

[SinsOfSalvation]

I understand why casual players are dropping this game, it lacks single player modes and players who are bad/mediocre can only get crushed so many times online before they drop it.

As far as players dropping it because of mechanics (higher damage, meter system, loss of old characters, etc) i don't get. I've played since SCII and i think the changes made were exactly what this game needed. this game was built to focus on online play and it did a damn good job of making a game with good netcode.

So yeah i get why casual players are dropping it but for the people dropping it based on all the changes made i just don't see why.

i dropped this game becasue of mechanics. to me, it doesnt feel like a natural progresion of the game. If SC5 is a reboot, then maybe thats why i dont like it

 

[SinsOfSalvation]

I don't want to live in a world where people actually believe this drivel.

Also, Death of the Author doesn't apply to sales date directly affecting releases, how they affecting outlooks of sequels, development cycle times, or even corporate policy regarding international releases. Those are all part of why SC5 is the way it is.

BOO! theres no future in gaming if devolopers dont listen to the consumer

 

[ShenYu]

The point of this thread is to masturbate and circle jerk in an endless parade of "lol this game sucks don't correct me on my WRONG opinion."

Basically.

 

[SinsOfSalvation]

You know what keeps me playing this game? Constantly learning new characters!

Sc5 has both good and bad qualities IMO, so I completely understand why people defect.

Developers don't always know what they're doing. Just because they think sc1-4 were fatally flawed, doesn't automatically make it true.

And besides, quality game play or not, the ONLY criteria namco (and probably PS too) gives a shit about is money. I don't care how bad you think sc2 is, that game sold way more than any game that came after it, and that alone made it a success.

To say that developers thought sc1-4 were "fatally flawed", is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What kind of idiot would favor something that made them less money?

thats right, its all about money. If you are someone who loves SC5 or hates it, i think SC6 wont be like it at all. On the weekend i went to Best Buy and they still have lots of SC5 boxes that advertise getting Dampiere as a pre-order bonus. I dont think that store has ever gotten a second shipment of games.

 

[SinsOfSalvation]

Look we can discuss with history and developer statements, or we can argue with YES SUH and NUH UH. No meaningful conversation ever happened from people saying THIS IS MY OPINION AND I WILL NOT BE SWAYED AND I AM ENTITLED TO IT. So do me a favor and stop dancing around the fact that developer statements hurt your nostalgia goggles. Nobody ever said you can't like SC1-4 because the developers consider it flawed; what I'm saying is, if you don't understand the REASONS why they consider it flawed, you will not understand why SC5 is the way it is.

tl;dr: when you know how and why something works, you come off like less of an ignoramus when you talk about it.

Side notes:

SC2 tanked in sales in Japan. TANKED. The game sold poorly in Arcades, and did not bring ARC ops the kind of return they were hoping for. This was cited primarily as GAMEPLAY FLAWS among the tournament players in JPN. In US/EUR it did well only on the gamecube console version. I can fill you guys in on the history of these things if you would just stop being so goddamn defensive. Maybe you will learn something.

Game designers are not publishers. A game designer is an artist, they make things because they want to make the best thing possible. Being in the field myself, I can tell you this is true. A game designer wants to constantly improve and innovate his product, and game designers who don't love what they do churn out terrible games.

A publisher is the one who cares about the money. Namco is the publisher. The publisher funds the project and expects a return on investment. PS was not paid in dividends, they are paid in salary. Namco controls things like release date windows, and can have influence on a product.

So, lets see if more pants-shitting NUH UH comes this way, or you children begin to sit down, shut up, and open your eyes.

of course developers care about money. Bayonetta 2 is a game publishers did not believe in so no one wanted to publish it. Thats why its a Wii-U exclusive, Nintendo jumped in and published it.