This stinks. I know these ports weren't well received off the bat, but they're still positively reviewed on Steam. Pulling them down entirely so Square-Enix can sell you another copy of the...
This stinks. I know these ports weren't well received off the bat, but they're still positively reviewed on Steam. Pulling them down entirely so Square-Enix can sell you another copy of the "fixed" versions sucks.
I hope they at least take advantage of Steam's ability to grant discounts based on other game purchases, like Dark Souls Remastered offered for owners of the original version. I think the decent...
I hope they at least take advantage of Steam's ability to grant discounts based on other game purchases, like Dark Souls Remastered offered for owners of the original version. I think the decent thing to do would be to either give a free copy of the upcoming Pixel Remasters to owners of the original versions, or give a discount to at the least.
Either of these are what most remasters that block the original retail releases do. I can understand replacing older versions of a game in the retail market but I think it's a classy move to credit your dedicated audience that have become early adopters.
They’re not even fixed from what it looks like, the text is awful, and the colors are kind of jarring, and they took the gba content out of these versions. FF6 on gba has been widely regarded as...
They’re not even fixed from what it looks like, the text is awful, and the colors are kind of jarring, and they took the gba content out of these versions. FF6 on gba has been widely regarded as one of if not the best versions and the took away the stuff that made them special, kind of dumb.
The good thing is that Steam doesn't get rid of your purchases and AFAIK still lets you download things that have been removed. Though I have to agree with the opinion of the random tweet at the...
The good thing is that Steam doesn't get rid of your purchases and AFAIK still lets you download things that have been removed.
Though I have to agree with the opinion of the random tweet at the end:
“The ones that are currently on [Steam] are already the ruined versions,” one user put it on Twitter. “So whatever replaces them could be a sidegrade at worst.”
And I do think it stinks that they aren't going to give people who bought that terrible earlier port for free, but still this is better than taking away the old version which almost certainly doesn't have compatible save data.
Yeah but I wouldn’t say Square is taking it down to sell you another copy. If you have the current game, you’re happy with it, then it’s all good, you can still play it now and in the future. It...
Yeah but I wouldn’t say Square is taking it down to sell you another copy. If you have the current game, you’re happy with it, then it’s all good, you can still play it now and in the future.
It makes sense to do so. It’s a bad user experience to type in FFV into steam and get multiple different releases of the same game with the modernity of each difficult to distinguish. Makes sense for Square to try and have a unified listing.
A more user friendly option would be to do something akin to unlisted YouTube videos (so if you really wanted to, you can acquire the old release) but I’m not sure if steam even offers that as an option.
Removing consumer choice is anti-consumer. They are solving a problem that they created. They sold a game. They're going to sell it again in slightly different packaging. Consumers given a choice...
Removing consumer choice is anti-consumer. They are solving a problem that they created. They sold a game. They're going to sell it again in slightly different packaging. Consumers given a choice would naturally flock to the better version of the game. What they're communicating by removing the prior version is that they cannot articulate the difference in value between the two. They don't know how to tell you that the newer one is better, so they're going to remove your ability to purchase the older one, whether the new one is an improvement or not.
Eh, I disagree. That maxim is only true in a perfect world where the consumers are all sufficiently well researched into the choices they have, but that's not really how it works in the end. As an...
Eh, I disagree. That maxim is only true in a perfect world where the consumers are all sufficiently well researched into the choices they have, but that's not really how it works in the end. As an extreme example, the existence of Intuit Free edition alongside Intuit Freedom File, despite technically offering more choice, is actually anti-consumer.
In the same vein, if there were like 3 versions of FFV that showed up when you searched on steam, the reality is that people are just going to go onto either the first one or a random one and buy that copy, not meticulously research each version.
I do think it would hypothetically be better if they could just unlist the old version, or change the name to "[DON'T BUY THIS VERSION] FFV" but the former is probably not something Steam supports and the latter probably isn't a good look.
Overall I think the only poor part of this is that they are removing it seemingly before the new version comes, leaving a weird gap.
When you buy a game on Steam, do you buy the first game you see or do you purchase any random game? It would be better for the consumer if they could just buy one game. No more confusion over...
When you buy a game on Steam, do you buy the first game you see or do you purchase any random game? It would be better for the consumer if they could just buy one game. No more confusion over which game is better.
You're still making excuses for a problem Square Enix created for themselves. They want to sell something that they already sell. The new product is so similar to the previous product that they feel like they need to remove the previous version from shelves to ensure people aren't confused over which one is better. But we don't know which one is better. We can't compare the two because the new one isn't out. We just have to believe Square Enix is doing the best for us. By the time the new version is out, it'll be too late to choose between the two.
If you're presented with two versions of the same thing, it's on Square Enix to convince you that the one they want you to buy is better. The consumer's going to do their own research to find out which one they want. If it's the newer version, I'm sure Square Enix would appreciate that, but the consumer got what they wanted. If it's the older version, the consumer got the better of the two and Square Enix should quit trying to sell worse versions of things they already sell.
Well, yeah, because I actually think it's better in the end given the state of the old releases. It's 100% a dark pattern to have "FFV" next to "FFV: Pixel Edition". I can guarantee you the vast...
Well, yeah, because I actually think it's better in the end given the state of the old releases. It's 100% a dark pattern to have "FFV" next to "FFV: Pixel Edition". I can guarantee you the vast majority of consumers do not do that amount of research, and it's not like Square can add a blurb to Steam or Google search results where they talk about the different versions. I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Apple still sold the old 21'' iMac, for instance.
People mistook which Zoom stock to buy! And that's a major financial decision, let alone a discount retro game re-release!
In fact, I fail to see the "greedy" angle - if anything, they'd make more by leaving both up and getting some double dippers. It's not like this would convince anyone who owned the prior to buy the new version if they weren't planning to, since it changes nothing for them. Whether or not it's on the store doesn't matter to people who own the game.
The more I think about it, actually, the more I think it's an overall good move. It's not like Square Enix actually has a reason to care if you spend your money on the old version or the new version - money is money.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, this convo already went one full cycle with nothing being resolved.
There's platforms that don't offer that feature. Itch.io for example allows developers to revoke their games from bundles after they've been purchased. Amazon has pulled ebooks from people's...
There's platforms that don't offer that feature. Itch.io for example allows developers to revoke their games from bundles after they've been purchased. Amazon has pulled ebooks from people's libraries (and all notes that were associated with them). Netflix has removed a show on me half-way through watching.
In the case of Netflix, yes it was a subscription, but so are most examples of digital ownership. You're granted a license, not a product. Steam works this way too (for all I know they invented the idea), but they are relatively good about letting people keep items they've purchased compared to other services.
Here's an example from the Racial Justice bundle. It lists multiple titles that were made inaccessible after the bundle launched. The game Smile for Me was similarly removed from the Palestinian...
Here's an example from the Racial Justice bundle. It lists multiple titles that were made inaccessible after the bundle launched.
The game Smile for Me was similarly removed from the Palestinian Aid bundle. Those that specifically accessed the game's claim page were able to keep it, but simply buying the bundle wasn't enough. This was the result of developer error, but should show that the mechanism exists to remove games once purchased.
A friend of mine ran into an issue with a dev pulling a game he purchased too, but I can't remember which one. I'll ask him for more details on that.
edit: I've heard back now. It's an unusual title, but Consensual Torture Simulator was taken down after purchase. It seems developers can simply remove their hosted files to make their games inaccessible.
Update: Steam listings for the new versions of these games are available. The new versions cost $2 more and there's no indication that they include the same level of features (dungeons, quests,...
Update: Steam listings for the new versions of these games are available. The new versions cost $2 more and there's no indication that they include the same level of features (dungeons, quests, QoL updates) as the currently available versions. Current mods will almost certainly not work with the new versions.
＊These games are newly developed remaster editions based on the original titles. Some of the changes and additional elements found in other remakes of these games are not included."
Nobody knows if the upcoming version is better than the existing versions. It's not out yet. If you don't want to wait for reviews of the upcoming version, this article on US Gamer says that the...
Nobody knows if the upcoming version is better than the existing versions. It's not out yet.
If you don't want to wait for reviews of the upcoming version, this article on US Gamer says that the original SNES version is the best.
FF6 is an amazing entry into the series and IMO the best one of the series. A lot of people will say 7 is the best but I strongly disagree. FF6 wins in every single category except graphics.
FF6 is an amazing entry into the series and IMO the best one of the series. A lot of people will say 7 is the best but I strongly disagree. FF6 wins in every single category except graphics.
I completely disagree with your assessment of the graphics between the two games. VI was extremely polished and refined. The polygon people in VII just make me feel really sad.
I completely disagree with your assessment of the graphics between the two games. VI was extremely polished and refined. The polygon people in VII just make me feel really sad.
Well at the time the polygon people were a massive step up in graphics from 2d sprites. I agree with you for the most part, but my comment was more geared towards the fact that 7 was the first...
Well at the time the polygon people were a massive step up in graphics from 2d sprites. I agree with you for the most part, but my comment was more geared towards the fact that 7 was the first game in the series to use 3D character models and battles. By today’s standards, the original version of 7 looks kinda odd, but back then when it was released it was innovative.
This stinks. I know these ports weren't well received off the bat, but they're still positively reviewed on Steam. Pulling them down entirely so Square-Enix can sell you another copy of the "fixed" versions sucks.
I hope they at least take advantage of Steam's ability to grant discounts based on other game purchases, like Dark Souls Remastered offered for owners of the original version. I think the decent thing to do would be to either give a free copy of the upcoming Pixel Remasters to owners of the original versions, or give a discount to at the least.
Either of these are what most remasters that block the original retail releases do. I can understand replacing older versions of a game in the retail market but I think it's a classy move to credit your dedicated audience that have become early adopters.
They’re not even fixed from what it looks like, the text is awful, and the colors are kind of jarring, and they took the gba content out of these versions. FF6 on gba has been widely regarded as one of if not the best versions and the took away the stuff that made them special, kind of dumb.
The good thing is that Steam doesn't get rid of your purchases and AFAIK still lets you download things that have been removed.
Though I have to agree with the opinion of the random tweet at the end:
And I do think it stinks that they aren't going to give people who bought that terrible earlier port for free, but still this is better than taking away the old version which almost certainly doesn't have compatible save data.
Being allowed to continue playing the games you've purchased is not a generous bonus. It's the absolute bare minimum.
Yeah but I wouldn’t say Square is taking it down to sell you another copy. If you have the current game, you’re happy with it, then it’s all good, you can still play it now and in the future.
It makes sense to do so. It’s a bad user experience to type in FFV into steam and get multiple different releases of the same game with the modernity of each difficult to distinguish. Makes sense for Square to try and have a unified listing.
A more user friendly option would be to do something akin to unlisted YouTube videos (so if you really wanted to, you can acquire the old release) but I’m not sure if steam even offers that as an option.
Removing consumer choice is anti-consumer. They are solving a problem that they created. They sold a game. They're going to sell it again in slightly different packaging. Consumers given a choice would naturally flock to the better version of the game. What they're communicating by removing the prior version is that they cannot articulate the difference in value between the two. They don't know how to tell you that the newer one is better, so they're going to remove your ability to purchase the older one, whether the new one is an improvement or not.
Eh, I disagree. That maxim is only true in a perfect world where the consumers are all sufficiently well researched into the choices they have, but that's not really how it works in the end. As an extreme example, the existence of Intuit Free edition alongside Intuit Freedom File, despite technically offering more choice, is actually anti-consumer.
In the same vein, if there were like 3 versions of FFV that showed up when you searched on steam, the reality is that people are just going to go onto either the first one or a random one and buy that copy, not meticulously research each version.
I do think it would hypothetically be better if they could just unlist the old version, or change the name to "[DON'T BUY THIS VERSION] FFV" but the former is probably not something Steam supports and the latter probably isn't a good look.
Overall I think the only poor part of this is that they are removing it seemingly before the new version comes, leaving a weird gap.
When you buy a game on Steam, do you buy the first game you see or do you purchase any random game? It would be better for the consumer if they could just buy one game. No more confusion over which game is better.
You're still making excuses for a problem Square Enix created for themselves. They want to sell something that they already sell. The new product is so similar to the previous product that they feel like they need to remove the previous version from shelves to ensure people aren't confused over which one is better. But we don't know which one is better. We can't compare the two because the new one isn't out. We just have to believe Square Enix is doing the best for us. By the time the new version is out, it'll be too late to choose between the two.
If you're presented with two versions of the same thing, it's on Square Enix to convince you that the one they want you to buy is better. The consumer's going to do their own research to find out which one they want. If it's the newer version, I'm sure Square Enix would appreciate that, but the consumer got what they wanted. If it's the older version, the consumer got the better of the two and Square Enix should quit trying to sell worse versions of things they already sell.
Well, yeah, because I actually think it's better in the end given the state of the old releases. It's 100% a dark pattern to have "FFV" next to "FFV: Pixel Edition". I can guarantee you the vast majority of consumers do not do that amount of research, and it's not like Square can add a blurb to Steam or Google search results where they talk about the different versions. I think it's absolutely ridiculous that Apple still sold the old 21'' iMac, for instance.
People mistook which Zoom stock to buy! And that's a major financial decision, let alone a discount retro game re-release!
In fact, I fail to see the "greedy" angle - if anything, they'd make more by leaving both up and getting some double dippers. It's not like this would convince anyone who owned the prior to buy the new version if they weren't planning to, since it changes nothing for them. Whether or not it's on the store doesn't matter to people who own the game.
The more I think about it, actually, the more I think it's an overall good move. It's not like Square Enix actually has a reason to care if you spend your money on the old version or the new version - money is money.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, this convo already went one full cycle with nothing being resolved.
There's platforms that don't offer that feature. Itch.io for example allows developers to revoke their games from bundles after they've been purchased. Amazon has pulled ebooks from people's libraries (and all notes that were associated with them). Netflix has removed a show on me half-way through watching.
In the case of Netflix, yes it was a subscription, but so are most examples of digital ownership. You're granted a license, not a product. Steam works this way too (for all I know they invented the idea), but they are relatively good about letting people keep items they've purchased compared to other services.
Here's an example from the Racial Justice bundle. It lists multiple titles that were made inaccessible after the bundle launched.
The game Smile for Me was similarly removed from the Palestinian Aid bundle. Those that specifically accessed the game's claim page were able to keep it, but simply buying the bundle wasn't enough. This was the result of developer error, but should show that the mechanism exists to remove games once purchased.
A friend of mine ran into an issue with a dev pulling a game he purchased too, but I can't remember which one. I'll ask him for more details on that.
edit: I've heard back now. It's an unusual title, but Consensual Torture Simulator was taken down after purchase. It seems developers can simply remove their hosted files to make their games inaccessible.
Well that’s just a scam, what the fuck?
Update: Steam listings for the new versions of these games are available. The new versions cost $2 more and there's no indication that they include the same level of features (dungeons, quests, QoL updates) as the currently available versions. Current mods will almost certainly not work with the new versions.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1173810/FINAL_FANTASY_V/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1173820/FINAL_FANTASY_VI/
edit: there is a note on the bundle for all of the re-releases regarding features:
Nobody knows if the upcoming version is better than the existing versions. It's not out yet.
If you don't want to wait for reviews of the upcoming version, this article on US Gamer says that the original SNES version is the best.
FF6 is an amazing entry into the series and IMO the best one of the series. A lot of people will say 7 is the best but I strongly disagree. FF6 wins in every single category except graphics.
I completely disagree with your assessment of the graphics between the two games. VI was extremely polished and refined. The polygon people in VII just make me feel really sad.
Well at the time the polygon people were a massive step up in graphics from 2d sprites. I agree with you for the most part, but my comment was more geared towards the fact that 7 was the first game in the series to use 3D character models and battles. By today’s standards, the original version of 7 looks kinda odd, but back then when it was released it was innovative.
I agree.
Although, the backgrounds in 7 are quite nice, and there was a project somewhere to automatically upscale them that looked rather good.