this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
145 points (94.5% liked)

Games

32911 readers
1489 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
quinten
shitpostpolice
Dremor
[email protected]
145
Cities Skylines 2: "Beach properties assets are all gone and my city is screwed. Thanks a lot." (forum.paradoxplaza.com)
submitted 7 months ago by FooBarrington to c/games
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It doesn't stop. It just never stops.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FooBarrington 15 points 7 months ago (3 children)

God, how can someone be so blind?

But this was such an edge case, removing assets resulting in the unavailability of said assets in game, that this interruption simply couldn't have been for foreseen.

They couldn't foresee issues created by removing assets, in a game that is supposed to support user mods, which can be added/removed at any time? Really?

The explanation I've seen is that they wanted to pull the DLC as soon as possible, since it was - literally - the worst-rated product on Steam. I'm 99% sure the bean counters responsible for all of the terrible decisions (release the game, no matter what state! Release the DLC, no matter the amount of content!) pulled the lever on this one again - no chance they'll see any responsibility with themselves.

[–] lanolinoil 71 points 7 months ago (2 children)

surely this is satire no?

[–] FooBarrington 42 points 7 months ago

You're probably right, especially considering this sentence:

It's difficult to see in advance that removing game assets from the game will result in the unavailability of said assets in game.

I've seen this kind of defense meant honestly before, so I'm not 100% sure, but by god - I hope you're right.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

This is but their legit response was "dunno, that wasn't supposed to happen but it kinda did, maybe don't do anything now, we'll try to fix it sometimes", so this is not that far:

developer response: "Hi all! I just wanted to pop in and let you know we're looking into what's happened as you were of course supposed to keep access to the Beach Properties content until the patch that moves it to the base game arrived. Assets are replaced by the placeholder boxes, but as the waterfront zoning isn't available in the base game yet, I recommend holding off on loading saves with a lot of those zones. At this time we don't have an ETA for when this is resolved, but at the very least the upcoming patch (date still to be announced) will resolve it as the assets become part of the base game. I'm so sorry for the inconvenience this is causing!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wooooooooooooooosh

[–] FooBarrington 1 points 7 months ago

God, I hope so!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wait, but if they pulled the game from Steam shouldn't the owners still keep the game (DLC in this case) on their libraries?

[–] FooBarrington 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They refunded people, which probably removed the DLC from their libraries. People who bought the ultimate edition kept it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That can happen? I wasn't aware developers could literally remove a game from your Steam library, if so that's really shitty and scummy.

[–] FooBarrington 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Well, they refunded it, so people got their money back. But it sucks that it breaks peoples save files.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I guess, but so the owner chose to get a refund, right? If so then that's to be expected, if that's the case then I don't see what the fuzz is about. Unless the refund was forced onto the customer.

[–] FooBarrington 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The refund was forced. Players didn't choose it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Well then my opinion stands, that's pretty shitty. The choice to refund should ultimately lie with the customer not with the company.

[–] FooBarrington 1 points 7 months ago

I think the refund would have been right to do from the company side once everything was prepared - it wouldn't be right for them to keep any money from customers after the content has been integrated into the base game. But only once they are sure nothing will break due to the refund.