See guys, Spinal’s in the game.
3 Likes
With an awfully shrunken voodoo head
My guess is that the character trailers and announcements drive interest through clicks and tweets and word of mouth and that each reveal is linked to sales of the game. Even if it’s just a small bump. Unfortunately, if every single fighting game is doing it the same way that suggests that there’s a compelling reason even if we don’t like it.
As far as the Tira DLC, I agree it’s kind of lousy. But it highlights just how much these developers need you to buy the DLC in order for the game to be a success. I’m all for voting with your wallet but I’m really not sure that “go back to the way it used to be where you release the entire roster in a single retail package” is even on the ballot.
As much as it pains me i do actually agree, I think the cost of game development has exceeded greatly and it’s for that reason we have pre order bonuses season passes etc. I’d much prefer them to just outright say “hey everyone it costs a lot to make a game so we need to sell it for £70 cheers”
1 Like
Interesting head and tail slots cool!
I guess we have a gender for all the races. Now, don’t expect the female lizards to have breasts lol.
Whether because of a change in thinking or the initial reports were inaccurate, Namco has clarified that Tira is included in the season pass and available as day one DLC whether or not you preorder. So she is not a preorder bonus, just part of the season pass that will be available day one.
4 Likes
Which is weird considering they have said that there will be a season pass pre-order bonus. You would think that that one would be who they reveal first.
Yeah I’m fine with the game having DLC, even if it’s past characters that were included in the game. I also would’ve been fine if she’d been a preorder bonus and if anything, that might’ve made me lock in my preorder that much faster.
I think where my frustration comes in is where they decide to use a well-known, well-loved character not as a free bonus for pre-ordering the game itself, where you know what you’re going to get, but in pre-ordering the season pass, which isn’t even part of the game yet and we still have no clue what else it will entail.
But even with all that, the main issue is the fact that you have a character that’s complete and ready to be used on the first day of the game’s release, but she’s been separated from the rest of the roster to lure fans in to paying extra money.
I love this series and I love the way this game looks so far, so I’m buying it no matter what. But if you look at the comments on their clarification, I think a lot of people are disappointed and some seem downright angry and I think their anger is justified in this case.
Honestly, I think they would’ve been better off announcing her as the first DLC character, but holding her back for a month after release, rather than showing fans that she’s ready to be in the game on the same day as the rest of the cast. It’s just a bad PR move. It looks like you’re holding a character you used to get free for ransom.
I’m kinda hoping Namco will see the fan reaction and make some sort of gesture of good will to help mitigate what they’ve done here. I don’t personally need it, but we’re only a few months away from release and this has the potential to leave a sour taste in some fans mouths and I really don’t think this game needs it.
Well, anger is a feeling so I’m told people are allowed to feel whatever way they want. Is it justified? I don’t think so, although it’s not surprising.
I think most of the anger is associated with an often unstated assumption that DLC is only “justified” if the content is not ready at launch and the associated assumption that any “day one DLC,” should be free. This goes back to the “on disc DLC” outrage that killed SFxTekken.
But I don’t think these assumptions have any merit. At all. We have myriad examples where you can pay extra for content as part of preorders and companies are free to divide their games up into whatever chunks they want to and sell them in whatever packages they choose. And consumers are free to buy that content or not buy it. I understand that “they should give me this for free with my normal purchase!” Is a normal human response, but as anyone who has ever bought a new car can tell you, no the floor mats are not included. Even though literally everyone expects to have floor mats in their car.
The alternative is really for companies to basically pretend that content is not ready at launch just to support this rather strange and unnecessary idea that DLC is only legitimate if it isn’t ready at the time of launch. I don’t see how this situation is radically different if Tira launches in December instead of on launch day. The intent and the price are the same. I think consumers worrying about the developers internal development and delivery schedule are taking on a strange and irrelevant burden. Instead the only question we need to ask is “is the game worth what I’m paying?” And for the season pass, I understand that people hate buying something sight unseen. But now they know they are getting Tira. And instead of seeing that as a plus, people choose to be annoyed that she’s not given to them as part of the original roster.
Well yes, people are allowed to feel what they want. I think that kinda goes without saying. 
I dunno, I’m going probably going to disagree with you on this, which is fine, of course.
Maybe “justified” is a bit of a loaded word here because there are certainly two sides to the story as you indicate:
This is true, however, due to the fact that content isn’t normally delivered this way, the fact that they have the right to do it doesn’t alone mitigate the fact that a lot of people are going to feel slighted by this. You may not think they’re justified in feeling that way, but if most gamers experience is that you buy a game, with or without preorder bonus, and then you wait a bit for DLC, and someone comes along and says “no, we’re actually going to separate this part of the game out. We’ll still offer it to you on the same day as everything else, but you have to buy this other thing as well or we’ll have to charge you for it.”
Wouldn’t you maybe bristle at that a bit, regardless of what the company has a right to do?
I don’t think it’s really even about wanting things for free just because we used to get them for free before. At least for me, it’s not. I shouldn’t speak for anyone else on that. But for my part, it feels like they’re holding a character for ransom when they didn’t have to. I get that this is the path they chose and they certainly have a right to choose it, but if it’s not what I’m used to, I have every right to dislike it (as I’m sure you’d agree).
From a PR standpoint, it just feels needless. I’m sure they wanted something to help sell their season pass, but maybe it would’ve been better for them to simply present the season pass content and let people judge its value on its own merits.
I think this particular case somewhat defies expectations though. If car companies typically included the floor mats, or the mats were included as a bonus for buying the car, then you go to a dealership and the salesman says “oh no, the mats are only included if you buy this rather expensive Sirius XM package (and we won’t tell you what channels you get with it), otherwise you have to pay extra for the mats,” I don’t think people would love that.
The difference is in perception. If she was announced for a December release, most would likely assume that this is when she’d be ready. If she’s announced as being day one available, then most would likely (and rightly) assume that she’s just as complete as the content that’s included in the game, but that she’s been separated out in an effort to get you to spend more money to buy something else that you don’t even know if you really want yet.
Even if the former perception is wrong, people wouldn’t know it. But given that the latter perception is almost assuredly correct, it’s certainly not going to play well from a PR perspective.
I think that people are happy that Tira’s in the game. I’m sure they’re also happy that a season pass is on the horizon. But I’m not sure why knowing a slight bit more about that pass would somehow offset the fact that she’s being delivered in the way that she’s being delivered.
I dunno. Maybe this isn’t such a big deal. I’m sure most of the people complaining were going to buy the season pass no matter what. I just think that even if a company has the right to do this, it still feels kind of oily if she could’ve been included in the game and they chose not to do that because they wanted to entice fans to spend even more money beyond the base game. If you disagree though, no problem. 
Of course it’s not a problem, but we so rarely disagree that it might be fun to talk about it.
I agree that this is upsetting people because it’s not the “normal” or expected way of delivering content. But I just think what is “abnormal” about it is really irrelevant and people shouldn’t worry about it.
People are upset because Tira is finished and could be part of the base game but is instead part of the season pass. They view this (at least according to internet memes galore) as cutting up the base game and selling it to you in parts. Fine. I will save my arguments against this backwards idea for another time.
But let’s do the thought experiment. What if they just don’t announce Tira - or they announce that she’s coming in November (a month after the game releases)? They announce the same content for the same price but somehow people who are mad right now would be okay with that. What people seem to be saying is that this is somehow acceptable while the first scenario is not. To me, this seems ridiculous. The only difference between the two scenarios is Namco’s project management timelines. Arguably what we are getting is better because we have access to Tira earlier. Which is why I feel strongly that the idea that “day one dlc” is somehow less legitimate than othe dlc based on when it is available is a harmful idea that is going to lead to negative impacts on gamers. Companies will see this preference and they absolutely will not cram their “day one” dlc into the disc. Instead they will just wait a month to release it.
The simplest way to phrase this is as a question: What’s the difference between a game with 17 fighters where the developer cuts out the 17th fighter and charges you for it (which everyone says is awful) and a game with 16 fighters where the developer is willing to selll you a 17th fighter as dlc (which everyone says is okay)? Nothing. The only difference is the language we use to describe it.
Edit: maybe people should think of Tira as DLC that they accidentally finished early and so decided to release early. It won’t save you any money but it will make you feel better about it.
2 Likes
@BigBadAndy and @Iago407
Well it could’ve been worse. They could’ve removed Tira from the game entirley no DLC or anything. But at least people won’t be forced to pre-order.
1 Like
No question! Sounds good to me.
If it was simply a different method of content delivery, say Killer Instinct going from a normal retail model in the distant past to a sort of (initially) murky “free to play but not free to play” model that kinda confused people, then I’d agree that what’s normal and abnormal is largely irrelevant.
But even then, some might disagree. Some might see the retail model is inherently better, not just because it’s cheaper for them or because it’s what they’ve always known, but because it’s more straight forward as well.
Now, applying that to this situation. It’s not a matter of Tira being DLC, although some wanted her on the main roster. It’s not a matter of using her as a lure for fans, as I’m sure most would’ve been fine with her being a preorder bonus. These are all kinda normal, status quo type things in games right now.
What’s not normal or status quo is using a character to entice people to pay extra beyond the original game itself for something we don’t even know yet, and having that character be DLC on day one. Regardless of whether she’s gated disc DLC or not, she’s still Day 1 gated which means she’s basically held at ransom unless you either decide to pay for her individually, or spend who knows how much for a season’s worth of content.
So for Tira fans especially, this being an abnormal practice is certainly relevant, wouldn’t you agree? It’s also relevant for people that either can’t afford the season pass at the time of purchase or simply want to wait to see what it is first. So while I’m not particularly worried about it, as I have the money and the inclination for the season pass, it’s still kind of a jerk thing to do to your fans.
If the character is done and ready on day one, can you explain why it’s not cutting up the base game and selling it to you in parts? I mean, they have the right to do that, for sure. But why do you think this is okay, or why do see it opposition to such a practice as backward thinking? I’m curious what your thoughts are here.
So you’re saying what if Namco announced that Tira would be the first DLC and she’s arriving in November even though she’s already complete and could be released the same day as the rest of the cast and game?
I’d be shocked if some developers haven’t done this before; held back content, perhaps in an effort to divide up their game to get more money later or to give themselves a bigger window to work on future content they haven’t finished.
That said, it would be a matter of what the public knows. If the public has no idea Tira’s ready day one and they simply announce her for a November release as the first character in the season pass, I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that because most would assume she took extra time to complete.
Now, if Namco came right out and said “she’s ready now and could launch with the game, but we’re going to hold her back and hold her out of the game so you’ll buy the season pass,” I’d think that’s kind of a garbage thing to do.
Again, you’re taking something that you’ve made for the game and you’ve split it away from everything else in an effort to get people to spend more than the $60 they’ve already spent on the game.
I mean, back to your car analogy. What if instead of the floor mats, car dealerships started taking the hoods off of cars and selling them to you separately? It’d be abnormal, but the car still runs fine, still has the engine, the wheels, the windshield, it starts and runs just fine, but in order to get the hood, you have to pay extra for a car package of unknown content.
Maybe it’s some stuff you really want like a cool spoiler, better all-season floor mats, a custom undercarriage, an upgraded body kit… Or maybe it’s just crappy looking decals, a one year subscription to Car and Driver that you’ll never read, a silly looking gear shift head that you’ll never use, and some other odds and ends, maybe even costly ones like tinted windows or an upgraded transmission that others might like, but that you’re not personally interested in?
So with Tira, you have a character you want, gated behind a pay wall of either a small amount (for her) or by a larger amount (for unknown stuff) and I say gated because, as far as we know, she’s available day one. If she wasn’t available until November, we’d have no reason to think they’re holding her back in order to get us to buy something else we’re not aware of yet.
Then they’re misreading the preference. The preference is toward putting the game out and then giving us DLC later and not putting the game out with a part separated out so we have to pay extra for that part or to get us to pay for another part we’re not sure we even want yet.
Now, maybe that’s not the choice to Namco. Maybe they have financial necessities or any number of reasons why doing this makes sense to them. But I think that’s the choice that many fans see and I think that’s why they’re upset. I hate speaking for others, but if you saw the choice as (pay $60 and have Tira, or pay $60 and either pay $5 for Tira even though she’s available the same day as the rest of what’s in the $60 package), which would you choose?
Honestly, I don’t want day one DLC. Day one patches to fix bugs? Sure. Those have become a necessary trend. No one wants a broken game. But DLC that would’ve been ready at the same time the game would have? What’s the upside for fans here? I see the upside for developers and publishers. They get to charge us 8% of the initial cost while providing far less than that percentage-wise in terms of content.
Now, maybe you think that we’re not talking about a lot of money, or maybe they have a right to do what they want because it’s their game, or maybe you’d rather have DLC this way than not have it at all, or you’d rather have it earlier than later and that’s all fine if that’s your opinion. I personally just find it to be a rather disingenuous way to do business.
I get that that development costs have dramatically increased over the years while prices have remained stagnant. That’s part of why DLC is such a great thing for developers. It’s part of why we have in-game ads, near-gambling experiences and several other aspects of our gaming landscape that simply didn’t exist 20 years ago. People used to bristle at $10 horse armor in Morrowind. I get all that.
But I also feel that as players, as much as the line has moved further and further and as much as companies have tried and tried to find alternative revenue streams for games and ways of making money off of these expensive products, I think every now and then we still need to say “okay hold on, that specific thing right there? That’s not okay.” It happened with EA and Battlefront 2 and it’s happening here, albeit to a MUCH smaller extent.
I don’t think it’s just a matter of language though. I think it’s a matter of game completion. If the game is complete and you pull the 17th fighter out and sell them to me separately for no other reason than to make more money? Then yeah I don’t think that’s okay, whether you sell them to me on day one or in November.
The only reason why I think it’d be okay to do that is if I didn’t know about it. If you’re going to do that to your fans; deceive them by creating content that’s ready to launch with the game, but holding it back and calling it DLC later, then it’s not just a matter of content scheduling if fans actually know you’re doing it. If it’s ready to play on day one, then it should be in the game on day one. If it’s not ready day one, then I’ll buy it later.
I know that seems like a nonsensical delineation to you and I can see why you’d feel that way. I mean, what if Tira wasn’t available on day one but she was ready on day two or day six? At that point, if we’re getting in to gray area territory, I’d hope the developer and publisher would use their best judgment and come down on the side of the fans when possible. Is that realistic? Probably not.
But again, if you keep just letting publishers do this, if you keep moving the line because they keep crying poor or we’re worried content won’t exist if they don’t do this or that, then they’ll keep pushing and they’ll keep doing what every corporation in the world does: They’ll try to get more money.
LOL, if they honestly told us that? I think more people would be okay with it. Of course, I also think that more people would’ve just said “if she’s done on day one then why can’t you just put her in with the rest of the cast on day one?”
Yeah, I certainly prefer more content to less content, and I’m glad she’s in the game. I’m also glad they’ll be having a season of DLC content. I just hope it’s not a bunch of guests I don’t care about. I hope it’s characters I want to use. I think that’s part of why the whole “buy the season pass and get Tira” thing is so annoying. It’s either do that or pay $65 for a game I only needed to pay $60 for before I decide I want this character when the game comes out.
I hope I’m not coming off like I’m utterly enraged about this. I’m not. I just consider this more of a philosophical / conscientious objection to a particular business practice that I find to be a little less than savory. That’s all.
I think Okubo said we are getting only one guest for DLC. The other two will be characters who did not fit in the timeline for SC-VI (which again goes back to SC-1’s story) I bought the season pass because I know what I’m getting already. Tira isn’t my favorite, but she is a welcomed to the franchise as always. Plus I can add alot of stuff for my lizardman.
Depsite that, I still hope Aeon gets revealed. I pre-ordered the collectors addition so I hope to see him in.
1 Like
Stupid question, but did you buy the season pass when you bought the physical copy? Did you buy a physical copy or are you just getting it digitally? Okay, that’s two questions. I guess I don’t really know how that works. I’ve honestly never purchased a season pass before I even purchase a game (or when I purchase a game for that matter) when it comes to physical games and I was hoping to buy an actual copy of the game rather than just having it only my system alone (digitally, I mean).
No. This is a weird, completely illogical non-sequiter. Its only supported by out of place adjectives like “entice” and “for something we don’t even know yet.” Remember, she’s not a pre order bonus and will be available to buy separately. So none of that stuff is even really true anymore. It’s only an issue because they are making false choices. They want to believe they are choosing between being forced to pay extra for day one Tira instead of just getting her included in the main game. But that’s a made up choice. The choice is more realistically between having the ability to buy Tira or having no Tira (and maybe no game) at all. The developers have to sell stuff or they won’t make games. The choice of a huge roster at launch for $59.99 is not viable. Tira is kind of a B league character for Soul Calibur and they should just be thrilled to get her at all. She’s part of the DLC. Boo boo. So is Sagat. You really think Capcom didn’t have a passable version of Sagat ready at SFV’s launch? I don’t.
This is another argument that I just don’t get. The “what if you don’t have the money?” Argument is a fallacy. If you don’t have the money don’t buy stuff. That’s it. No matter how rich or poor you are there is always something cool that you might like to have that you don’t have the money to buy. It is not the fault of the person selling it that you don’t have the money. The heart of this argument is that the seller could, if they just had a heart, give it to you. And because you really, really want it, they should give it to you. And because you really really really are desperate to have it they are treating you shabbily by not giving it to you. But this completely ignores how money works and leads to things like… Venezuela.
The bit about people who want to wait and see first. How is this unfair or lousy for them? They can still wait and see. No one is stopping them. In fact, they now know one thing that comes with the season pass. In any other context, giving people a reason to buy your product is not considered shady or weird. They want people I buy the season pass so they put a cool character in the season pass. Duh. They would be nuts NOT to do that.
What is “the base game?” And what is the difference between “cutting up” the base game to sell dlc and just making a smaller game then “adding” DLC later. It’s irrelevant. They have a product. They are selling it to you at X cost. Decide whether the product is worth the money and then buy it or don’t. Whether that product is a huge game chopped into pieces or a tiny game with loads of downloadable add ins is irrelevant. It’s just added baggage people are making up.
The default scenario that people are using to define the “base game” is “whatever they can have finished by launch.” This is a TERRIBLE way to define “the base game.” It doesn’t help you at all evaluate what content you are getting and whether or not it’s worth the cost. And it is built on a fantastically inaccurate picture of the way development works and a misleading assumption about the purpose of DLC. If I’m a developer and “the base game” is whatever I can deliver at launch then I can pay fewer people to do less work and sell a small game as “the base game” and it’s all that’s available at launch and I’m fine. Whereas if I pay a bigger team to make more content but want to allocate that content in multiple sets that’s somehow horrible. Because… with no logic or objective criteria about what constitutes a good amount of content for a release a developer is expected to dump absolutely everything they have already produced into the retail release. It makes no sense. At all. And if faced with a public that demands all day one content be part of the base game then we will not see more content in the base game. We will just motivate developers to delay the release of additional content. That helps no one.
I’m certain this is true
What these two paragraphs say is that it’s okay to do it as long as they lie to us about it.
Aaaaaaaaaaaggggghhhhhh!!!
Content is content. Whether it’s split off or added on matters only as much as if the glass is half full of half empty. If I say “he gave me half a glass of water” it sounds like a nice thing to do. If I say “he only gave me half a glass of water” then it seems like a ■■■■■■ thing to do. In both cases I got the same amount of water. This is all based on some magical thinking that there is a predetermined “whole game” that god has ordained will be full retail price. No matter what, you can define ALL dlc as being split off the main game. Or you can define it all as extra content. This business of whether it’s split off or not has NO REAL MEANING, and therefore is not a rational argument for or against dlc. All paid dlc is an effort to get people to spend more money. In fact, all games or anything you sell is an attempt to get people to spend more money. When we put these weird straw men together it rests on this idea that games should be inherently free but we tolerate having to pay a certain amount - but that any effort to get more money is somehow unfair or shady. That’s not how money works.
Fourth time - exact same nonsense argument. Just stated as a fact that “separating” parts from a game and selling them is not okay. We don’t know what those parts are and don’t know what constitutes a whole game but separating is bad. Also the phrasing “we have to pay extra for that part” is wrong. “We have to pay for that part.” There’s no “extra.” None of the parts are free. We pay for them all. “Extra” is an arbitrary distinction. They could just release Tira, as an included character and charge $65 for the game. Nothing split. Nothing separated out to entice us. There is nothing magical or mysteriously appropriate or ethical or morally correct about selling all available content on day one for $59.99.
If Namco goes broke selling me a game with 20 characters for $59.99 that’s bad. I’d rather have them sell me a game with 16 characters for $59.99 and then sell me four additional characters for $20 and stay in business. Your statement above is once again predicated in the assumption that the Fair price for any and all content on day one (whether that’s a lot or a little) is magically linked to $59.99
The upside for fans is more content for the game.
So it’s looking like Tira or Geralt I will play. Probably both! They look so cool, and I never got around to playing Tira in any of the Soulcalibur games. Now is my chance! 
This clears up any issues I had with the whole Tira debacle.
And it makes me happy. ^^
I thought the only way to get the tin/ sdtk/ book is to pre order in store.
There’s no way to get those digitally
I bought it physically. It also came with the season pass too. I also bought it for the art book simply to see the design and the process of making these characters. Being someone who draws and does 3D modeling It’s a little something for me to add.
Blanka was my favorite character when I was into street fighter, it took them a long time to get him in the game.
Also real talk, Tira would not of made the main roster because of where SC-VI takes place. The biggest misconception that I hear about SC-Vi is that it is a complete reboot. Okubo has said time and time again that Soul Calibur VI goes back to soul calibur 1 with a slogan “History hides more than one truth” The reason why they did this was because Okubo said that they wanted to present the first game’s lore abit better. So they added characters like Groh, and because Zasalimel was immortal and fans were upset that he was left out of SC-5 they brought him back because of his immortality. The question that can be asked about him is what was he doing when Nightmare, Aeon, Ivy, and Astaroth were raising hell? We also know that SC-II was added in which helps Talim, Raphael, and Cassandra show up in one way or another. Soul Calibur III hasn’t happened yet as far as SC-VI is concerned. That’s also why it wouldn’t make sense to remove any characters from SC-1 either. If neccisary they can make the others DLC too. But folks like Aeon have been hinted at and with CAS Lizardmen getting his wepaon style his chances are at 99.9% in my opinion. Rock was also hinted at from Astaroth’s Bio. It refereed to him as the white giant. Plus with characters from SC-IV and SC-V left out of the main roster we can safely assume that all if not most of the SC-1 cast will be showing up at launch.
with that said, it doesn’t mean that Tira should be left out. while yes she is DLC, she made it in and I know not everyone is pleased about it, but if they save their money when they get enough, they can get her.
My point is for Tira fans is don’t assume the worse.
