Skullgirls got review-bombed on Steam after some art changes

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: MetallinatusYeah, people who bought Cyberpunk 2077 at release should just keep that version without a single patch, and if they want a new version they should just buy again, amirite?

art direction and bugs are 2 separate things, but yes.
are we really in a linux forum discussing if an consumer should have the rights to access an old version of an single player game if he dont like what changed in an patch?

we arent even talking about code here, but assets, i can understanf if an company changed a lot of things in a game (eg: the AI) but also fixed a lot of bugs, that they cant provide an version with the old ai system for those who dont like the new one, but with the bugs from the older version, fixed, im not asking for that.
but its that hard to not remove features, or assets or change assets without providing an option for those who dont like the new art direction? or what if the player rather deal with the old bugs than the new version of the game, in a single player match? whats wrong with that? why the consumer shouldnt have this right?
linux should be about freedom yet in a linux forum/discussion we are deffending that the companies should be able to do whatever THEY want with the product we paid for and supposedly OWN?

No, we were talking about whether devs should reserve the right to change a product that a customer already paid for, as that is what you complained about. And btw, fixing bugs is not always good for everyone either, in fact, it can be even worse than changing art, as it can *actually* affect the game for the worse. Ask any speedrunner if that isn't true.

You didn't mention anything about customers being able to downgrade their games at will before, that is different from what I was talking about, but I agree, game stores should allow us to do that. But unfortunately only GOG allows it as far as I'm aware.

Quoting: neffo

Quoting: kit89The removal of armbands seems exceptionally pointless considering they kept the soldiers pointy helmets (WWI German Soldier).

WWI there were no Nazis though yeah. So, what's your point? Nobody is suggesting representation of Germans is a bad thing.

Yes, I forgot WWI German soldiers didn't involve themselves in any atrocities of their own. It doesn't have to be directly related to the Nazis to be a symbol that is reprehensible.

The pointy helmet and the red armband are not subtle associations to the horrendous acts of WWI and WWII, and if you are going to remove one, then I'd argue any decent person should then remove the other, as the arguments for one can easily be applied to the other.

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: slaapliedjeAs far as hating on removal of racist imagery making you a racist? What if it is important to the story line that you are taking out a band of racists, but some sensitivity editor decides that shouldn't be in the game, and now you're just killing a bunch of random people? :P

a good example of that is the series "everybody hate criss" wich have a bunch of racist jokes that are intended to show how absurd racism is, it make fun, mock how ridiculuous racism is all the time, yet it feature racism to show that.
should it be censored too?

I didn't play Skullgirls, but my guess is that this game does not actually think about racism/nazism, but is just using it for, well... fun? In contrast, Svoboda 1945 e.g. obviously needs nazis.

Quoting: EikeAccording to your logic - not mine.

Changing some sprites and backgrounds is very different from changing the genre or even the business model.

the question is: where you draw the line? what is acceptable for you might not be the same as what is acceptable for me, what define an piece of art for you might not be the same as what it define it for me.

an fighting game have tons of patches changing the balance (how much damage an attack does, how fast it is, the cool down,recover, range of the hitbox, timing) all of that can change, hell i played league of legends for a while they completely changed the gameplay of some characters!
an game can change a lot, and if its only there arent much we can do aobut it.

an video game is a lot of things, it is gameplay, sure, but its also soundtrack, graphics, every part of it matter.
one small change might not change an product but if we change a little bit for little bit in the end of the day we might end up with a completely different product, so again, where you draw the line?

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: EikeAccording to your logic - not mine.

Changing some sprites and backgrounds is very different from changing the genre or even the business model.

the question is: where you draw the line? what is acceptable for you might not be the same as what is acceptable for me, what define an piece of art for you might not be the same as what it define it for me.

an fighting game have tons of patches changing the balance (how much damage an attack does, how fast it is, the cool down,recover, range of the hitbox, timing) all of that can change, hell i played league of legends for a while they completely changed the gameplay of some characters!
an game can change a lot, and if its only there arent much we can do aobut it.

an video game is a lot of things, it is gameplay, sure, but its also soundtrack, graphics, every part of it matter.
one small change might not change an product but if we change a little bit for little bit in the end of the day we might end up with a completely different product, so again, where you draw the line?

To be honest... I don't know. Somewhere between changing sprites and changing genre or business model. ;)
(I personally usually don't run into such problems as I tend to play a game and then say goodbye for good.)

Quoting: MetallinatusNo, we were talking about whether devs should reserve the right to change a product that a customer already paid for, as that is what you complained about.

for all intents and purposes... its the same thing in that case.

Quoting: MetallinatusAnd btw, fixing bugs is not always good for everyone either, in fact, it can be even worse than changing art, as it can *actually* affect the game for the worse. Ask any speedrunner if that isn't true.

i know, one more reason why consumers should have this right.
except for things like achievments, i think its fair for the developers to call "exploiting bugs" an cheat in their achievments system and remove achievments you got that way if proven, so long as they inform you beforehand.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: slaapliedjeAs far as hating on removal of racist imagery making you a racist? What if it is important to the story line that you are taking out a band of racists, but some sensitivity editor decides that shouldn't be in the game, and now you're just killing a bunch of random people? :P

a good example of that is the series "everybody hate criss" wich have a bunch of racist jokes that are intended to show how absurd racism is, it make fun, mock how ridiculuous racism is all the time, yet it feature racism to show that.
should it be censored too?

I didn't play Skullgirls, but my guess is that this game does not actually think about racism/nazism, but is just using it for, well... fun? In contrast, Svoboda 1945 e.g. obviously needs nazis.

Skullgirls uses it as a trope to tell you -in a not so subtle way- that these 'good guys' are not good at all. It tells you quickly what ideology they follow. It's very much follows the Mitchell and Web sketch: 'Are we the bad guys?'.

Quoting: IzaicThere's no reason to completely remove the violence from a game that has had it from TBD beggining. This *is* just people being too sensitive. They could have added a censor option for those who were sensitive to it. Just because a game has violence in it does not mean it is glorifying it.

But they didn't do anything to the violence, though? They deleted some armbands and made a few shots very marginally less sexy, although you have to squint to figure out how. Well, I guess there's one still image where they didn't show a corpse. Plus they just did a couple of fixes.

I mean, if someone asked me "Which do you think is better, the 'before' or the 'after'?" I might actually say the 'before' is better, and that the changes seem kind of pointless. But it's such a marginal bleedin' change--it clearly makes zero difference to the game. If I'd been playing before the change and then after the change without anyone telling me about this oh-so-huge controversy, I almost certainly would not have noticed that it happened.

The only reason for someone to bother to go and bitch about it is being addicted to having fun foaming on the internet about "all wokes must die" kind of thing.

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: EikeAccording to your logic - not mine.

Changing some sprites and backgrounds is very different from changing the genre or even the business model.

the question is: where you draw the line? what is acceptable for you might not be the same as what is acceptable for me, what define an piece of art for you might not be the same as what it define it for me.

OK, I feel like calling someone out on this whole thing. These changes were tiny, and games make this amount of change and way more all the bloody time and nobody bitches. I put it to you that if they'd made exactly the same amount of change to add a few extra blood spatters and strategically tear one or two more garments, nobody here including you would be squalling about "But muh artistic integrity! But the exact art it had when I bought it!!!"

But the whisper that they might have made the changes because woke, or maybe just the simple fact that some are in the direction of less sexy, and suddenly everyone's foaming at the mouth or "standing on principle". Frankly, I don't think this principle you're espousing is one you sincerely hold, or you'd be bitching every time there's an article on GoL about changes made to a game, which is to say pretty much every day.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 4 July 2023 at 7:45 pm UTC

Quoting: Purple Library Guy, and games make this amount of change and way more all the bloody time and nobody bitches. I put it to you that if they'd made exactly the same amount of change to add a few extra blood spatters and strategically tear one or two more garments, nobody here including you would be squalling about "But muh artistic integrity! But the exact art it had when I bought it!!!"

woke? i complain when that type of thing happen since the days of 4kids.
we paid for cable expecting to see animes (and other things) legally distributed and translated to our idiom.

what they did?
replaced the soundtrack (for inferior songs, but regardless of quality, that change the integrity of the animes), replaced the dialouges for inferior ones (again even if they "improved" something, we wanted the original, we didnt pay to be fooled), censored violence or sexually sugestive things (i can understand if the content was designed for kids, different countries have different definitions of what each can see, that is why we have CERO on japan, ESBR on europe and something else in the us, but as an adult i want the option to see the original and they dint provided it, not to mention that they adapted many shows to an younger audience than the originaly intended)

as they say, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
i understand that games have updates that change content, but most of the time the changes arent trying to censor something for another audience that is bothered by this type of content.
no one purchase an porn magazine without the intetion of seen boobs, if your ebooks started removing porn they of course you'de be pissed.
sexually sugestive things are part of the reason why people purchase games like this, dead or alive and others, its quite different removing it than adding blood.


Last edited by elmapul on 4 July 2023 at 8:20 pm UTC