Sharin no Kuni Prefundia page is up

[Darklord Rooke]

6 minutes ago, Nosebleed said:

This thread was a horrible idea.

Well, it's been a robust argument but it hasn't degenerated (too much.) And look, Tiag's posting from prison, which is undoubtedly a positive. Haven't we all missed him?  

[Dark_blade64]

11 minutes ago, Nosebleed said:

This thread was a horrible idea.

Well the point was to discuss about sharin no kuni. So it kinda served it purpose. When there is opinions who differ from yours normally people start immediately argument about how each other point of view is flawed. It is a normal process who could happen in any thread.

[OriginalRen]

Rooke, sanahtlig, and Tiago all believe that Front Wing has a right to remove content from the game that others view as being an integral part of the visual novel. Some of us believe it's a cash grab and dishonest business practice that Front Wing is essentially telling us to pay more money for a feature we already would have expected as it was in the original game to begin with. None of it matters; the project will still be funded in 10 days or less because weebs love anime and visual novels. After it's funded, people will still bitch about the game removing the 18+ content, and this pointless cycle will start all over again.

No matter what game you put on Kickstarter, if it's a popular fan translated novel, people will fund it. If it's a cute moege (i.e. = Pulltop games, Yuzusoft games), people will fund it. If it's a yuri game that either has a good story or an actual artist who is involved in a circle at Comiket, people will fund it. If it's an otome, it will fail because gay dudes are gross. OELVNs will always be written like Shakespeare because high school protagonists are all geniuses like Yuuji and Kenichi, and the h-scene discussion will always result in debate.

The fandom will never change, so this discussion is pointless. Sharin no Kuni is my favorite visual novel of all time, but even I know this won't go anywhere.

PS - Hoshizora no Memoria is trash.

[sanahtlig]

10 minutes ago, OriginalRen said:

Rooke, sanahtlig, and Tiago all believe that Front Wing has a right to remove content from the game that others view as being an integral part of the visual novel.

No.  I don't think adult content should be removed.  I don't think the Sound Mode or CG Gallery should be removed.  I don't mind the option of a version without these things.

[OriginalRen]

3 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

No.  I don't think adult content should be removed.  I don't think the Sound Mode or CG Gallery should be removed.  I don't mind the option of a version without these things.

Again, they have the right to remove it, not that you want them to.

[Darklord Rooke]

2 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

No.  I don't think adult content should be removed.  I don't think the Sound Mode or CG Gallery should be removed.  I don't mind the option of a version without these things.

Yeah, twas another strawman. I was having a private bet with myself -> what the chances were that someone would pick up on that statement and launch an entirely new argument based on beliefs we didn't actually hold ... 

[Zenophilious]

42 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

-snip-

Ooooor I was saying that your statement itself was hypocritical, since it actually is, and was making no comments about you yourself.  I'm claiming that the argument itself is illogical.  How you got "you're a hypocrite and everything you're saying is wrong because of that" from "that is hypocritical" escapes me.

46 minutes ago, Rooke said:

-snip-

I might have misinterpreted what you were saying, then.  I thought you were contradicting people that were predicting the worst and stating that their logic was faulty while using that same logic to conclude that your view was correct.  Sorry.

I don't know if it was obvious, but my view has changed since yesterday.  I no longer think that Frontwing is Literally Hitler™ for suggesting what they did, but I will remain suspicious and continue to believe that it's a very bad idea until they prove otherwise.

[solidbatman]

I think its a fucking stupid idea and sets a bad precedent that I would rather not see in the future. The reason it pisses me off is the simple fact that the CG gallery, and sound modes are essentially free. That shit is already in the VN. If the version without those two things is cheaper, why? Why isn't the full version then cheaper? The music and art are already in the game.

[Down]

What's weirder, Frontwing deciding to make a DLC/deluxe version out of shit nobody cares about anyway, or people arguing about it (I can't even imagine on why and don't count on me reading everything) for four pages?

Everything about this project makes no sense, even the threads discussing it.

[Mr Poltroon]

32 minutes ago, OriginalRen said:

Rooke, sanahtlig, and Tiago all believe that Front Wing has a right to remove content from the game that others view as being an integral part of the visual novel. Some of us believe it's a cash grab and dishonest business practice that Front Wing is essentially telling us to pay more money for a feature we already would have expected as it was in the original game to begin with. 

The fandom will never change, so this discussion is pointless.

What you are describing is most definitely a cash grab, and not at all what we've put forth as a possibility: what if, instead of paying more more for those features, you paid exactly the same, but had the possibility of paying less for a version without them?

What if you were given an option to pay less for a version with said content removed? Mind, I said option. You would still be able to buy the full, or what they are calling deluxe, version for the same, standard price as any other VN of its calibre. 

Merely a possibility, but one people have been refusing to acknowledge.

 

Regarding content removal... yes. Let's take this to another realm. See games. Imagine Left4Dead. Imagine you were able to buy the game normally as you are... But that you also had the opportunity to buy a version with only single player for a reduced price. Certainly, the developers are removing content from the game to sell as DLC (in which the value of cheaper game +DLC=Normal game price), but this is actually benficial for the consumer. A player in unique circunstances, like with a beyond flimsy internet, would have no use for the multiplayer, hence he pays less. As much as you may think removing multiplayer in that sort of game is asinine, it's an extra choice for the consumer.

So, yes. In extraordinary circunstances, I'm fine with the developer removing content to sell separately. Prices and circunstances are everything.

 

This discussion is only pointless if the arguments aren't coming through, and from your post, I fear that's possible.

[sanahtlig]

21 minutes ago, OriginalRen said:

Again, they have the right to remove it, not that you want them to.

When did this become a discussion about rights?  This is just another pointless strawman.

 

16 minutes ago, Zenophilious said:

Ooooor I was saying that your statement itself was hypocritical, since it actually is, and was making no comments about you yourself.  I'm claiming that the argument itself is illogical.  How you got "you're a hypocrite and everything you're saying is wrong because of that" from "that is hypocritical" escapes me.

You've done nothing at all to show my argument is illogical other than state it's hypocritical.  I contend that no--you simply don't understand my viewpoint.  Feel free to prove me wrong.

15 minutes ago, solidbatman said:

 If the version without those two things is cheaper, why? Why isn't the full version then cheaper? The music and art are already in the game.

I think this has already been answered multiple times.  Frontwing is likely trying to create price segmentation to appeal to value shoppers with a lower price while simultaneously charging the usual rate to traditional VN customers.  They don't WANT to charge everyone the same low price OR the same normal price because those would generate less revenue.  Given that the price for the full version for backers is $20, I find the accusation that they intend to raise prices overall absurd, or at the very least unlikely.  I would be very surprised if the full version was sold for more than $35 on Steam, which is still reasonable for a game of that length.  Not to mention the game will likely be discounted to the price backers paid within a year of the Steam release...

[solidbatman]

5 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

 

I think this has already been answered multiple times.  Frontwing is likely trying to create price segmentation to appeal to value shoppers with a lower price while simultaneously charging the usual rate to traditional VN customers.  They don't WANT to charge everyone the same low price OR the same normal price because those would generate less revenue.  Given that the price for the full version for backers is $20, I find the accusation that they intend to raise prices overall absurd, or at the very least unlikely.  I would be very surprised if the full version was sold for more than $35 on Steam, which is still reasonable for a game of that length.  Not to mention the game will likely be discounted to the price backers paid within a year of the Steam release...

I'm not implying that they intend to raise prices, but its cool. You tend to shove words into people's mouths quite often. I'm saying that if the art and music are already in the game, why in the hell do they feel the need to cut it out gallery mode and offer the game for cheaper? It's content that is already in the game so having the CG viewer and sound gallery are basically free to have minus a little programming which is already done. So, in my opinion, the VN should sell for whatever they are offering the cut version for. $20 you say? Cool, then don't cut anything, and have one edition at $20. 

[Mr Poltroon]

7 minutes ago, solidbatman said:

I'm not implying that they intend to raise prices, but its cool. You tend to shove words into people's mouths quite often. I'm saying that if the art and music are already in the game, why in the hell do they feel the need to cut it out gallery mode and offer the game for cheaper? It's content that is already in the game so having the CG viewer and sound gallery are basically free to have minus a little programming which is already done. So, in my opinion, the VN should sell for whatever they are offering the cut version for. $20 you say? Cool, then don't cut anything, and have one edition at $20. 

Some players/readers have already expressed concern at the removal of integral VN segments like the galleries. For the sake of their own profit, and of consumer choice, two versions are the optimal way, depending on their pricing. Not a single consumer loses, and people like you, who may or may not find such content disposable, get the VN for cheaper.

AkabeiSoft seem intent on VN segmentation for what I would assume are the reasons sanah's already pointed out, either way, that's why something had to be cut out.

 

EDIT: A friendly reminder that this argument is entirely hypothetical. We don't yet know the pricings.

[sanahtlig]

8 minutes ago, solidbatman said:

I'm not implying that they intend to raise prices

Did I imply the opposite?  No (notice I said "the accusation" and not "your accusation").  But the whole premise of the "nickel and diming" argument that others have made is that the total price of the entire package increases.

Anyway, I see that your question was meant to be rhetorical, rather than actually seeking to understand an alternative viewpoint.  I apologize for responding to your rhetorical question.  I'll refrain from making the same mistake again.

[solidbatman]

Just now, Tiagofvarela said:

Some players/readers have already expressed concern at the removal of integral VN segments like the galleries. For the sake of their own profit, and of consumer choice, two versions are the optimal way, depending on their pricing. Not a single consumer loses, and people like you, who may or may not find such content disposable, get the VN for cheaper.

AkabeiSoft seem intent on VN segmentation for what I would assume are the reasons sanah's already pointed out, either way, that's why something had to be cut out.

And that to me is something I refuse to support. I don't care how its worded, or argued, its asinine to cut something like that, and offer it at a lower price. If they make more money by doing it, so be it. They won't be getting a penny off of me. 

 

[Darklord Rooke]

12 minutes ago, solidbatman said:

I'm saying that if the art and music are already in the game, why in the hell do they feel the need to cut it out gallery mode and offer the game for cheaper? It's content that is already in the game so having the CG viewer and sound gallery are basically free to have minus a little programming which is already done. So, in my opinion, the VN should sell for whatever they are offering the cut version for. $20 you say? Cool, then don't cut anything, and have one edition at $20. 

Already been over this.

Quote

The idea of charging more or less for a product has to do with how many features are implemented in your VN. Assume the normal price of a VN is $40 (as it is in the Western market ... sorta.) Assume you acknowledge that a number of people would never buy a VN at that price. Assume the market and powers that be would never consider selling a full version of a VN at a significantly cheaper price. Assume you want to attempt to target this potentially untapped portion of the market. The only way to do this would be to offer a version with fewer features than the full version, and to apply a price that represents the reduced package you are offering. Yes, it doesn’t cost anything extra to offer the whole packaged at that reduced price, but you wouldn’t due it for reasons stated above. They are adopting a strategy to try and target those who don’t want to fork out a premium price and putting together a package to fulfill that strategy. It’s not ‘scummy’, they are not ‘double dipping’, they are not ‘charging extra’ for a DLC if the cheaper version + DLC = the price of the normal version. And not all ‘DLC’ is ‘shitty DLC’.

...

If they’re creating a cheap version for ‘no frills’ customers, then they’re offering an incentive for a different customer base to leap in at a cheap price point with fewer features. It doesn’t so much matter what those features are, as long as they’re not the same. However, nobody in the VN community has established that this is a price inflation for VN consumers, rather than a bit of a special for those they’re trying to lure in, and they are 2 very different things. VN consumers are acting as though they’re being ripped off, without having established whether they’re being ripped off. You’re not being ‘ripped off’ because you have to pay more than someone who got a bargain, you’re ‘ripped off’ when what you pay is out of kilter with market expectations of that product (or it’s dodgy.) Of course, this is ONLY if they’re offering a no-frills, cheap version and not price hiking (which hasn't been established.)

22 hours ago, sanahtlig said:

That's just it.  No one outside the fanbase can understand why fans are annoyed at the existence of a lower-priced version with features removed--a version which isn't even being offered to Kickstarter backers.

Artificial product differentiation is very common.  In the PC hardware market, companies will disable functionality at the hardware level simply to create a lower-priced version.  Let me repeat: they'll irreversibly sabotage their own product simply to split the product into two price categories.

Whether you accept those reasons is a personal POV. However, if you want to contend that purchasers of the full version are being ripped off, I would contend that you would need to show a price inflation against market norms rather than a price inflation against a different version of a product they've discounted to try and lure people in. That's just based on my view of the definition of being 'ripped off', and the types of stuff people tend to complain about in the market place. As Sanah said artificial price differentiation is common, I've also touched on different prices for different versions of products, none of these products have faced the sort of backlash as has been apparent in the VN community. So, for some reason (and I'm not saying what,) expectations among VN consumers seem to be different than expectation among the normal consumer.

[solidbatman]

11 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

Did I imply the opposite?  No (notice I said "the accusation" and not "your accusation").  But the whole premise of the "nickel and diming" argument that others have made is that the total price of the entire package increases.

Anyway, I see that your question was meant to be rhetorical, rather than actually seeking to understand an alternative viewpoint.  I apologize for responding to your rhetorical question.  I'll refrain from making the same mistake again.

You are such a pretentious person. Are you so insecure that you must belittle anyone with an opposing viewpoint? I get why they are doing it. They think they will make more money and appeal to more people. But it still makes no sense, whatsoever to call the original version the deluxe version when they are cutting a gallery for assets already in the game and the gallery is already done. And this isn't even a bid to be on steam because there won't be an H patch. This is just insane to me. 

 

8 minutes ago, Rooke said:

Already been over this.

Whether you accept those reasons is a personal POV. However, if you want to contend that purchasers of the full version are being ripped off, I would contend that you would need to show a price inflation against market norms rather than a price inflation against a different version of a product they've discounted to try and lure people in. That's just based on my view of the definition of being 'ripped off', and the types of stuff people tend to complain about in the market place. As Sanah said artificial price differentiation is common, I've also touched on different prices for different versions of products, none of these products have faced the sort of backlash as has been apparent in the VN community. So, for some reason (and I'm not saying what,) expectations among VN consumers seem to be different than expectation among the normal consumer.

No where did I say anyone is being ripped off, but good to see you're also in the business of shoving words into my mouth. 

[Darklord Rooke]

Just now, solidbatman said:

No where did I say anyone is being ripped off, but good to see you're also in the business of shoving words into my mouth. 

If you don't believe you're being ripped off, that would imply you think the deluxe version would be sold at a fair price. If you believe it's already being sold at a fair price, why are you so adamant the price needs to be brought down.

[solidbatman]

Just now, Rooke said:

If you don't believe you're being ripped off, that would imply you think the deluxe version would be sold at a fair price. If you believe it's already being sold at a fair price, why are you so adamant the price needs to be brought down.

I'm saying sell one version with everything in it. If its $35, cool. If its $60 cool. I could care less about price. What is making me mad, is the idea of cutting out basic features of a VN that already exist, with assets already in the game, and selling it a lower price point, and then calling the original deluxe. The assets are basically free already.  

[sanahtlig]

7 minutes ago, Rooke said:

If you don't believe you're being ripped off, that would imply you think the deluxe version would be sold at a fair price. If you believe it's already being sold at a fair price, why are you so adamant the price needs to be brought down.

My understanding of the viewpoint at large is "removing features and selling at lower price = paying to unlock content that's already on the disk".  People don't like the practice.  The backlash has nothing at all to do with actual prices or market outcomes.  They simply don't like it because it's similar to practices that have been used by unscrupulous companies in the past who are more interested in their bottom line than providing value to their customers.

[solidbatman]

Just now, sanahtlig said:

My understanding of the viewpoint at large is "removing features and selling at lower price = paying to unlock content that's already on the disk".  People don't like the practice.  The backlash has nothing at all to do with actual prices or market outcomes.  They simply don't like it because it's similar to practices that have been used by unscrupulous companies in the past.

Basically this. Its similar to on disc dlc. Its content that is already in existence in the game and in my opinion worse because unlike on disc dlc, the content is already in the damn game. 

[Darklord Rooke]

6 minutes ago, solidbatman said:

I could care less about price. 

AGH! Stupid American phrase butchering alert >:c

Otherwise it's a fair enough statement.

3 minutes ago, sanahtlig said:

My understanding of the viewpoint at large is "removing features and selling at lower price = paying to unlock content that's already on the disk".  People don't like the practice.  The backlash has nothing at all to do with actual prices or market outcomes.  They simply don't like it because it's similar to practices that have been used by unscrupulous companies in the past.

To me, that's silly. But c'est la vie.

[Erogamer]

1 hour ago, Nosebleed said:

This thread was a horrible idea.

Yes, please stop this pointless arguing. We are all supposed to be friends, or at least acquaintances here that have a passion for the same thing. This continues and people may end up disliking each other.

[solidbatman]

Just now, Erogamer said:

Yes, please stop this pointless arguing. We are all supposed to be friends, or at least acquaintances here that have a passion for the same thing. This continues and people may end up disliking each other.

You must be new. This is the Fuwa way

[Darklord Rooke]

7 minutes ago, Erogamer said:

Yes, please stop this pointless arguing. We are all supposed to be friends, or at least acquaintances here that have a passion for the same thing. This continues and people may end up disliking each other.

Unless people are actively insulting one another, I don't see why an argument should be in any way a destructive experience. You call it an argument, I call it a robust discussion. It's more meaty than pointless spam topics and repetitive cheering imo. That's just me, though. Of course once it descends into name-calling it can very quickly descend into uselessness.