Limited Run Games Thread - Nothing is Limited, We Make Everything Now!

Squarehard

Squarehard

CAGiversary!
Feedback
182 (100%)
Please move all off-topic and non-game related discussion (such as reselling, or he who shall not be named) to the other thread below,

LRG Off-Topic Discussion Thread

---------------------------------------------------------

LRG is on Amazon now!

LRG Trading Thread - Miss a release? Trade with someone who might need a release you have.


Limited Run Games Store Fronthttps://limitedrungames.com/videogamedeals

Limited Run Games at Best Buyhttps://shop-links.co/chgcByJn9wg

Holiday 2022 LRG Releases at Best Buyhttps://cag.vg/lrg

Props to Cheapy for keeping the OP updated. :3
 
Last edited:
Upvote 3 Downvote
Yes, you are buying a license even for a physical copy, only the distribution method changes.

I used COD as an example and specifically said certain titles, which includes the likes of Overwatch, Division II, Rare Replay,  Gears of War 5, etv.

You can play something like Street Fighter V offline out the box but it will be severely gimped. The game was always a work in progress and playing without establishing any internet connection leaves you with outdated gameplay tweaks and a huge shortage of characters.

 
Most games aren't gimped out of the box on the Switch.  Yes some have downloads required, but the majority work without updates or downloads (thankfully).   That's one of my requirements for the vast majority of my physical game purchases.  Which is why on PS4 I'll typically wait for any big game to have a complete edition before buying it.

 
Super Strider TurbulenceEX said:
Yes, you are buying a license even for a physical copy, only the distribution method changes.

I used COD as an example and specifically said certain titles, which includes the likes of Overwatch, Division II, Rare Replay, Gears of War 5, etv.

You can play something like Street Fighter V offline out the box but it will be severely gimped. The game was always a work in progress and playing without establishing any internet connection leaves you with outdated gameplay tweaks and a huge shortage of characters.
Click to expand...
You keep trying to come up with these extreme examples to make this point that you will find impossible for anyone to buy. Street Fighter V could still be played offline out of the box, so you negate your own argument. How are you only buying a "license" if you can hold it, look at it, and use it?

Let's try this - you want to tell me that when I recently bought "The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening" for the Switch that all I got was a "license"?

 
Of course not. You can sell it, trade it, destroy it. It’s yours. A digital copy is just that, a digital license that is accessible as long as it’s hosted for sale.

You would have to be an idiot to buy a digital game over a physical copy to be honest. Thank god the ps5 will have a Blu ray drive.
 
Super Strider TurbulenceEX said:
Yes, you are buying a license even for a physical copy, only the distribution method changes.

I used COD as an example and specifically said certain titles, which includes the likes of Overwatch, Division II, Rare Replay, Gears of War 5, etv.

You can play something like Street Fighter V offline out the box but it will be severely gimped. The game was always a work in progress and playing without establishing any internet connection leaves you with outdated gameplay tweaks and a huge shortage of characters.
Click to expand...
"Let me make my point by using outliers and online multiplayer examples which are exceptions to the rule and not the norm"

 
So I know it's for charity but who in their right mind is bidding $1,100 on Revenge of the Bird King on Ebay? Seems a bit excessive.
 
FYI Revenge of the Bird King is .09 cents on eshop for Switch.

I honestly prefer physical games when the whole game is on the cart and not a huge online game, like Overwatch or Rocket League. There are a couple games I have bought digital during a sale that LRG or someone else is going to release physical, but I want a physical copy as well because I like it so much.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
With LRG releasing Star Wars games, it'd be a treat if they released a remastered Knights of the Old Republic 1&2, Starfighter, Rogue Squadrons 1 & 2 and Rebel Assault 1&2.

 
BrandonJF said:
You keep trying to come up with these extreme examples to make this point that you will find impossible for anyone to buy. Street Fighter V could still be played offline out of the box, so you negate your own argument. How are you only buying a "license" if you can hold it, look at it, and use it?

Let's try this - you want to tell me that when I recently bought "The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening" for the Switch that all I got was a "license"?
Click to expand...
I had the feeling that you don't know what you are talking about, but now I just got confirmation.

When you buy a game, movie, song, etc, you are buying a license for that copy. That includes 8 tracks and digital downloads, you do not own the IP. You just bought a license for a copy. That can include a cartridge. A disc. A digital download. It doesn't matter, the distribution method is what changes.

Street Fighter V can be played offline. No shit it can. But if I buy SFV brand new from Gamestop and then start playing it, guess what? There are a shit ton of characters. stages, costumes and gameplay additions that are not available until you update the game. This isn't hard to understand. I don't know if this is denial or ignorance, either way I'm done responding.

 
Ultra Street fighter 4 is a compete package offline that has everything except some costume dlc unlocked. so...

coincidence that 5 flopped & 4 didn't?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BrandonJF said:
You keep trying to come up with these extreme examples to make this point that you will find impossible for anyone to buy. Street Fighter V could still be played offline out of the box, so you negate your own argument. How are you only buying a "license" if you can hold it, look at it, and use it?

Let's try this - you want to tell me that when I recently bought "The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening" for the Switch that all I got was a "license"?
Click to expand...
Wow are you wrong and boy did you pick a bad example. Most of the Street Fighter characters aren't even on the disc. The new Arcade Edition version is nothing but the same old 1.0 disc as well. All of the extras are digital and that disc is going to be all but useless whenever the servers get taken down.

Then you follow it all up with a strawman statement to boot. Did he suggest or say that all you get when buying Zelda was a license? No, of course he didn't.

Strider is pretty close to spot on with his sentiments.

So much of everything these days is a base install disc while 40-80% of the remaining game files are downloaded digitally. So at least we still own our own games in a sense by having the rights to them through disc ownership. But in 15-20 years from now so much of what we play today is going to be completely unplayable through said discs. We're obviously talking about AAA and retail versions of games here and not most of what LRG puts out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Super Strider TurbulenceEX said:
I had the feeling that you don't know what you are talking about, but now I just got confirmation.

When you buy a game, movie, song, etc, you are buying a license for that copy. That includes 8 tracks and digital downloads, you do not own the IP. You just bought a license for a copy. That can include a cartridge. A disc. A digital download. It doesn't matter, the distribution method is what changes.

Street Fighter V can be played offline. No shit it can. But if I buy SFV brand new from Gamestop and then start playing it, guess what? There are a shit ton of characters. stages, costumes and gameplay additions that are not available until you update the game. This isn't hard to understand. I don't know if this is denial or ignorance, either way I'm done responding.
Click to expand...
We understand what you're saying: the physical versions of many games are either useless or severely limited. You mentioned many examples that show this, and basically everyone here agrees with you. I think the thing you're missing is that most of us avoid those kinds of releases in the first place, and we generally make a point to emphasize the importance of having the complete version of a game printed on the cart/disc.

There are plenty of publishers out there who do a decent job of that, too. Fangamer just put out a physical version of Hollow Knight on Switch that was missing a piece of DLC content on the cart. That DLC can be downloaded for free, but they still reprinted the game with everything on the cart and set up an exchange program for people who bought the incomplete version. LRG also recently delayed their release of Celeste until the dev was finished with the final update so that it could produce a complete version of the game. The last several games I've bought for Switch--Star Wars Pinball, Minit, Mana Collection, The Messenger, Guacamelee Collection--all work just fine without any updates (although not all if those are complete on cart).

So anyway, you're right when you say that companies releasing incomplete/unplayable physical versions of their games is a problem, but not everyone is like that. There are plenty of instances where buying physical is more than just owning a lisence.
 
Zeldafanatic15 said:
FYI Revenge of the Bird King is .09 cents on eshop for Switch.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was going to note that as well. IF anyone is curious about RotBK, $0.09 or 9 gold coins for the switch version is a good way to go.

Pricing like this is usually what makes me just shrug at some physically produced games. I'd never pay $30 or even $25 for RotBK but 9 gold coins... yeah, maybe.
 
Super Strider TurbulenceEX said:
When you buy a game, movie, song, etc, you are buying a license for that copy.
Click to expand...
This is true. However, it is also true that buying a physical copy of a game gives you a slightly different license for the copy you possess. The vast majority of digital copies that can be purchased can't be re-sold or transferred legally. At best you can "sell" your account, and even that is a grey-market area.

However, purchasing a physical copy of any game provides you with a license for playing that game whose ownership can be transferred. It is entirely possible to sell or exchange your physical copy however you see fit, and you won't be violating any copyright law. This is one of the primary advantages of purchasing physical copies. Yes, it is true that you don't own the game. All you have is a license to play the game represented by your physical copy. But you do have far greater utility for the license you purchased, simply by that license being manifested in a physical good.

This is why some collectors straight-up ignore digital copies, but will consider physical copies to be part of their collection. Digital copies can be very convenient, but they aren't really "collectible." Physical copies are.

 
https://twitter.com/LimitedRunGames/status/1183812503568076803

One more thing for Friday. Looks decent, but we're at five SKUs for Friday now.

I get that the people buying Star Wars stuff and indie RPGs are mostly separate crowds, but it's kind of a bad look to pump out as much as possible while there are a hundred items waiting to be shipped. But that conversation's been had a hundred times here and I won't rehash it, just grumble like the curmudgeon I am.

 
Tothoro said:
https://twitter.com/LimitedRunGames/status/1183812503568076803

One more thing for Friday. Looks decent, but we're at five SKUs for Friday now.

I get that the people buying Star Wars stuff and indie RPGs are mostly separate crowds, but it's kind of a bad look to pump out as much as possible while there are a hundred items waiting to be shipped. But that conversation's been had a hundred times here and I won't rehash it, just grumble like the curmudgeon I am.
Click to expand...
six SKU as I posted on the page before THE MASTERS OF RPG ARE BACK

https://twitter.com/LimitedRunGames/status/1183794634251800577

 
Nothing- said:
One of the reasons why Nintendo does so well is that they ship (mostly) completely finished products with their games.
Click to expand...
On the whole the only people who care about that are hardcore collectors and serious gamers, but they are the minority of all gamers though. That only matters to a tiny portion gamers but it seems like a lot more to you because you travel in those circles and see it discussed a lot. But most people who play games do not care about it.

Nintendo does well because they are a friendly and non threatening company in general. They don't get involved in scandals, all of their first party games are safe and soft for all ages so parents have no issue blindly buying them for kids, their spokesmen are always friendly and soft speaking people with big warm smiles. Basically they have a public image on one can be upset with or be turned off by.

Then you have the nostalgia factor as Nintendo was a huge staple in gaming's old days when it really took off. Nintendo was there with Mario, kirby, pokemon, Mario kart, metroid, zelda, etc. That's why they continue to do not much besides milk the same old franchises over and over and over again. They just stick with what's safe and well known. Anytime nintendo does create a new game like arms or Wii music it's quickly forgotten in favor of yet more zelda and Mario character's.

But their biggest success is merchandising. They merchandise the living shit out of their brands. Board games, stickers, trading cards, clothing, diapers, nintendo monoply, mario spaghettios, kites, amigos, figures, toys, bikes, game accessories, posters, blankets, dishes, kid's chairs, and a thousand other items. Without it they would be dead in the water.

Nintendos success is built on not taking risks, not creating new things, repetition, being as non threatening as possible and by milking well known franchises.

 
Dr_dreadful said:
Nintendos success is built on not taking risks, not creating new things, repetition, being as non threatening as possible and by milking well known franchises.
Click to expand...

This is the most incorrect assessment I have ever read. Nintendo's entire raison d'etre is taking risks. When the industry does something, Nintendo has consistently gone against the grain. Sometimes it works out for them (the Wii), sometimes it does not (Wii U). When the industry was pushing FMV heavy games and optical media, Nintendo made a cartridge based console with a boomerang for a controller. When the focus was first person shooters with HD graphics, Nintendo made a console no more powerful than the GameCube with motion sensitive controls. Sony and Microsoft are trying to edge one another out with 4K and 8K graphics powerhouses and ray tracing and Nintendo is like: "lets make a console that graphically is behind 1-2 generations with removable controllers that make it a handheld!" I'm sorry if Nintendo's public image is not edgy enough for you (as you are not wrong about that) but I fail to see how that is a negative.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
kevers7290 said:
This is the most incorrect assessment I have ever read. Nintendo's entire raison d'etre is taking risks. When the industry does something, Nintendo has consistently gone against the grain. Sometimes it works out for them (the Wii), sometimes it does not (Wii U). When the industry was pushing FMV heavy games and optical media, Nintendo made a cartridge based console with a boomerang for a controller. When the focus was first person shooters with HD graphics, Nintendo made a console no more powerful than the GameCube with motion sensitive controls. Sony and Microsoft are trying to edge one another out with 4K and 8K graphics powerhouses and ray tracing and Nintendo is like: "lets make a console that graphically is behind 1-2 generations with removable controllers that make it a handheld!" I'm sorry if Nintendo's public image is not edgy enough for you (as you are not wrong about that) but I fail to see how that is a negative.
Click to expand...
They also released a home console (NES) immediately after the collapse of the home console market in the US and created a dedicated handheld console (Game Boy) on a scale that no one had ever come close to before. When it comes to hardware, Nintendo has a pretty long history of going against the grain.

The criticism of them consistently returning to a familiar stable of characters is totally true...although I always wonder why we don't hear it so much when a new God of War or Gears of War game comes out, or when a new Spiderman or Batman movie/comic/game comes out.
 
Add to the pile of risk, the VIrtual Boy, DS, 3DS... they continually try something new.  Granted it's not all well received, but look at Ring Fit Adventure and all the cardboard construction required for Labo.  They also took a huge risk bringing Dragon Quest to the west, going as far as offering the first game for free through Nintendo Power.

Yes they rely on their established franchises, but they continually change the formula on those games and make fantastically fresh experiences.  Just look at the evolution of Zelda games.  From top down to include side scrolling to going 3D to open world and beyond.  Mario has continually evolved as well.  And usually for every step Nintendo takes forward in game design come a bunch of copy cats that try to make their own spin on it.  We saw that most recently with Breath of the Wild, but even still the classic Zelda formula keeps getting used by other companies that try to tap into the love people have for those games.

And the love for those games isn't about blind loyalty... it's about great gameplay.

They do publish games outside of their main franchises, but they don't shy away from publishing new games in franchises people love.  If anything they sometimes go a bit too far in evolving the games which gets some backlash.  Heck I know one person here that definitely didn't enjoy Zelda Breath of the Wild.. and that's ok.   Not everyone can enjoy every game.  Look at Metroid Other M.  It got a lot of rejection for changing things yet Metroid Prime was pretty well loved.

 
Equippt said:
The criticism of them consistently returning to a familiar stable of characters is totally true...although I always wonder why we don't hear it so much when a new God of War or Gears of War game comes out, or when a new Spiderman or Batman movie/comic/game comes out.
Click to expand...
Well, I have heard those issues in regards to Spider-Man, Batman, X-Men, etc as most franchises have had tons of reboots in a rather short period of time(Hollywood of current times). But having maybe 1 or 2 movies, than completely changing the cast is nothing like a company releasing the same game with a new coat of paint every 3-5 years. Almost each movie franchise in question(good or bad), is completely a new situation with each new reboot, and most things "N" are pretty much the same games with not much change. Yes, there are exceptions of course.

BotW is of course a whole new experience(one I personally didn't care for), but for sure something "new", but that is very rare at this point. My biggest issues aren't the milking of franchises, but how long it takes to turn out a generic game like Mario Kart, and have it show very little changes from the previous game. Stuff like this should be offered annually, as not much changes, but of course many will say that dilutes the brand, as then it becomes COD of "N", which is very true. Making me wait ages for a cookie cutter game isn't going to make me want it more, but the fan base eats this shit up, and "N" knows their base better than most.

Diddy Kong Racing offered more innovation in a title from the N64, than I've seen from MK in 9 new games over a franchises history. The DS MK was the only one I found different, as the challenge mode was amazing, and like all good things "N" does now, it was gone never to be seen again for the next game. For me, the "N" of today is to focused on innovations(hardware), to the detriment of actual good games, and that's my current issues with this company. When a game like Star Fox can't have a good game, because motion controls are more important than the actual game play, maybe it's time to get back to basics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr_dreadful said:
Nintendos success is built on not taking risks, not creating new things, repetition, being as non threatening as possible and by milking well known franchises.
Click to expand...
Not creating new things? I mean Splatoon came out on what is dubbed as the worst Nintendo home system in sales (if you don't include Virtual Boy) and has become a giant franchise. Or look at Mario + Rabbids, another risk there. Zelda Breath of the Wild was a GIANT departure from what the series had been as well. Picking up the Bayonetta franchise when PS and XBOX passed on funding the 2nd one. So I have to disagree on this one.

And this is all recent things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
kevers7290 said:
This is the most incorrect assessment I have ever read. Nintendo's entire raison d'etre is taking risks. When the industry does something, Nintendo has consistently gone against the grain. Sometimes it works out for them (the Wii), sometimes it does not (Wii U). When the industry was pushing FMV heavy games and optical media, Nintendo made a cartridge based console with a boomerang for a controller. When the focus was first person shooters with HD graphics, Nintendo made a console no more powerful than the GameCube with motion sensitive controls. Sony and Microsoft are trying to edge one another out with 4K and 8K graphics powerhouses and ray tracing and Nintendo is like: "lets make a console that graphically is behind 1-2 generations with removable controllers that make it a handheld!" I'm sorry if Nintendo's public image is not edgy enough for you (as you are not wrong about that) but I fail to see how that is a negative.
Click to expand...
You're going back decades to argue against me which is fine. I'm talking about recently. You can't really argue my point unless you want to just say motion controls or new or some other gimmick that isn't new and done by others before them.

I'm not bad mouthing Nintendo as I own a switch and just finished links awakening. But they are very much a company now a days of the same old same old. They rely on their image and rehashing the same old games. And everytime they rehash them they make them simpler and easier each time, dumbing them down.

At any rate I'm done with this conversation. Were clogging up a lrg thread with nonsense about how nintendo isn't a very good game company, only very good at doing what they do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr_dreadful said:
You're going back decades to argue against me which is fine. I'm talking about recently. You can't really argue my point unless you want to just say motion controls or new or some other gimmick that isn't new and done by others before them.

I'm not bad mouthing Nintendo as I own a switch and just finished links awakening. But they are very much a company now a days of the same old same old. They rely on their image and rehashing the same old games. And everytime they rehash them they make them simpler and easier each time, dumbing them down.

At any rate I'm done with this conversation. Were clogging up a lrg thread with nonsense about how nintendo isn't a very good game company, only very good at doing what they do.
Click to expand...
If you don't understand what is unique and special about Nintendo then there is really no discussion to be had. There's a reason why they survive all the ups and downs in the video gaming sector over the decades, usually with inferior hardware, and its not just bc they have recognizable mascots or keep making the same games.

They make GREAT first party games, achieve a genuine standard of very high quality with these games, and just plain get the 'fun factor' right. It always makes me sad when I encounter "gamers" that have long forgotten the core pillars of gaming.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr_dreadful said:
At any rate I'm done with this conversation. Were clogging up a lrg thread with nonsense about how nintendo isn't a very good game company, only very good at doing what they do.
Click to expand...
Well, if not this discussion, it will turn in to LRG being a shit company, so this thread is always off the rails, so don't feel bad. LOL

Yeah, I've been a "N" fan since their start in the US, as I go back to the Game & Watch and arcade titles, and I'm beyond unimpressed with most things offered in current times as well. Sadly, voicing any other opinion here that isn't strictly how good their "kool-aid" taste, your not going to sway any minds. Or even have a well meaning conversation, as if you don't love what they are doing today, your mentally ill, or have some other condition that says you can't dislike something that others do.

At one point in time, "N" was the greatest gaming company around, but I haven't felt that way about them in a very long time, and that's OK! I vote with my funds, and for someone who has owned more "N" products than most, I've earned my opinion and I'm more than entitled to it.

 
Dr_dreadful said:
You're going back decades to argue against me which is fine. I'm talking about recently. You can't really argue my point unless you want to just say motion controls or new or some other gimmick that isn't new and done by others before them.
Click to expand...
Wii U and Switch were not decades ago, and both offer(ed) something unique, new and innovative to the world of gaming. Not sure what you are misreading in my post.

 
I still resent Nintendo (and NOA) for their kid-friendly censorship in the NES & SNES eras, enough to ignore them for 2 generations.  The DS and Wii tempted me with tons of games, but the vast majority weren't very fun for me.  If Sega were still active, I would be saying similar things about Sega as many say about Nintendo here.

I just can't get on-board collecting for Switch due to the online DRM for save files, but I still pick up a single copy of limited games, and pretty much any game with HD Rumble or Ad-Hoc Multiplayer (which is most).

If Sony keeps going with all their recent social-justice censorship, I want to feel free to change my default console from PS4/PS5 to Switch.

 
addicted2games said:
Kinda on that topic with Sony, but what was the reason to recently discontinue Facebook integration on the PS4? Anybody know?
Click to expand...
Contract for the arrangement ran out and they weren't able to finalize a new one in time. As far as I know they're still working on a new contract so I doubt it's permanent.

 
Zeldafanatic15 said:
No, they never said anything outside the initial announcement during their E3 video.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Actually, they did say that it was on hold after the incident but Douglas mentioned on one of the chats recently that they expect it will still move forward likely next year if everyone agrees.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top