TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
But it's nothing like the Tomb Raider FFS,it's the same deal as Titan Fall, Dead Rising 3
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Angry Joe Street Fight V Rant
- Thread starter Jigorath
- Start date
- Status
njean777
Member
If the game wouldn't have been made, and Sony came in a funded it to be made, then it isn't the same situation... how hard is that to grasp?
There was no street fighter between 1999 and 2008, almost a HL3 sort of wait. Capcom is in pretty dire straights as well and is choosing project cautiously without much thought to fanfare and nostalgia.
Capcom seems to be aggressively partnering (DR3, PR engine, Deep Down, SFV) to keep themselves going these days. That's not really much different than the Bayo situation. Capcom has decided they can;t burden the risk and is spreading it out to MSONY if they'd like to keep certain titles going that do align with all their interests.
And in this case, for gamers, quicker might be better. Capcom might not be around too much longer in the AAA sphere if they can't get a pulse on gamers outside the shrinking Japanese market. Last gens push to westernize while outsource titles to cheap production nations failed horribly.
alexandros
Banned
That isn't at all hard to grasp. What is really hard to grasp is how some people choose to believe that Street Fighter V wouldn't have been made without Sony's involvement.
a.k.a. i didn't even watch the video but i'm gonna post an edgy comment just for the hell of it
Zombie James
Banned
Bayonetta 2 and Tomb Raider are two different kinds of exclusivity deals. One is funding a game that wouldn't otherwise get made and the other is paying off the publisher to prevent the majority of people from playing their game. Street Fighter V is clearly the former and not the latter. I don't understand how people can't see the obvious difference between these situations.
Ono also said publicly that Super would be the last version of SF4 and they made three more. So what? What is he going to say? "Yeah, don't buy Ultra SF4, we're already making SF5". Of course he's going to deny any upcoming game to make you buy the one which is releasing now. He also said no to bring Ultra SF4 to next gen, and look at USF4 PS4 exclusive.
SF4 across all versions sold almost 9 million copies. With SF5 they could do the same, so no, it's not like Bayo 2.
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
Exactly. Of course sf 5 would have been made without Sony. That's painfully obvious.
nobodyshero
Banned
It IS different, because Tomb Raider WILL come out on PS4. Even MS have admitted that it's a timed deal. Why are people ignoring this?
You do realize there was a NINE year gap between SFIII3S and SF4, right? You also realize Capcom might not be around in 9 years if they can't do something more than rely on yearly Resident Evil and Monster Hunter releases.
They're actually heavily funding and pushing away from AAA releases to try to capitalize on their home turf that has almost exclusively adopted mobile. And its not an easy or for sure thing for them to do.
The same deas as Titan Fall where not even Respawn knew it was going to be exclusive?
https://twitter.com/VinceZampella/status/395325209521029120
MS paid to get Titanfall exclusive, and Sony has paid to get SFV exclusive. It's like some of you don't want to believe that Sony also does moneyhats.
gundamkyoukai
Member
How did it get painfully obvious when it took 10 years( who know if capcom still going to be around in the same way ) to get a new SF when it was cheaper to make and capcom was in much better health .
I can say the same for people who think capcom would rather spend there money on SF instead of a new MH, RE or mobile games.
For Capcom it is a simple ROI choice and SF is not high up on the ladder .
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
Why make new ones, when you can sell the old ones?
PS2:
2000 - Street Fighter EX3
2003 - Hyper Street Fighter II: The Anniversary Edition
2004 - Street Fighter Anniversary Collection
2004 - Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike
2005 - Slotter Up Core 7: Dekitou da! Street Fighter II
2006 - Street Fighter Alpha Anthology
Wii:
2006 - Street Fighter 2: World Warrior
2007 - Street Fighter 2 Turbo: Hyper Fighting
2008 - Street Fighter 2: New Challengers
2008 - Street Fighter 2: Special Champion Edition
2009 - Street Fighter Alpha 2
2012 - Super Street Fighter 2: New Challengers
Excuse me in case one of those actually contains new content. I'm not a Street Fighter expert.
That was 6 years ago.
SFxT was a dud and this year's USF4 didn't sell that well.
Wait... was ROTR's development part-funded by MS?
gundamkyoukai
Member
With each version selling and less and there other fighting games not selling well either .
Or maybe for Capcom there rather spend that money on a new MH where they can reuse the assets (since for SF they have to start over ) and making it much cheaper while also selling more.
Because after a while the update don't sell as much .
It's not the big of a difference, if those money will help the company develop games.
The point of contention is: would that game have been made without the exclusivity deal?
Capcom did not stop making fighting games after 3rd Strike released. Stop ignoring them to try and make a point that doesn't exist.
SFV definitely would've come out at some point but we're probably talking years from now considering Capcom's situation plus the same management being there that didn't want to make SFIV. Sony stepping in means SFV comes out in two~ years instead of 4~+ years and that's if Capcom lasts that long as an independent studio.
It always amuses when people call third party exclusives anti-consumer but are ok with any other "type" of exclusive. Does it really make a difference if SCE's logo is on the box?
If something like SFV is anti-consumer, than so is Halo. So is Uncharted. So is Mario. Can't have it both ways.
If something like SFV is anti-consumer, than so is Halo. So is Uncharted. So is Mario. Can't have it both ways.
RotTR was well into development a year before MS announced any type of exclusivity. I'm gonna venture to say no.
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
You mean each revision of SF4 selling less? Well that makes sense. A new version is going to attract the most interest.
I suspect the SF and MH teams are different.
Pocky4Th3Win
Member
People keep forgetting this. Capcom is not the same company they use to be. They gambled a lot and none of their games were huge success that probably made them break even. Resident Evil 6, Ultra SF and even Dead Rising 3 did not do too well for them that they can have many major games in development.
They just don't have the capital to put out a large lineup per year anymore and they need a way to fund development of the games to bring capital in. Remember they aren't like Sony where they can get a loan easily based on their assets due to lack of trust in their IP as of late (Resident Evil doesn't have the cash name it use to).
I honestly wouldn't be surprised to hear about Capcom being bought out sometime this generation.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
This was talked about for a while back some time ago, people were all pegging Nintendo to do it or someone completely other than First Party.
I can't imagine the meltdown if they announced next year that Capcom is getting in bed with Sony all the way =p
Wasn't ROTR already being made before the MS deal came about?
As for SF5, Capcom's previous tone was that Ono couldn't get approval to start development, or at best a 2018 backlog.
I threw a fit about TR because, from reports, it was already getting made and was far into development when MS came in and bought it for X amount of time. I understood people being pissed about Titanfall when it was supposed to come out after X amount of time to PS family, which is understandable since MS helped funding, but then MS went to EA and just bought full exclusivity. I understand people NOT throwing a fit with SFV because, from all indications, the game would not be getting made for YEARS and now, because of Sony, it's being worked on now.
Zombie James
Banned
Again, SFV and Tomb Raider/Titanfall are very different kinds of exclusivity deals.
gundamkyoukai
Member
They have different teams( which can be move around so that don't matter really ) but the money and resources still has to come from capcom .
For capcom management it's easy choice for them to make with how bad the company doing .
Pocky4Th3Win
Member
Sony does have the asssets to put against a loan to buy it. Hell Sony did say they are doubling down on the gaming division since its the most profitable.
I don't see how Titanfall is any different since people seem keen on pointing out capcom's financial situation. I'd also argue TR's situation is far better, at least it's going to PS4/PC.
If we take previous comments to heart, we would probably be looking at a SFV in 2018, or a f2p version like Soul Calibur, there's a level of uncertainty that we'd even be looking at a SFV trailer today if Sony hadn't stepped in.
Pocky4Th3Win
Member
Titanfall was funded and published by EA not MS. MS had no hand in its development other than giving money to the publisher for its exclusiveness. Do people forget about EA in regards to Titanfall? It was not a MS game...
When a game is actually exclusive to a console like this, I'm fine with it. Good way to get people to buy your console beyond just first party offerings.
It's DLC being platform-exclusive that I dislike.
In regards to Joe's rant...he starts out by saying "This is Capcom. If you're an Xbox One owner, FUCK YOU. We don't want your money." OK...where was your rant about Dead Rising 3 being Xbox One exclusive?
It's DLC being platform-exclusive that I dislike.
In regards to Joe's rant...he starts out by saying "This is Capcom. If you're an Xbox One owner, FUCK YOU. We don't want your money." OK...where was your rant about Dead Rising 3 being Xbox One exclusive?
PopcornMegaphone
Banned
Totally different. We should applaud Sony for funding these low selling troubled indie games that wouldn't have been financed otherwise.
Right guys? That's the narrative?
binarymelon
Member
They're really not. They're low risk money hats preying on financially unstable devs/publishers to artificially prop up your platform.
Once 12 months is up it doesn't make sense for capcom to keep it exclusive.
The difference is Titanfall had a timed exclusivity of X months (13 I believe) to MS family thanks to them helping fund it and then AFTER that MS went to EA and bought it for full time exclusivity with Respawn unable to say or do anything about it.
The TR situation was the game was well into development and MS paid money to keep it off other platforms for X amount of time. That was a game already being made that wasn't in any trouble or dev hell (no reports of such from anyone or anything and even one of the Gaf insiders saying MS just swooped in and bought exclusivity).
SFV wasn't getting worked on since Capcom wouldn't give Ono the budget/resources at the moment and Sony stepped in to give them the budget/resources to make it.
Would you guys prefer having the game come out in 2018, with tons of F2P, Microtransaction shit for characters, etc.?
Keep thinking that Capcom's rich, guys. LOL
Exactly.
Wasn't Titanfall funded by EA? MS just paid EA for console exclusivity.
edit: oops looks like ROTR was also part-funded by MS
IIRC last year it was found that Capcom had started development on a 'next-gen fighting game'. Unless you're implying that this deal happened at that time.
Can you give me an article or something? I only have Ono saying, early last year, that he couldn't get the budget/staff to make SFV. Then, later last year, another producer said game development takes quite a while and, jokingly, we may see SFV in 2018 at this point.
Edit: I'm only seeing "Next Gen fighting game" stuff from this year.
Unless I've read lies this whole time. MS did more than simply buy the game outright. If you have a source to indidicate that Titanfall as developed with 0 funding from Microsoft, would clear a lot up in regards to your argument.
Its entirely possible.
I think we can agree that re-releases and quick remasters are relatively cheap, painless, and profitable endeavors that don't require nearly the time or investment creating a new installment in a long running IP does. Capcom is king of milking old content and franchises, they've been doing it since 98. Hell they're doing it again with REmake REmaster; A Remaster of a remake that had a directors cut of the original game.
The point is new AAA games take loads of resources. Looking at list of fans wants and what Capcom repeatedly offers, its not hard to conclude they're being very careful of what gets green-lit and what doesn't.
FFS, they are partnering closely with Sony to help them developed their next gen engine. Capcom isn't really in a position of strength right now, and I highly doubt fighters are high on their list of priorities.
With the financial information of the company on the table, their stated priority of moving more towards mobile, their release games the last 18 months, and the already long list of current gen partnering and outside funding of legacy AAA IP's; I'm not sure why it's so unbelievable.
- Status