| Chris Valdez |
|
I wonder if there'll be a re-issue of the game without these "feature" later on.
|
|
|
| Curtis Turner - IceIYIaN |
|
|
What even -is- the reason you cannot create new save files?
Silly stuff like this is why people use EmulatoZ. They have way more features than the actual console version |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| kevin wright |
|
|
who was the genius that thought this would be a viable "feature" to add to the experience? Probably some exec they hired recently with a background in marketing he honed while working at Nestle's; and as we all know, games and candy bars are the same....
It probably went something like this: Executive Producer: "Let's make each copy of the game unique in play. How can we do that?" Marketing Director:"We'll just make each copy with explicit game saves; call it a feature! And bonus: If they want to play from a fresh start again they'll have to buy a new copy. We'll sell em like candy bars. And everyone knows you can only eat a candy bar once..." Executive Producer: "Oh, that is EFFING brilliant!!!" (Scene closes; truck out as executive producer and marketing director continue to complement each other's brilliance; fade to black). |
|
|
| Andrew Witt |
|
|
"I think it's fair to say there was never quite the malicious intent that the conspiracy theorists out there would have you believe".
Sorry, guy, I don't believe you there. Give me an explanantion as to why you actually implemented that design element that doesn't sound like a PR spin. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Nick Kinsman |
|
Call me naive, but I suspect it was never intended to be such a malicious thing. Everybody seems to want to jump on the bandwagon of hating a big company, but this seems so minor to me. They tried something, and it failed. The backlash happened. Woo ... I feel it was overblown on most fronts myself. It's not like the game ever stopped working, or you were charged $10 to access online content every time it changed hands. All the unlock system ever served for in the Mercenaries game was forcing you to do well in one level before you could play another, and I honestly feel it's such a dumb point it works both ways - it's so simple, why COULDN'T they include it? But why is it such a big deal that they didn't?
I really feel this one is better left with us being happy they listened and respected the opposition. It was minor, it stopped before something bigger, and that's good enough. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| kevin wright |
|
|
Nick-
It isn't about hating the big company- to be VERY clear, this is not the first example of this development behavior from Capcom- super monkey ball was also set this way. I also remember WAY back in the day games Strider, Maximo and a few others; there are more, but these exhibited varying degrees of bad design elements that impeded upon consumer experience (and btw, some of these games had amazing elements as well). My point is Capcom has a long and storied history with this behavior. So as this is not a one time occurence, their admitting this was a bad idea is NOT a form of Altruism worthy of congratulation/adulation- it is not.They are being reactive, instead of proactive, and from a group that has been around as long as Capcom, let's be super honest. They DO know better. |
|
|
| Eric Geer |
|
|
Good. If this feature was included in other games I would skip them as well. I was actually excited about RE-Mercenaries....but I skipped. Sometimes after I've played through a game...I like to delete and start fresh. This is hindering not only on used games but even for the initial purchaser. I call Shinanigans on Capcom for not thinking that this was going to be a problem.(I think that they thought this through very well from the start)
|
|
|
More: Console/PC, Business/Marketing