• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived.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

Corridor89 said:
I still think it sucks because Skullgirls survived for such a long time purely because of good will from the players.
I mean... That's where surviving on goodwill gets you. Just ask any show staff when they DARE to go away from a fandom's headcanon or popular fanfic. The Internet will betray you at the drop of a hat, no matter how much you think you prepared yourself.
Not gonna repeat my points here but like, there are some wild and horrid takes on this thread alone, that's before getting into twitter and reddit. If it's all people that have been playing the game for years, then it's just showing the true faces that were there from the start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Kittens said:
I mean... That's where surviving on goodwill gets you. Just ask any show staff when they DARE to go away from a fandom's headcanon or popular fanfic. The Internet will betray you at the drop of a hat, no matter how much you think you prepared yourself.
Not gonna repeat my points here but like, there are some wild and horrid takes on this thread alone, that's before getting into twitter and reddit. If it's all people that have been playing the game for years, then it's just showing the true faces that were there from the start.
Comparing it to a show isn't quite correct, shows have changes made during it's creation so they then launch the episodes. They don't change the episode after the episode is already launched, and they definitely don't change it if you had to pay for the show, like a digital copy.

In this case the devs ended up breaking the trust with the majority of the community, first they went against their promise back in 2015, second they went about the changes through anti consumer practices, meaning that they did removals purely based on arbitrary reasoning to an already paid product, and third the changes made are against the nature that the game initially presented about being different and not caring about conformity, what makes this really bad is that they stated this is their vision for the game moving forward meaning that more possible changes are bound to happen, or at least it's reasonable to think so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cannon fodder and renda
https://twitter.com/x/status/1677768385755508737
F0ihaRGXwAEW8Nt.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: Kittens and Roger
Comparing guest artwork from highly esteemed Japanese artists to dirty socks you need to throw out is... quite a take. But at least I'm starting to piece together the mindset of the developers, they really did just dislike Skullgirls as it existed before their arrival.
I think people nowadays lack humility.
 
Nerio said:
Comparing guest artwork from highly esteemed Japanese artists to dirty socks you need to throw out is... quite a take. But at least I'm starting to piece together the mindset of the developers, they really did just dislike Skullgirls as it existed before their arrival.
I think people nowadays lack humility.
Yeah. It must be hell of a trip to be Gashi-Gashi, one of the most popular fanartists of Skullgirls's early days, and has even designed T-shirts for the game, only to eventually have your contributions to the game and community spat on by the developers.

Also, I am absolutely laughing at this trash edit. Notice how the layering on Painwheel's hair is wrong. It goes behind the tentacle in the censored version.
1687820891767.jpg
 
There's also a thing to be said about how more pink-colored sausage-esque tentacles wrapping the heroines' bodies feels more perverse than what we had before.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Holy Goose
Stepping in as a moderator again, but please avoid 1-word or 1-sentence replies - this goes under the "constructive post" rule. If you have a short reaction to someone else's post and don't have another point to contribute to that, you can use the reaction buttons.

And as it should go without saying, don't double post. If you want to reply to multiple posts consecutively, you can make it one post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
At this point, I don't think there's even any reason to discuss this any further.
The current developers don't seem to care about anyone who dares to say anything that's even slightly critical of their decisions, they only want sycophants to send money to them on a semi-regular basis, and they will feel the heat only when they realize that those sycophants care about them as much as they care about their former fans.
They also don't see Skullgirls as anything other than the one thing that makes them money, so it's their job now to scrub it clean of anything that might disturb a particularly delicate toddler, as well as freely discard any parts they don't like no matter the value or importance, all in the name of the almighty bottom line.
It's a shame to say that this game's future will not be bright because it's in the hands of people who never liked it all that much. They will turn it into a painfully safe, unfunny, and bland cartoon game that tries to ride on the coattails of its former glory as more talented and driven people continue to push the fighting game genre forward.


Alex Ahad's life's work deserved so much better, but it wasn't meant to be.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Sad
Reactions: E-Wan, cannon fodder, CaioLugon and 1 other person
Hi! Usually I'd comment on the Steam forums but it seems nobody at Hidden Variable or Future Club is reading them, so I've come here instead of shouting at the void in the hopes that someone from the dev team will read it, plus to have a proper discussion (hopefully); though to be fair I should have come to the Skullheart forums way, WAY earlier. Also yes, I'm a bit late because this situation was a lot to take in.

To me, it looks like Skullgirls could potentially have ended with the pre-Season Pass 2nd Encore had it not been for the mobile game and Autumn Games banking on its success (and by extension the IP's, which to my knowledge is their only noteworthy production with it being an original work instead of a licenced game). But I'm not really here to talk about that. In fact I'm not even here to discuss the changes (which I disagree about on several aspects), or the devs' standpoint (which, with all due respect, I also disagree with as I'm not quite convinced); I want to talk about what I believe could be done to address at least part of the situation.

For starters, as it's already been suggested by others in this thread and other places: giving access to legacy branches could provide temporary relief to people wanting to downgrade their copy, at least on Steam. Even besides that, it would be really neat from a game preservation point of view. Currently, the only available branch is "Fight for the Past" (with the code "ireallyfearchange"), which is a pre-SG2E+ version from 2016, but there's at least four other branches that exist and are unavailable to the public (the pre-GGPOtest and CB2020 one with a build from 2018, the post-DLC consolidation "last public Lab Zero build" from 2021, and both the "last Annie retail" and "last Umbrella retail" branches).
It would only marginally help with the backlash if the changes really are here to stay, but it would at least provide a simpler option to play older releases and show that the parties involved are not trying to "erase" these versions from existence in a way (which from what I've seen seems to be how the changes are perceived by a lot of people, and yes that includes the outrage mob, even though said versions are technically still available for download). As for the artbook: whatever was removed should still, in my humble opinion, be kept officially available one way or another. Even on a special page on the official website stating "this content does not represent how we see the game anymore, thus was removed from the artbook but preserved here as part of the game's legacy" or something. I know it technically still exists on sites such as The Cutting Room Floor, but it would prove the new team is still embracing the game's legacy and not rejecting it.

Next up: I already mentioned the idea in the void before, but I believe rebranding the game would be a good idea. With a soft reboot of the dev team and the departure of the series' creator, plus the new content, the current "2nd Encore" feels like a brand-new iteration to me as opposed to the slowly-evolving old 2nd Encore which was pretty much "complete". Doubly so if the devs want to make changes to already existing content, whether they genuinely don't feel comfortable with specific aspects of it or do that to try and appeal to a wider audience. But that's just my two cents.
It would not ultimately change much, but it would still send the message of "we're trying to move Skullgirls forwards" instead of relying on the existing name (which if you ask me makes it all much more confusing when talking about SG2E: is it the 2016 version, SG2E+, Combo Breaker 2020 update, new version with Season Pass?).

Finally, it would be nice to have some official confirmation regarding the "True End", that things are still sticking to the plans that were drafted years ago but never came to be, even without Alex Ahad's involvement. Also maybe whether or not he was contracted to work on the new stories (from Skullgirls Mobile to the Season Pass ones), since it's originally his universe and all...
This would reassure people that the new team is trying to stay true to the envisioned creative direction for these characters' stories, despite the edits made to some of the original game's content.

I would make some point about a toggle for content that could be deemed offensive, but considering the official statement regarding the changes, it sounds like the idea was never to give an option, at least going forwards. Though it would certainly make the game more presentable (no matter the actual reasons behind the updates, plus it doesn't mean any of the new content would have to be kept consistent with legacy stuff) while satisfying those who disagree with them without having to resort to workarounds (and yes, that includes a certain wrong crowd again, but at least they'd have to find another bone to pick). In my opinion keeping a "scorched earth"-like stance is only bound to make things worse and makes it much harder to see these alterations as "not censorship".

I could also discuss a few of the changes and why they don't sit right with me (I almost mentioned one in particular but it's already been debated here), but that will be for another time assuming it's even useful to talk about them at this point.

Anyway, thanks for reading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
Corridor89 said:
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.
I think this downplays how much effort the devs put into the game. They poured their everything into this. Folks who've followed a long time know how the whole team worked for crap pay to work on the crowdfunded characters, and didn't see a dime of sales until nearly the end of the LZ's life, because of the legal trouble that Autumn was embroiled in. Mike not only made the engine and designed the gameplay, but was working on the game constantly, to a point of unhealthiness; He went to tournaments and talked to players (what other dev does this?), he was always reachable on twitter for help or feedback on the game, he was here in the forums talking about the game, he was releasing balance patches daily for a long time, etc.

The game's success owes a lot to the community, yes, but it would only mean so much if it wasn't also an extremely good game made by very dedicated people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose, cannon fodder and renda
Steam has allowed the reviews made after 26/06/23, or modified to be negative, to be hidden by default putting the "*" on reviews.

Returning the ALL TIME and RECENTLY to the review status before 26.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Ikkisoad and tso
Roger said:
Steam has allowed the reviews made after 26/06/23, or modified to be negative, to be hidden by default putting the "*" on reviews.

Returning the ALL TIME and RECENTLY to the review status before 26.
And this right here is when you succumb to the ideal of being a transparent company with meaningful ideals to project real interest in a community.

Where the ethics of giving the community an insight response to something they didn't liked to be changed, altered, removed in order to have an understanding on why out of nowhere things that been in the game for over a decade are now considered totally wrong?

What times are we living where seems an audio quote making reference to a gig, joke, meme or cheesy could be considered extremely offensive or just too naughty?

Seems Skullgirls is no longer what it used to be for a while now and it's pity how now things from this point forward can be subject to a major overhaul because of a character skin color, or because X character could be associated to Y movement. Rather than ignore the fact it's the character's story & lore without total emphasis on something bad that happened IRL while totally taking it out of context to turn the narrative into THAT just to Justify it's removal.

Really woulda liked things to be like it was back in 2013 on it's glory days of hype and where you could just enjoy playing the game in tournaments without someone pointing out the obvious of the Suggestive factor on it's true colors. But i guess this day and age seems to be where an digital version of a game can be twisted and remolded by taking away THAT you used to liked the game to make you got interested in playing in the very first place.

Oh yeah and about the steam reviews covering, is just shows that it's their way and you must DEAL WITH IT and there's nothing wrong while trying to hide the sun with your thumb.

Does this really shows any inch of transparency to the playerbase on being in disagreement with the changes?
 
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...
Seeing this was enough to convince me that I would probably be better off washing my hands of Hidden Variable and Future Club for good.
If someone on the development team thinks I'm a pedophilic Nazi creep for being upset about the changes to Big Band's story mode art, the removal of a Kickstarter stretch goal, the removal of art from an art book, their condescending post about refusing to take feedback from the community regarding the update and worst of all, the horrible precedent this sets for consumer rights with regards to ownership of digital game licenses... they don't need my money.
 
On the one hand, a lot of people who dropped negative reviews were probably from the outraged mob and never actually cared about the game or constructive feedback. I've seen that happen for other games, I don't see why it would be any different for this one, especially considering how many people got it over the years just because it was sold for dirt cheap on third-party stores or even on Steam itself. And for all I know the "off-period review activity" might be Steam automatically detecting a huge spike in negative reviews and omitting data from that period in the score's calculation.

On the other hand, whether "hiding" recent reviews was intentional or not, it will only make things worse because it can look like an attempt at silencing negative feedback caused by the recent content update, and the hate mob will absolutely use that as an argument to say "see, we were right!". Again, in my opinion, keeping such a firm stance on changes that obviously got a mixed reception (which might have been expected as part of the "careful consideration and lengthy discussion", at least I can't imagine them not thinking about potential backlash though I'm not sure they expected it to be that big) is only going to work against the devs and publisher. Even more so as long as they don't address any part of the situation.

At this point even simply giving access to archived builds would be a first step to try calming things down, though it's still a fine line to tread and I'm not sure there's any "correct" answer especially if the changes are here to stay: double-downing on that part would likely cause an uproar again, but not commenting on the move itself might be received as a mixed signal (as in "we heard you, we're giving you access to these old branches so that you shut up, but the changes are still definitive", whether it's the gesture's intended meaning or not).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
This review ban really shows what the developers really think of our opinions - no one is allowed to oppose them in any way, they're the only ones who matter. Simply disgusting.
And with that being said, now I will make a negative review of my own. They really deserve it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger
I think it's probably good to have all the facts on hand and see how Steam deals with review bombing based on their statement:

steamcommunity.com

Steam :: Steam News :: User Reviews Revisited

Some time ago we made some changes to how we presented the User Reviews for games, and their resulting Review Score. We talked about those changes in this blog post. As we describe in that post, we want to ensure that players who've played a game can voice their opinions about why other people...
steamcommunity.com steamcommunity.com

Particularly:

But while easy to say, it raises a bunch of questions, so let's dig into the details. First, what do we mean by an off-topic review bomb? As we defined back in our original post, a review bomb is where players post a large number of reviews in a short period of time, aimed at lowering the Review Score of a game. We define an off-topic review bomb as one where the focus of those reviews is on a topic that we consider unrelated to the likelihood that future purchasers will be happy if they buy the game, and hence not something that should be added to the Review Score.

The first step is a tool we've built that identifies any anomalous review activity on all games on Steam in as close to real-time as possible. It doesn't know why a given game is receiving anomalous review activity, and it doesn't even try to figure that out. Instead, it notifies a team of people at Valve, who'll then go and investigate. We've already run our tool across the entire history of reviews on Steam, identifying many reasons why games have seen periods of anomalous review activity, and off-topic review bombs appear to only be a small number of them.

Once our team has identified that the anomalous activity is an off-topic review bomb, we'll mark the time period it encompasses and notify the developer. The reviews within that time period will then be removed from the Review Score calculation. As before, the reviews themselves are left untouched - if you want to dig into them to see if they're relevant to you, you'll still be able to do so.

Finally, we've also enabled you to opt out of this entirely, if that's your preference - there's now a checkbox in your Steam Store options where you can choose to have off-topic review bombs still included in all the Review Scores you see.

So it appears that review bombs are automatically detected by Steam. It then notifies Value employees who go to investigate, and if it's determined to be real review bombing, the relevant reviews are excluded from total score calculation as "off-topic reviews", but can still be viewed.

Worth to note that you could also go to your Steam Store options and opt-in to have off-topic reviews still automatically be included in the score calculations you see, although I don't think anyone would do this lol.

But yeah, Steam isn't applying any rules differently here. The anti-review bomb implementation has been in place in a while. While people who have bought the game have every right to be pissed off and leave negative reviews, the vast majority of people who are looking at the game now would have no idea what things would have looked like prior to the censorship patch and it doesn't really affect them. In Steam's words: "We define an off-topic review bomb as one where the focus of those reviews is on a topic that we consider unrelated to the likelihood that future purchasers will be happy if they buy the game, and hence not something that should be added to the Review Score."

On the other hand, I think it could be argued that the fact that such a big change has already occurred, it's indicative that further similar changes could be made in the future. As it has been said previously, the game still has a lot of things that people have issues with, and I don't see any reason they are going stop with just this. For people who actually care about this sort of things, I think it would be relevant for them to know that this is the direction that the devs are currently pursuing and they can make their purchase decisions accordingly.

But yeah, the reviews can still be viewed, and if you really must, you can opt-out of off-topic reviews being hidden. It's hardly a 1984 situation here. Someone who cares about reviews when buying games can see from the review chart that there are some shenanigans going on and investigate:

reviews.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: BallotBoxer, missingno, coroice and 1 other person
Chrono_Tata said:
On the other hand, I think it could be argued that the fact that such a big change has already occurred, it's indicative that further similar changes could be made in the future. As it has been said previously, the game still has a lot of things that people have issues with, and I don't see any reason they are going stop with just this. For people who actually care about this sort of things, I think it would be relevant for them to know that this is the direction that the devs are currently pursuing and they can make their purchase decisions accordingly.
I don't think that matters to the developers. The criticism got scrubbed as clean as it can be, which is a win in their book, they won't dispute it. They probably didn't even look at the reviews, and to them, anyone who said anything negative was an evil hater undeserving of their attention in the first place.

I don't normally get so agitated over video games, but this infuriates me because Skullgirls was an iconic indie title. One artist had a dream and worked on it tirelessly since college; a bunch of people came together and pitched in to make the dream a reality, the result was an amazing and unique game that could have never been made by a committee. It was all around a wonderful story of what independent video games are all about. But then the business swooped it, wrestled the rights away from the creator, the creator was fired (and considering the settlement, they knew they were in the wrong and used money to make problems disappear, as it's usually done), and now his work is being dismantled and turned into a battle pass-infested "game as a service" without an ounce of spice it was famous for while spitting in the faces of all those old fans.

I came here hoping that I was wrong and that the current developers would at least try to listen and make their reasonable case. Even if they don't want to change things back, they could at least reassure the people who cared about the game that they're something more than a soulless machine that doesn't understand Skullgirls, that they remember their roots. But no, I was right. This godforsaken industry truly never fails to disappoint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tionpo, cannon fodder and Ramrod
To be honest, after the official Discord banned discussion of the censorship patch, I would never expect them to listen to feedback that wasn't just in agreement.
[Not my screenshot]
1688751369743577.png
 
Hi all. All the posts from the Social Media Update threads related to the Content Update have been moved here. Any further discussions on this topic on this forum should be here and here only.

I want to take the opportunity again to remind everyone of the forum rules. Keep your posts constructive and respectful.

As I have said before, I don't want to police anyone's tone. I think people have the right to express their emotions here, but there is a fine line between that and bashing. Criticise ideas. And always remember that the people whom you disagree with are people too. I've been trying to be as hands-off as possible so far but if the thread devolves then I will step in with heavier hands.

I know there are probably users who disagree with my moderation approach to this subject here, and I want to re-iterate that I'm just a third-party moderator and this is my own personal opinion to keep this channel open to contain the discussion in one place. Anyone who is not interested or tired of this discussion can ignore this thread and use the rest of the forum as they are intended. I apologise if my approach is not up to your expectations but I'm always willing to discuss over PM.

And again to remind everyone using this thread that I'm just a single moderator here. Other moderators and admins may have their own ideas to apply the forum rules and the rule application approach may change at any moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Nerio said:
This review ban really shows what the developers really think of our opinions - no one is allowed to oppose them in any way, they're the only ones who matter. Simply disgusting.
And with that being said, now I will make a negative review of my own. They really deserve it.
From what I've seen on reddit, I think this might be Steams doing. I believe its a result of Steam automatically flagging all the bad reviews as off-topic. I think I heard all the reviews are still technically there, they're just hidden. I don't actually think FC is behind this but I could be wrong. Here's some posts talking about it if you wanna take a look:

Reddit post on steam reviews situation [1]

Reddit post on steam reviews situation [2]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
To be honest, after the official Discord banned discussion of the censorship patch, I would never expect them to listen to feedback that wasn't just in agreement
Not to start an argument or anything but they actually never banned discussion on the changes since I still see people discussusing them here and there. I think they just don't want people to start arguing and throwing insults at each other and they're overall just tired of dealing with whiney people. I think if you go about things the right way they'll probably hear what you have to say

fgfsgsfdg.PNG

dsfasfasdfa.PNG

Love or hate the people on Discord, I can totally understand them being hesitant to continue talking about the recent changes when they have people like this that show up (In order from top to bottom):
1.PNG

2.PNG

3.PNG
I'm not taking sides here but like I said, when you have to deal with people like this on a daily basis, I don't really blame them for not wanting to talk about much anymore (Even though they still technically do but whatever). Dude could have gone about things much better instead of harrassing people and insulting them before leaving. Thats just my take, feel free to disagree
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: missingno, coroice and Holy Goose
i've tried to talk about it and got a final warning. I didn't insult anyone I just pointed out how the changes still don't a line with their current mind set is and asked about future changes. why do we gotta walk on egg shells anyway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: E-Wan
Dr.Sanity said:
What's not cool is, say, the framing of the camera originally in Filia's story mode. She's being sexually harassed, and the framing is "asking" the watcher/player to oogle her with the harasser. That's already something, but her being school aged and in school uniform bumps that up another tier past comfort. That's a real problem in life that can fuel super gross mentalities! That's why it's a damaging thing to communicate.
I won't deny that the camera is pretty pervy during this scene, but she is given agency and humiliates her harasser, which makes the scene less problematic. It's fan service, not an endorsement of this behavior. Nonetheless, the problem with filia is fundamental. Part of her main appeal and also the reason for her character design is being a sexy schoolgirl. To denounce her sexualization when she was designed to have this appeal communicates a mixed message that vilifies some of the audience for liking prominent qualities of her character design. It is such a half-assed atemp at fixing a problem and taking a stance when the problem still remains. She is not magically not sexualized just because there is one less pantyshot of her in the game. And I don't even know if this is a problem, because her school girl aesthetics are so removed from their real life counterpart by the artstyle of this game and her design choices that they are essentially their own thing. No one is going to look at the inspiration of these aestethics in their real life environment with the same gaze and mindset just because there are narrative details that relates it to the game. Think of all the people you know who watched Bible Black and yet are well-adjusted adults. I can think of many famous internet celebrities who have admitted to watching it and yet are very normal.
 
Last edited:
renda said:
i've tried to talk about it and got a final warning. I didn't insult anyone I just pointed out how the changes still don't a line with their current mind set is and asked about future changes. why do we gotta walk on egg shells anyway?
They don't want to discuss it because they have nothing to respond with, so the whole thing turns into a one-way pummeling with criticism. Obviously, they don't enjoy that much, so they forbid it.
 
Chrono_Tata said:
I think it's probably good to have all the facts on hand and see how Steam deals with review bombing based on their statement:

steamcommunity.com

Steam :: Steam News :: User Reviews Revisited

Some time ago we made some changes to how we presented the User Reviews for games, and their resulting Review Score. We talked about those changes in this blog post. As we describe in that post, we want to ensure that players who've played a game can voice their opinions about why other people...
steamcommunity.com steamcommunity.com

Particularly:









So it appears that review bombs are automatically detected by Steam. It then notifies Value employees who go to investigate, and if it's determined to be real review bombing, the relevant reviews are excluded from total score calculation as "off-topic reviews", but can still be viewed.

Worth to note that you could also go to your Steam Store options and opt-in to have off-topic reviews still automatically be included in the score calculations you see, although I don't think anyone would do this lol.

But yeah, Steam isn't applying any rules differently here. The anti-review bomb implementation has been in place in a while. While people who have bought the game have every right to be pissed off and leave negative reviews, the vast majority of people who are looking at the game now would have no idea what things would have looked like prior to the censorship patch and it doesn't really affect them. In Steam's words: "We define an off-topic review bomb as one where the focus of those reviews is on a topic that we consider unrelated to the likelihood that future purchasers will be happy if they buy the game, and hence not something that should be added to the Review Score."

On the other hand, I think it could be argued that the fact that such a big change has already occurred, it's indicative that further similar changes could be made in the future. As it has been said previously, the game still has a lot of things that people have issues with, and I don't see any reason they are going stop with just this. For people who actually care about this sort of things, I think it would be relevant for them to know that this is the direction that the devs are currently pursuing and they can make their purchase decisions accordingly.

But yeah, the reviews can still be viewed, and if you really must, you can opt-out of off-topic reviews being hidden. It's hardly a 1984 situation here. Someone who cares about reviews when buying games can see from the review chart that there are some shenanigans going on and investigate:

View attachment 17091
I would like to say that this negative reviews can be interesting for the player since they directly correlate to what is being bought.

So if the product has precedents of having content removals for arbitrary reasons the buyer would definitely be interested in knowing, making them on topic.

I think it's more likely that the devs did the first recommended thing when it comes to review bombing, contacting a steam employee, and they possibly provided some pretty disingenuous reasons for why it's being reviewed bombed. Not completely outlandish when they liked a post that call us pedos and nazis.
 
Last edited:
renda said:
that miazaki guy has a picture of filia showing her panties in his bookmarks on pixiv, the hypocrisy is real.
*moderator hat on*

Like I said, criticise ideas, not people. Anti-ad-hominem rules extend to people outside of this forum as well. Scouring people's social media for things that have said/done to discredit their argument is considered ad hominem. This is not the kind of behaviours I am encouraging here.

*moderator hat off*

There are times and places for everything. Pretty much everyone look at contents that may not be appropriate in public in private, it doesn't mean you want such contents in every media you consume, especially in games you are playing in public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Milky said:
Probably should clarify that it wasn't us betraying them, they stabbed first.
This isn't a knife fight, or a religious schism, it's a product that they can patch and change as they see fit.

But like, I already get where the tone of the thread is going. Should've known it'd be just waiting for literally any crumb of evidence to call it even more authoritarian behavior from the devs and censoring discussion and how dare they do this to us. Egg on my face for trying to convince anyone this isn't the end of the game as we know it. Not all good choices? Yeah. But the narrative has turned silly if people are assuming that Steam's automatic review filter is somehow the eeevil devs' doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
renda said:
that miazaki guy has a picture of filia showing her panties in his bookmarks on pixiv, the hypocrisy is real.
Was digging through someone's Pixiv bookmarks to find potential dirt on them the best you could do? Come on now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Kittens said:
This isn't a knife fight, or a religious schism, it's a product that they can patch and change as they see fit.

But like, I already get where the tone of the thread is going. Should've known it'd be just waiting for literally any crumb of evidence to call it even more authoritarian behavior from the devs and censoring discussion and how dare they do this to us. Egg on my face for trying to convince anyone this isn't the end of the game as we know it. Not all good choices? Yeah. But the narrative has turned silly if people are assuming that Steam's automatic review filter is somehow the eeevil devs' doing.
Didn't hogwarts legacy get review bombed?
 
missingno said:
Was digging through someone's Pixiv bookmarks to find potential dirt on them the best you could do? Come on now.
when did I say I was the one that found it? just like that discord screen shot it was shown to me.

Roger said:
Didn't hogwarts legacy get review bombed?
exactly. review bombed because of a person that had no involvement with the development of the game. at least the sg complaints were related to the devs and content of the game.
 
Last edited:
Incredibly unhappy that the current dev team has decided to compromise the artistic integrity of the game after so long. As a fan who's bought it on two systems and the art book once the superfluous justifications offered in the SG mobile forum thread are insulting. The hypocritical insinuations by a vocal part of the community that suddenly condemn liking the original design and the radio silence from the devs is further disheartening.

An option to enable the original art going forward and keeping it somewhere in the art book is the bare minimum owed to the IP itself, much less the fans. The idea that keeping the original assets in the game would damage it is ridiculous. Even the most edgy parts of the game couldn't do more damage to SG's legacy than this move just did, and thats not even counting the original materials decade of precedence.
 
renda said:
exactly. review bombed because of a person that had no involvement with the development of the game. at least the steam complaints were related to the devs and content of the game.
And from what I remember hogwarts legacy didn't have the time period removed.

I truly think the only way to get a period removed is if you personally complain to steam.
 
Roger said:
And from what I remember hogwarts legacy didn't have the time period removed.

I truly think the only way to get a period removed is if you personally complain to steam.
According to the link you sent a few messages ago, it seems to be automated detection -> manual flagging of the period -> notification to developer/publisher -> developer/publisher chooses whether they want to keep these reviews or not reviews are hidden by Valve.
 
Last edited:
I know it's tiresome and I know it's probably just so much pissing in the wind, but I wanted to vent my feelings about the update in a place I feel they might be heard by cooler heads. These changes don't make me angry, they don't make me feel cheated or robbed, they make me feel very sad.

I first heard about this game because of ZONE's animation and the (possibly apocryphal) story that the company had actually hired ZONE on the merits of their fan-animation. This cemented the game and its developers as cool (at the time we didn't say "based" yet) in the back of my mind. It seemed like such a fresh and bold thing to do.
I love that the game operates on so many different layers of culture. I adore and deeply vibe with the fact that in a single match you can realistically expect to see and hear references to Egyptian hieroglyphics, John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Bubsy, Fleischer Brothers, Touhou, Kill La Kill, online smut, The Bible, 2010s-era Lolcat memes and classic fighting games. As someone who enjoys culture from all across the spectrum of respectability, it felt very affirming and accepting to see a game treat it all as equally worthy of homage. It felt like a game that was made for me, though I could of course see how it could turn people who weren't horny straight nerds off.

These new changes are small and easy to overlook. When I started playing, I didn't care about the 2015 edits and I can absolutely see somebody getting in now not caring about these new changes. In and of themselves they are minor.
Still, this feels like a "Mask Off" moment for the newly in-charge devs. Their priorities and values have changed, or maybe they were never in line with what I loved about the game. It feels like they are embarassed by the same edgy stuff that (in combination with the deep-cut cultural references) I found so cool. If you overhear the owner of your local game shop call DnD players useless nerds with no life, will you still feel good about going there? If the local comic shop owner secretly thinks weeaboos are all disgusting perverts are you still going to get your copy of Berserk there?
Though the changes are small, they feel like the devs stating HOW they want fans to enjoy their game. It's an imposition of (frankly kind of arbitrary) moral codes where none existed before. Maybe times have changed and I really am just an embarassing dirty old sock who needs to get with the program. I just didn't expect this game to be the one to tell me that.
I feel like I've drifted apart from a good friend. So I'm sad. Not angry or indignant, just kinda sad...
 
Last edited:
hmm i been thinking about it and this update kinda of feels like a gamble a bit i guess the devs knew this would happen but they just kept going i guess?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holy Goose
Sun said:
hmm i been thinking about it and this update kinda of feels like a gamble a bit i guess the devs knew this would happen but they just kept going i guess?
A gamble is normally made when you except to win something.

I'm confused to what the devs were excepting to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back