Capcom switching their games from "one time purchase" model to "continuous recurring revenue" model

#1
Crapcom said:
3. Growth Strategy Aimed at Increasing the User Base of Each IP Medium-term Long-term As the founder of Capcom, I think it is important to create a structure for passing the business on to the next-generation. As with any structure, building the foundation is the most challenging part, but efforts launched five years ago are finally starting to take shape. To establish solid growth strategies and further enhance corporate value, there are two risks that are critical to address; first, I will talk about the stable growth mechanism (control of earnings volatility risks).
To mitigate earnings volatility risks over the medium-to-long term, measures enabling sustainable growth must include (1) transforming the foundation of our Consumer business model from a traditional one-time sale “transactional model” to a continuous “recurring revenue model” and (2) creating a business portfolio and diversifying earnings risks by thoroughly leveraging Capcom’s basic strategy, Single Content Multiple Usage.
Source: http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/data/pdf/annual/2018/annual_2018_01.pdf

YIKES I really hope the fu7ur3 isn't the smartphone model
 
#6
I can understand this from a business point of view. I mean, EA make around 800 million with one game alone (FIFA) by applying a "continuous recurring revenue model". But as someone who only has bought 3 DLCs in his life and does own 90% of his games in physical form, I sincerely hope that Capcom's games don't become balanced towards this... Otherwise, I will wait for some "complete edition" or something or not play Capcom games at all, I guess.

That being said, if it takes shit like this to get Mega Man Legends 3 to happen, then just do it...
 
#19
This is no different than every other publisher. They're all having these same conversations with shareholders.

Even Nintendo has started finding ways to continue to charge for their games after the initial purchase.
 
Last edited:
#20
YIKES is the correct response.

I saw glimmers of this with the season pass in MvC Infinite (where it was built for the idea of a steady flow of characters and stages, but I think the licensing hurdles threw too many wrenches into those infernal gears).

Oh well. It was a good game, so was MHW, so was SF5 (eventually), and I've heard RE7 was also good. Maybe if we're lucky we can get some more remasters of their old arcade titles and maybe a Darkstalkers 4 before they fully commit to this nonsense.
 
#22
Well I personally welcome Capcom into my "wait for the complete edition and never pay more than $30 for it" tier.

But don't worry it won't get lonely there since EA, Ubisoft and WB games have been there for a while
 
#26
I truly don't get this statements. Its not like they can just remove features of a game and b00m, sell that.
Like the monetization of Resi 7. You can buy a coin that makes you more powerful, a coin that makes you tougher and a coin that makes both. Who the fuck thunk of that?!?! its the most stupid thing I've seen in a singleplayer game. I would love to have data of that, how many people got it. Its just so dumb.
I don't trust capcom on this regard.
 
#27
My ERA post:

SFV does this the RIGHT way. The ONLY purchases that are not cosmetic in SFV are the DLC characters, which by the way most fighting games nowadays will charge you for DLC characters. Welcome to 2018. Every other update in SFV is free. Anyone who purchased the base SFV back in 2016 is enjoying the Arcade Edition package and can play online with someone who just bought the "Arcade Edition" package yesterday. This is much better than segmenting the player pool by releasing "Super Hyper Turbo Alpha" updates where some people will buy the update, and some will not, thus chopping the players in half.

Like it or not, the Street Fighter V model is a thing a beauty (much like the game), and it is here to stay because it makes sense. Arc System Works could have learned from this before they chopped up the Guilty Gear Xrd pie three different ways with -Sign-/-Revelator-/Rev 2. That's bush league thinking these days. Maybe Street Fighter could withstand that because its Street Fighter but a niche title like Guilty Gear slowly kills off its already small userbase.

Learn from CapGOD.

(I'm speaking specifically for Street Fighter and fighting games. Don't know and don't really care how this plays in to their other titles)
 
#30
Source: http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/data/pdf/annual/2018/annual_2018_01.pdf

YIKES I really hope the fu7ur3 isn't the smartphone model
I keep bumping into this persistent problematic view where the best of intentions run contrary to personal freedom and personal responsibility.

Let the market do its thing.

If this is what people want from Capcom, the new model will succeed. And if this is what people do want, what arguments do you have that might persuade them that what they want isn't what they should want but rather what you have in mind? And would that be just your opinion, or would it be something more substantial, say, objective? Because if it's just a matter of opinion, you have yours, they have theirs, and, by all means, to each his own.

And if this isn't what people want, if competition has elucidated them that there are better models out there, models offering more value per buck, then in the long run this new paradigm will have crashed and burned and the lesson will resound though the ages like no annoyed insular post would ever manage to.
 
Last edited:
#33
I really hope capcom doesn’t embrace this new direction in their games because I think it could violently backfire on them in the long term when it seems they are gaining some ground again. They can try it with a few games, but if all of their games implement these tactics, then I feel it might be detrimental to some of their franchises.

Something like sf5 or marvel could work, maybe but I don’t want to see that for resident evil or mega man. People could be much more selective or wait on the inevitable complete edition later also.
 
#37
Everytime I read something like this, I´m more and more inclined to go full retro. The majority of the gaming biz seems to go in a direction that´s not suited for me. This generation has been really good, with some spectacular games to boot, but the warning signs are all there to what´s in store for the future. And those signs are nothing but trouble.
There won't ever be a better time. This generation will probably be my last since my current + retro collection will be over 1,000 titles by the time PS5 and X2 come out.
 
#38
They've already been doing this for a long time. Could mean every game needs a special edition just like the majority of their games have. Also not buying DMC5, the most relatively feature-complete game they will probably release in the next five years upon launch, will only motivate them to put out more games like MHW and mobile games, and less single-player focused games with a beginning and end. Mostly the same could be said for RE2, but I expect that to have more DLC than DMC5.
 
Last edited:
#39
This seems like an unusual turn after the success of Monster Hunter World, now the best selling title in Capcom history, which was a single-purchase game that had tons of free updates and events. I hoped MH World would show Capcom that there is value left in just putting out a great product at $60.