Game Developers you (still) have faith in

[Scruffington]

Go read up on its monetization practices. They take advantage of their customers to a disgusting degree. And if you think the reception was overwhelmingly positive then you never saw the fan backlash when they released half a game for full price and also immediately began nickel and diming people with microtransactions for things like characters. In a fighting game. Where having all of the characters is kind of important and you're never more than a stones throw from a company making things pay to win.

I don't need to read up on its monetization practices. I bought the game on Day 1. I wouldn't call anything they've done "taking advantage of their customers." About the only issues I have with the game is that fight money has been harder to earn over the years, and the DLC costumes are expensive. But what do you expect? All fighters can be purchased for free now. They need to sustain the development of future DLC fighters, and the tradeoff is that cosmetics are now fairly pricey. I think that's a fair trade, but you're welcome to disagree.

Also, when I said the reception was overwhelmingly positive I referenced Arcade Edition. An update that was completely free for existing owners of SFV.

Being president is not the same as directing a title. And Dark Souls 2 is a game that I honestly liked less and less the more I played it. I don't give a trout how well received it is. My post is about my opinion. Not the rest of the worlds.

Obviously, which is exactly why I pointed out that he's directed 5 of the last 6 FromSoftware titles. I don't understand how you could point to one game that you dislike and use that to tarnish the entire company's legacy (or at least their legacy of the last decade) as well as your faith in their ability to produce titles, but you're welcome to your opinion. I just think that if you really enjoy 5 of a developer's previous 6 titles, it usually means they're doing a solid job.

Because even the most talented companies with the best intentions can make a bad game and being willing to do things like put up money to pre-order a game no one has played yet is never to the benefit of the customer and basically amounts to slapping money on the table in the HOPE that a game will be good. It's silly.

Sure, but certain companies have legacies built on consistency. Look at Naughty Dog since Uncharted: Drakes Fortune released in 2007. Look at Nintendo with The Legend of Zelda and the 3D Mario series. These developers have earned reputations as being among the best game-makers in the industry because they always release high quality games. You can have confidence in something based on its consistency and reliability, and certain game developers have proven themselves to be very reliable. So to me, it really doesn't seem ludicrous to have faith in a developer.

What you actually mean is preorders benefit the consumer because the company generously gives you the bonus content that would have been included standard in the game years ago. Companies shouldn't get credit for carving out content to encourage pre-orders and which they later sell separately to those buying later to get even more money. I won't take part in game companies further nickel and diming me thanks.

No idea how your response applies to what I said. The Aethyrite Earrings in FFXIV were specifically made for existing players of the game so they could catch up to the Level 70 cap in time for Shadowbringers. It's not content that "would have been included in the game years ago"; it's content that's relevant for the game now because it prepares you for future content. You're free to dislike pre-orders, but I happen to take a more optimistic view about them.

Why would I give a company that ultimately doesn't care about me my business without even knowing if the product is any good?

I think it's a little dishonest to say that developers don't care about their fans, because many developers depend on a healthy relationship between the fans and the people who make games, and a healthy relationship involves treating fans with respect rather than the indifference you seem to suggest they do. Indie developers like Matt Makes Games achieve success because they show thoughtfulness and kindness to their players, the makers of fighting games wouldn't exist without a community full of dedicated competitors, and companies like Capcom wouldn't have their current reputation without prioritizing games their fans will enjoy over making the most profitable games possible.

I don't give a trout about whether a companies previous games have been good as it gives me zero indication that the next will also be good.

What? This doesn't make any sense. Logic dictates that you should always proportion your confidence in something to the evidence that supports said confidence. If the evidence suggests that a developer can be consistently relied upon to produce good titles, then there is a substantiated argument for having faith in their ability to make good games in the future.

Now I look forward to your next reply that tries to convince me I'm wrong using measures that don't matter to me and more arguments that boil down to supporting companies because they promised good games. Or business arguments that just aren't. I'll very much enjoy ignoring it I think.

This is pretty dismissive and, in all honesty, disrespectful. Disappointing to read.