Bucky Seifert on 13/6/2017 at 01:11
I have no shame in saying Skyrim is in my top 10 games of all time (yes, I am a horrible horrible heretic who likes it more than Morrowind), and I'm all for games having a long period of support. But, after watching the giant thud that was the Bethesda E3 2017 conference, I really can't shake the feeling that they are now just milking Skyrim for all it's worth. It's not that it's coming to another platform on principle that gives me this impression, but on the other hand, this game came out almost 6 years ago. How many people who would be interested in the game don't already own it? Not to mention the highly questionable Creators Club thing they have going on that they are going to have to fight an uphill battle convincing people it's not paid mods all over again.
Skyrim is a great game but I really wish we could at least get a hint that they are doing something other than Fallout 4 VR and Skyrim ports.
Edit: Now we have Skyrim Playstation VR. FFS.
demagogue on 13/6/2017 at 13:23
Lol, I came here to post the same thing.
I'll just quote what I wrote in another forum:
Quote:
Yeah ... VR & paid mods. It's transparently trying to milk Skyrim (like the special edition) since they aren't on track with ES6. Skyrim is what, a 6 year old game now. Who tries to start milking a 6 year old game like it was released last week? Needless to say I'm not a fan of this move.
Dia on 14/6/2017 at 11:28
What dema said.
Thirith on 14/6/2017 at 14:04
To me it depends entirely on how they do it and how much they ask for it. From VR perspective it makes sense to test the waters to see to what extent traditional gaming experiences can be done in the new medium. By taking an existing game where the content already exists, they can do so in a relatively cost-effective way - because, let's face it, no big publisher would bring out new content as massive as Skyrim for VR.
If they end up selling this at the same price and don't offer any discounts for people who already have the game, then they're idiots and deserve to fall flat on their faces. But if they can do this without a massive impact on new games (and, let's face it, the team needed for this would be much, much smaller than what you'd need for a full new game), I don't see the problem.
ZylonBane on 14/6/2017 at 15:20
Quote Posted by Buccura
How many people who would be interested in the game don't already own it?
Oh no, GOG.com just disappeared in a puff of logic!
Renault on 14/6/2017 at 15:24
Yeah, I thought the beginning of all this was last year when they released the Special Edition at full retail price.
Thirith on 14/6/2017 at 15:25
... which people who had the full game got for free.
Renault on 14/6/2017 at 15:46
I think that only applied to PC, right? Either way, for people who don't own it, $60 (PS4/Xbox One) is a lot for a 6 year old game.
Thirith on 15/6/2017 at 05:56
True - but this is one business practice I honestly don't have much of a problem with, because it's entirely transparent and up to the buyer. Do you think the game is worth the price? Buy it. Otherwise don't. There are lots of practices in this business that I consider dodgy, insidious and destructive, but this isn't one of them for me.
Renault on 15/6/2017 at 17:12
I don't think it's dishonest in any way, it's just going to the well a few too many times. I'd much rather have them work on new stuff than continue to re-imagine and enhance the existing stuff. It's as old as the first Dark Souls game, and we've had 3 full games plus expansions released by From since then.
I do think it's amusing how from the start, the Switch has used Skyrim as a marquee game in it's ads and promos.
