Support NeoGAF

[PHOENIXZERO]

Eh, by the time I get a PS4 it'll be $10, also never played the original version so it'll still be new to me. It'll stay unplayed unless Sony puts the PS3 version on PS+ before I get a PS4.

 

[Interfectum]

I don't think it's entitlement to have an expectation of your digital purchases triggering discounts for future purchases of the same/upgraded content or even sequels to past purchases...

Save an additional 5% if you own The The Witcher: Enhanced Edition or The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Enhanced Edition on Steam.

Pre-purchase today to take advantage of an exclusive loyalty bonus offer – a 25% discount for each original Metro title in your Steam Library.

Sony easily could have done:

PS3 Season Pass users get an addition 10% off the remaster as a loyalty bonus!

 

[Mr. X]

I don't think it's entitlement to have an expectation of your digital purchases triggering discounts for future purchases of the same/upgraded content or even sequels to past purchases...





Sony easily could have done:

Expecting a gesture of goodwill from a select few to be the norm for everything is entitlement.

 

[constantstatic]

So are the people not happy with the price still going to begrudgingly buy it? Are they going to do the smart thing and wait for a price drop like most products that you feel aren't worth the initial asking price?

ill be buying it when it hits 30 bucks I just got a ps4 from the target deal and last of us was one of my favorite games last gen. But its hard to justify spending 50 bucks on a game I already own with all the dlc. Also comparing this to the content in master chief collection the last of us seems over priced.

 

[Interfectum]

Expecting a gesture of goodwill from a select few to be the norm for everything is entitlement.

It's not a gesture of goodwill, it's building loyalty. Something Sony should be interested in doing if they want people to invest in their digital ecosystem.

 

[RoadHazard]

Ok, not getting it then. I love the game, but it's still great on PS3. Won't pay full price again just for sharper and smoother visuals. Maybe at a much lower price at some point in the future.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Got $23 for my ps3 copy at EB Games. Never played the DLC map packs or the Left Behind DLC which is $15. Pretty much getting TLOUR for $15.

 

[p3tran]

hmm... I will sell my ps3 copy then.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Game should be 10 dollars max, It's the SAME GAME. We are getting fucked over by the man.

It should be fucking free man. And Sony should be giving away steelbook editions, hand delivered by Val Kilmer or Liza Minelli (whoever the kids are fancying these days) to dish out a oral sex and a cuddle.

 

[Moon_frogger]

No one wants it free and it barely counts as being discounted at $50

5o dollars with the dlc. That's actually a good deal. It's not like the expect people to double dip, there are a lot of gamers that never played it to begin with.

 

[zackmorris]

Did people really think there would be? If there was going to be it have been announced a long time ago.

 

[Hatty]

5o dollars with the dlc. That's actually a good deal. It's not like the expect people to double dip, there are a lot of gamers that never played it to begin with.

if they gave a discount people would double dip that wouldn't in the current situation. I see very little downside to giving a slight discount

Did people really think there would be? If there was going to be it have been announced a long time ago.

They said they would look into it then they have been silent about it until now

 

[Fallout-with-swords]

They said they would look into it then they have been silent about it until now

Them dropping the price for everyone was their reaction to discount questions.

 

[Popetita]

You know what I'm calling you out GAF. This is suppossed to be a discussion so I really don't get why the guy that gave the one great and sensible response as to why he feels 'cheated' is being COMPLETELY ignored:

Well, to be fair, on Steam right now:



The original versions of these had *much* longer availability than the original version of TLOU.

That's something that's making me a little uncomfortable about the rapid turnaround of games for remastered editions (this and Tomb Raider, maybe GTA5 and Dark Souls 2 down the line): a game that's only had a year or so in its original form being sold again, such that there's a quantity of the audience who may feel that they were misled into purchasing the 'wrong' version. Put it this way: If the remastered edition had been suggested *before* people made the first purchase decision of the original game, I don't think we'd see these complaints. The rumours around GTAV ensured I didn't purchase GTAV on 360/PS3, and that was the right decision; hence, I feel adequately forewarned, and don't have quite the same issue with that game (Which, I'll concede, is inconsistent; they were only rumours, and there may be purchasers of the title who *do* feel aggrieved because they didn't feel forewarned)

Now, to turn things around, though, is that actually a poor business decision? The risk, from a business point of view, is adding another reason for people to *not* purchase a game at launch but wait for a GOTY or similar. While I know that games are generally front-loaded, I'm not clear on how much the market is dependent on those front-loaded full-price sales to be sustainable, but I suspect it's significantly so. If that gets eroded too much, the whole edifice tumbles down. The question then becomes: How majorly *does* this erode things? Had you known then what you're now aware of, would you still have purchased TLOU PS3?

The price tag, it must be said, is a good, pro-active move. I don't think it's quite sufficient, but it does alleviate the issue.

I have a problem because the game is practically new and this guy has great points. I don't feel entitled that I deserve anything for free, $40 would have been nice, but $50 is ok too. Maybe even a way to prove to them I bough the game and DLC for the PS3, send in my copy and get the remaster for $40? I know it's too much to ask, but oh well PC gaming treats me well so I don't lack good deals.

This is not MCC which has focused on the remaster of a 10 year old game. Hell give me RDR PS4 or other early gen gems( lost odyssey/Blue Dragon 2 pack please ) rather than I game I bought the DLC pack a day before you anounced the remaster.

I will get it. I sold my copy last month for $25 because I knew no sort of goodwill upgrade pacakge would come. It was not needed but it sure would have been a good gesture because it is a slight releasing a remaster of a game so new. So many other games they could have done, but oh well.

Also to those that say the game is not for me, that's BS, I bought a PS4 to play games ND games included. Everygame should have the possibility to be for me since I bought into their vision day 1. It sucks that they could focus on remaster. I just hope if they do they look at the early PS3 games or late PS2, rather than re-releasing year old games( unless it's Souls games)

 

[x-Lundz-x]

Them dropping the price for everyone was their reaction to discount questions.

I demand more! I've already paid them 60 dollars over a year ago for this game. I played it twice, put more than 40 hours into it and enjoyed one of the best games of the generation. However, I demand justice for my loyalty on top of the already said price cut. How dare they charge me 50 bucks for the exact same game with zero improvements or additional content!!@!!

 

[RandyBobandy]

It's not a good deal for me, I paid something close to 75€ for the PS3 version and the DLC of this game. Not gonna give them another 50€ for the same shit.

Same. There's no incentive for me to buy it. Not at that price. It would be stupid to

Previous games gave you a discount if you had the ps3 version

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Well, to be fair, on Steam right now:



The original versions of these had *much* longer availability than the original version of TLOU.

That's something that's making me a little uncomfortable about the rapid turnaround of games for remastered editions (this and Tomb Raider, maybe GTA5 and Dark Souls 2 down the line): a game that's only had a year or so in its original form being sold again, such that there's a quantity of the audience who may feel that they were misled into purchasing the 'wrong' version. Put it this way: If the remastered edition had been suggested *before* people made the first purchase decision of the original game, I don't think we'd see these complaints. The rumours around GTAV ensured I didn't purchase GTAV on 360/PS3, and that was the right decision; hence, I feel adequately forewarned, and don't have quite the same issue with that game (Which, I'll concede, is inconsistent; they were only rumours, and there may be purchasers of the title who *do* feel aggrieved because they didn't feel forewarned)

Now, to turn things around, though, is that actually a poor business decision? The risk, from a business point of view, is adding another reason for people to *not* purchase a game at launch but wait for a GOTY or similar. While I know that games are generally front-loaded, I'm not clear on how much the market is dependent on those front-loaded full-price sales to be sustainable, but I suspect it's significantly so. If that gets eroded too much, the whole edifice tumbles down. The question then becomes: How majorly *does* this erode things? Had you known then what you're now aware of, would you still have purchased TLOU PS3?

The price tag, it must be said, is a good, pro-active move. I don't think it's quite sufficient, but it does alleviate the issue.

To be fair, there probably weren't solid plans for a PS4 version before the PS3 version was released. And no business is going to sabotage their product before it releases by telling consumers that a cheaper, superior version with more content is on its way. I understand what you're saying, but it's not the way the world works.

 

[zoukka]

aren't all games cash grabs?

"Remasters" more so.

 

[Zia]

They can't even be bothered to distribute an uncensored version of the game to the relevant European markets so this is unsurprising.

 

[theytookourjobz]

I demand more! I've already paid them 60 dollars over a year ago for this game. I played it twice, put more than 40 hours into it and enjoyed one of the best games of the generation. However, I demand justice for my loyalty on top of the already said price cut. How dare they charge me 50 bucks for the exact same game with zero improvements or additional content!!@!!

Keep fighting the good fight brother. For people that haven't played TLoU $50 is a steal but to me, it looked amazing on PS3 and $50 is too much to have a very similar experience on PS4.

 

[BabyFaceKillah]

Lol some of these post man..

anyways I'm getting it for like $30 off of gamefly.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

You know what I'm calling you out GAF. This is suppossed to be a discussion so I really don't get why the guy that gave the one great and sensible response as to why he feels 'cheated' is being COMPLETELY ignored:




I have a problem because the game is practically new and this guy has great points. I don't feel entitled that I deserve anything for free, $40 would have been nice, but $50 is ok too. Maybe even a way to prove to them I bough the game and DLC for the PS3, send in my copy and get the remaster for $40? I know it's too much to ask, but oh well PC gaming treats me well so I don't lack good deals.

This is not MCC which has focused on the remaster of a 10 year old game. Hell give me RDR PS4 or other early gen gems( lost odyssey/Blue Dragon 2 pack please ) rather than I game I bought the DLC pack a day before you anounced the remaster.

I will get it. I sold my copy last month for $25 because I knew no sort of goodwill upgrade pacakge would come. It was not needed but it sure would have been a good gesture because it is a slight releasing a remaster of a game so new. So many other games they could have done, but oh well.

Also to those that say the game is not for me, that's BS, I bought a PS4 to play games ND games included. Everygame should have the possibility to be for me since I bought into their vision day 1. It sucks that they could focus on remaster. I just hope if they do they look at the early PS3 games or late PS2, rather than re-releasing year old games( unless it's Souls games)

Whoa, I didn't know I could get a discount on The PS4 version of the Metro Redux since I bought Last Light and Metro 2033 on the 360.

Oh? That's right, I CANT.

There is no precedent for console gamers to get discounts on games that came out on another console.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Same. There's no incentive for me to buy it. Not at that price. It would be stupid to

Previous games gave you a discount if you had the ps3 version

Very sensible response. You don't have to buy it. Isn't that a great right to have as a consumer?!!!

 

[Two Pikachus]

I'm so surprised at all of the entitled people here. I hate that t word- entitled. It's just so accurate.

I mean really..some of you are mad that you have to pay for a remastered game on another system? Could you be any dumber?

and one dude complaining about how he bought a season pass and should get it..really?! From the very beginning they told you that the season pass would have 2 multiplayer DLCs and 1 story DLC...

This selfish crying really bothers me. I think I'll just stick to SteamGAF

Edit: Bottom line. Don't buy it if you feel cheated. You aren't owed the game and you definitely don't NEED to play it again.

Could people stop misusing "entitled" for like one day?

"Entitled" means you have a right to something. If these people were entitled, they'd have a right to get the game at a discount. What you're looking for is "a sense of entitlement" where people THINK they have a right to something, whether they do or not.

That said the game sold 7 mil before the remastered version even came out. They can afford a little customer satisfaction. Whatevs, this just means I won't get it at launch and I'll wait for it to become a PS+ goodie.

 

[constantstatic]

To be fair, there probably weren't solid plans for a PS4 version before the PS3 version was released. And no business is going to sabotage their product before it releases by telling consumers that a cheaper, superior version with more content is on its way. I understand what you're saying, but it's not the way the world works.

I think the port was rushed to market because Sony has very little to offer from first parties this year. I don't think it was planned from the start.

If it wasn't for the crazy target deal I wouldn't have gotten my ps4 till early next year. But comparing this to other remastered games or even the master chief collection it's not worth double dipping at 50 for me. I have a feeling if this was done by Microsoft it wouldn't have been received as well and would be called a cash grab.

 

[Hades Hotgun]

Could people stop misusing "entitled" for like one day?

"Entitled" means you have a right to something. If these people were entitled, they'd have a right to get the game at a discount. What you're looking for is "a sense of entitlement" where people THINK they have a right to something, whether they do or not.

That said the game sold 7 mil before the remastered version even came out. They can afford a little customer satisfaction. Whatevs, this just means I won't get it at launch and I'll wait for it to become a PS+ goodie.

Indeed.

On your following point however, they lowered the price by $10 and included the major DLC. Its no different than a game of the year edition, and early adopters don't typically get extra discounts on those either.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I wonder if there would be as much teeth gnashing if Sony simply called it a GotY edition? I don't see anyone complaining about those, or expecting discounts because they bought the vanilla version.

 

[Interfectum]

Whoa, I didn't know I could get a discount on The PS4 version of the Metro Redux since I bought Last Light and Metro 2033 on the 360.

Oh? That's right, I CANT.

There is no precedent for console gamers to get discounts on games that came out on another console.

Between Sony systems there are plenty of precedents for using past digital purchases as a way of giving discounts, games, etc.

 

[Respawn]

I have never understood why anyone ever thought they should get a discount because they purchased the game on a prior system.

That's the same thing as saying you are owed a 10 dollar discount on this years call of duty because you bought call of duty last year. You aren't owed anything, even if you purchased the season pass.

Thank you.

 

[RPGamer92]

$35 for the main game isn't bad at all imo.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

Could people stop misusing "entitled" for like one day?

"Entitled" means you have a right to something. If these people were entitled, they'd have a right to get the game at a discount. What you're looking for is "a sense of entitlement" where people THINK they have a right to something, whether they do or not.

I, much to my shame, had to check this was the case, and you are correct. This I learned today.

 

[Loudninja]

I think the port was rushed to market because Sony has very little to offer from first parties this year. I don't think it was planned from the start.

If it wasn't for the crazy target deal I wouldn't have gotten my ps4 till early next year. But comparing this to other remastered games or even the master chief collection it's not worth double dipping at 50 for me. I have a feeling if this was done by Microsoft it wouldn't have been received as well and would be called a cash grab.

How is it rushed?

They added and improved several things.

 

[Two Pikachus]

Indeed.

On your following point however, they lowered the price by $10 and included the major DLC. Its no different than a game of the year edition, and early adopters don't typically get extra discounts on those either.

Not quite the same. I bought the GOTY of Morrowind on Xbox for $30 with all that extra content. I bought the Special Edition of DMC3 with extra content for $30. $50->$30 is a totally reasonable drop. $60->$50 isn't really that reasonable. But like I said I can just wait for what I consider a more reasonable price. It's nice that this is my right as a consumer.

The point is it would be a win-win for Sony to build a little goodwill. They're seen as less greedy, early adopters now have an incentive to buy, and the gamers make out with a little extra. I can personally say that I would have double-dipped if Sony had made the first move in courting me, but since they expect me to pay nearly full price again I won't be until the price drops for real, you know?

 

[rokkerkory]

Guess ill buy it when its cheaper then.

 

[Kinitari]

How crazy would it be for game saves to port over at least? I would love to replay the game, and would love to even more with my moderately buffed Joel.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I never expected it but would have been nice.

 

[soqquatto]

it's OK, we've already played this. we can give a pass.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

How crazy would it be for game saves to port over at least? I would love to replay the game, and would love to even more with my moderately buffed Joel.

That would be great I think but I believe it's already been stated this will not happen.

 

[entremet]

Who thought they would get a discount?

Are guys with the halo titles getting money off the master chief collection?

Cross buy. Also you can do it with Flower.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I think the port was rushed to market because Sony has very little to offer from first parties this year. I don't think it was planned from the start.

If it wasn't for the crazy target deal I wouldn't have gotten my ps4 till early next year. But comparing this to other remastered games or even the master chief collection it's not worth double dipping at 50 for me. I have a feeling if this was done by Microsoft it wouldn't have been received as well and would be called a cash grab.

Of course this tripe would be spewed. Good grief. "But if Microsoft did this!" Lazy and poor argument.

 

[Popetita]

Whoa, I didn't know I could get a discount on The PS4 version of the Metro Redux since I bought Last Light and Metro 2033 on the 360.

Oh? That's right, I CANT.

There is no precedent for console gamers to get discounts on games that came out on another console.

You missed the point completely and yes there has been this precedent in consoles for some PSN games.

 

[HT UK]

I was expecting a small discount for owners of the game digitally and/or owners of the season pass to be honest. Sony are usually good with this kind of stuff.

 

[MagicWithEarvin]

They couldn't do a $10 digital "next-gen upgrade" like what happened with Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Ghosts and Assassin's Creed IV? Even $20 wouldn't have been so bad and would've been a nice discount for owners of the digital version.

 

[Brutalitops]

this is a cash grab remake of a one year old game. It wouldn't make sense if they didn't monetize as much as possible.

Everything that costs money is a cash grab

 

[Magwik]

The MCC comparisons are stupid. Different content, different purpose. Even if it was just Halo 2 Anniversary on the disc and nothing else, people wouldn't be asking for discounts or upgrades or anything. It never happened with CEA either (though that was $40 but lacked actual multiplayer).
You are a loyal customer, congrats. You loved TLOU, plenty of others did too. But this game took money and hours to make and improve. People need to get paid for that work. It also is respectively cheaper than TLOU PS3 too! DLC included and for $50 with all the improvements. Its the same shit as the Drive club PS+ version and discount. Bullshit sense of entitlement to free or cheaper shit.
Value is perceptive. If you're not gonna buy the game, then just stop posting in the damn threads.

 

[zeorhymer]

All I'm seeing is "I'm an early adopter, I want a discount!" People are making up excuses with "Sony needs to build good will!" No. They. Don't. Or saying that it's not fair. Fair to whom? The early adopters? Nope.

So, how many people are going to bitch at Rockstar for bringing out GTA5 on PS4 at full price?

 

[mclem]

To be fair, there probably weren't solid plans for a PS4 version before the PS3 version was released.

Perhaps not *solid* plans, but I'd be very surprised if it wasn't being seriously considered.

And no business is going to sabotage their product before it releases by telling consumers that a cheaper, superior version with more content is on its way. I understand what you're saying, but it's not the way the world works.

My point was - in part - musing whether that's a risky move when it comes to long-term side-effects; if purchasers start to feel buyer's remorse from having purchased the original title as a result of this, would it have a detrimental effect on their willingness to purchase games at launch in the long run?

I feel that's something businesses should be less casual about than they are right now, and I do wonder if it'll turn around and bite them in the long run. It's something very similar to the issue with GOTY editions with the added caveat that you can't simply buy the missing components to *upgrade* your existing version to this new improved version.

(Also, thinking through the way I'd approach it, the PS4 version wouldn't actually *have* to be cheaper to justify it. I'm thinking of something akin to the Twilight Princess model)

 

[rokkerkory]

The MCC comparisons are stupid. Different content, different purpose. Even if it was just Halo 2 Anniversary on the disc and nothing else, people wouldn't be asking for discounts or upgrades or anything. It never happened with CEA either (though that was $40 but lacked actual multiplayer).
You are a loyal customer, congrats. You loved TLOU, plenty of others did too. But this game took money and hours to make and improve. People need to get paid for that work. It also is respectively cheaper than TLOU PS3 too! DLC included and for $50 with all the improvements. Its the same shit as the Drive club PS+ version and discount. Bullshit sense of entitlement to free or cheaper shit.
Value is perceptive. If you're not gonna buy the game, then just stop posting in the damn threads.

You have a point but then again it's a gaming thread forum. People will express how they feel and if done in a good way then that matters.

People have equally good reasons not to buy the game. It's not like they don't like or understand how good of the game it is. But for those that paid $60 for PS3 version and then have to pay another $50, it can be hard to swallow.

 

[GoaThief]

Could people stop misusing "entitled" for like one day?

"Entitled" means you have a right to something. If these people were entitled, they'd have a right to get the game at a discount. What you're looking for is "a sense of entitlement" where people THINK they have a right to something, whether they do or not.

That said the game sold 7 mil before the remastered version even came out. They can afford a little customer satisfaction. Whatevs, this just means I won't get it at launch and I'll wait for it to become a PS+ goodie.

Much as I'd like it to, it doesn't seem likely either of your points will happen.

It's a shame that so much unwarranted vitriol has seeped into this thread particularly from discount naysayers. It stifles proper discussion, I used to hold GAF to a higher standard than that but it is what it is.

A discount for people who already own TLoU wouldn't have been unprecedented or unfair. It does seem to sit in stark contrast to the similar and upcoming Metro release, which I'm happily shelling out for. As a value proposition it certainly outshines TLoU:R, which seems to indicate that people wishing the latter had a discount for prior owners are not acting out of a false sense of entitlement, nor demanding for that matter. Speaking of which if those making out this is the case for the majority could kindly quote these offending posts it would be most appreciated as I seem to have overlooked them.

 

[chickdigger802]

Don't really see the problem. If you bought this last year, there is pretty much zero reason to rebuy just one year later for sharper knees. Get it down the line for cheaper.