560°

Final Fantasy VII Remake Received Via PlayStation Plus Will Be Upgradable to PS5 Version

When Sony included the PS4 version of the Final Fantasy VII Remake in the PlayStation Plus lineup in March 2021, it was said that it wouldn't be eligible for the upgrade to PS5. That is about to change.

Jin_Sakai870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

Good! Should’ve been this way day 1 through.

Orchard870d ago

Hard to blame Square when this is a recurring theme with PS+ games nowadays.

blackblades870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

@Orchard
It's there product not Sony, its the devs decision so yeah it's on them. Its only been 2 games that I know of and square was the one that announced this news on twitter.

RauLeCreuset870d ago

I don't get why there's any need for "blame" at all. It's a full priced AAA game included with PS+ less than a year after it's initial release. Something was negotiated to make that happen. This isn't Godfall. The full game that I bought for $60 at launch released on PS+ less than a year later. Who predicted that game dropping on PS+ for free before Game Pass, or dropping on PS+ before debuting on PC or Xbox? I don't get the controversy. Does owning the PS+ copy preclude later buying a normal copy and upgrading?

Orchard870d ago

@blackblades It is Sonys decision what games are in PS+ and the associated budget - not the developer.

Mr_Writer85870d ago

Orchard

Sony work with the publisher, the publisher will set the conditions not Sony.

Sony try and give the publisher what they want in order to get the games on the service.

Unfortunately with the PS5 being so early days publishers want to make money back.

Sony have a choice, either give them what they want to get the games on the service, or don't and have to work on other games.

Eonjay870d ago

@Orchard. Its free now. You shouldn't be looking to blame anyone. If you still need to blame someone blame yourself lol.

ocelot07870d ago

@Orchard

Can you explain to me how for November's game the 2 PS4 games we got we where also allowed to claim the PS5 upgrades?

Not sure how it's a recurring theme.

Eonjay870d ago

@ocelot07

"Something... something blame Sony... something."

thesoftware730869d ago

Wow, you jumped right in with the Sony defense...that is incredible. No one even mentioned Sony before you did that.

Blackblades, you ok bro?

CrimsonWing69869d ago

Can you link me to where you were able to confirm this?

Orchard869d ago

@Mr_Writer85 Sony are a huge corporation, they have enough money to please PS5 early adopters.

@ocelot07 I said recurring theme, not that it happens 100% of the time. We've seen other games not include the upgrade - even as recent as this month with Mortal Shell.

@eonjoy You do realize it's OK to criticize corporations right? You don't have to blindly love a company just because you bought their product. I will happily criticize any company I have given so much money to when I feel like they're doing wrong.

thorstein869d ago

How about all of you just shut up. No one cares what you have to say regarding PS Plus. Not Sony, not Square, not N4G.

Seriously, you sound like a bunch of cackling hyenas. And nothing you say bears any weight on what Sony nor Square do in the future.

Be happy or unhappy that PS5 owners get the upgrade for free... and shut up.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 869d ago
DarXyde870d ago

I don't disagree, but let's not get jaded. It was amended before taking effect, so fair enough.

Microsoft reversing course on Xbox Live pricing was sudden and shouldn't have been the case at all, but it was addressed before taking effect.

No harm done in my opinion. It does show some concerning practices, but working too fix it before anyone gets their hands on it is a good move.

NotoriousWhiz869d ago

Amended before taking effect? FF7R was released on PS plus in March of 2021. So it was in effect for 9 months before they changed their policy.

DarXyde869d ago

Yep, you're right. My mistake.

babadivad869d ago

When is the upgrade supposed to happen?

LucasRuinedChildhood870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

I held off buying this after getting the PS4 PS Plus version because I wanted 60fps, and I've been too busy with other games.

Feel really bad for the people who bought the PS5 version in the meantime (€80 ain't cheap) but I'm VERY happy about this. Merry Christmas, lads.

blackblades870d ago

Same i was holding off for the ps5 version to go on sale.

Teflon02870d ago

Why'd you feel sorry, some people want to own their games lol. That being said, I bought on PS4 on release so just paid for the DLC which you'd still have to do

LucasRuinedChildhood870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

If people want to spend money to own a game that they already got on PS Plus, that's fair enough, but I'm obviously not talking about that.

I think most people who bought the PS5 version after getting FF7 on PS Plus primary wanted 60fps - the graphics are already great on the PS4 Pro version anyway.

It was similar to the Mortal Shell situation. The whole no upgrade through PS Plus thing is nonsense. We're paying for PS Plus - it's not free. It's great that the upgrade is now included.

People had to shell out up to €80 for 60fps (easily done in a patch) and now everyone's getting it for free like they originally should have.

They've basically been ripped off so I feel bad for them. It was a bad practice ... but I'm happy for myself though. lol

k2d870d ago

@LucasRuinedChildhood

Hard to feel bad about someone financially supporting a game they enjoy. That they already got for mere scraps.

Teflon02869d ago

Lucas I'm talking about buying it on release. Whyd you feel sorry for people who bought it? Even if they got it free from ps plus. There's people who'd still want to own it and buy it. My point is, that was a ridiculously ignorant comment to make. Gamers these days are childish af I swear. There's no feeling sorry for no one. Gaming is a luxury. If you want to game and willing to pay a price, you paid it.

CobraKai870d ago

I played the PS4 version, but bought the PS5 version and I have zero regrets. I knew the saga was gonna end on 5 so I waited.

Kurt Russell870d ago

I've been playing through the PS+ one and feeling salty I couldn't upgrade (without paying the full wack)... this is great news as I am going to happily upgrade :D

jznrpg869d ago

Why do you feel bad ? We need to give devs $ to support our hobby and they didn’t have to wait?? Not all of us are broke af and can’t spare some change for our hobby . If you can’t afford to play games make your priorities straight

Profchaos869d ago

Gave a feeling that was part of their strategy it would have been a square Enix choice to hold back the upgrade for PS plus customers in a effort to get longtime fans to buy it at full price. But also if they release or free it helps promote the next game in the pipeline now

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 869d ago
Relientk77870d ago

It sucks it took this long, but it's better late than never I guess. Next time just do it from the start

Orchard870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

Finally. It should’ve been from day one - but better late than never.

Sucks for those who paid for it though.

FlavorLav01870d ago

Games always go on sale down the road, unless we’re talking Nintendo. So, that’s like saying your sorry for every gamer who bought day 1 and the game was cheaper later. That’s the price you pay to experience something first, and some are ok with that. If you want it, buy it and support it. If you wanna cheaper game then wait. Pretty simple if you ask me.

Orchard870d ago

This isn’t the same as a game going on sale at all. This was offered via PS+ and at the time no PS5 upgrade was included, now that has retroactively changed.

Teflon02869d ago

Here's the fact. If PS Plus got a free ps5 upgrade. The people who paid more for the game than it costs for PS Plus basically get spit in their face. PSplus got the game for ps5 the same day and only gotta pay for intergrade as well lol. Yeah, you're crying like PS Plus owners are being screwed but the truth is the people who'd have been screwed are the game owners in that case. They're only releasing the upgrade now because Square is aware the key buyers of the game likely picked it up already and since the dlc is ps5 exclusive. Letting them on now doesn't screw the initial buyers and they can push the dlc on a new audience lol

RauLeCreuset870d ago

Why do you frame it that way?

The initial PS+ release was an exceptional get for the PS+ games this year. It's a game that came out the year prior to dropping on PS+. The base PS4 copy is still selling for $24.99 at popular retailers like Game Stop and Amazon. $59.99 at Best Buy. That's PS4 standard edition, not Intergrade. $24.99 is 42% of the cost of a year of PS+ ($59.99). That one PS+ release, among multiple PS+ releases that month, is currently 42% (or more) of a full priced PS+ 12 month sub.

It's reasonable to consider that there are costs to getting games on PS+ and that Square Enix may have only been willing to release on PS+ without it being upgradeable or wanted more money to allow it. I'm not about to argue against them including it as they've now done, but I don't get how some are making a negative out of one of the best PS+ drops this year. The cynical corporate interpretation of such reaction might be to bypass the headache by releasing lesser offerings if it's a choice between that and releasing something of this caliber, a AAA GOTY contender less than a year after its debut, limited to the base PS4 version without an upgrade path or upgradeable at a cost.

Orchard870d ago

It’s simple - we pay a lot for PS+ and I expect the PS5 upgrades to be included.

Unfortunately this doesn’t just apply to FF though - we’ve seen other many games exclude the free upgrade - far cheaper games than FF.

They should go all out or don’t bother - half baked solutions aren’t good. I want to play the best versions via PS+ otherwise why subscribe if ultimately I’m going to have to buy the PS+ games separately anywhere?

They just screw the early adopters who spent $500 on their hardware by doing non-upgradable versions.

RauLeCreuset870d ago

@Orchard

"It’s simple - we pay a lot for PS+ and I expect the PS5 upgrades to be included."

Maybe you have unrealistic expectations. Your rationale is that we pay a lot for PS+, but the best (USD) price I've found on the base PS4 edition right now, 9 months after dropping on PS+, during the holidays, is 42% of what it costs for a whole year of PS+, equal to the price it costs for a 3 month sub, and 2.5x the price of a 1 month sub. Yes, someone could have signed up for a 1 month sub back when this game dropped on PS+ and gotten a game that is still 2.5x or more the value of their sub.

"They should go all out or don’t bother - half baked solutions aren’t good. I want to play the best versions via PS+ otherwise why subscribe if ultimately I’m going to have to buy the PS+ games separately anywhere? "

You don't HAVE to buy anything. You got for free the same game I paid $60 for less than a year prior. I prefer to get a full game of that caliber (though I already owned it) with no upgrade path as part of my sub than the vast majority of what has been releasing as part of the online play subs this year.

RauLeCreuset870d ago

"They just screw the early adopters who spent $500 on their hardware by doing non-upgradable versions."

I forgot about the Playstation Plus Collection in my last reply. That's 20 games provided from jump to the PS+ subscribing "early adopters" you're saying are being screwed. It's interesting that your argument is "we pay a lot for PS+ and I expect the PS5 upgrades to be included," and you just had to expand that argument beyond talking about this one game to push a broader narrative of PS5 early adopter subscribers being screwed.

Let's continue doing the math. For the sake of argument, let's go low and say each of those 20 games is $5. That's a $100 collection exclusive to the early adopters you say are being screwed. Add the value of FF7: Remake to that. And the value of the other 3 games released to PS+ that month. We can keep going, but I made my point. Honestly, it was made in the last post. This is the icing on the cake.

Chevalier870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

@Orchard

Please stop pretending you know the 'cost' and inner workings of Plus. The property does NOT belong to Sony. Square easily could have said this option is not on the table. We want customers to pay for the upgrade. Unless you're a lawyer (which you definitely are NOT) and were there when the paperwork was signed please stop your f'n entitled BS tirade. If PS Plus cost as much as your trying to make it out to be then you should NOT be a f'n gamer. Because if Plus cost is so high as you put it then it's time to find a new hobby.

Plus has been excellent and offered quite incredible games and value for its low cost. As it's been mentioned already 20 instant game library alone is an incredible value. The rest is icing on the cake.

The only think half baked here is your garbage reasoning. Since you're getting so screwed maybe you should just close up your account. No need to comment and you get to move on from getting 'screwed' and we don't have to listen anymore to your idiotic rants. Win win all round!

Orchard870d ago (Edited 870d ago )

@RauLeCreuset

Well each to their own - I've moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games) and expect PS+ to match my current console. Also, the game is a free upgrade for anyone who bought the PS4 version so I expect the same via PS+.

PS+ collection is good for 'new to Playstation' gamers, but if you had a PS4 then you likely had the games in there. If you had a PS4 and weren't playing the 1st party exclusives & big hitters like RE7... what on earth were you doing!?

And yes, FF7 is an expensive game, but it's also a balancing act - other months we get weak/cheap titles like the glorified Godfall demo...

Again though, I don't really care about the business behind it - give me the best game for my platform, or give me something else that is native.

@Chevalier I'm not a lawyer, just a developer, and while that does give me some understanding of cost and inner workings, it's irrelevant anyway. They should be throwing PS5 games at us now with PS+ and keep the PS4 version as a fallback for PS4 consumers. It's half baked because I am a PS+ subscriber on a PS5, I expect PS5 content. If I wanted PS4 content, I wouldn't have bought a PS5. It's that simple.

jznrpg869d ago (Edited 869d ago )

@Orchard I pay 29.99-31.99 a yr for plus . That’s less than 3$ a month . I don’t pay much

RauLeCreuset869d ago

"Well each to their own - I've moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games) and expect PS+ to match my current console. Also, the game is a free upgrade for anyone who bought the PS4 version so I expect the same via PS+."

Yes, to each their own, but that's a dodge by you. You didn't argue that PS+ has less personal value for you because you've "moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games)" (whatever that means). You argued that you expect the PS5 upgrades to be included because "we pay a lot" and that "they just screw the early adopters." You weren't limiting your argument to yourself—See your comment on what "we" pay for PS+ and references to early adopters being screwed—let alone arguing that you perceive less value in your sub because you've "moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games)."

Asked to explain your rationale, you made it clear. "It’s simple - we pay a lot for PS+ and I expect the PS5 upgrades to be included." You want to retreat to a more subjective argument about your perceived value of the PS+ games supposedly predicated on whether you have "moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games)," now that I've confronted you with objective evidence comparing the cost of the games to the cost of the service because you asserted your argument was based on us paying a lot for PS+.

"PS+ collection is good for 'new to Playstation' gamers, but if you had a PS4 then you likely had the games in there. If you had a PS4 and weren't playing the 1st party exclusives & big hitters like RE7... what on earth were you doing!?"

You complain they aren't giving you the best, but you hand wave away them giving away them giving you "1st party exclusives & big hitters." It's almost like you're just looking for a gripe.

Am I missing something? FF7R wasn't a PS4 game? It wasn't a big hitter that sold and shipped over 3.5 million in its first 3 days and over 5 million by that August? Yet here you are arguing that early adopters are being screwed because the PS+ release didn't include an upgrade path. You know what I can confirm included an upgrade path? The PS4 version for sale. A.K.A. The "What On Earth Were You Doing Orchard!?" version.

You're inconsistent. You either didn't have FF7R already, contradicting your attempt to downplay the PS+ offerings for PS5 subscribers, or you did have it and are trying to argue that games you played already don't contribute to the value of the service, at the same time you're trying to argue that your sub is devalued by the the PS+ version omitting an upgrade feature available for the copy you already played. What's next? You're going to argue you played FF7R but didn't own it or keep it? Others can say the same for the games released exclusively for PS5 subscribers that you tried to downplay being included.

RauLeCreuset869d ago (Edited 869d ago )

"And yes, FF7 is an expensive game, but it's also a balancing act - other months we get weak/cheap titles like the glorified Godfall demo..."

Sir, we already did the math on the cost of PS+ (without taking into account discounts) versus prices FF7R is still selling for today (including discounted prices) and the prices of the 20 games released exclusively for PS5 subscribers (which I lowballed at $5 each for sake of argument). Again, vanilla FF7R for PS4 (Today!) is retailing for 42% of the cost of a full priced 12 month PS+ sub, equal to the cost of a full priced 3 month sub, and 2.5x the cost of a full priced 1 month sub. What are you even talking about "FF7 is an expensive game, but...." There is no "but." Stop searching for a reason to downplay a great get for PS+.

It's funny how you're quick to downplay perhaps the best PS+ release this year while mentioning perhaps the worst to downplay the overall quality of PS+ offerings. I agree that Godfall edition with less content is whack. It's not the full game. It's a ploy to grow the base for a disappointing game and doing it the cheap way by releasing a version with significant content cut. That's different than even the Drive Club PSVR release. That was at least planned to launch around the same time as the full game version and communicated upfront, not as an attempt to revive a dying game. I'd rather whatever was spent securing fragments of Godfall be spent getting something else. FF7R contains all of the content. Nothing was chopped out. That's a great get.

Edit:
@jznrpg

Same here. I'm good at that price for years and will catch re-ups in that range long before I have to worry about my next renewal. I was comparing the full price of PS+ to the cheapest discounted prices I found for unused and digital copies for sale to underscore how ridiculous Orchard's argument is. But you're right. Many of us obtained PS+ on a discount. How many signed up for 3 months to get a game that months later, on sale, still matches the cost of that sub? How many signed up just for that month to get a game that costs more than the sub?

Mr_Writer85869d ago

@orchad

"I've moved on from PS4"

So have I, but look at the early days of plus on PS4, mostly Indies, ATM it's not worth investing in the PS5 side as the player base is tiny in comparison to PS4.

I mean if you didn't have a PS5 and was stuck on PS4 you would still be upset if they started abandon you just because you weren't lucky enough to have a PS5.

Orchard869d ago (Edited 869d ago )

@Mr_Writer85 I agree they shouldn't abandon PS4 gamers, and I'm not suggesting they do. They should support PS5 and PS4 customers.

@RauLeCreuset I've been clear from the start that I believe they should support PS5 properly with PS+. Not sure what's so hard for you to understand there - and I say we because I am likely not the only PS5 owner in the world :)

"You complain they aren't giving you the best, but you hand wave away them giving away them giving you "1st party exclusives & big hitters." It's almost like you're just looking for a gripe."

They are old games though, like I said, unless you're new to PS, you've played those games.

"Yet here you are arguing that early adopters are being screwed because the PS+ release didn't include an upgrade path"

And yet, I am not the only one, many people have criticized Sony for not including PS5 upgrades in PS+ releases. And Sony + Square obviously saw those complaints if they went back and corrected it.

Ultimately though, it comes down to not being a corporate shill. I believe large corporations/games companies should be giving us good value, not screwing us out of things that ultimately are pocket change for them (like free next-gen upgrades). Heck, they just dinged us with $70 standard edition games. I also don't believe we should be paying for online play or cloud saves in 2021.

If you're happy to continue the status quo and get screwed, that's on you - I am not.

RauLeCreuset869d ago

@Orchard
"I've been clear from the start that I believe they should support PS5 properly with PS+. Not sure what's so hard for you to understand there -"

Classic Orchard tactics. Rather than respond to the argument, you respond to a challenge that was never issued to give the impression it was. It's deflection. When did I argue that you switched up your position on PS5 support? Do you not understand your own arguments, or is it that you think you can do a hand wave and convince people you didn't say what you said? Let me help you.

What you are implying (Can't spell "implying" without "lying.") you were called out on:

"I've been clear from the start that I believe they should support PS5 properly with PS+."

What you were called out on:

"You didn't argue that PS+ has less personal value for you because you've 'moved on from PS4 (minus a few backlog games)' (whatever that means). You argued that you expect the PS5 upgrades to be included because 'we pay a lot' and that 'they just screw the early adopters.'"

You weren't called out for switching positions on supporting PS5 subscribers. You were called out for trying to retroactively switch up your rationalization for arguing we aren’t getting our money’s worth considering "we pay a lot for PS+."

"- and I say we because I am likely not the only PS5 owner in the world :)"

Confirmation I was correct in citing that to point out that "you weren't limiting your argument to yourself." Thank you.

"They are old games though, like I said, unless you're new to PS, you've played those games."

"Those games" total 20 games, my guy. Please provide me with anything beyond anecdotal evidence that comes within the ballpark of establishing your claim. 20 games. That's almost double estimates of the tie ratio ( https://gamedaily.biz/artic... and your argument doesn't consider people who may have played the game but no longer have it or people who bought a physical copy who may want to sell or trade it after getting a digital copy through PS+.

I keep all my games, and buy a lot of them. Still, there are 4 games on that list I haven’t owned or played. I'm favoring your argument by not counting games I own but haven't played. Let's continue the other favor I did your argument by capping the cost of each of those titles at $5. That's $20 right there. I've gone over the cost of FF7R, which, as I've also previously stated, released on PS+ alongside 3 additional games that month.

"And yet, I am not the only one, many people have criticized Sony for not including PS5 upgrades in PS+ releases."

How many of them rationalized that criticism by saying, "It’s simple - we pay a lot for PS+ and I expect the PS5 upgrades to be included," only to get tripped up trying to switch up their flawed rationalization, downplaying PS5 subscribers getting a collection of 20 titles they themselves described as "1st party exclusives & big hitters," while also trying to argue that PS5 subscribers are being screwed because of the lack of an upgrade path for the PS+ release of a heavy hitter, which wouldn't prevent any PS5 subscribers who already owned it from upgrading?

I think it's just you. But anyone else is free to engage the points in my reply to blackblades comment.

RauLeCreuset869d ago

"And Sony + Square obviously saw those complaints if they went back and corrected it."

Or someone decided there's more money to be made now by doing a sale on the DLC and gifting anyone still holding out on buying the game with the opportunity to buy the upgrade. It has been 9 months. They probably snickered to themselves imagining how they could maneuver the most dedicated hater trolls to frame them allowing people to buy their product as them listening and correcting something. It's probably similar to the way I snickered at you lecturing on not being a corporate shill while trying to align your rhetoric with more honest objections people have to paying to play online.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 869d ago
Chevalier869d ago

"I'm not a lawyer, just a developer, and while that does give me some understanding of cost and inner workings, it's irrelevant anyway. They should be throwing PS5 games at us now with PS+ and keep the PS4 version as a fallback for PS4 consumers. It's half baked because I am a PS+ subscriber on a PS5, I expect PS5 content. If I wanted PS4 content, I wouldn't have bought a PS5. It's that simple."

Honestly all you ever do is complain about your PS5 and talk about Gamepass. Why not just sell your PS5 already? It's clear you're miserable and probably not much of a gamer. Lol

But you're right what you think you know is absolutely irrelevant. You're 100% passing off your 'knowledge' as facts when they couldn't be further from the truth. You get one of the top selling games in under a year and now get the upgrade and you STILL complain. Your expectations of the service are absolutely unreasonable.

Time to move on. Should seriously sell your PS5 while it's hard to find still and be less miserable. You're a developer with a spiffy computer. Maybe just stick to Gamepass rentals and some Steam sale will improve your mental state.

Orchard869d ago (Edited 869d ago )

I do think GP is great, and I'd love for Sony to create something similar. Why is it a bad thing to want better services/subscriptions and better bang for our buck? It's not - we as consumers should always be pushing for more, not sitting back and being lax - that's how you end up with 100% price increases for XBL Gold and $70 games, ugh.

I don't only complain about PS5, I love my PS5s. I give credit where credit is due, and criticize where criticism is due.

"You're 100% passing off your 'knowledge' as facts when they couldn't be further from the truth"

I never stated anything as fact, my posts are my opinion. If you interpret it as facts, that is on you.

"Time to move on. Should seriously sell your PS5"

Nope. I like my setup, I have my PS for exclusives + 99% of 3rd party games, and then I have my PC for shooters and RTS (which are very few and far between nowadays anyway). I'm good, thanks for your concern though - I appreciate it.

2moda5gamer870d ago

I feel like this was maybe always going to happen down to the line. I paid for the full ps5 version day 1 - and I WANTED to - but this does still sting a little.

blackblades870d ago

At least 100% own it, I might still buy it one day

Eidolon869d ago

Yeah. But, that's just the price of playing games Day 1. You go in knowing it's going to drop in price sometimes within the first month. I don't think 100% owning vs having it digital would matter after you beat it or 100% complete it, but at least he can get $10-20 back. I only do it for certain games, probably not more than once a year. I like to wait for the patches and to finish up other games.

Show all comments (73)
80°

Final Fantasy VII Remake Trilogy vs Final Fantasy VII Original Story Comparison: Which Is Better?

Twisted Voxel: "We compare the story in the original Final Fantasy VII and the new Final Fantasy VII Remake trilogy."

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
80°

The creation of a real-life Final Fantasy VII Buster Sword

PlayStation Japan: “A great sword that has been passed down from generation to generation and carries the thoughts of those who fight.”

450°

Final Fantasy VII Remake Cutscenes Changed With New Patch, Comparison Inside

A new patch for Square Enix's action role-playing game, Final Fantasy VII Remake, has brought changes to certain cutscenes.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
Sgt_Slaughter70d ago

If you can't go without breasts in a cutscene, you need help

Rebel_Scum70d ago

Should’ve ended that sentence with either “you maggot” or “you puke” Sarge

Barlos70d ago

Well bloody hell, I guess I need committing then. Stick me in a padded cell

Eonjay69d ago

People need serious help if you 'need' to stare at a minors breasts. And some of you admitted that so at least we have acknowledgement. Can we not sexualize children? It shouldn't be considered progressive. I think the mass majority of people regardless of political view aren't into to kiddie boobs.

CrimsonWing6969d ago

look, man... why support censorship in any way? Forget the cleavage, it's the principle. Do you like owning the cable television edited version of a movie or do you want the original R-rated version?

I'd be just as irked by this if WB Games put out a patch that censored all the swearing and gore in an MK game. So, regardless of how you feel about boobs being covered up in the game, it's the principle of censorship that gets most people. I couldn't care less if she wore a sports bra from the beginning, what I hate is people covering my eyes and ears like I'm a 5-year old telling me, "This is too inappropriate for you."

So, yea, censorship is dumb as f*ck regardless of the content. Changing something that's already established that nobody made a big deal about, and nobody is getting their rocks off to (let's be real here), all because people get uncomfortable with boobs is dumb, plain and simple.

Like, give me a f*cking break here...

AdonisIsBeast69d ago (Edited 69d ago )

Yea, apparently you’re incapable of comprehending the point of the complaint. As another user mentioned, it’s principal. These are fictional characters in fictional worlds, it gives most people no pleasure see “the cleavage” as used in this example. The entire point is that we are all getting sick and tired of these fake and unnecessary DEI and ethics departments censoring media simply for the sake of it. Unless theres nudity, they should leave it alone.

Babadook769d ago (Edited 69d ago )

I prefer the before, but I won’t make a mountain out of a molehill. (No pun intended)

CobraKai69d ago

It’s about the needless censorship.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 69d ago
andy8570d ago

I mean she is portrayed as being 15 in the scene. I don't really consider it woke to cover up a child (begs questions why they did it in the first place though).

Rocketisleague69d ago

In the original nomura was going nuts with child panty references and such. Look it up

k2d69d ago

Devil's advocate here.. who's doing the objectification here though? How would progressives react if teenagers where asked to not show skin and cover up their feminine traits? No bare shoulders. No hair. No make-up etc.. 20-30 years ago the main stream tune was the complete opposite, and games where under attack from conservatives and we had to defend games from them. Now publishers are pre-emptively chastising and censoring to please left AND right, depending on which region of the world their trying to up ease.

dmonee68d ago

Alot of Japanese animation, cartoons, video games, are SuS, when it comes to sexual exploitation lol.

Gamingsince198169d ago

She's not anything , she's not a real person, she was never born, they could make her nude and no harm would be done to anything but the minds of people that can't tell real life from video games.

OMGitzThatGuy69d ago

Black rock is against sexualizing minors? Those demons!

AdonisIsBeast69d ago

Actually they’re FOR exploiting children and promoting puberty blockers and life altering hormone treatment for minors. Do your research

qalpha69d ago (Edited 69d ago )

BlackRock is apparently FOR sexualizing minors. They (along with Disney) were vehemently against the Florida parental rights bill (better known as the 'don't sexualize young elementary kids' bill).

banger8870d ago

"It’s unclear why Square Enix opted to make this change around 4 years after the game’s release."

Because some progressive, blue-haired freak started quivering uncontrollably and frothing at the mouth?

CrimsonWing6969d ago (Edited 69d ago )

What’s weird about it? Females wear low cut shirts all the time, do you bust a nut over it? No… well, I’d hope not.

This is a person who has breasts that wore a low cut shirt, the end. It’s not child porn and nobody in hear was fapping to it.

When you go to a mall and some 15 year old has cleavage showing do you run up and throw a bed sheet over her? I mean Geezus you see more with swimsuits…

Our culture is so weird. We have people championing women for doing OnlyFans as such a brave and empowering decision. I see celebrities barely wearing anything on the red carpet exposing their nipples and butt cheeks and everyone is gawking at how amazing the outfit is.

A freaking game has a fake character that in no way looks 15 and in no way is oversexualized, but had a shirt with cleavage in what, a 30 second scene, and suddenly that’s where we draw the line… like what world am I living in?

andy8569d ago

Just personally find it weird. But what is actually weird is the people who are complaining about it. If she was 12 is that suddenly not OK. 10? There's a reason stuff like that isn't shown in media on children. You'll obviously see it in real life but doesn't mean it's right.

gold_drake70d ago

yes and to make it more in line with Rebirth. shes wearing a black undershirt in that game. consistency.

the japanese definetly didnt care if she has one on or not ha.

Barlos70d ago

Sweet Baby Inc is probably the reason

I_am_Batman70d ago (Edited 70d ago )

Seems much more likely that the team simply wanted to prevent perverts from zooming in on the cleavage of a 15-year-old in photo mode. I'm pretty sure the Nibelheim flashbacks in Remake were only a couple seconds with a fixed cutscene camera, so that wasn't much of an issue until Rebirth where this character model is obviously used a lot more.

Maybe you guys should hold your horses until you've played the game and stop jumping to conclusions. I've already got spoiled about a scene that happens later on in the game and it certainly didn't fit your hypothesis of Square bending the knee to oversensitive "progressives" with an allergiy to attractive females.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 69d ago
franwex70d ago

They wanted to have consistency with the new character model. That basically it.

Why not make the new character model resemble the design of 4 years ago though?

gold_drake70d ago

while i want my games, especially the ff games with alot of lore, to be as accurate in their translation as possible, the english localisation took huge liberties in the first place.

the japanese and german for example are in line with one another. english is not. but yea. its a silly change, the steel sky was a great thing when she said it, but apperantly the original english lip movement was more in line with "i dont like it" than with "the steel sky, i miss it"

Show all comments (47)