Forum - View topicThis Week in Games - Tariff Woes and A New Splatoon
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Treecko Tempo
Posts: 168 |
|
|||||||||||||
This is wrong, you can order the physical version from multiple sites right now with the release date of September 17th. What might be exclusive to Japan is if you pre-order 2nd Chapter you get a remaster of the original Sky first chapter game(the one on psp). This might be a code, but it would be nice to see physically. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Greed1914
 Posts: 5345 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Zero surprise that Shuhei was fired by Jim Ryan. Devs have said that Shuhei would go hands-on and give meaningful input. Various devs that didn't do anything for Sony have said that he would go around show floors and play all the demos he could just to see what people were making. The guy liked games, but in the corpo world, liking the thing you sell is a liability compared to risking obscene amounts of resources on a gold rush.
Toei games: We'll see how that goes. I have a hunch that the focus on "new IP" might be because Bamco has those licenses locked up tight for some time, and Toei might not be able to make games using its existing stuff. Even if they could, starting your own operation that immediately competes with a long-standing partner probably isn't a good move. Tariffs: I think this new lawsuit is worth a try. It's possible they will lose since companies can say that they paid the taxes, and were careful to say that increased costs were because of "economic circumstances." Realistically, we know customer ate the final costs, but not being able to pin an exact number to it for the customer might be the stumbling point. But, they are exactly right that passing on the cost, and then getting the tariff money means a windfall. I saw some comments about why this was just with Nintendo, and not Sony and Microsoft. I don't know if this is true, but apparently out of those three, only Nintendo actually filed a suit to get tariff reimbursement. If that is accurate, then the premise of the suit doesn't apply to those two since they don't have the money coming back. But, considering that corporations are supposed to maximize shareholder value, it seems like a problem to not try to get back unlawful taxes. Maybe they'll explain to shareholders what we already know; the costs were passed on and the company doesn't need it back. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Sockman
Posts: 5 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I think that you're right about Nintendo, aside from the $80 thing. I'm sick of seeing everyone say that Mario Kart World's the only $80 game, when there's also the Switch 2 editions of Tears of the Kingdom, Kirby and the Forgotten Land, Mario Party Jamboree, and Mario Wonder. No company has ever priced upgraded versions of games like that. Usually, these kinds of upgrades are cheaper. It's especially offensive in the case of Mario Party, which doesn't even function as a normal upgrade. It has a bunch of problems, like how it splits itself into 2 "games," so you always have to lose out on something when you play.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
AiddonValentine
 Posts: 2943 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
-Yoshida: Y'know, what's really destructive about this isn't the waste of money, it's the waste of time. Ryan wasted basically half the generation on pie in the sky nonsense instead of bolstering Sony's 1st party stable. And it's just gonna take more time to fix that considering how long games take to produce nowadays.
-Splatoon Raiders: Looks fun so far. Considering Deep Cut didn't get a single player campaign focus like the Squid Sisters and Off the Hook have, doesn't surprise me they're the focus in this. I wonder how much of Raiders will show up in future Splatoon games as a spinoff is also a good place to do experimentation. -Tariffs: Guys, first off, maybe wait until the damn thing is FINISHED considering it's suspended due to other procedures. Second, you should probably sue Sony and MS considering it's clear they HAVE raised prices for their current consoles to an absurd amount. Anyway, it'll probably be dismissed in time because the ninjas are not to be messed with |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
ThatGuyInTheHoodie
Posts: 15 |
|
|||||||||||||
Yeah I never heard of Sony or Microsoft suing the government for refunds only Nintendo so it makes sense people would find it suspect of them if the customers were the ones paying for it. Generally if people focus on one company its probably because it's a company specific problem. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
FishLion
 Crazy Fangirl Posts: 856 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
As far as Sony and a Microsoft not suing, the tariffs are already going to be refunded to everyone who requests it using a state made system, which is why the Nintendo suit is frozen. Sony and MS are definitely going to be getting their money back too, Nintendo just wanted to be legally ahead of the ball.
As far as consumers deserving that money morally it makes sense but realistically I find it hard to agree because tariffs are so complicated to calculate in terms of total cost. Nintendo is getting a refund for the import tariffs, but we have no idea how much tariffs changed the cost of materials and manufacturing for Nintendo's suppliers outside of the actual imported tariffs. If those manufacturers in Vietnam, Cambodia, and other suppliers had to up their prices then Nintendo could very well be still taking an overall loss compared to previous prices even with the refund. Even after all that, how do you distribute these refunds? FedEx is refunding people, but they had an actual line on your receipt that says "tariffs" that they can refund. Does everyone take their receipts to the store and get their cards refunded five dollars for their pro controller? How do we prove that the $5 dollars were only import tariffs and not the cost of materials going up due to supply chain breakdowns? After all, Nintendo blamed market conditions generally and not just tariffs. They did say in an investor meeting they were adjusting prices to deal with the effects tariffs, but they never said they the entirety of the price increase was only to cover import tariff costs rather than the cost of materials going up. If tariffs happened in a vacuum where manufacturing wasn't a deeply interconnected system that was complete mangled by tariffs and every Nintendo item has a tariff line item attached then I would be much more comfortable saying they need to refund everyone, but when supply systems are so complicated and we can't even account for if every dollar went straight to paying for tariffs and not the wider effects it seems like a really weird and bad precedent to force a refund. Now that I've explained why this lawsuit it logically bad, it does just seem like some dude is making some point or clout chasing by suing Nintendo. You could have bought a Switch 1 ( the console they actually did raise the price on) and every Switch 2 accessory that changed in price and the difference still wouldn't add up to groceries for one week. Since most people wouldn't buy a SW1 with SW2 accessories most people would realistically get less than $50 back and even less when you take out the lawyer fees necessary to win, unless you have a strong moral crusade and completely misunderstand that only Nintendo is making money back the only reason to do this to Nintendo and not others is because you are making a point to them or you get your legal knowledge from rage bait Youtubers that love pretending Nintendo is worse than other companies. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
FishLion
Crazy Fangirl Posts: 856 |
|
|||||||||||||
Jean-Karlo just highlighted people calling out Nintendo for patent stuff and ignoring others, the only problem people have is with the company name. For tariffs system has been set up to refund all tariffs so Xbox and Sony are definitely getting money back too, so anyone who's upset Nintendo is "double dipping" should be suing everyone. Even if that wasn't the case though, assuming popular internet outrage has no algorithmic or engagement based bias and doesn't need to be investigated is the opposite of how anyone should engage with the internet. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
AiddonValentine
Posts: 2943 |
|
|||||||||||||
The reason Sony and MS aren't suing is because they have government contracts and are scared of retaliation. Nintendo has no such conflict of interest and is suing (along with thousands of other companies) because nobody in their right mind trusts this administration to respect an official judgment. They are getting that money, come hell or high water |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 7185 |
|
|||||||||||||
Key difference is most people who want PS5’s likely have them, few if anybody wants the S or X. Whereas the Switch 2 is pretty much in demand hence this lawsuit.
Even then they may not get the entirety of that money. Depending on what No So Perfect Hair Forever did with it. Who also essentially just floated the idea of doing favors for companies that don’t apply for refunds.
Are we counting Among Thieves which was the worst written of the original 3 games?
I mean it wasn’t all that long ago Microsoft was catching hell for the Xbox One coming in a 499 back in 2013. Years after Sony launched the PS3 for 499 and 599. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
tuxedo-melvin
Posts: 45 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Well today we also just learned Nintendo is making people pay a separate sub for FFXIV on the Switch 2 which Xbox and PlayStation don't do so that's not exactly a good look for them right now or helps the angle that people are just singling out Nintendo. They seem to be doing these things themselves. Def an odd one, that Nintendo. Wonder if there'll be much backlash to that from FFXIV players.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
FinalVentCard
ANN Reviewer
 Posts: 921 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
In the spirit of transparency, I realized that Sony and Microsoft hadn't asked for their tariff refunds the morning my column went live (while I was brushing my teeth, even). I even mentioned it myself a few columns ago! Goes to show, even I can't keep track of everything I've written
Thanks for the correction, this will be fixed!
Yeah, that's my read on the situation too. Bandai Namco is still one of the other big entertainment houses in Japan, and Toei likely doesn't want to rock the boat with them. I do think it'll be quite a while before Toei ever puts out, like, a Kamen Rider game on their own, but it'll happen somewhere down the line.
Eh... you're talking about people buying upgrades for games they likely already owned. More notably, a lot of the games with paid upgrades were pretty long-in-the-tooth too (like BotW). $10 to upgrade a game you likely already own on your console's ecosystem is still way better than having to buy a brand new SKU entirely (at full price). Also, as for "no company has ever priced upgraded versions of games like that": Sony did exactly that for PS4/PS5 games in 2021.
Not like I want Nintendo to weasel out of this one, but these are good points. Like, you can argue that Nintendo still made a profit during the time where the tariffs were in place, but that doesn't mean that they didn't have to make massive internal restructuring just to do it. I think the other thing that matters, which I saw someone else point out, is that the waters get muddied when you factor in all the people who didn't buy their Switch 2s directly through Nintendo's storefront. Like, what if someone bought their Switch 2 at Gamestop or Walmart? Those companies were also subject to tariffs, and they still had to pay increased prices to import/stock Nintendo's wares. But then, would that be on Nintendo's side of things? Or does that count as Walmart/Gamestop? Not that these are necessarily impossible problems to solve, but it is a wrench in the gears for sure.
Full disclosure, I don't even go here when it comes to Uncharted, so I can't make any calls regarding any of the games and their writing quality. (I felt like I was having an aneurysm when those games were celebrated for their writing because Soul Reaver was right over there.) |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
AiddonValentine
Posts: 2943 |
|
|||||||||||||
Plus doing "but what about this one????" is just pedantry and misses the point which is that Uncharted, regardless of one's own view on it, is a highly successful franchise and it wouldn't have been that way without someone like Yoshida going to bat for creators. Ryan clearly not valuing that and firing Yoshida for taking a stand is a classic bungle, likely done out of nothing more than petty ego. Seriously, gaming's #1 priority should be creators, otherwise what's the point? |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 7185 |
|
|||||||||||||
It’s definitely funny in retrospect when you see some of the criticism of the movie with people making it seem like it was an affront to the games especially the first one. Which was as generic and boilerplate in writing as you could get. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Fluwm
Moderator
 Posts: 1620 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Very glad to see SC’s release date, especially with it being a month earlier than previously indicated (used to just have an October release window). W/R/T the physical edition, I am immensely disappointed with how Gung-ho has handled the steelbooks and LEs. They sold out basically immediately, and there was never any advance notice of when the sales went live, so whether or not you could snag a copy was mostly down to luck.
Which sucks so, so hard. SC is probably my all-time favorite JRPG. And while I’m glad I’ll at least be able to put the NS edition on my shelf, I really wanted at least the steelbook. Oh well.
You don’t need to name-drop Soul Reaver here: I already knew you were a very cool person with excellent taste. Seriously, though, Hennig’s writing for the Kain games is absolute peak stuff, but those games were just too niche to find much of an audience when they came out, and have an even steeper uphill climb finding new audiences today on account of how dated the gameplay is. Like even by contemporary standards, SR2’s action combat/platforming was well below the standards of other PS2 games. Anyway, I’m not really sure what you mean by “go here.” Have you played the Uncharted games? If not, you may not be aware, but they were constructed in a very slapdash manner. Basically, ND would design big set-piece levels first, and once they’d decided what those would be, only then did they start thinking about what the narrative would be, and they’d just rearrange those sequences to make the story work. That this approach worked well even once is kind of a miracle, so it not working so well in the third game isn’t something I get too upset about personally, and certainly isn’t something I’d hold against Hennig. (Speaking of, I think she also wrote the scripts for the second and third Jak games, which, you know, were also pretty good. With Jak 3, in particular, doing a lot of the weird time travel stuff that so well-featured in the Legacy of Kain games.) |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 7185 |
|
|||||||||||||
True the entire section with the cruise ship is terrible largely due to illogical reason it’s made to occur. But it’s not the most most disappointing aspect of the game doomed by its writing. That would be how the game teases Drake leading his own team of treasure hunters with Chloe and Charlie just to drop it pretty early. Or the main villain who felt underwritten and underused before she’s ultimately replaced by her second in command not unlike Gabriel from the first game minus the betrayal. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group