this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
185 points (92.6% liked)

Games

16645 readers
591 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Fans have taken to the likes of X (formerly Twitter) and TikTok to question NetherRealm's decision to market Mortal Kombat 1 as a $70 Switch release. It has been called "robbery" and "disrespectful" to users.

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Realistically it's entirely possible it took more platform specific work to make the switch version viable than anything else.

It's not their fault it's lesser hardware.

[–] clanginator@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah I looked and idk what to say - it looks like a switch game.

If you bought a switch, which was an extremely underpowered when it was released 6 years ago, and then get upset when AAA games releasing on current gen consoles look like dogshit... You have nobody to blame but yourself.

[–] ThisIsNotHim@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It doesn't look like a hardware issue. Yes, the less powerful hardware is what forced graphical changes, but it looks like an art direction problem.

The changes mostly fail to capture the essence of the original design. The characters look like they were ripped from the SIMs.

No one is expecting the same lighting, textures, or poly counts, but they do expect something that looks like Mortal Combat. That isn't an unreasonable expectation.

You're right that this may be a budgeting issue of sorts, but if they can't set aside enough resources to make it look like some sort of Mortal Combat game, then maybe they shouldn't have made the port.

[–] Mudface@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you’re buying this (or anything other than Nintendo exclusive games) for your switch, it’s because you don’t have any other options and likely only own a switch

If you had a PC or a PS5, you’d buy it on that.

So switch only owners would pay whatever for it, but the rest of us wouldnt

[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean, not necessarily - they might be buying it on the switch because they want a "mobile" version and don't own a steam deck.

But yeah, ultimately if you own a switch, you should know what to expect by now from anything that isn't a first party Nintendo title (and even then it can be a bit hit or miss from a performance standpoint)

I admit I haven't really touched my switch much since I got a Steam Deck.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds like they should accept their inferior switch version, or invest in better hardware.

[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Given that the switch version looks terrible even by Switch standard, I think they're right to complain and refuse to buy it. And not everyone can just "invest in better hardware" the second an upgrade comes along. Let's not forget that up until the Steam Deck, the switch was the gold standard for handheld gaming - mainly by virtue of being the only real option

[–] yukichigai@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Not always true; some games work really well on handheld/portable devices and the Switch is really good for that. The Binding of Isaac springs to mind.

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I own a ton of games on my switch that aren't switch exclusives. I travel a lot and use it like a Gameboy on planes, in hotels etc. Anyone using a switch entirely as a home console experience, ya silly to not buy games on PC etc instead.

[–] 123@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago

To see this content please enable targeting cookies.

What a horrendous website.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It probably cost more in development to port the game to Switch than any other console. Graphics quality is irrelevant when users willingly buy a device with worse hardware than consoles. This seems like a case of "fans" wanting to eat their cake and have it too.

[–] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

But it also puts it closer to the mobile market than console, especially given that the switch essentially has a mobile soc

[–] Fraylor@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

You're one of the first people I've seen use the cake metaphor correctly.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Seriously, it's a product for sale. Don't like the price, vote with your wallet and don't buy it. What's with the manufactured outrage for every topic nowadays

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People are complaining because they don't like a thing, that's fine. Same as you're complaining in this post. Call companies out on their bullshit. Also don't buy bullshit, that's a good point too.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't like how many posts cater to outrage lately, true.

But I don't think this one is manufactured.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, manufactured might have been the wrong word. Pointless? Uncalled for?

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

But why would it be pointless or uncalled for? $70 for a rather old game?

Edit: I've been schooled. Is a brand new game with a confusing name. Still $70 for a console game; yikes.

[–] Vamanos@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Others have already replied with this info but I’m just spelling it out for anyone who is not familiar like me:

They fucking named the brand new game mk1. Is it a remaster? No. It’s not a remaster. Is it a recreation of mk1? No. It’s an alternate timeline game given the worst name in the history of naming things. It’s genuinely a brand new game.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Holy shit. They really fucked up with that name.

[–] Poggervania@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I mean… we live in the timeline where we had the Xbox One being the third Xbox, and Battlefield 1 not being the first Battlefield.

I would not be surprised if we start seeing “[Game Title] One” for rebooted games.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Its not an old game, MK1 is the latest release. The people getting served this are running it on hardware that was weak last generation. At a certain point you simply cannot push these devices any further. MK1 for Switch was never going to look beautiful, the current gen Switch can't do it. I'm okay with devs making their games available, I mean at least you can play it. Theres a reason a Switch 2 is in the works.

This is a brand new game, they just gave it a confusing name

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because you have the full choice to not buy and support it, if you think the price is unreasonable. It's not a vital need, and nobody's forcing customers to buy it. Housing, food, healthcare, we don't have a choice. Buy or die. A video game? Not so much. The issue is not game publishers overcharging, it's players who moan and whine... AND THEN BUY IT ANYWAY, thus ensuring the publishers will continue the practice

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, but are we talking about people who buy the game, or people in general bashing at the price? They're not necessarily the same group.

It's like when Apple announced that $1000 monitor stand. It was laughable. Even if I won't buy one, I bashed it to no end, because it was fun.

[–] VonCesaw@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's standard price for new games from EA, greater Microsoft (id, Bethesda, Obsidian, 343, etc), SqEnix, and WB

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Which is bullshit. It reminds me of when web email services offered ridiculously small inbox sizes, such as 25MB or 50MB. Then in came Google and offered 1GB, and all of a sudden all those companies found the way to match Google's offering.

But I guess if people are willing to pay for those ridiculous prices, and deal with in-game payments..... shrug.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think it's "outrage". It's people making fun of the port on x and the website capitalizing on that to publish a story

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're calling it robbery and disrespectful. I'm not seeing where the joke is

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Crying at the Switch version of Mortal Kombat 1, Why didn’t they just wait for the next gen switch console, the fact it costs 70$ is robbery💀💀💀

I think it's clear that they're not literally calling it a robbery, they're just expressing their discontent in a twitter way.

[–] SSUPII@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For the quality offered the cost was very steep, but its also true the Switch doing some major heavy lifting already.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What does that mean, the Switch doing some major heavy lifting?

[–] SSUPII@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

The hardware the game is running is painfully terrible in 2023.

[–] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

Well that makes sense. The switch is a less powerful platform, an intentional trade off for the mobility. And at this point, it's on the older side. Either accept the trade off so you can play on an airplane or buy a more powerful modern device like a steam deck.

[–] giantofthenorth@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've seen phone games look better

[–] mriormro@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I've seen Switch games that look better.

[–] WiildFiire@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 5 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Bayonetta 3 Gameplay

MK1 switch Gameplay

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Do people not realize that some, if not all store fronts have a clause that the base price of a game has to be the same on other storefronts.

I know its true for steam vs other pc store fronts, but i believe its probably true for consoles as well.

[–] DeriHunter@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To all people who buy switch and say it's not about the graphics, it's about the experience, this is what you get.

I'm not criticizing them saying this , I'm just making a point that switch as inferior hardware and you can't expect to have the game with the same graphics as ps5. The game price is not tied to the graphics, it's tired to the amount of work they had to put in it, which I'm sure is a lot

[–] And009@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Experience expensive

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago