PHOENIXZERO
Member
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.
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.
PS3 Season Pass users get an addition 10% off the remaster as a loyalty bonus!
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:
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?
Expecting a gesture of goodwill from a select few to be the norm for everything is entitlement.
Game should be 10 dollars max, It's the SAME GAME. We are getting fucked over by the man.
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.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.
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
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.
Them dropping the price for everyone was their reaction to discount questions.
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.
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.
aren't all games cash grabs?
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!!@!!
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.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)
Very sensible response. You don't have to buy it. Isn't that a great right to have as a consumer?!!!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
Could people stop misusing "entitled" for like one day?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.
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.
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.
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.
Thank you.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.
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.
How is it rushed?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.
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.
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.
Who thought they would get a discount?
Are guys with the halo titles getting money off the master chief collection?
Of course this tripe would be spewed. Good grief. "But if Microsoft did this!" Lazy and poor argument.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.
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.
Everything that costs money is a cash grabthis 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.
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.
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.
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.