Soul Calibur: Lost Swords - No Multiplayer Due to "Pay-To-Win Model"

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Soul Calibur: Lost Swords - No Multiplayer Due to "Pay-To-Win Model"

soul calibur lost swords

Soul Calibur: Lost Swords had it's multiplayer mode cut due to concerns over it's "pay-to-win" microtransaction model.

Soul Calibur: Lost Swords is a Soul Calibur game recently released for the PS3 that is singleplayer only. Of all of the genres in the gaming sphere, fighting games are usually the one in which some form of multiplayer is basically a given, so many fans were scratching their heads over this move. Masaaki Hoshino, the game's producer explains that while a multiplayer mode was originally planned, it was cut "because we're going with a pay-to-win model."

"The reason that we went singleplayer...well, originally, we were thinking about having a multiplayer option, but because we're going with a pay-to-win model, we were worried that by having online multiplayer, for all the new users that would be coming in experiencing the game for the first time, they might be immediately deterred by fighting against opponents who had superior equipment and gear-and we didn't want to have that kind of negative impact on new players."

Hoshino does stress that while he felt the game's micro-transactions would affect multiplayer, "In the singleplayer experience, having a pay-to-win structure won't impede the player's experience with the game."

Hoshino went on to talk about the game's character roster. As of right now, there are but three character available to new players (Sophitia, Siegfried, and Mitsurugi), but he said that the company was planning to make new characters available through limited time events.

As for those of you expecting a secret guest character, a la Link in Soul Calibur II or Yoda and Darth Vader in Soul Calibur IV, Hoshino says "I would love to see something like that happen, but currently it's still undetermined."

As someone who was once told to not write stories using the phrase "pay-to-win" because it's inflammatory, I'm just perplexed at how nonchalant Namco Bandai is being about the whole thing.

Source: Siliconera

Permalink

An odd if understandable reaction.

Still I think they could have figured something out to get multiplayer in. Single player in fighting games is super boring.

So they knew this was a completely idiotic move but went ahead and did it anyway...

*facepalm*

Well, I appreciate their honesty, at least. I haven't played a Soul Calibur game since II, and I don't know if I'll go back to the series. I had a blast with the old game, but the newer titles haven't quite grabbed me the same way.

So basically they gutted their game in favour of nickel and dime DLC...

Can someone hand me my vomit bucket. Thanks Sam.

HUUUUUUURRGHHHH

Hmmmmm...

Maybe SCV was a good point to part from the series. Pay to win is poopy. I'd rather grabspam my way to victory.

The next main-series game will inevitably have me feeling left out, though, unless they decide to port it to PC.

Steven Bogos:

As for those of you expecting a secret guest character, a la Link in Soul Calibur III or Yoda and Darth Vader in Soul Calibur IV, Hoshino says "I would love to see something like that happen, but currently it's still undetermined."

Did he really that? Isn't Link in Soul Calibur 2?

edit:

edit2:

Ah, looks like it was just a typo. Seemed odd for him to make that kind of a mistake.

Is... is this April Fools?

What is happening?

I guess that's ONE way to overcome the "multiplayer in everything" trend, but seriously, Soul Calibur without multiplayer?

Wait....

So a new Soul Calibur game....without the multiplayer, which (for me anyway) was the best aspect of soul calibur.....

Well, looks like I won't be getting this then.

So wait. Can anyone explain what this game is? Soul Calibur with pay-to-win microtransactions but no multiplayer just sounds kind of like... I don't know. An RPG sort of thing?

So...is it like an action hack'n'slash now or something? Or did they seriously just pull the multiplayer aspect out of a fighting game, thus gutting its major selling point for nearly every fan of the series? I myself do not care for fighting games, but good Lord this is a baffling move. It's so baffling I can't even say it's stupid or insane. It's just a, "Wait, what?" type of moment.

Is this a Free 2 Play game or is this 60dollars with microtransactions on top? I've never been much of a fighting game fan at all but Soul Calibur series is the only one I always really enjoyed. (because of it's easy to pick up combat system and customization options). Either way I imagine core fighting game fans are going to feel REALLY burnt by this.

I wonder if they realize that they just killed a franchise...

I'm trying to imagine how this happened. Maybe the higher ups dictate pay to win, the developers put their foot down saying they won't make a multi-player game like that, and the higher ups not understanding how important multi-player is to fighting games say go ahead and make it without multi-player?

Soooo... did it ever occur to them to segregate the singleplayer and multiplayer to some extent to prevent Pay 2 Win in MP? Or did their brains start melting whenever someone brought up Multiplayer WITHOUT exploitative business models, so they decided to just cut it instead?

At least they are honest, EA and Mircosoft are not.

You gotta hand it to Namco - they happily put their BS right up front so everyone could get a good whiff of it. Doesn't make it any less repugnant though.

Not that it matters to me, I usually play alone, but what's the point in a fighting game if there isn't local multiplayer? How would that affect game balance if players have access to the same content? Even then, why not have separate online modes for item games and the vanilla game? Do they simply want to cut costs on hosting servers?

Namco, I love your games, but your logic is killing my brain.

Kopikatsu:
So wait. Can anyone explain what this game is? Soul Calibur with pay-to-win microtransactions but no multiplayer just sounds kind of like... I don't know. An RPG sort of thing?

Basically, yeah. You fight AI, and improve your stats, unlock stuff, level up, etc. There's a story mode to it.

OT: Honestly if it weren't such a task to unlock other fighters, I'd probably be playing it more. I mean in between the cost in energy points, and the randomness, and the fact I have no idea how to soul break, and the strange peaks, and valleys in difficulty regardless of the rating of the mission that go from lulz to rage inducing.

Honestly, I debated if I were just better off playing SCV coz I like the new character designs, but the whole point of me playing SC:LS was to unlock characters (mostly Ivy, and taki so far), so what's the point in playing SCV if I already have them unlocked?

I'm not a terribly competitive person. I'm pretty conscious of the quality of my internet connection, too.

I think they might be on to something with SC:LS, but until it's not going to take days for me to unlock a character w/o me playing through the game as a character I don't want to be, spoiling most of the plot, I think I'll do other things.

This is why I prefer PC gaming, cheating is free.

What is happening to you, Namco? First, Ace Combat, then Soul Calibur... Bring us back our good old franchises, dammit!

Disable the gear properties and make it purely cosmetic for Multiplayer? That can't be too hard to do in theory... something they should have addressed before release.

I can't help but wonder if there's a translation issue here. Masaaki Hoshino does seem like he's using "pay-to-win" without being aware of the negative stigma that it carries over in the west.

Wtf aspect in a fighting game requires "pay to win" to even cross the developer's minds?

If they absolutely had to have it, couldn't they simply have made the pay-to-win aspect single-player only and just let the multiplayer be a lever playing field?

I am... literally beyond words...
I've never heard a dev literally admit they were going with a pay to win model, let alone cutting what's usually the selling point of any fighting game FOR THE PURPOSE of maintaining that pay to win model....
I just... I never thought I'd see the day...

Zeren:
I wonder if they realize that they just killed a franchise...

It was already dead.

The hell...
So they have a game that could benefit from current technology by allowing online multiplayer just like Marvel Vs Capcom or Street Fighter.

Instead they butcher the starting roster down to make the micro transactions necessary, tag prices onto everything else and don't innovate by including one of the most consumer convenient changes in the fighting genre in the last decade...

What the hell? Won't pay to win reduce the longevity of the game anyway?...

Also who were they interviewing, Sophitia, Siegfried, and Mitsurugi are all returning characters, not just Sophitia.

Oh Soul Calibur, I've loved you since I first played you on a Dreamcast all those years ago. I'll miss you.

Wow, just wow...if at the end of the interview Masaaki Hoshino had turned round and said 'We had a bullshit explanation for this that I was supposed to tell you all to calm things down a bit, but my friends I'm so fucking high right now I couldn't care less' I wouldn't have been surprised.....radical honesty 4tw I guess...

Okay for those not familiar to Soul Calibur: Lost Swords, it's a F2P Sony PSN download only game.

The game allows you only 1 character from 3 available at the beginning the Pay-to-win element is in regards to unlocking additional characters which take forever to grind out as the game would much rather you pay for each individual character.

So anyone who buys this came is a massive idiot doing damage to the industry. And the devs are slime.

Kilo24:
I can't help but wonder if there's a translation issue here. Masaaki Hoshino does seem like he's using "pay-to-win" without being aware of the negative stigma that it carries over in the west.

I feel like this is almost certainly what happened. Either he's unaware of the connotations or the phrase is used so often in development meetings, it just kinda slipped into his speech.

Pay-to-win is odious in any case, but in a genre which has traditionally prided itself on producing games with radically different characters which are still balanced, its particularly obnoxious. For all that people complain about on-disc DLC characters and Super-hyper-turbo editions in fighting games, if the company absolutely has to gouge me, these are all infinitely preferable shady business tactics to pay-to-win.

That's, er nice of them.

At least they're admitting it, which is good. And utterly fucking depressing.

Last I checked it was May 20th not the first of April. Is this a mistranslation, or something or has he been reading the EA guide to PR and business?

*scratches head*

huh.

I mean, at least they're being honest for once, right? That's almost respectable. Almost.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here