You know, aside from the change after months of the release (and apparently the availability on Steam in countries where there’s no PSN?) I don’t see what’s the big deal. Yes it’s annoying, but at the same time everyone else does it and that’s hardly ever causing uproar.
Downvote and argument your opinion. Because what I’m saying is go make a stink about (for example) Microsoft games on Steam requiring a MS account, don’t be selective in your dislike for multiple accounts.
A lot of people missed the, frankly quite obvious, yellow warning label that said a PSN account was required. There was a period of time where it was turned off due to technical issues on launch week and now they’re turning it back on now that its fixed. They definitely should’ve region locked it from the start but if you missed the notice, that’s on you. It was quite obvious on the page.
Thanks, I don’t have the game (yet… it’s in the wishlist, waiting for a sale) so I’m not 100% up to date with whatever is going on. I have a quick skim of the first article I’ve found, and that was either missing or I missed it. You know, I haven’t even skimmed the game’s page, so to be honest I’m seeing how that could be a detail people would fail to notice lol. Getting one more account to use the thing that is logged in with a different account is a thing I don’t like, but I think I have a full Pokédex of them by now (sigh)… so I usually just need to grumble while filling in the details.
Its truly not the end-of-the-world scenario everyone seems to think it is, but Sony’s response to the whole scenario might fully tank the game at this point.
You’re completely ignoring that PSN isn’t available in most countries, meaning people can’t play the game anymore without breaking ToS. It’s not okay to sell a game in a country, and then change it so players can’t play the game without committing a bannable offense.
Yes it’s annoying, but at the same time everyone else does it and that’s hardly ever causing uproar.
Could you share 3 other cases where access was taken away after a couple of months? I can’t think of a single one.
aside from the change after months of the release (and apparently the availability on Steam in countries where there’s no PSN?)
Or, worded differently “those two things are bad, but I don’t see the problem with having to use another account, something that most companies do already”
The point is that, for all I’ve seen (and mind you, it started with the meme above plus a quick search) the big deal was centered around not wanting to make an account, hence my edit mentioning specifically Microsoft accounts for MS games on Steam not causing any stir.
That said, your initial comment made me wonder, and after seeing all AI failing miserably at getting the meaning of my post, I’m thinking that I might have worded it poorly to say the least.
Maybe try rephrasing your question, because I’m really not sure what you’re asking. Yes, some people are upset about having to create an account, but it’s specifically because of this being done months after release. Others are upset because they were told they weren’t allowed to play anymore, and yet more were upset for these people. Why are these not sufficient reasons?
Yeah, it’s clear that my message was not easy to parse. Anyway, starting from the moment I found this meme: I looked into what’s going on with Sony accounts, discover a mix of poor choices (adding back a requirement that wasn’t really ever there), awful planning (making the game available where it technically wasn’t supposed to be supported), and the always-annoying need for an extra account. Overall, it’s not a pretty picture. However, when considering valid reasons for complaint, the main issue causing controversy seems the fact that it’s a Sony account, with plenty of comments and review bombing the game for reasons such as “I’m not making a Sony account!” rather than focusing on more sensible reasons like the sudden change or the effect it would have on part of the player base due to regional availability. I too dislike extra account requirement. However, it seems blown out of proportion if that’s the main focus of so many complaints. It’s worth noting that nowhere in the meme above there’s any hints of the other problems. Hopefully this conveys my thoughts better as I’ve even got ChatGPT to review it for clarity. As a side note, this took way too long, so if there’s still confusion… I’m probably just going to bow out of the conversation.
However, when considering valid reasons for complaint, the main issue causing controversy seems the fact that it’s a Sony account, with plenty of comments and review bombing the game for reasons such as “I’m not making a Sony account!” rather than focusing on more sensible reasons like the sudden change or the effect it would have on part of the player base due to regional availability.
I think the core issue in this comment chain is explained here: you perceive the complaints to be only about the account requirement, while they’re mostly about the combination of the account requirement under the delayed implementation. Unless people explicitly say “I’m only angry about the account requirement, not the delayed implementation” you have to assume any complaints to be in this context, because people usually don’t repeat the whole context of whatever current thing everyone is talking about, especially while angry.
If I could give you a screenshot in time of what was the comments and reviews situation when I looked at it, it was a fairly surprising half of them specifically mentioning not wanting a Sony account, then 1/4 understandably not happy with the new requirement, and the remaining 1/4 either angry about it or straight up living in an unsupported country. Is it possible I got the exact moment where that group was most vocal? Honestly it could be, you’re not wrong after all. Regardless of everything, I’m glad I managed to get at least you to understand what I meant! Thanks for keeping an open mind.
I admit that I overlooked the part where it said it needed a third party account. But if the Game asks for a login for another network or launcher at Start, I immediately close and refund it. I just can’t be arsed to look through all the requirements that are listed on the right side of the buying page. And it worked flawlessly without another account or launcher from the Start. Why would you need one now? 2 Months later one bought it? That is what rubbed the people wrong, that’s why they are pissed. It feels like a rug pull. Get the people in without an account, make em like (and in some cases invest with in-game currency) the game and then put a mandatory login to a network they don’t like to keep them there.
Many ppl have just a Steam account and would like to have it to stay that way. And while “everyone else does it” is true, you can see it from the start and have the time to refund the game. I am 20hours in after 2 Months, so no refund for me. But this will be a lesson for me: no more Sony games
I think you might still be able to refund it, just not automatically: the reason seems good enough (to me anyway) that Valve could go through with it. Might be worth a try, if that’s how you feel about the situation! Worst case scenario you get a negative response.
And thanks for the reply. Again I don’t mind the downvotes, but getting an explanation why is good.
And all is well what ends well. Happy to see a requirement has been removed, ensuring it’ll remain accessible to the widest possible audience! Isn’t it nice when a massive corporation can be made to see reason and backtrack instead of going through with controversial decisions? Speaking of: fuck spez.
Can’t talk about snw, I wachte none of it, not even trailers. Honestly, why bother? Everyone raved the same about discovery and it was so bad, so so so bad… Same for Picard, it was cringy bad and ruined TNG for me.
Lower decks? The actual episode has a special place in my heart, as it was a great story with heart. The show? I saw the chest bumping admirals and the lower shields song crap and I was out.
You mean the shields up shields down song show with the chest bumping admirals? Haven’t even started that, never will, hells no.
Everybody is raving about new worlds too, but then again, people were raving about ST Picard which singlehandedly ruined all TNG for me. They also raved about st discovery, which pretty much ruined the franchise.
So no, not watching that either. I was beyond a huge fan, I have countless books, thousands of play cards, dozens of models and posters, I have like a cubic meter of star trek stuff, easily, measuring over 100kgs in weight. I went to conventions, even though I lived in Europe and good ones were hard to find. Every time when I have to make a huge decision, I watched tapestry before, to inspire me. I would rewatch episodes at least once a week. After Picard, I haven’t watched a single episode anymore, I dunno, it made it all vapid, leaving a bad taste in my mouth. The feeling is gone.
I’m a person who liked Disco for about a season and a half until it was clear they didn’t have a clue what they were doing. I was pumped for Picard until it turned out to be a dud in reality.
SNW brings back what Trek has been good at: thought-provoking narratives, true ensemble casts, mostly episodic stories. LD takes what I love about Star Trek and makes fun of it in the most loving way possible – and in the process makes some really good “true” Trek episodes.
I can say as someone who shares your opinions of Disco / Picard that SNW and LD (if animated humor would work for you) are worth trying out.
And just… be careful conflating how those old episodes made you feel (and make you feel remembering them) versus how good they were. You want to talk about bad TV? S1 of TNG was a dumpster fire. But we all feel good about it because of where it led to. If bad new stuff can make you feel differently about the old stuff, your feelings about the old stuff might not be rooted in what you think it is.
Not going to try it anymore. I wasted countless hours on the horrors of discovery, with the continued promise that NOW it will get better! It only got worse. It was horrible trek, it was horrible SciFi.
I then tried Picard because hey, the TNG crew, it has to be good, right? Right? But then it became clear that even though the name was star trek, the actor was the same, the characters had the same name, it was a vapid nonsensical CGI fest. The characters has nothing to do with the original, and it was just sad. Picard managed to ruin Picard, Q and the rest of the crew for me, I haven’t watched TNG ever since, something I did almost weekly.
So I’m done with it, one day I hope to feel that love again and rewatch the older trek, but the new trek seriously trashed everything that star trek was and is.
I know that this opinion will be down voted, I’ll be called right wing or something dumb, but it’s the truth. Look at “the Orville”, holy shit, that IS star trek TOS/TNG, done by a huge fan of star trek, and made with love for the star trek universe, not “I never watched star trek, I never liked star trek, but star trek is a great platform for my political opinions! The Klingons are now trump supporters!” <Insert Picard facepalm here>
So the king is dead, long live the king, long live the Orville, even though I doubt that will pass beyond season 4
It’s not a show to get new audiences into Trek like Prodigy. Lower Decks is written by fans for existing fans of TNG era Trek. It is non stop obscure Trek jokes.
I don’t even recall the chest-bumping or “shield ups, shields down” song they’re referring to, but apparently it’s such a big deal that the other 39 episodes are garbage without even seeing them.
Strange New Worlds feels a lot like older Trek. But if your feelings about the other recent series have soured you to the point of being unwilling to try another series, that’s your perogative. But I think you’re missing out.
Add comment