Why not Greatest Hits status?

This board is for general discussion of Lunar. Especially things such as Lunar merchandise, general discussions about the story that span more than one game, etc.
User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
jedwabna poszewka na poduszkę 70x80
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters

Re: Why not Greatest Hits status?

Post by Werefrog »

I just don't see how making a game available to a larger amount of people is "selling-out." It doesn't hurt existing fans. Sure, more copies means that the trade-in/eBay value would diminish. But what true fan would sell their game anyway? Besides, they would still have a nifty collectible version as Working Designs wouldn't have released all the extras in the Greatest Hits version. Yeah, it might also hurt our egos a bit to see our beloved game in the bargain bin.

But still, I feel that it would be worth it to get more people to play the game. I honestly think that it's a possibility that Working Designs knew that they couldn't sell enough of another printing to make a profit or break even. Sure, the whole "we're too cool" explanation might have been legitimate, but WD might have been equally motivated by profit (in which case everything I said about WD having poor business sense would be negated as would everything you said about them being a great idealist company)

Also, I didn't say that they deserved to go out of business. I just meant that their attitude towards the Greatest Hits edition is perhaps indicative as to why they went under. Yeah, Sony played a part in it. But, it was also just that they didn't have the number of fans to be successful. WD was great in that its fans were very loyal and felt very close to the company and games they produced, but in the end there just weren't enough of them.

Edit:
Bloodrose wrote: If you honestly think any company deserves to fail because they're unwilling to tarnish its reputation, then wow you'd fit right in with the gaming industry. Sometimes you have to make sacrifices to ensure that your name isn't forgotten and that what you create is set aside from the norm.
No, I agree completely. However, I disagree about when you need to make these sacrifices. Releasing more copies of a game doesn't diminish the quality. The sacrifices that you have to make is in the production of the game to make sure that you don't through out all artistic merit in order to appeal to the masses. To return to your music metaphor, hipsters don't call people sell-outs for switching to a major label (well, some do). They call them sell-outs because they've allowed the label to overly influence their new aesthetic until becomes purely about making money. For instance, the Beatles were on a major label, but they remained in control artistically of their music. For this reason, nobody called them sell-outs (well, some did). By Vic, allowing for a Greatest Hits release, he would not be adversely affecting the quality of the game. He would just allow for better distribution. He would basically gain the good parts of signing on to a major label without making the sacrifices in quality that bands often make.

Edit 2: Also, don't worry about making members mad. I'm sure that my opinion is far more unpopular on here than yours. :P

User avatar
Sonix
Red Dragon Priest
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:30 am
Location: Slovenia

Re: Why not Greatest Hits status?

Post by Sonix »

Greatest Hits doesn't always make a game cheap. Look at Xenogears, it still goes 50$+ on ebay, kinda like Lunar games (for PS1). Some however, like Chrono Cross and Legend of Dragoon, can be found at ~20$.
"And yet, I've realized that maybe living a "decent" life means you won't ever have a "good" life."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests