Topic: Looks like Capcom still hates money.

[SixthAngel]

Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
Capcom doesnt have a reason to change anything about SF it was perfect when it was made and it continues to be the staple for fighting games. ALL fighting games are built off what SF did. Thats a weak weak weak argument. All Mario games are bsaically the same just new levels and new pwerups too, that doesnt make them any less special or magical.

Mega Man X and regualr MM series ahd plenty if similarities and plenty of differences to distinguish the two. They arent all the same game with new levels. They add a lot each game they imrpove alot, the increase the challenge they make new bosses they doa lot to maek the games bigger and better, at the same time they have to stay within the formula to an extent otherwise its a whole different series.

Zelda is basically the same game everytime, it gets bigger and better and more impressive but its basically they same game every time you play it. The story changes just enough but its not something anyone can deny, especially when people have complained about it. Not that I do  I LOVE Zelda as much as Mega Man, but I wont put down one over the other for not changing enough when they both are quit guily.

Sometimes a game is great enough all you have to change is the bg and powerups to keep people playinh. SOmetimes you dont have to change anything just add more story.

So what if Re plays all the same? whats the point? Its a fun game for people who like it, it sells really well and it has plenty of squels and has two prettyg ood movies based on it as well.

I agree with a lot of what you said segagamer and I would like to add about the sequels to games.  The reason Nintendo sequels tend to be special is that there are not nearly as many released.  Zelda games are maybe 2 a generation tops and the same usually goes for Mario and the other big franchises such as Metroid.  

Megaman and more recently GTA seem to have lost a lot of their specialness, at least to me, because they released so many games in such a short time.  There were basically 5 GTAs released this generation if you include the psp games that made it to the ps2.  When the older games are fresh in your head and the the second sequel is released with the usual tweeks and basically the same graphics it gets old.  Nintendo games have had not just improvements per generation but the change to 3d that has kept them fresh.  There have only been 4 3d Zelda games spreading over the n64 to the end of the gc.  Megaman released that many on just the nes, GTA more on just the PS2.  Releasing too many sequels really keeps me from gettting excited for the next one because the old games still seem so fresh.

[Ceric]

I have to say on the X series the first 2 and maybe the third were good.  After that they deviated from the formula way to much.

[segagamer12]

true ceric, but they still added a lot to them. See the point was people bitch they dont do anything, when in fact they do more than anyone else. And to the guy who talked abotu sony and ms fans, yeah thats true too, but see thast why if you really care about 3rd aprty games you kinda have to own at least two systems, but its has always been that way.

Back in the 16 bit era you had plenty of great games by both 1st-3rd party devs on both systems so if you wanted ot enjoy everything you *had* to own them both. TG16 you could live without because the handful of decent games it did have either got ports, or werent good enough to justify the purchase.

Never in gaming histroy has one console had every game made by every dev and there never will be thats a fact of life. DMC4 makes sense on PS3 because its a very graphic intense game and really deserves to be on the highest end system, that may or may not warrent a purchase but still.

Heres something to consider, about the delayed porting. Even back in the 16 bit days and early 32 bit days, there were games that got ported to the low end systems just to make a quick buck, but the high dolalr sysetsm that diudnt have a chance in hell at winning still got some of the high end games.


Take this into consideration, Capcom released Super Street Fighter II for the 3DO! They did it because they wanted the ARCADE PERFECT tarnsaltion. They knew it wasnt going to save 3D0 from doom, but it *did* have a big impact and became one of, if not the best selling games on that platform, again proving my pont they like to take risks and its justfyable because they have vision and they do what is best to see that achieved and dont ever follow market leader. If they gave a crap about who was number one and who sold more systesm Saturn wouldnt have had more games than N64. Cacpom has always done its own thing. They even stated the *only* reason Saturn got all those games was to piss sony off so they could get 2d games on PSx.

I just dont get all the hate and I guess I never will. I can understand Nintendo fans hating Sega, but not capcom who has been Nitendos strongest supporters for as long as they have been around. Hey at elast they tried to make GC gamew work, you cant blame them for goiong multi plattorm with games that didnt have a strong chance to sell. People think RE4 announced for Ps2 canablisied GC sales? BS, they game came out way too late in GCs life to matter and nothing since then has sold at a high enoughr ate to be consdiered a hit ut sdie Nintendos own stuff.

[Mikintosh]

I probably overreached by including the Capcom of the 90s in my criticism, since I think they were pretty respectable then. Seriously, the dumping of all of their fighting franchises at the same time in the early 2000s was very disappointing, and showed that they'd rather drop a famous series that was starting to look passe rather then adapt it to a new generation and bring in new fans. It's like they half-assed Street Fighter EX (from what I heard) then never tried a 3D Street Fighter again, and it could've worked.

And the PS2 Resident Evil 4 did hurt the Cube version sales, and while that wasn't a huge hit for either company, it lost them a great opportunity to show that a mature game could sell well on a Nintendo system.

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: Mikintosh
It's like they half-assed Street Fighter EX (from what I heard) then never tried a 3D Street Fighter again, and it could've worked.

And the PS2 Resident Evil 4 did hurt the Cube version sales, and while that wasn't a huge hit for either company, it lost them a great opportunity to show that a mature game could sell well on a Nintendo system.

I'm surprised the EX series got up to 3 instalments (just like the original series as well as the Alpha series).  From what I've played, the original EX was crap, and the minor changes in the sequels never really made it close to appealing as the 2D games were.  Well, maybe, MAYBE they're better than the first Street Fighter, but not by much.  The 3D never felt right.

There have always been rumours that for the 20th anniversary of Street Fighter that Capcom would release a Street Fighter IV, in 3D done better.  It wouldn't be the EX series, but actually just Street Fighter IV.  No difference to me, really, III was so different from II in terms of characters.  I would really prefer a Street Fighter Alpha 4...  Anyway, it's just rumours.  Nothing more.

Mature games have been on Nintendo consoles, but people probably see it as the exception rather than an expected number as the rule.  Even though the PlayStations have more Bob the Builder and Barbie games, the PlayStation isn't seen as being for kids as much.  People in general are irrational and go with image and vibe.

[Ceric]

Personally, for me Pre-GameCube I liked Capcom for the most part.  After they pulled that junk with Exclusives, I stopped liking them.  For a smart person it only takes getting burned once to realize that fire is dangerous.  Same here.  Capcom has a long way to go before it will earn back my trust and benevolence.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12
Take this into consideration, Capcom released Super Street Fighter II for the 3DO! They did it because they wanted the ARCADE PERFECT tarnsaltion. They knew it wasnt going to save 3D0 from doom, but it *did* have a big impact and became one of, if not the best selling games on that platform,

Wow... Segagamer12... you should be given a medal for keeping track of 3D0 sales figures.... *awe*

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[segagamer12]

I dont knwo is that a compliment or an insult. I actualy compile all kinds of data on every game company ever made, and am currently adding a lot to my video game collectors guide, located of course on mysite. 3D) was the game systems that I wanted mroe than anythign as a kid.  

[KDR_11k]

After they pulled that junk with Exclusives, I stopped liking them.

Um, you hate companies for releasing games on more than one system? WTF? If they refused to release them on the GC I could understand but making them accessible to MORE people?

[segagamer12]

exactly why I dont get all the hate, as far as I am concerned Capcom is now, has always been and likely wil always be one of the best developers out there. Maybe scrapping 2d fighting games wasnt the smartest move but honestly 2d has been on the decline and if you cant accept that then just keep buying the compilations because the 2d fighters will always be around for those.

I dont thing SF in 3d is a bad concept, but i havent tried it yet. Firtua Fighter set a pretty high standard for 3d fighting games and tekken and sc seam to be the only was who can mathc VF in qualtiy. not saying VF is now what it once was. but it still set the standard.

Even MK fans had to adjust to 3d, MK Gold was fine, DA seamed to take it to extremes, and Deception/Armageddon started to get back to the original formula but still not close enough. Its a fact of life things chance, we dont always like change but it is always necesarry.

 

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: segagamer12we dont always like change but it is always necesarry.

There's nothing necessary about dumping ALL 2D games, which are still functional and enjoyable games.  Nothing about having the capability to render polygons should say that sprites are finished.

[denjet78]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
After they pulled that junk with Exclusives, I stopped liking them.

Um, you hate companies for releasing games on more than one system? WTF? If they refused to release them on the GC I could understand but making them accessible to MORE people?

The whole Capcom 5 situation was incredibly idiotic. Capcom came out and made MASSIVE promises that they most likely knew they weren't going to keep. Out of all of them, only one remained exclusive. Would that have happened to Sony? HELL NO! Would that have happened to MS? Again, a resounding no. The point was the deal was huge for Nintendo, and then they backed out of it. Respect means nothing to them, and they obviously don't respect their customers either.

When the PS2 port of RE4 was announced a few short weeks before the "exclusive" game was set to debut on the GC that showed just how little respect they have for Nintendo gamers. They couldn't even wait until the game came out to announce a port that was almost a year away. And to top it all off, I don't remember hearing anything about any heads getting chopped off.

The timing of the announcement was most definitely bad business and almost certainly a dig at Nintendo on Sony's behalf. If you can't see that then you're obviously not paying attention. Besides, I have the right to hold these companies to whatever standard I want. I'm a customer and without me, they make no money. The whole purpose for their existence is to please me. They better get their act together soon though because they've got a long was to go.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: denjet78 Besides, I have the right to hold these companies to whatever standard I want. I'm a customer and without me, they make no money. The whole purpose for their existence is to please me. They better get their act together soon though because they've got a long was to go.

Well said.

In the end, I acknowledge that my expectations may be a bit much, but Nintendo generally doesn't have a hard time holding to some morals when it comes to loyalty and customer satisfaction so why can't 3rd parties?

[KDR_11k]

Capcom came out and made MASSIVE promises that they most likely knew they weren't going to keep.

Management doesn't care what employees promised, if they see money they'd sell their own grandmother. Lesson learned: Never believe a company that promises anything. I do seem to recall even Nintendo making promises they wouldn't keep (region free Wii, anyone?)

When the PS2 port of RE4 was announced a few short weeks before the "exclusive" game was set to debut on the GC that showed just how little respect they have for Nintendo gamers.

You mean Nintendo fanboys because a normal gamer doesn't care whether a game is exclusive.

Besides, I have the right to hold these companies to whatever standard I want. I'm a customer and without me, they make no money. The whole purpose for their existence is to please me. They better get their act together soon though because they've got a long was to go.

You're not the only customer in the world and I doubt exclusivity to please random fanboys is profitable.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k

When the PS2 port of RE4 was announced a few short weeks before the "exclusive" game was set to debut on the GC that showed just how little respect they have for Nintendo gamers.

You mean Nintendo fanboys because a normal gamer doesn't care whether a game is exclusive.

That is definately a load of crap, gamers do care about exclusivity whether it be on a Nintendo system, Sony or even a MS system. Exclusivity has always been a big thing for not only the console manufacturers but the customers as well (arguably it matter more to the manufacturer). Some of it is because of status of the gamer ::I'm so cool because I own PS2 with these EXCLUSIVE games::, others to justify their purchases. Not to say it is right or anything, but to box Nintendo fans as being the only ones is naive and quite insulting, I see it all the time for every system. Why do you think there are system wars still going on today if exclusivity didn't bother the average gamer?

Regardless I think was was trying to be said is that Capcom arguably screwed Nintendo over by announcing RE4 for the PS2 since that most likely had an impact on sales. This in turn potentially hurt Nintendo's image more amongst the gaming industry because of the lower sales, and further pigeon holing Nintendo owners as "kiddie". Granted it can't be proven, but Capcom announcing RE4 as multiplatform to a once exclusive game before it even came out may have had a snowball effect that is also hurting the Wii.

[segagamer12]

there absolutley is something necessary about staying competitive and keeping up with the times. just because we can watch movies on dvd doesnt mean we cant make movies for vhs right? thast how ludiscious your argument sounds to me.  

[KDR_11k]

That is definately a load of crap, gamers do care about exclusivity whether it be on a Nintendo system, Sony or even a MS system.

"Care" as in "f###, it's not on a system I own"?

Capcom announcing RE4 as multiplatform to a once exclusive game before it even came out may have had a snowball effect that is also hurting the Wii.

I don't see the Wii hurting at all. Everyone's making games for it.

[Ceric]

Ok, for me it's about respecting the customer.  If you don't respect me then I won't respect you.  Capcom with that little stick relegated all the forgiveness that I had built up for them over the years.  It's gone.  Back to scrutinizing them like I do every other brand I know nothing about.

Now on Exclusives.  They are very important in any form of marketing.  If you don't believe that then you are mostly liking living in a world I am not.  Lets take cars for example.  You have a Truck and a SUV.  They both get you where you are going.  They both take gas.  You have a family of 6.  SUV has the feature of holding 6 peoples and the Truck only features 2.  So are you going to buy the Truck?  No, even though you can modify the Truck to carry 4 more people, it makes more sense to go with the SUV where that feature is initially exclusive to it.

Why do I own a Wii instead of a 360?  Because it exclusively has Nintendo.

[hudsonhawk]

I find the title of this thread misleading, it should be called "Capcom loves money too much."

The fact is that Capcom is a very risk-averse company, to a fault.  They'll keep pumping out sequel after sequel, driving a franchise into the ground if possible.  They shamelessly reuse the same resources, engines, and designs and they will avoid taking a chance on new platforms that would require new code and tools to develop for.  That's why the PSP is such an easy choice for them - even the original titles they've released on it likely contain a lot of recycled code from past projects.

As far as the Gamecube exclusives thing goes... I can't fault them for it.  Frankly, Nintendo failed to deliver a large enough install base to make exclusive games a profitable venture.  And besides, most (all?) of the titles were still exclusive in the same sense that GTA and Splinter Cell were exclusive to the PS2 and Xbox - short periods of exclusivity followed by multi-platform releases.

[KDR_11k]

Car analogies rarely work. Trucks cost more and modifying them costs even more. What you're saying is that it's unfair towards SUV owners to sell trucks that have six seats, too (especially when those SUV owners would complain to the upholstery maker). When I had only a GC I hated how so many games were excusive to the PS2 and liked it when they were multiplatform because that meant I could play them. I imagine it's the same way in the other direction, if I had only a PS2 I'd be annoyed by games that were available only for other platforms. Today, too, I am annoyed by games that are only on the XBoxes or the PSP. Why should I be happy about being forced to buy a specific console to play a game? Exclusivity is anti-consumer, it's not something I WANT, it's something I despise. The only reason one would appreciate exclusivity is if one is a fanboy, i.e. one derives pleasure from the victories of a specific company. I don't f###ing care how much it helps the companies, it doesn't help me.

If Capcom were to port their PSP exclusives to the PS2 I could play them and I wouldn't think one minute about all the poor, heartbroken PSP gamers that can no longer claim that they're the only ones who get to play the games.

Multiplatform titles are better for the publisher and the customer, exclusives are good only for the console manufacturer.

[vudu]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Ok, for me it's about respecting the customer.  If you don't respect me then I won't respect you.  Capcom with that little stick relegated all the forgiveness that I had built up for them over the years.  It's gone.  Back to scrutinizing them like I do every other brand I know nothing about.

Pretend for a second that you only had a PS2 and not a GameCube.  Wouldn't you be pretty pissed off if you went out and bought a GameCube just so you could play RE4 and then a couple months later Capcom announces that the game is going to be ported to PS2?  I know I would.

Capcom pissed off Nintendo and lot of Nintendo fans by announcing the port before the GameCube version came out.  They also averted a potential situation where a lot of PS2 owners were pissed off at them for "making" them go out and buy a $100 console they had no interest in.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k Multiplatform titles are better for the publisher and the customer, exclusives are good only for the console manufacturer.

Multiplatform games, especially 3 way ports, are notorious for not only spreading development resources thin and making a worse game overall but ALSO ensuring that the graphical quality of the game is only up to par with the least powerful of the three platforms.

I can probably count on one hand the number of titles that were 3 way ports and were still AAA titles last gen. When a company gets the chance to focus on one specific hardware type, it generally means the game itself will be infinitely better than if the company were forced to retrofit the game to two other hardware types. When you have one dev team developing for three different consoles, quality becomes an afterthought.

That's why the Wii's unique controller is probably a godsend for the console because it generally forces companies to think so differently about it that they need to set aside development resources specifically for the Wii.

For example, Sonic and the Secret Rings is easily the prettiest Wii title to date. However, if the Wii had just received a port of the 360/PS3 STH, the game would more than likely look like ASS and would have a bad shoehorn of the Wii controls.

It's insanely rare that multiplatform releases are also AAA titles or even coming anywhere close to it. I agree that consumers benefit in some ways, but there's no question that exclusivity almost always increases the project quality and that in turn guarantees more sales. Look at what Gears of War is doing for MS: it sold 900,000 copies in Dec. alone. Do you think the combined multiplatform sales would have equaled 900k had it been on three different consoles and suffered from 3 way port syndrome?

[Ceric]

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Ok, for me it's about respecting the customer.  If you don't respect me then I won't respect you.  Capcom with that little stick relegated all the forgiveness that I had built up for them over the years.  It's gone.  Back to scrutinizing them like I do every other brand I know nothing about.

Pretend for a second that you only had a PS2 and not a GameCube.  Wouldn't you be pretty pissed off if you went out and bought a GameCube just so you could play RE4 and then a couple months later Capcom announces that the game is going to be ported to PS2?  I know I would.

Capcom pissed off Nintendo and lot of Nintendo fans by announcing the port before the GameCube version came out.  They also averted a potential situation where a lot of PS2 owners were pissed off at them for "making" them go out and buy a $100 console they had no interest in.

Personally, if I was so into a game that I would be willing to shell out the cash to get another game system just to play that game,  I would want the original version because that is the one that should be superior.  I know I'm rare but it's a risk and one that in that case I was obviously willing to take.  If I ever wanted to buy Gear of War, lets say, enough that I was willing to get a 360 and tomorrow it was announced for Wii.  I probably still want to go ahead and get the 360 version because it is the original version and how it was originally envisioned.  Same games wouldn't warrant that sort of devotion and I agree.  Like Tetris, I mean personally I wouldn't buy a system for Tetris.  The core gameplay remains mostly the same.

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k Multiplatform titles are better for the publisher and the customer, exclusives are good only for the console manufacturer.

Multiplatform games, especially 3 way ports, are notorious for not only spreading development resources thin and making a worse game overall but ALSO ensuring that the graphical quality of the game is only up to par with the least powerful of the three platforms.

I can probably count on one hand the number of titles that were 3 way ports and were still AAA titles last gen. When a company gets the chance to focus on one specific hardware type, it generally means the game itself will be infinitely better than if the company were forced to retrofit the game to two other hardware types. When you have one dev team developing for three different consoles, quality becomes an afterthought.

That's why the Wii's unique controller is probably a godsend for the console because it generally forces companies to think so differently about it that they need to set aside development resources specifically for the Wii.

For example, Sonic and the Secret Rings is easily the prettiest Wii title to date. However, if the Wii had just received a port of the 360/PS3 STH, the game would more than likely look like ASS and would have a bad shoehorn of the Wii controls.

It's insanely rare that multiplatform releases are also AAA titles or even coming anywhere close to it. I agree that consumers benefit in some ways, but there's no question that exclusivity almost always increases the project quality and that in turn guarantees more sales. Look at what Gears of War is doing for MS: it sold 900,000 copies in Dec. alone. Do you think the combined multiplatform sales would have equaled 900k had it been on three different consoles and suffered from 3 way port syndrome?

I agree for the most part.  My experience when it comes to ports that yeah as a single system owner I like some games to come out for my system ,*cough*Monster Rancher*cough*,  though the majority of the time I find that when a game wasn't specifically designed with your system in mind it tends to be glitchy and a let down.  Everyone has different experience with different things.  Like I prefer Hatchbacks over Sedans because I can fit more in them.  Thats been my experience.

I just find games that don't have to worry about supporting different platforms come out better and have more easter eggs and the like in them.

[hudsonhawk]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother


That's why the Wii's unique controller is probably a godsend for the console because it generally forces companies to think so differently about it that they need to set aside development resources specifically for the Wii.

I think it's waaaayyy too early to tell if that will be a bastion or a boon for the Wii.  3rd-party publishers are saying all the right things right now, but I think you're just as likely to see weak last-gen ports with Wii controls hastily tacked on as you are groundbreaking, original titles.  Only time will tell, obviously we all hope it will be the former.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
That is definately a load of crap, gamers do care about exclusivity whether it be on a Nintendo system, Sony or even a MS system.

"Care" as in "f###, it's not on a system I own"?

Capcom announcing RE4 as multiplatform to a once exclusive game before it even came out may have had a snowball effect that is also hurting the Wii.

I don't see the Wii hurting at all. Everyone's making games for it.

The Wii is still hurting because 3rd parties (like Capcom) are still reluctant to release Mature rated games. In regards to your comment, you see that same mentality with most systems, I'm sorry its the truth, it is a way 1 system only owners like to justify their purchases, but on the flip there are many that would like to play games on others systems and that INCLUDES Nintendo fans. It is a stupid generalization because frankly I've heard the same thing regarding people not interested in Nintendo games because they are "kiddie", don't tell me you haven't either.