Konami's Pachinko Hate: Why?

FPLOON

Your #1 Source for the Dino Porn
Jul 10, 2013
12,531
0
0
Well, for one thing, I can't play them! Da Fuc, Komani?

Second off, I got nothing... My general indifference can't get any more indifferent otherwise it would be considered indifference from another dimension...

Other than that, third off, I really want to hit the lever... Is that so much to ask?
 

NiPah

New member
May 8, 2009
1,084
0
0
Something Amyss said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
That's not it.
Seems to be exactly it. Hence complaints that Konami's machines are a "slap to the face," etc. Complaints that predate the Silent Hills cancellation, even.
Doesn't that argument work against anyone complaining?
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Gamers are kind of entitled to those series since a lot of gamers bought their games and are therefor a reason why MGS/Silent Hill became such successful series. Just to exclude those people for no good reason at all is kind of a slap to the face. That's just my opinion though.
So you said "that's not it," but your counter argument is that same false sense of entitlement I was referencing. You are not owed video games and you have no right to dictate what direction a company takes. Sorry that you feel excluded, but...it's not because you are entitled to the game.
 

List

New member
Sep 29, 2013
104
0
0
I would be ok if konami just did it on the side like the others mentioned. But Konami in all intents and purposes stopped making games and are just 100% panchinko machine makers now.

Yes, it's their IP and they can do what they want with it. But that doesn't mean it doesn't hurt when you know they have no more intention to make games EVER because pachinko makes them tons, as in TONS more money. Those are perfectly good IPs that they killed.

#Fuckonami
 

Mcgeezaks

The biggest boss
May 25, 2020
864
0
0
Sweden
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Something Amyss said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Gamers are kind of entitled to those series since a lot of gamers bought their games and are therefor a reason why MGS/Silent Hill became such successful series. Just to exclude those people for no good reason at all is kind of a slap to the face. That's just my opinion though.
So you said "that's not it," but your counter argument is that same false sense of entitlement I was referencing. You are not owed video games and you have no right to dictate what direction a company takes. Sorry that you feel excluded, but...it's not because you are entitled to the game.
Poorly worded by me. That's not why so many are pissed but I do understand why someone would feel entitled and that was my explanation and I can understand why someone would feel that way, sorry that you don't. Calm your tits, no one is trying to dictate anyone, people have the right to have an opinion and if someones opinion is that Konami are a bunch of assholes for saying ''Fuck you and your favorite games'' then it's fully understandable and that's why most people are mad. Not because of a sense of entitlement.

Then they tease an amazing scene from your favorite game and goes ''loljk it's just for pachinko'' which is kind of a slap to the face. They've shown they care more about pachinkos than the games millions of people love.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
Something Amyss said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Gamers are kind of entitled to those series since a lot of gamers bought their games and are therefor a reason why MGS/Silent Hill became such successful series. Just to exclude those people for no good reason at all is kind of a slap to the face. That's just my opinion though.
So you said "that's not it," but your counter argument is that same false sense of entitlement I was referencing. You are not owed video games and you have no right to dictate what direction a company takes. Sorry that you feel excluded, but...it's not because you are entitled to the game.
Doesn't mean we have no right to "hate them", though. Yes, we can't dictate the direction of a company, but it doesn't mean we have to gleefully like it, or even accept it.

If Konami wants to left many of their most passionate employees (Kojima, Igarashi, Toyama, Ito, etc) and their fans behind in pursuit of that sweet gambling money, they can't do that; but I don't think they can cry foul when those people are unhappy.
 

Dragonbums

Indulge in it's whiffy sensation
May 9, 2013
3,307
0
0
First comment basically beat me to it but I'm gonna say it anyway.

Nobody particularly cares that Konami is making Pachinko machines and are using their videogame IP's to advertise them.

What people are mad about is that in their process towards moving out of videogames they have deliberately shat on every good will from their fans, the media and even their own gaming development teams.
They cancelled and snubbed games for no good reason but for cash grabs, they treated even their most senior and valuable employees like Kojima like sub human trash (and they blew it with the media when he won an award and was even planning on going but Konami literally barred him from going. Denying him from getting his trophy with the team that helped him.), and their regular employees are spied and discarded like wasted scraps.

It's understandable that a company may want to move to more profitable ventures. But it's absolutely stupid to burn any and all good will in your previous business ventures should you ever want to go back to it if the new ones failed.
 

RedRockRun

sneaky sneaky
Jul 23, 2009
618
0
0
Because it's a complete waste for IP like Metal Gear to only be used for a glorified slot machine. Slot machines don't need cutscenes and story lines. I think it's fair to say that there will no longer be another MGS game; Konami will continue to use the Metal Gear name for brand recognition, and thus Kojima will never have the opportunity to buy it back.
 

Cowabungaa

New member
Feb 10, 2008
10,806
0
0
Something Amyss said:
Because certain people feel entitled to video games, even though they are owed nothing by Konami.
So people can't care about something without being "entitled"? The fact that Konami doesn't owe gamers nothing is absolutely irrelevant. Equally, gamers don't owe it to Konami either to like them or be okay with them. Owing stuff doesn't at all come into play. You can only say that if, say, a gamer would sue Konami to demand them to release a good new Silent Hill game or something. But simply saying "Fuck Konima" because they shit all over a franchise you care about? That has nothing to do with someone owing someone something or someone being entitled. "Rights" have nothing to do with anything here.

And for the record, it's through gamers that Konami even has these franchises to now exploit. Gamers made these franchises big through supporting them with purchases and fandom. Not to mention creators like Kojima who guided these franchises for them who Konami does definitely owe something to. And look how they are treated. If anything that's what pisses off most fans the most.
 

FillerDmon

New member
Jun 6, 2014
329
0
0
Throw another one onto the "It's not that they're doing Pachinko; it's that they're deciding to kill other perfectly good gaming products for no good reason -while- focusing on Pachinko". You believe me if Nintendo flushed the next generation of Pokemon or Mario down the drain while investing energy in Nintendo Pin-ball, the fanboys (myself included) would be so butthurt the salt would dry up the Pacific Ocean and we'd be able to march to Japan and punch Kimishima in his face for it.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
7,282
2,869
118
Country
United Kingdom
Something Amyss said:
So you said "that's not it," but your counter argument is that same false sense of entitlement I was referencing. You are not owed video games and you have no right to dictate what direction a company takes. Sorry that you feel excluded, but...it's not because you are entitled to the game.
Well, aye, but it's perfectly valid to criticise the artistic direction a company takes. Criticism does not necessarily imply a sense of entitlement to output.

We all criticise art we like and don't like. It's a big part of why most of us are here, presumably.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,747
227
68
As stated the general problem is not the Pachinko machines existing, its that they have effectively ended the various beloved franchises as video games proper. Along with most of recent efforts being money grabs and shoddy products. Neither of these are entirely specific to Konami, but they've established themselves at something of a peak. Mega Man and Sonic take similar levels of flak on their own terms, but to the best of my knowledge (which admittedly, isn't a vast case for Japanese pachinko machines) don't have alternate properties being released while the main series flails or stays dormant.


My own personal variation is franchises suddenly abandoning ship to go into generic MMO cash grabs. Which seems to be a rising trend (Warcraft, Elder Scrolls, Star Wars, Neverwinter Nights, and Dragons Dogma, off the top of my head)
 

Drathnoxis

Artificial Person
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,114
881
118
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
I played a Dungeons and Dragons slot machine by Konami a little while ago and it was actually really bad. It was utterly generic in every way, and didn't have anything that evoked Dungeons and Dragons specifically. There was a lame dude in armor, a dragon, and some unrecognizable objects, all presented without any style. The musical cues were really weak too and just had a little doot doot doodly doo melody that was public domain for sure when Dungeons and Dragons is crying for something sweeping and adventurous.
[sub][sub][sub]It didn't pay good either.[/sub][/sub][/sub]

So if their slot machines are anything to judge by, their pachinko machines must be pretty lame too.
 

gyrobot_v1legacy

New member
Apr 30, 2009
768
0
0
Well if they are still making mad dosh without us hen its a win fot Konami since they are no longer dependent on an EXTREMELY fickle fandom who flies off into a rage over anything. Its not like Famitsu has smeared them ad called them monsters
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Something Amyss said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Gamers are kind of entitled to those series since a lot of gamers bought their games and are therefor a reason why MGS/Silent Hill became such successful series. Just to exclude those people for no good reason at all is kind of a slap to the face. That's just my opinion though.
So you said "that's not it," but your counter argument is that same false sense of entitlement I was referencing. You are not owed video games and you have no right to dictate what direction a company takes. Sorry that you feel excluded, but...it's not because you are entitled to the game.
Doesn't make what Konami did any less of an infuriating dick move. I'm not entitled to get a ride home from work with my brother, doesn't make it any less of a dick move when he leaves without me.
 

Hair Jordan

New member
Mar 25, 2016
28
0
0
Something Amyss said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
That's not it.
Seems to be exactly it. Hence complaints that Konami's machines are a "slap to the face," etc. Complaints that predate the Silent Hills cancellation, even.
The "entitlement" you describe is a fundamental tenant of market principles. Consumers will rightfully feel entitled to be offered quality products, that suit them, at a reasonable price. When those expectations are not met, you can expect some form of "market discipline". This takes a few basic forms, but it all boils down to potential loss of current and/or future sales.

A bad reputation is one of the possible forms of discipline you can expect from failing to meet your consumer's expectations. Bad reputations are dangerous, because they not only cost you sales from current consumers, they may also dissuade potential customers, as well, through word of mouth. People will no longer trust your brand, and may actively avoid it.

In short - the activity you're criticizing is a vital part of a functioning economy, if we actually want anything resembling a free market. I would counter that it's your apparent allergy to criticism that needs to be justified, not the opinions of customers. But sure...go ahead and wag your finger at people, under the presumed, self-justifying authority you possess, which enables you to distinguish the valid from invalid concerns of consumers.
 

Hazy

New member
Jun 29, 2008
7,423
0
0
Dizchu said:
People don't hate the pachinko machines, the pachinko machines are merely a symbol of the absolute incompetence of Konami over the last few years. The icing on the cake, the salt in the wound. It's an arrogant taunt by a company that thinks they can do no wrong.
This. After all the transgressions they've committed against people who enjoyed their games for years, including screwing over one of the most innovative minds in the industry, what happens? Do they default like many wish they would -- a sweet resolution to a bumpy history?

Nope! They come out with a plethora of Pachinko machines and turn a profit! That's why so many people hate Konami, because each new machine they come out with is them sticking their asses out the window to give us a big ol' pale moon.
 

aozgolo

New member
Mar 15, 2011
1,033
0
0
I think what people hate is the marketing for them, I mean we've had spin-off arcade machines for years, it's nothing new.

It's when you hear about a new trailer or a bit of hot news related to something you are interested in... and it turns out to be less... SIGNIFICANTLY less than what you were hoping for.

It's kind of click-bait style grab-your-attention gimmicks, I'm not sure if Konami itself is directly responsible but all those advertising it are.

"Hey there's an exciting new game coming in a franchise you love"

"PS: It's a pachinko game"



In other news, Konami to unveil new entry in the Suikoden game series (it's gonna be a kart racer)
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Then they tease an amazing scene from your favorite game and goes ''loljk it's just for pachinko'' which is kind of a slap to the face. They've shown they care more about pachinkos than the games millions of people love.
If this is the response they can expect, then I see no reason why they should do otherwise. In fact, with the way their fans have reacted in the past, it's probably an actual catalyst to leaving video games.

hermes said:
Doesn't mean we have no right to "hate them", though.
You have the right to hate anyone for any reason. You can hate Doctor Phil because the Space Ponies beat the lizard people at Quidditch. Doesn't mean it's logical, worthwhile, or not based on a false sense of entitlement.

Cowabungaa said:
So people can't care about something without being "entitled"?
Please point to where I said that. Like, I want a specific quote where I say that.

Kibeth41 said:
It's not it.

The issue is that the IPs are literally being used purely for pachinko machines.
Which shouldn't be an issue if you don't feel entitled to these games. Don't like it? Don't play the pachinko games! That's been the basic argument for everything else in the industry.

Silvanus said:
We all criticise art we like and don't like. It's a big part of why most of us are here, presumably.
I find trying to make an artistic argument here to be rather disingenuous. This isn't about the art, but about the limitations on the commerce.

erttheking said:
Doesn't make what Konami did any less of an infuriating dick move.
Didn't say it did. So what?

A friend of mine just found out she no longer has a bus route that services places she needs to go. She's upset, but she's handling it like an adult. She's contacting the powers that be, talking to them in an adult fashion, and trying to resolve this in a civil fashion. She hasn't threatened to kill the planning board or...well, so much as raised her voice to my knowledge. She's not owed anything, she wants something, and somehow, her actions seem to demonstrate that more than whatever hashtag people are floating around right now.

Then again, this is over a necessity, not a toy, and therefore she has incentive to do more than grandstanding. Maybe that's the difference.

Now, maybe you're different, but I haven't reacted to a "dick move" by my brother on anything approaching this level since I was like eight years old. I don't think you're different, though. I've seen you respond to other outrages in the same fashion I have: with embarrassment. Because this sort of conduct is embarrassing.

Hair Jordan said:
The "entitlement" you describe is a fundamental tenant of market principles.
As long as the market is gaming.

Really, you don't see this sort of behaviour on this scale outside a very specific niche of consumer products. If something were that fundamental to market principles, one would expect to see them more widely distributed. That doesn't happen. The "entitlement" I describe is histrionics and theatrics. Nobody threatens death over a washing machine or stove not being released. Well, I'm sure someone does, but it doesn't end up widespread enough to end up on the news or trending on Twitter. You don't even see this level inside similar entertainment genre enthusiast groups.