Video Games I'm sad and Confused.

[Coco Adel]

So I need to ask. Why are gaming companies under the impression that gamers don't want to play their old games on new consoles? I would respect the fact that they don't want to make a quick buck off of old creations if it just didn't make sense to me from a business or respecting your fans standpoint and I swear I'm not just saying this because I am currently unable to play my favorite games before cause they are not available on PS4 because as it turns out my favorite games are available for me to play on Xbox One x so I will be getting that so I can play my favorite games of all time. However, I'm currently sad because I can't play them until I get said X Box One X.

However, I find this policy to be strange, because the games in question are games that a very large majority of people would like remastered and have been begging for so from a business standpoint it makes no sense not to remaster them because it's a guaranteed way to make lots of money for your company to provide a product you know a large number of your consumers want.

From a pride and respect your fans standpoint, it makes no sense because one would think they'd be honored and proud that they made such awesome games that tons of people are begging them to remaster it, hell some people said they didn't even have to remaster them just release them on PS4 and they would take it as is and be willing to buy the DLC's that came free with the original games, you'd think they'd be more than happy to hear this, but apparently not.

As I said I'm not particularly upset with these people as I am about to be able to play my favorite games very soon. However, I will say this much I don't like that they teased their fans since there was an incident where they told the fans they were taking making the remasters of these games under heavy consideration only to reveal that they were never considering it at all in the first place and I felt that was pretty messed up. I mean even if I don't understand why if they just said no I could probably let it go but I don't think you should tease people with their favorite game and then reveal that you were just trolling them that seems kind of cruel.

 

[Brea The Brave]

I feel that way too my favorite games are Dragon Age, well right behind Xenoblade Chronicles and I don't like that Bioware won't remaster them because unless you get DAI on PS4 you can't get the trespasser DLC but if I don't play all 3 on PS3 the Dragon Age Keep will not allow me to pick every choice I actually made in the game. I also really REALLY want to play Mass Effect Trilogy again but they don't have it on PS4.

 

[Idea]

Well, I'm not these companies, but if I had to throw a wild guess, I'd say "stocks".

Imagine, for a moment, that you are a company. You spent millions developing a game and a console and it was a big success. As time goes on, you get better tech which means better consoles. Now, you could make a remastered version for the new tech of the old game. There's certainly an audience that would lvoe to play their favorite games with the new tech, and other than maybe needing to translate the game for the new tech, you're sparing a lot in creative resorces. However...

What about the old version? What about the old consoles?

If you're a company, a large company, you probably have a lot of it in stock right up until the new game or console is release that replaces it. Then, you are left with hundreds of thousands worth of a product that you can neither use nor sell. From a business perspective this is a ton of sunken cost. If you don't make the newest versions, however, any new players who want that experience will have to obtain the old tech.

Next, consider a rebooted or altered version of the game. It's common practice to have a new version of the game altogether, or a sequel or something of the type, in other words, related to the original game but not actually the original game in the new consoles/platforms. When you make the remastered version you are cutting a slice off this market, due to product similarities and the budgets of your clients which may not be able to afford two games.

So if you want a remastered version, for a company the final profit of the remastered version needs to be greater than the potential selling off that leftover stock, added to the potential money loss from the profits of other similar games, plus the costs of producing the remastered version. This is all without factoring in the potential losses in returns, public outcry against minor changes done for the sake of adaptation or update, or the simple fact that sometimes it's easier said than done.

In other words, I'd say it's less that companies think players don't want to play their games in the new consoles, and more that they don't think players want it enough to weigh the scales in their favor.

 

[Coco Adel]

Well, I'm not these companies, but if I had to throw a wild guess, I'd say "stocks".

Imagine, for a moment, that you are a company. You spent millions developing a game and a console and it was a big success. As time goes on, you get better tech which means better consoles. Now, you could make a remastered version for the new tech of the old game. There's certainly an audience that would lvoe to play their favorite games with the new tech, and other than maybe needing to translate the game for the new tech, you're sparing a lot in creative resorces. However...

What about the old version? What about the old consoles?

If you're a company, a large company, you probably have a lot of it in stock right up until the new game or console is release that replaces it. Then, you are left with hundreds of thousands worth of a product that you can neither use nor sell. From a business perspective this is a ton of sunken cost. If you don't make the newest versions, however, any new players who want that experience will have to obtain the old tech.

Next, consider a rebooted or altered version of the game. It's common practice to have a new version of the game altogether, or a sequel or something of the type, in other words, related to the original game but not actually the original game in the new consoles/platforms. When you make the remastered version you are cutting a slice off this market, due to product similarities and the budgets of your clients which may not be able to afford two games.

So if you want a remastered version, for a company the final profit of the remastered version needs to be greater than the potential selling off that leftover stock, added to the potential money loss from the profits of other similar games, plus the costs of producing the remastered version. This is all without factoring in the potential losses in returns, public outcry against minor changes done for the sake of adaptation or update, or the simple fact that sometimes it's easier said than done.

In other words, I'd say it's less that companies think players don't want to play their games in the new consoles, and more that they don't think players want it enough to weigh the scales in their favor.

I would agree with that for the most part if it weren't for the fact that companies seem to be trying their hardest to make the old consoles obsolete by a certain time since they want you to buy the new console and this particular company has been making it so you have to buy the newer console to somewhat fully enjoy the sequels because if you buy it on the old consoles you can't have the DLC's so it feels like they're trying to force you to buy the newer console.

On top of that as I have said all other things considered this particular company went out of its way to tease fans with the possibility of a remaster saying they were heavily considering it only to come out later and say they were never considering it at all. I can understand if they couldn't afford it and maybe even if there was more money to be had if they didn't but I don't think it's right to tease your fans with an option you were never actually considering and when I say this I don't mean they said they were considering but decided not to, or couldn't afford it, I mean that they flat out said they were never considering it meaning that they lied to them which I feel was messed up. I'd be okay with a flat no even if they couldn't do it or just didn't want to even if I couldn't understand I could deal with that but I don't think you should give people hope where there is none, I think that hurts you more in the long run because then the fans feel disrespected.

 

[Idea]

I would agree with that for the most part if it weren't for the fact that companies seem to be trying their hardest to make the old consoles obsolete by a certain time since they want you to buy the new console and this particular company has been making it so you have to buy the newer console to somewhat fully enjoy the sequels because if you buy it on the old consoles you can't have the DLC's so it feels like they're trying to force you to buy the newer console.

Oh, no they absolutely try to make the older consoles more and more obsolete, not just to sell more but because progress naturally causes past equivalents to be obsolete. However, that doesn't change the fact that anyone new trying to get into the game for themselves specifically will thus be made to get an extra console, nor that the company thus creates stocks they don't know what to do with if they can't sell them. The obsolete consoles become a niche product, something sold at a discount, but at least with the game being stuck in that version, the company creates some demand beyond nostalgia. It's precisely because demand is so low to begin with that any extra they add is a lot more signifcant. The difference between adding a up of water to the ocean and a cup of water to your table. One makes a much greater difference.

On top of that as I have said all other things considered this particular company went out of its way to tease fans with the possibility of a remaster saying they were heavily considering it only to come out later and say they were never considering it at all. I can understand if they couldn't afford it and maybe even if there was more money to be had if they didn't but I don't think it's right to tease your fans with an option you were never actually considering and when I say this I don't mean they said they were considering but decided not to, or couldn't afford it, I mean that they flat out said they were never considering it meaning that they lied to them which I feel was messed up. I'd be okay with a flat no even if they couldn't do it or just didn't want to even if I couldn't understand I could deal with that but I don't think you should give people hope where there is none,

The fact that the company hasn't delivered on that could come from a number of factors, but in all potential options, they did consider giving out the remastered version.

*Market analysis conclusions may have shifted, resulting in the company having to abandon their previous plans. This is the most likely option, as it encompasses anything from new information on the development itself, to trouble at the company etc...
*The company still intends to deliver on their promise, but it may be way later than what was teased. This may be on accident, due to delays, or it may be on purpose to build hype and tension, a tactic which gave jaw-dropping results with some companies, such as the recent example of wow classic from Blizzard.
*The company considered the possiblity, rejected it, but still marketed it as a half-truth of the possibility being in consideration in order to get people to buy the console.

I am not going to say there aren't some...less than honorable exchanges here, quite scummy behavior is unfortunately not that uncommon, but from a business sense at least it makes sense.

I think that hurts you more in the long run because then the fans feel disrespected.

Historically speaking "fans feeling disrespected" hasn't hurt companies that much if they already have something solid under their belt...

 

[zippy]

Don’t fret too much. The lack of backwards compatibility was a huge part of the critique of the PS4 that Sony has taken very seriously. The PS5 will have a huge focus on backwards compatibility so you only have to be frustrated about it for another year.

 

[Coco Adel]

Oh, no they absolutely try to make the older consoles more and more obsolete, not just to sell more but because progress naturally causes past equivalents to be obsolete. However, that doesn't change the fact that anyone new trying to get into the game for themselves specifically will thus be made to get an extra console, nor that the company thus creates stocks they don't know what to do with if they can't sell them. The obsolete consoles become a niche product, something sold at a discount, but at least with the game being stuck in that version, the company creates some demand beyond nostalgia. It's precisely because demand is so low to begin with that any extra they add is a lot more signifcant. The difference between adding a up of water to the ocean and a cup of water to your table. One makes a much greater difference.


The fact that the company hasn't delivered on that could come from a number of factors, but in all potential options, they did consider giving out the remastered version.

*Market analysis conclusions may have shifted, resulting in the company having to abandon their previous plans. This is the most likely option, as it encompasses anything from new information on the development itself, to trouble at the company, etc...
*The company still intends to deliver on their promise, but it may be way later than what was teased. This may be on accident, due to delays, or it may be on purpose to build hype and tension, a tactic which gave jaw-dropping results with some companies, such as the recent example of wow classic from Blizzard.
*The company considered the possiblity, rejected it, but still marketed it as a half-truth of the possibility being in consideration in order to get people to buy the console.

I am not going to say there aren't some...less than honorable exchanges here, quite scummy behavior is unfortunately not that uncommon, but from a business sense at least it makes sense.


Historically speaking "fans feeling disrespected" hasn't hurt companies that much if they already have something solid under their belt...

Well what I am saying on the teasing part was that they officially said "We are heavily considering the possibility of remaster" and then later said "We would never consider the possibility of remaster it was never an option for us as we want to focus on newer and move forward and not looking back on old projects."

Now I could be reading this wrong but to me when you say something like this it doesn't sound like you were considering it and something came up to make you change your mind or that it was delayed. To me, it sounds like you told people you were considering to get them excited and more willing to buy your new game which was a sequel to said games when you were never actually considering it. Now I could be wrong and as I said it's not like I can't play my favorite game because I recently discovered Xbox will allow me to do so.

As for rather or not it will hurt the company I honestly think it has hurt this company in particular, all their best designers are leaving, and the fans aren't happy with their most recent games, the sequel was a terrible bug-ridden flop and by the time it was fixed (which trust me the bugs in this game should have been fixed long before release and were too noticeable for them not to know. In fact the bugs beta-tester had pointed these bugs out to them long before release were still not fixed.) No one wanted to buy it anymore. On top of that his particular company has a bad habit of making shameless cash grab mechanics in games as of late that people are quite frankly sick of and feel are bordering on criminal now. One of their games actually broke people's consoles because the bugs were so bad and now they have put a mechanic in one of their games where not only is it pay to win, but pay to pay as in you have to buy certain items to have the opportunity to buy another item. People are very much getting fed up with thief shit and from what I can tell people don't want to buy from them anymore.

 

[ShadowAssassin]

There are several reasons why backwards compatibility is difficult to achieve on consoles but the two major ones are cost and development.

I'll give you and example before I explain. Remember when the PS3 was first launched with the outrageous price tag? There was a reason for it. It's because it had a ps2 chip inside of it to allow the console to play ps2 games. (Newer ones used software emulation instead) but even then some PS2 titles were unplayable. It was a disaster for Sony as not only did they lose money on the console after every sale (Factor in R&D costs and Marketing into the price of the console) but also most of their fans went to Microsoft and Nintendo.

Now here is the issue. Unlike PC's that use one operating system regardless of hardware (Windows for example) Consoles are different. The hardware is chosen before the software is developed to work with that specific hardware. Each OS on each console is different in terms of how it commits resources to run the game and operate the system. So what might work for new generation of games will not work for the old generation because of how it's coded. That is why most companies forgo backwards compatibility because it would cost to much to develop which would be passed onto us, the consumers. Most people keep their old consoles anyways to play their old titles.

Now in terms of remastering a game, the same principles apply. In order to "Remaster" they have to change the entire coding of the game to work with the new coding of the console. This costs a lot of money and resources and if there isn't sufficient demand, no company would do it. That is why most won't and would rather focus on coding new games as the profitability is much higher than it is on an old game. And in order to "remaster" a game, the gaming company has to get its hands on a Dev kit which they would most likely use to figure out how to code new games rather than recode old ones.

So in short, nobody is gonna pay over 500 dollars for a console that can play their old games when they can use the previous console to do that and no gaming company will remaster a game unless they are guaranteed to make a profit.

 

[Coco Adel]

There are several reasons why backwards compatibility is difficult to achieve on consoles but the two major ones are cost and development.

I'll give you and example before I explain. Remember when the PS3 was first launched with the outrageous price tag? There was a reason for it. It's because it had a ps2 chip inside of it to allow the console to play ps2 games. (Newer ones used software emulation instead) but even then some PS2 titles were unplayable. It was a disaster for Sony as not only did they lose money on the console after every sale (Factor in R&D costs and Marketing into the price of the console) but also most of their fans went to Microsoft and Nintendo.

Now here is the issue. Unlike PC's that use one operating system regardless of hardware (Windows for example) Consoles are different. The hardware is chosen before the software is developed to work with that specific hardware. Each OS on each console is different in terms of how it commits resources to run the game and operate the system. So what might work for new generation of games will not work for the old generation because of how it's coded. That is why most companies forgo backwards compatibility because it would cost to much to develop which would be passed onto us, the consumers. Most people keep their old consoles anyways to play their old titles.

Now in terms of remastering a game, the same principles apply. In order to "Remaster" they have to change the entire coding of the game to work with the new coding of the console. This costs a lot of money and resources and if there isn't sufficient demand, no company would do it. That is why most won't and would rather focus on coding new games as the profitability is much higher than it is on an old game. And in order to "remaster" a game, the gaming company has to get its hands on a Dev kit which they would most likely use to figure out how to code new games rather than recode old ones.

So in short, nobody is gonna pay over 500 dollars for a console that can play their old games when they can use the previous console to do that and no gaming company will remaster a game unless they are guaranteed to make a profit.

Well as I said before it's not the fact that they didn't remaster the game I have an issue with as the person before you explained I understand there are factors that could prevent them from doing so, and while I might be sad that I can't play my favorite game on PS4 as I said I can play it on Xbox. I could point out that lots of people sold their old consoles because they were told while there would not be backward compatibility it would be made up for by remastering the old games so people did give up their old consoles because they were initially told they would still able to play their old games thanks to remasters which turned out not to be true.

However, that aside my issue with the remaster situation was not that they chose not to do it for any varying number of reason I understand that there could be many legitimate reasons not to do it, hell, I'd even be willing to accept just not wanting to do it as long as you're honest about it. What I did not like is this particular gaming company after hearing so many people wanted this game remastered said officially that they were heavily considering it and then later told these same fans officially after the game they were pushing came out that they were never actually considering it begin with whatsoever which I feel is messed up. I mean it's kind of like dating a girl and telling her you're heavily considering moving in with her just to get her excited and then reveal later on that you never had any intention of moving in with her and were never considering it whatsoever which meant you were stringing her along and giving her hope for something that you knew full well would never happen because you had absolutely no intention of doing it in the first place and I kind of feel it's the same here albeit not quite as emotionally invested. Basically, this company told these people that they were considering something they were never actually considering and then later on flat out admitted that they were never considering it whatsoever and I feel like as disappointed as people would have been with a flat out no or something possibly coming up that prevented it I think that would have been much better than stringing them along for something that was never going to happen and the reason I don't believe that something came up for them not to be able to do it is because....well who would admit to doing something kind of messed up if it were merely circumstances that prevented them from doing so?

I mean take moving in with the girl for example of something came up where you were no longer in a position to move in with her or maybe you considered it and decided against it why would you then tell her you were never considering it in the first place knowing that this will make you look much worse than the actual truth? I don't know is there a benefit to making yourself look bad in situations where you don't have to?

 

[ShadowAssassin]

I understand where you are coming from. We must remember something very important that we tend to forget. A Company, regardless what industry it is in, is responsible to its shareholders first and foremost. Everything else comes seconds, including the fans. I understand your frustrations as I have been there and got my hopes up before it was crushed. That is why I don't believe anything they say until i have the product in my hand physically (or digitally)

Maybe it didn't generate the hype that they were hoping it would to greenlight the project? Like i said, if there is no profit to be made, they ain't going to do it. If they said they would seriously consider it then turned around and said they never did, then I agree, that is a dick move but again, its all about the bottom line in the end and keeping their shareholders happy which is unfortunate because we all suffer in the end.

 

[Coco Adel]

I understand where you are coming from. We must remember something very important that we tend to forget. A Company, regardless what industry it is in, is responsible to its shareholders first and foremost. Everything else comes seconds, including the fans. I understand your frustrations as I have been there and got my hopes up before it was crushed. That is why I don't believe anything they say until i have the product in my hand physically (or digitally)

Maybe it didn't generate the hype that they were hoping it would to greenlight the project? Like i said, if there is no profit to be made, they ain't going to do it. If they said they would seriously consider it then turned around and said they never did, then I agree, that is a dick move but again, its all about the bottom line in the end and keeping their shareholders happy which is unfortunate because we all suffer in the end.

Right which is why I don't believe Young Justice season 3 Kingdom Hearts 3 were actually coming out until they actually did. I just didn't like that they told people they were seriously considering it and then, later on, admitted they never were as I feel it was an unnecessary lie to tell and even more necessary to admit to and honestly as of late I feel like gaming companies are in a contest to see just how much they can openly get away with before people actually get fed up with them.

You wanna know the sad part of how bad it's getting. Bethesda has been on some shit lately and it was so bad that for a minute when my brother told me that Nuka Cola Quantum was made with a nuclear isotope my first thought was "These motherfuckers are trying to go to prison" my first thought was not that he was actually talking about fallout 4 in-universe but that Bethesda had put a nuclear isotope in the Nuka Cola brandy that they sent people for fallout 76 and I'm not sure if that's because I was halfway asleep when he told me that I thought that or if they've just been fucking up that much

 

[zippy]

There's good news in this regard though - apparently the PS5 is backwards compatible all the way back to PS1. I knew I kept all my PS2 games for a reason. Welcome back Spyro, Sly Cooper, and Spiderman! (I swear I don't just play games with s names).

Guitar Hero ain’t ready for my return to greatness