• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived. You can find them at the bottom of the forum in the Archives (2021) section. The archives are locked, so please use the new forum sections to create new discussion threads.

June 2023 Content Update Discussion Containment Thread

Nerio said:
They didn't design Black Dahlia or any of the released characters, those designs were done by Alex Ahad. I don't think we've yet seen anything not previously designed by him in Skullgirls.

It's gross either way. People paid for those old art books, specifically because they represented the game's history. They didn't pay for a digital canvas that Future Club can edit at their whim. It's even more insulting because if it wasn't for those people, Skullgirls simply wouldn't exist. Editing things like in-game pantyshots is something you can debate, but editing art books that were already sold simply because you can is inexcusable to me.


This is the real big issue and the reason why Future Club needs to address the situation. Censorship of character art is one thing - as you said, it's something we've seen before, and we can debate it separately. But removing and altering things people paid for (such as voice packs, color palettes, or old art books) with no reimbursement or option to opt out feels downright scummy. This is something I've never seen before, even in online gaming, and I've been around for quite some time.
A very good point! While it obviously doesn't affect gameplay, of course, it's still surprising that they would touch that and be very vague as to the reasons why. If they can had given a list of reasons detailing as to why, then there would be less speculation and people would be able to understand the situation better. As I can tell, there are three options FC/Hidden Variable/Autumn whomever you want to say decided it should do.

1: Return everything back to the way it was. Apologize and say you'll better listen to the community next time.

2: Give compensation. Say that you'll replace the Soviet announcer back with a brand-new voice pack for the characters--say, Japanese Doki Doki Schoolgirl-chan Filia, Italian Squigly, Weeb Valentine, etc. For people who have the art book, they can choose to be sent the art that was taken out and that they can keep and do what they wish with or choose a piece of exclusive merchandise. This way, when something is taken out, people will have less reason to complain because they are at least getting something back.

3: Host a Q&A in which free, open, civil discussion of the changes is held. Dispel any misinformation, discuss future plans, open up new avenues of player-dev communication. Let people get a better understanding of the changes and allow the community to be better informed of changes.

While I will admit I have enjoyed everything up until this point, the devs, whether it's FC or Autumn who made the call, should give a prompt and appropriate response. People have been overblowing things, and there are people who clearly just want to complain about the woke left or the facist right or whatever and haven't even heard of Skullgirls until a few days ago, but fans do have legit concerns and they should be answered openly and treated with respect and professionalism.
 
renda said:
y'all dancing between "the devs aren't comfortable with this anymore" to "they need to do this to appease the larger market" which is it?
Both? I thought that was the point of this whole argument.
 
Big Boy Beo said:
While I will admit I have enjoyed everything up until this point, the devs, whether it's FC or Autumn who made the call, should give a prompt and appropriate response. People have been overblowing things, and there are people who clearly just want to complain about the woke left or the facist right or whatever and haven't even heard of Skullgirls until a few days ago, but fans do have legit concerns and they should be answered openly and treated with respect and professionalism.
Yes, this is vital. They need to communicate with us, to say something. They can't stick their heads in the sand and pretend like nothing is happening, especially because they're fighting game developers. They need the community, or everything they're doing would be for nothing.
Capcom, for example, made mistakes in the past. The launch of Street Fighter 5 was a great example of that. But they also always listened to the community and communicated with the fans, even at their lowest points. And thanks to that, not only did they manage to turn SF5 around by the end of its cycle, but also made one the greatest fighting games of all time with SF6, an unprecedented success that harkens back to the age of SF4, and it was built with community feedback.

I don't know if any devs are reading any of this, I really doubt that, but I wish they would, and I wish they would respond.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Excarius
I really think the devs should done the censorship better than it is right now. With how creative and good they are with making content like new characters and stuff like that, you think they give the same treatment with censoring stuff, but no, they did it at unsatisfactory levels, leaving behind a controversy we're currently in. Some of the censored stuff should have been handled way better or not touched at all with the art book and big band's story. If I were to have done the censorship, I wouldn't have changed anything as unnecessary as some of these. It doesn't mean I don't like what they're doing because they did have good intentions but I really wish they gone differently with this censorship. I'm sounding a lot like the complaints but I'm not as mad as them, just disappointed.
P.S: I think they should have kept the umbrella logo on the egrets' arms where the armbands were, just as a remnant of what used to be (not the armbands themselves).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose and Excarius
missingno said:
Capcom? Really? I have been waiting a full seven years for any communication whatsoever on this broken promise.
Capcom was always good at keeping up with community demands, even if they screwed up from time to time. From smaller things like character model fixes in MvCI to larger things like trying to address the issues in SFxT. Capcom never lets their fighting games get buried without a fight, because they know their reputation is always at stake, they learned its value after Inafune almost tanked the company by trying to pursue the elusive "wider audience".
 
-It is true that Ahad made the initial concept of Black Dahlia but the people who fleshed her out (animations, attacks, mannerisms, full dialogue) are the current development team, not Ahad. If they really wanted to, if they were really trying to do some "whole scale de-lewdification" of the game they could have changed her outfit/design from its concept. Not only is there tons of precedent for that within video game development, there's even precedent within the context of SG (the original Ms. Fortune concept and how she looks in the actual game are quite different) but they didn't. All the team's current and recent actions are consistent with their stated aims/preferences (slightly trimming back what they feel are the most exploitative elements of the fanservice) rather than trying to make SG "not lewd" or anything.

-"DLC characters are tame relative to DLC" because most of the "sexy" characters in the SG universe are already in the game. The sexy was coincidentally front loaded. I think that's a point the devs themselves made years ago. Of the remaining SG characters that we know about that might ever become playable, only Mrs. Victoria/D.Violet (meh) and Venus (who I really hope one day becomes playable, but she'll probably be among the last SG characters ever made) are really "babes". Of course, they could just make more characters that could fit into the SG world which I hope they do. I get why had to show all their potential cards back during the IGG but it is lame to think it's impossible to be surprised by future characters and there are holes in the playable cast the revealed characters can't really cover IMO. But until that happens, almost all upcoming characters are going to be more of the "Annie mold" by requirement. I'd also have to disagree with "all panty shots are the same". As an easy rebuttal, a SG where we are getting constant Umbrella pantyshots is a very different product with a very different discourse >_< The nuance matters.

-I'd be careful with the idea of "I paid for this voice pack/color palate/etc. so they CAN'T change it!". Many of these elements were incentive goals for *donations* not specific items bought or investments anyone made. Once you accept the game is modular and will be constantly changed over time you have to be willing to accept elements can be changed even if you disagree with a change. For example, there have been lots of changes made to the gameplay over the years, as with any fighting game, and "my favorite character/mechanic was nerfed, I/we demand a refund or I/we'll riot" has never been a reasonable response. "They removed 6 specific panty shots and also made some characters look less like Nazis, so I/we want my money back!" is even more hysterical of a response.

-I certainly appreciate communication and transparency from developers. Over the past decade this team has been among the most transparent I've ever seen and their dedication to communicating with their fanbase is admirable. They're not infallible, to err is human afterall, and there have been a few quiet periods (often for entirely understandable reasons) but compared to most other dev teams I've seen or followed they've been among the best. They also been very open to community feedback on many elements of the game, the gameplay being chief among them, over the years. HOWEVER, this isn't a game "designed by committee/community". It never has been and that rarely ends up well. For the good of any game/project, a development team has to know when to say "no" and that includes when to say no to vocal minorities.

There could have been some lead time for the announcement ("these changes will take place one week from now") and maybe they could have done a visual "before and after" breakdown instead of just text denoting the changes so one wouldn't have to rely on outside compilation videos. Those strike me as things that would have been good to do but obviously it's too late now. Otherwise, I'm not sure what people want? Very much feels like people are saying "I want more transparency/communication" when what they just mean is "I don't like the changes!". They explicitly told us what the changes are and why they were made. If the changes are made primarily because it's stuff they don't want to do/push anymore for the IP then a toggle defeats the purpose and as does reverting things just because some people on Twitter yell at them. If the devs say "we want to rollback some slight Nazi references or a few bits of fanservice they felt leaned more exploitative" and people respond with "Well why is there any fanservice at all still?" or "Well why does SG Mobile exist at all?" I dunno if that's something that can be "fixed" with more "communication"?

When they made the changes, they understood some people would disagree with or not like them. That seems fine and it's hard to make any change that would make everyone happy (including the developers). But "Where's my refund!", "Forced Censorship!" and so on strike me, and many others, as over the top reactions to what are really, really, REALLY small changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose, Kittens and missingno
HellCofer180 said:
I really think the devs should done the censorship better than it is right now. With how creative and good they are with making content like new characters and stuff like that, you think they give the same treatment with censoring stuff, but no, they did it at unsatisfactory levels, leaving behind a controversy we're currently in. Some of the censored stuff should have been handled way better or not touched at all with the art book and big band's story. If I were to have done the censorship, I wouldn't have changed anything as unnecessary as some of these. It doesn't mean I don't like what they're doing because they did have good intentions but I really wish they gone differently with this censorship. I'm sounding a lot like the complaints but I'm not as mad as them, just disappointed.
P.S: I think they should have kept the umbrella logo on the egrets' arms where the armbands were, just as a remnant of what used to be (not the armbands themselves).
They could of just made the Umbrella Icon a sort of military rank shoulder patch similar to a thing many real world militaries do. Though I assume they dont have enough money to spare the work effort for more edits since they could only muster a 5k prize pool.
 
That would require edits to every sprite individually. Removing the armbands is just a matter of making the palette a solid color.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Excarius
ChocoP said:
-It is true that Ahad made the initial concept of Black Dahlia but the people who fleshed her out (animations, attacks, mannerisms, full dialogue) are the current development team, not Ahad
They're still working with his sketches and concepts, and we're yet to see what new characters would look like designed with their sensibilities from the get-go. Black Dahlia is certainly Alex's creation as much as any other character in the game.
ChocoP said:
-I'd be careful with the idea of "I paid for this voice pack/color palate/etc. so they CAN'T change it!". Many of these elements were incentive goals for *donations* not specific items bought or investments anyone made.
I'm not sure how that makes things any better. If anything, it's worse - people donated the money at the project's darkest hour and received some of those rewards as a symbol of gratitude. Without them, Skullgirls wouldn't be a thing today. So what does it say to have those rewards removed and changed with no warning or compensation, so many years later? That the new studio telling all those people to get bent? I'm inclined to say no, but that's certainly what it sounds like. And comparing these things to balance changes is rather dishonest - balance changes are ubiquitous in online gaming, necessary to keep the project alive, and expected. They do not compare to editing art books, which is very unprecedented.
ChocoP said:
They explicitly told us what the changes are and why they were made
First of all, you're implying that the people who disliked these changes are a vocal minority. This doesn't seem to be the case, a vocal minority is never so ubiquitous. If anything, those who defend the content update are in the minority, judging by the evidence we have. Second, you're saying they told us why the changes were made, but the problem is - it's kinda hard to buy their reasoning. They make it look like a moral decision when it's a financial one - that can be argued by using many similar examples from other developers. And third, you're focusing entirely on the sprite changes (panty shots and armbands) and ignoring the content that was removed or changed with no reasoning or commentary provided whatsoever, such as the voice pack and the art book, those are the changes I have the most issue with.

And if people want a refund because they disagree with such sweeping changes to the game and everything around it, it's their right as customers. The product they paid money for was changed in ways that would've impacted their initial purchase. Saying that they don't deserve the refund because "it's not a big deal" makes you look like you're defending the company over the people, which is a slippery slope. And if Future Club chooses to ignore such a strong pushback entirely and willingly, with nothing to say beyond their initial pitch, then I don't think they deserve to be called transparent, at least not anymore.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tionpo and Excarius
ChocoP said:
-I'd be careful with the idea of "I paid for this voice pack/color palate/etc. so they CAN'T change it!". Many of these elements were incentive goals for *donations* not specific items bought or investments anyone made. Once you accept the game is modular and will be constantly changed over time you have to be willing to accept elements can be changed even if you disagree with a change. For example, there have been lots of changes made to the gameplay over the years, as with any fighting game, and "my favorite character/mechanic was nerfed, I/we demand a refund or I/we'll riot" has never been a reasonable response. "They removed 6 specific panty shots and also made some characters look less like Nazis, so I/we want my money back!" is even more hysterical of a response.
"well you shouldn't have expected some content to stay" this just makes them looks like snakes if that's the logic they are going with. i get that the voice pack has to go but they couldn't get a replacement? it doesn't even have to be a soviet voice pack just any kind of have voice pack would've helped soften the blow but they didn't even do that.

they censored filia and cerebella before and said that would be the last time they'd be changed visually, but they did get changed so it kind of sets the precedent that no character is safe from being changed visually so expecting no one to complain is silly. balance changes are to be expected when buying a game, visually censoring a game over fanservice is not what anyone expects when buying the game, even then people have dropped games due to balance changes, if they thought they could get a refund over balances changes then they would try to get one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tionpo
renda said:
they censored filia and cerebella before and said that would be the last time they'd be changed visually
That's a good point, actually, I remember that. They said so on this very forum, in fact, back in 2015.

Skullgirls PC Beta Updates Discussion

What actually got changed? I assumed PG13 meant language/tobacco stuff. EDIT: Thanks for the fix on gallery music
skullheart.com skullheart.com
This is not up for debate. The changes are staying and there aren't any more coming. We're not trying to significantly alter the game, because as some have already pointed out, there's plenty of other stuff in the game that's more racey than what was edited.

Yay!
Yay indeed. This is kinda like Darth Vader's "I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it any further".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
Well remember, that was when the game was helmed by people with slightly more integrity.
 
So I noticed that the official Skullgirls account liked this tweet.

99381722112.png

I want to mention that, as far as I know, officially encouraging fake positive reviews with free giveaways is a big yikes as far as the FTC is concerned, and while this is probably not illegal, it's not a good look at all.
Really people, what are you even doing at this point...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ramrod
It doesn't say to leave a positive review, it says to leave an honest review. I think that's an important distinction.

People who receive the game don't have to give a positive review if they don't want to. Just a review, good or bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: missingno
Stuff said:
It doesn't say to leave a positive review, it says to leave an honest review. I think that's an important distinction.

People who receive the game don't have to give a positive review if they don't want to. Just a review, good or bad.
You don't have to be a genius to understand exactly what the "honest" review here implies, given the first half of the tweet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Excarius
I mean, he says it shouldn't be review bombed over the pedo and nazi stuff, anything else they have problems with seems to be fair game. EDIT: in fact that's not even off the table either, anyone on twitter can easily lie and drop a bad review upon receiving the game, not every shit head is going to look like a porn addict, he can't really control what they do afterwards. Hell they could choose to not drop a review, gifted games don't get refunded as far as I know.

shrug

If you think it's legally binding then take that to your own hands, that's just my interpretation. You're welcome to yours, I just don't agree with you, plain as that.
 
Last edited:
Nerio said:
So I noticed that the official Skullgirls account liked this tweet.

View attachment 17088

I want to mention that, as far as I know, officially encouraging fake positive reviews with free giveaways is a big yikes as far as the FTC is concerned, and while this is probably not illegal, it's not a good look at all.
Really people, what are you even doing at this point...
practically telling people to leave a positive review for something they didn't do.
tso said:
You think this has somehow significantly altered the game?
doesn't matter if it doesn't, they said there weren't gonna be anymore changes.
 
Stuff said:
I mean, he says it shouldn't be review bombed over the pedo and nazi stuff, anything else they have problems with seems to be fair game.
What he says is that the game is being review bombed over that stuff, not even implying that there're other reasons why people are angry. It's a lie by omission, and the fact that devs themselves support this comment reflects very poorly on them.
Stuff said:
If you think it's legally binding then take that to your own hands, that's just my interpretation. You're welcome to yours, I just don't agree with you, plain as that.
I don't think it's legally binding, which is why I said it's probably not illegal in the first place. But it's a bad look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Excarius
Ignoring that the account liked the tweet, who's to say that the review bombing isn't interpreted by him as just anger over filia and the armbands? Seeing as how the last time the game had changes like this that was the problem people in their entirety, maybe they just assumed.

I will say this entire thing is a pr nightmare though, I don't see them being able to do anything to avoid bad pr particularly because there is a point to be had when it comes to igg backed incentives that were removed. (though for images you can just download them elsewhere, kind of a mountain over a molehill to me)

idk I've never had to look that hard for meaning in anything, I just don't agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Stuff said:
Ignoring that the account liked the tweet, who's to say that the review bombing isn't interpreted by him as just anger over filia and the armbands? Seeing as how the last time the game had changes like this that was the problem people in their entirety, maybe they just assumed.
That's the most likely explanation, yes. Judging by his tweets, he doesn't actually play Skullgirls, so he probably looked at some other tweets and made a sweeping judgement (something people on Twitter often do). Whatever, he's just some guy doing his own thing.
Still, that's quite literally the worst "supportive" tweet the devs could've endorsed.
Stuff said:
I will say this entire thing is a pr nightmare though, I don't see them being able to do anything to avoid bad pr particularly because there is a point to be had when it comes to igg backed incentives that were removed.
There was a better way, to word things better, and to do better. But, to be honest, I don't think anyone's going to say anything now. I want to believe that the devs would still acknowledge our grievances, but I feel foolish doing so.
 
hmm i wonder if the marie dlc is gonna be bombed too
 
perfectly exemplifies why i hate twitter users, what a dishonest tweet
 
Will said:
That would be pretty silly considering she has nothing to do with the current drama. That would be taking things to far imo
Marie's DLC certainly doesn't deserve to be spammed with bad reviews, it's kinda disrespectful to the work artists put into her, and I doubt they had a lot to do with this whole situation.
But I do think that "the ghost" of this update won't ever leave Skullgirls, and the negativity will always be there, maybe to a lesser extent, but still. The only way for Future Club to get rid of the stigma is to address it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: coroice and Holy Goose
Will said:
That would be pretty silly considering she has nothing to do with the current drama. That would be taking things to far imo
To be honest, the goal of review bombing isn't to be reasonable. It's to be loud and to make a point.

Having said that, I doubt it would be as bad because in order to review bomb the Marie DLC people actually need to buy it or the Season Pass. A lot of the review bombers on the main game are people who bought it ages ago prior to the Season Pass. It doesn't help that the game is going for 90% off right now so it's very easy to get it and leave a review.

Nerio said:
But I do think that "the ghost" of this update won't ever leave Skullgirls, and the negativity will always be there, maybe to a lesser extent, but still. The only way for Future Club to get rid of the stigma is to address it.
I mean there were still people seething about the changes from 2015 up to before this new patch dropped. The majority of the protests are probably going to die down in a couple of weeks but yeah, it will never completely go away. Devs 100% would have expected this and decided the risk was worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Don't use forums usually, but I registered and wanted to add my two cents.

Remember the game back during the Kickstarter, first trailers, etc., etc.
First got it back on the 360 in 2012, and then bought the physical Limited Run copy of 2nd Encore on PS4 several years back.
I like the series. It's something I've gone back to between years at a time and was always glad to see it survived for so long because of the fans.

You could say I'm not a fan of this new update.

Were most of the things edited/removed "edgy"? Arguably, yes. But you know what? People liked it and the game for what it was, myself included.
I never saw Filia's panties as "problematic" because the game markets itself on sex appeal, she looks like an adult, and above all: she's a cartoon. I know that's not good enough for a lot of people nowadays, and if you disagree that perfectly fine.
Same goes for the armbands and Big Band's beatdown scene. They're not real, they're not "promoting" anything, and to me, they weren't an issue because I don't have as hard of a time differentiating these things from real-world events.

These are all things that many people don't like seeing nowadays, including some of the devs apparently. And like I just mentioned, that is all perfectly okay. I'm not asking you to change your sensibilities and world views on my behalf. We can agree to disagree.

The insidious part of all this is taking it away from people without choice.

Removing the voice announcer pack that people put money into as a backer reward and leaving nothing in its place?
Removing the guest art of artists who wanted to support your game?
Editing/removing art from an art book that people paid for? (Not really concept art anymore when you edit the concept is it?)
Editing color palettes people specifically paid for? (Parasoul's Mitsuru color losing the SEES armband and essentially the reference?)

How could anyone defend this?

Sure, games are remade/ported all the time with censored imagery, removed content, and whatnot. I'm well aware. But in those cases, I can just play the original versions. The issue I have with this is that they're outright stripping content from the version I paid for. I've never had that happen to any game I've owned. And it's not like they're updating or patching to remove glitches and bugs within gameplay, these are artistic and emotionally charged changes. Honestly, if they wanted to make a version of this game more suited to their current tastes, they should've made a new installment, and left the people who bought the current version with the product they knew they were getting.

And sure, you can argue that they were minor things. That they didn't matter you, personally. But how far will it go? Will we start nixing taunts, victory animations, and sound clips off season pass characters at some point? Who's to say that won't happen eventually?

"You can just look that stuff up/find it using third party methods"

Yeah, but the point is I shouldn't have to.

Will they go for Peacock's cigar next? Underage smoking is pretty bad, isn't it? Maybe we can remove the image of Dahlia's gun pressed against Squigly's head too? There's no reason to think that they won't just continue to strip and strip things from the original game and art book.

My plan was to get the newest season pass after it was all finished, but I'm quite glad I didn't. Why should I? So they can remove content from those new characters years later when they decide aspects of them are offensive? These devs have established that the content you purchased from them is liable to be taken back by them if they feel like it. I can't wisely give anymore money to a studio that does this. And I won't.

I know I'm one singular voice. A drop in the bucket. And I'll probably just play the base un-patched version with my physical PS4 disc. But I find this to be a legitimately underhanded decision, and I think Future Club deserves every piece of criticism it's currently getting for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tionpo, Ramrod, coroice and 1 other person
the difference with the 2015 changes was is it was one frame for filia and cerebella plus one move and we were told that they wouldn't make anymore visual changes like that so it was a lot easier to accept those changes. also there wasn't a bunch of non-sensical changes like filias comb
 
Nerio said:
Marie's DLC certainly doesn't deserve to be spammed with bad reviews, it's kinda disrespectful to the work artists put into her, and I doubt they had a lot to do with this whole situation.
But I do think that "the ghost" of this update won't ever leave Skullgirls, and the negativity will always be there, maybe to a lesser extent, but still. The only way for Future Club to get rid of the stigma is to address it.
What exactly do you want them to 'address'? They gave their explanation in the update post, that was the statement. I don't think there's anything else they even could say that will appease the rioters, people just want to be mad no matter what.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BallotBoxer, Holy Goose, Ikkisoad and 1 other person
missingno said:
What exactly do you want them to 'address'? They gave their explanation in the update post, that was the statement. I don't think there's anything else they even could say that will appease the rioters, people just want to be mad no matter what.
To acknowledge that they're not trying to neuter Skullgirls, and they remember what this game is - a somewhat raunchy and fanservice-y fighting game made as a love letter to similar Japanese fighting games. To assure us that they won't be shying away from these themes going forward, and keep the spirit of Skullgirls alive. This game, and its incredibly loyal fanbase, deserve that much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
While Skullgirls is no stranger to characters that confidently express their sexuality, there are instances in the game where characters are fetishized and/or have sexualization imposed upon them. This includes a few depictions of unwanted predatory behavior, particularly towards younger characters.

There's still plenty of raunchiness in the game that they embrace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
renda said:
doesn't matter if it doesn't, they said there weren't gonna be anymore changes.
Where did they say that? Or did I miss something?
 
missingno said:
There's still plenty of raunchiness in the game that they embrace.
That doesn't really mean much, nowhere do they say that they embrace it. They inherited it, that's all. For all we know, they might be completely opposed to it, and going forward, every character will be PG-13, especially characters not designed by Alex Ahad. This content patch is a pretty big turn on their part, a turn that nobody expected. So their initial statement is simply not enough.
Big Boy Beo said:
Where did they say that? Or did I miss something?

Skullgirls PC Beta Updates Discussion

What actually got changed? I assumed PG13 meant language/tobacco stuff. EDIT: Thanks for the fix on gallery music
skullheart.com skullheart.com
The changes are staying and there aren't any more coming. We're not trying to significantly alter the game
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
Will said:
That would be pretty silly considering she has nothing to do with the current drama. That would be taking things to far imo
that is true,,but people do have a tedency to do many things to be heard not like i am saying skullgirls fans would do it but..
 
Considering how every so often I'd see trolls pop up out of the woodwork to whine about the 2015 patch, it frustrates me to think about how we're never ever gonna hear the end of this one. Even when the current rioting calms down a bit, it'll never fully go away, will it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
I feel like the question to ask is "why should this drama ever go away?"
Twitter/Reddit/4chan dramawhores on both sides of the argument will eventually move on. And the Steam reviews will probably eventually be deleted, but I can imagine that this will be a massive black mark for a lot of people in the Skullgirls fandom and I think it should certainly concern anyone who does actively care about the game's style and edge or doesn't want more outright removal and edits to the content.
I think Skullgirls will outlive this upset because of Mobile's success, but I still think it sucks because Skullgirls survived for such a long time purely because of good will from the players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose and Milky
missingno said:
Considering how every so often I'd see trolls pop up out of the woodwork to whine about the 2015 patch, it frustrates me to think about how we're never ever gonna hear the end of this one. Even when the current rioting calms down a bit, it'll never fully go away, will it?
Yes, they did it once before and told us they wouldn't do it again.

We trusted their words, now they did it again and to an even larger degree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Milky
tso said:
You think this has somehow significantly altered the game?
That's kind of irrelevant, no?

The size of the changes aren't the problem, the problem is that they were arbitrarily removed, without any type of care for the product owners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tionpo, Milky and Holy Goose
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back